I just don’t see the use of self hosting these just for myself. I guess that’s why so little people do this?

What are some interesting things to host?

funded by an actual business.

You’re talking like that’s a good thing?

Multiple ways.

Companies can completely erase the idea of ownership. If everything is subscription-based, they can simply stop the subscription and have no further obligations.

Or Europe just gets completely locked out of functionality, as already happens in some European countries.

Of course good things can come from this, but I’ve read here several times that this just isn’t a good proposition and might just lead to the anti-consumer practices disappearing in a negative way too.

Or kill it completely. The only reason I’ve held off signing this is that the wording is so vague that it could work in favor of gaming companies. I’d rather not see that.

It’s a web app wrapped in Tauri. So basically a desktop app, but the web app can be hosted too.

I mean, stuff has leaked about a possible new Half Life game, I guess we’ll see soon™

Thanks! Will definitely pass it on!

I’ve read through your links. They don’t have much to do with the codebase itself, but with protecting the trademarks.

From what I read, you’re free to change whatever you want. You just can’t go around using their trademarked names for your modified version.

Happy to keep it going too https://steamcommunity.com/id/Hawked/

While this would be great for those “online needed to play” games, wouldn’t this also lead to companies preferring subscription models?

I’d assume it’s easier to not include multiplayer in the “base” game and just charge a monthly subscription for the online part. Now the proposed law wouldn’t apply, since the customer only paid for the base game.

It’s pretty obvious what the intention of the writers of the proposal is, but I feel like it could have an opposite effect and push even more to the “games as a service” model those greedy publishers so desperately want.

It also raises red flags about what they (hopefully don’t) have in mind for the future

No, you have it the other way around. It means copyright owners can share “corrupted” versions of their works and the AI can still use it. Possible AI leaks won’t return the original work, since it was never used.

Of course I think this is only one aspect of why artists wouldn’t share their works, but it’s not the point the paper is trying to make. They’re just giving an aspect of how it could be useful.

It’s not what the paper is about at all, seems this is just shit journalism again.

All the paper says about copyright is that this method is more secure because AI can sometimes spit out training examples.

The wheel is just there during the testing phase as a backup, seems the final pods don’t have it, as it would make the idea useless.

Gabe has always said he’ll make HL3, “when the technology is there”.

No idea what it means, but it seems he at least has a vision for what the game should be.

Aha, so you actually read it? Thanks for clarifying.

So you didn’t reach the conclusion that this license is incompatible with posting on Lemmy?

Like I told you before. That’s not a link to the license, the page itself says so!

Because it’s probably trolls, not Nintendo

There’s going to be some silly background story that somehow levels the playing field, I’m guessing…