|
Cyron posted:Ignore DStecks, he is a rear end in a top hat who attacks anyone who slightly disagree with him. I disagreed with him fairly significantly just a page or two ago and he didn't attack me. Also Archer no one is saying that developers are outright going "I think women are just sexual objects and so I am going to show that through my game". Unintentional sexism, as you described it, brought about through industry norms is still just as important to fight against. More even, maybe, since it's the sort that people are by definition less likely to be aware that they are doing because it isn't consciously decided, so it is more likely to go unnoticed by those doing it.
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 20:49 |
|
|
e X posted:Yes, but two things: one, that doesn't mean that the status of the critic wont be challenged and two, youtube is a private enterprise. Basically, you don't decide whether or not something falls under Fair Use, the law does, and many videos probably wouldn't make the cut. And secondly, even then, that law only protects you from being sued, it doesn't mean that youtube/google has to use those standards. They can be a hell of a lot stricter if they want to. Not even the law, the courts decide if something is fair use or not on a case by case basis. You can use past decisions to determine if something you're doing would probably pass a fair use defense or not, but there is no explicit black and white definition of fair use, and purposely so.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:They've said that, but their actual trademark application is way less specific: http://superfame.com/post/fine-brothers-copyright-react-trademark/ Wait, did they really try to take that video down? I was thinking it was just the internet blowing things out of proportion, but hahaha wow, that is ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:Yeah they've got many cute and heartwarming videos and even more hilarious videos. What's wrong with those videos? They were basically just long-form PSAs from what I remember. Idran fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Feb 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
senae posted:Most people think that monetizing videos about tragedies is a tad gauche. Wait, they were monetized? Well never mind then.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:More than how every video on youtube does that? Like they put an ad in the middle or something? No, that's an option for monetization. You can choose individually for uploaded videos between the video ad at the start, the banner ad, or nothing at all.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Wrageowrapper posted:Fine Bros are just a big advert now anyways. One of their recent videos is just about how amazing Netflix is. I'm pretty sure you are supposed to clearly say that your product is advertising somewhere within the content itself but maybe thats just Australian law (or maybe they really weren't paid in which case it was just a lovely video). Yeah, that's not the law at all in the US. Which can lead to some hilariously obvious examples of product placement. Edit: Carrying this over from the Miscellaneous Offsite LP thread courtesy of watho, this video is a pretty good breakdown of the issues with the whole React World thing beyond just the video-takedown aspect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a49fipjglyc Idran fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Feb 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
And speaking of, the Fine Bros are shutting down React World and cancelling all their trademarks.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Testekill posted:I don't even get the point of the second FBE channel but here's how it essentially works. It looks like TFB2 is just for bloopers. Maybe it's split apart because who cares about bloopers; TFB2 only has 700k subscribers overall.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:I like the cut of your jib, HBG, but I really feel like you're putting more thought into the prequels than Lucas did, at least WRT the Jedi. It seems more like a lot of the issues were just "bad writer threw a bunch of stuff together without examining how it connected." That's not necessarily an issue in analysis, creator intention is at best a bonus for it, but that last post does honestly feel more like trying to fit the film to the theory than trying to fit the theory to the film, HBG. Like you have this theory in mind about it in advance and you're going to make the film fit it by whatever means necessary in order to support the theory.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:So far, ranting about Fair Use has done precisely dick to prevent all the issues people are having that are singularly based on using other people's poo poo without permission. Did you miss the top of last page that gave two examples of videos being taken down for using seconds of something else as a mere illustration of something? There's a difference between saying "reviews shouldn't just be a voice over over 90% of the work you're 'reviewing'" and saying "reviews shouldn't show anything at all about the thing being reviewed whatsoever". Review shows have been showing brief clips of the things they're reviewing literally since review shows have been a thing, that's not an internet critic thing; show me one review show off the internet that doesn't even show clips of the thing being reviewed. That's standard. Saying "your product is worthless if you show anything at all from the thing that you are reviewing, however short, and so it doesn't matter if it gets taken down" is either a stupid opinion or stupid internet hyperbole.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
"Someone filed a cease and desist against 'Siskel & Ebert & the Movies' for showing trailer clips and it got them cancelled? That's their own fault really, they should've known better. What kind of worthless show would do that, we didn't lose anything of value."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
SatansBestBuddy posted:Guys! Whining about how your videos are getting taken down over nothing isn't working! Stop making a living and go do something else now! Let's be fair; he's not saying don't make videos. He's just saying don't do something that review shows have been doing for literally decades.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Critical literature is not a copy of the original literature with wacky jokes and riffs in the margins, which is the stuff that's being flagged on YouTube. And what about videos that don't do this, that highlight small segments of a work in order to provide context and then go on to comment about it in long-form without just doing funny voice overs or jokes in the margins, and that still get hit with content ID strikes? Why do you keep presenting it as though the only thing that is getting content ID strikes is something in this specific style when multiple people have told you otherwise? That is not the only kind of content getting flagged on Youtube and people have presented multiple examples showing that. And what about the situations where it isn't actually the rights holder that make these claims, allowing someone completely unrelated to get monetization income through scamming the system? If it's not okay when critic A does voice over stuff over a clip from company B without permission and gets money for it, how is it okay when unrelated party C gets money from critic A doing voice over stuff over a clip from company B without permission from either of them? If your issue is people getting money from things they didn't make, are you okay with this situation where someone gets money from something they didn't make twice over? Because this is a thing that happens on a regular basis because Youtube's system is stupid. Idran fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Feb 25, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
I'm just going to drop this here, MisterBibs, alongside a reminder that videos that do critical reviews in the standard style of showing short clips interspersed with commentary on the content long-form are getting Content ID flags as well as the "do a voiceover over a film for the whole thing" style. Since I think you literally do not understand what "fair use" means. 17 USC § 107: quote:...the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
It wouldn't even be that big an issue if you were going "well it's not how copyright is supposed to work but YouTube does it this way so you should adapt", MisterBibs, but you keep describing it as though this is how copyright actually legally works, as though under copyright law as it is now you literally can never use any part of any copyrighted work. And that is just outright false.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
LFK posted:I mean, first of all, and you should tattoo this to the back of your hand so you see it when you type, is that "fair use" isn't a right and thus, no, they're not in the legal right ever unless they've received permission. Even "is fair use" cases boil down to "yes, they broke the law, but we're not going to punish them." It is literally in the same category as self-defence. Most of your post is essentially right (except that again someone is going straight to thinking that people are trying to defend the "voiceover over a full movie" style when literally no one is defending that style of video), but just because there's no bright-line test for fair use doesn't mean that fair use is a violation of the law that's let slide by the government. 17 USC § 107 explicitly says that something which is judged to qualify as fair use in the eyes of the law is not infringing, and thus is not in violation of copyright law. That's why it's a defense if judged valid. There is no law broken if something is judged to qualify as fair use, it is not "you broke the law but we won't punish you for it".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
8-Bit Scholar posted:Somebody called LK a rapist completely unironically because he convinced a drunk girl to get her tits out One person did that because they had remembered what he did incorrectly, and then took it back after being corrected. Though he didn't just tell a drunk girl to take her shirt off, he fondled her breasts out of nowhere to "see if they were real". You're really mischaracterizing the thread with that description, this isn't even a regular thing. You might be remembering it as a regular thing, but out of everyone the thread doesn't generally like, there's maybe two or three people that get described the way you're talking. And one of them is a literal white supremacist sympathizer.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
Kay Kessler posted:I don't know how much he's changed since then, but early Joe was pretty unbearable. His interview with Seth Killian was painful. He acted like a prick to him for seemingly no reason. Was that the Spike Game Awards guy? Because if it was, I think there was some backstory there that didn't come through in the video if I remember right. Like, there was a bait-and-switch thing going on with the sort of interview Joe was told he'd get vs. what he actually got.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 07:09
|
|
|
LFK posted:Bambi falls more into the background radiation of authoritarianism by being yet another story about a crown prince who learns morality lessons from the subjects he is destined to be lord over. Also the whole Baden-Powell/Rudyard Kipling style Burden of Leadership thing. Again, it's less specifically fascist and more generically authoritarian. I think with a question like that, there is an implied "more than other media". Even if you ascribe to this view of media interpretation, given the context of the conversation they were asking what makes those in particular do so. And a later post showed that the poster they were asking meant the actual war propaganda and not their feature length stuff anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Annointed posted:The day the US realizes that having a multi party system to better cater to different demographics is when the two parties become entirely incompatible/unlikeable to everyone. The Democrats and Republicans are essentially long term coalitions of multiple interest groups, not single monolithic entities. That's why this hasn't already happened despite the fact that people have realized this for literally centuries. Every so often individual blocs break off from one and realign to the other, but the coalition keeps the same name.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
LFK posted:Yeah, it's a reenforcing cycle. We've been working on believable social interactions with computers for about fifty years, you're conflating two different kinds of complexity in this characterization. Spatial simulation is complex in the sense that the computations take a lot of operations. Believable social interactions are complex in the sense that we're still working on finding a way to compute it in the first place.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
To go into more detail, if I remember right, Hussie was collaborating with them on the Homestuck game, but there was a sudden massive delay in development for no public reason and with no announcement, during which time the new Kings Quest came out. Later, one of the people involved in the game said on Tumblr that the developer had used the Kickstarter funds from the Homestuck game to fund the Kings Quest game instead, but the post was quickly deleted. And rather than denying it, Hussie just said not to talk about it, leading most to think that there was some kind of legal settlement with a nondisclosure clause behind the scenes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:Nah, actual biologists don't tend to subscribe to You can really just sum that up with "evolutionary psychology", it's much more succinct. 
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2016 14:39
|
|
because it's bad biology to make assumptions with no real evidence. That stuff comes almost entirely from people without a strong bio background trying to interpret studies, or just making up stories without doing any kind of actual research.
|
echopapa posted:90% of silent films, at least. Nearly all major studio releases in the sound era exist in some form or another, but film only lasts about fifty years, at most, before it starts to decay, and it’s expensive to transfer to new stock. It's more than that; a lot of films were melted down to recycle the silver in the cellulose for other films, all the way up to the 50s. Theaters would often chop prints to be able to show multiple showings a day. Some were even just thrown away because no one saw any reason to keep a film after it wasn't popular anymore. Like, this is a part of it, but it's not just natural decomposition. Going outside the movie realm, look at what happened to the DuMont Television Network's archives.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:I just read an unrelated article calling the AVGN show "misogynistic" based solely on articles responding to his video. A video that wasn't an AVGN video. Was it the 538 thing, or did more than one article do that?
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:For me the weirdest explanation for a thing in MGS will be the time in 2 where spamming Plisken on the codec had him tell me Vamp wasn't called Vamp because of that whole vampire thing he had going on. No he's called Vamp because he was Bisexual. And it then went into how he was shagging that woman who deflected bullets and her father. I remember thinking as an impressionable twelve year old, cool, so why is he called Vamp then? A vamp is another word for a seductress or femme fatale. That's probably it from Kojima's view; he's a male vamp.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
watho posted:It's a bait-and-switch joke you god drat sperglords. Baka-nin didn't know the other meaning, so the joke didn't make sense to them. We told them the other meaning, and then the joke made sense. What's "sperglord" about that?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
LFK posted:Nah, Mist of Pandaria is all about how exposure to the various Sha unhinges Garrosh culminating in him using the Heart of Y'Shaarj to nuke most of the Vale of Blossoms. As far as I remember he never even set foot on Pandaria itself until after he'd already started going that path. You could read it as Sha energy unhinging him further I guess but it seems a lot more clear to me that it's what the person you quoted said. He was just an awful win at any cost guy with access to magic WMDs.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Tracula posted:Y'know. I'm thinking back to Jim Sterling's latest video where he made fun of people getting mad about different opinions. I'll come at him: Numbered review scores are dumb. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Didn't Roland say that the military wouldn't help with the first one because he wouldn't remove references to Area 51, or did 14-year-old me fall for marketing hooey? I'm not sure if he actually said that. But on one hand I could believe it because the government was really dumb about Groom Lake at one point. I might be getting details wrong, but from what I remember it wasn't publicly acknowledged until employees there tried to sue for damages from a chemical spill that, because it officially didn't exist even when it was so widely known in pop culture, the government refused to cover medical costs for since that would require acknowledging details of where it happened. Even after the suit was filed the government tried to stonewall a federal court about it for a while I think, but they ended up losing and having to pay. On the other hand, though, the Air Force loved working with Stargate SG-1, and Area 51 was a big part of that. Edit: I did have some of the details off, including that the employees didn't actually win the suit, but basically yeah: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_51#Environmental_lawsuit Idran fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Jun 20, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:It just feels like a bizarre choice of historical trivia to draw upon, with the excuse that it lets them use Rasputin as a literal wizard. At least The Sound of Music has the justification of being (very loosely) based on a real guy who actually did flee the Nazis. There was for a long time a lot of romanticization around Anastasia and rumors that she survived and escaped the country. That's basically why; it was a big thing for a while.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:Tablets are quite a long ways away from replacing anything for gaming. Even if the hardware gets there, the controls won't. If you include a controller with the tablet then what's the point? You're sacrificing your big screen TV or monitor for something the size of the Vectrex's screen. Tablets are a good gateway into other forms of gaming, though. It's just another means to play different kinds of games. No one in this thread was arguing that tablet gaming would replace gaming. They were arguing that the decreasing presence of desktop PCs as a consumer item would as a result reduce the popularity of PC gaming. DStecks literally and specifically said that tablet gaming sucked and wasn't actually a replacement. It wasn't "tablet gaming will be better than PC gaming", it was "tablets and laptops are displacing desktops generally as consumer items in the home, and this will have a concurrent impact on the popularity of PC gaming as a result".
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2016 06:07
|
|
|
Mraagvpeine posted:I heard about that too. Was there evidence for that? Nothing definitive, but one of the people involved behind the scenes made a long post that went into the details, the post was deleted, and Hussie refused to confirm or deny anything afterwards. Because of that, most people assume it happened but when he found out they settled before it reached the lawsuit stage, and the settlement included some kind of non disclosure agreement. I think I remember hearing something similar happening between that company and Neil Gaiman too, but I might be remembering wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
adamcantsleep posted:I do hope Cecil gets more VO work, though. He's the only performer on the show with any comedy chops. Really? Retta was on Parks and Rec for six years, and I thought she was great on it.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Oh I thought the tories only had 314. Even if they had only had 314, Tories + DUP still would have been enough for an effective majority. Sinn Fein has 7 seats and they always abstain, so 322 is the effective majority mark, not 325.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Jimbot posted:I don't mean to sound insensitive either. Having that kind of attention beating down on you can be really stressful and can have adverse effects on your mental health. But if you're not in a position to talk about something controversial, then don't talk about it. You don't actually help people who suffer from bigots and are generally oppressed by being "completely center" in these kinds of issues. Contra made a video on this very thing. Do you have a link to that video, out of curiosity?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Max Wilco posted:Wasn't there something a while ago where the UN or some other organization was working to make cultural appropriation illegal? Not exactly, but sort of? A committee of delegates in the UN have been working on legislation to bring to their member nations to protect the cultural heritage of indigenous people, that would make people outside indigenous culture claiming elements of it and selling it for a profit illegal. So specifically situations like, as in the example they cited, Urban Outfitters selling "Navajo hipster panties". It's specifically pointed at products that are using elements of indigenous cultures and that are being promoted as or named to imply that they were either created by or endorsed by those cultures. But they've been working on it since 2001 and haven't had much progress. http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/indigenous-advocates-call-on-un-to-make-cultural-appropriation-illegal-a7791851.html Idran fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Jul 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:Er... yes? If you're not interested in the story what happened I do not understand why you are playing the game "Her Story" in the first place. I think they meant within the context of the game. Not the player themselves, but why is the player avatar (such as it is in a game like that) doing this within the narrative.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 20:49 |
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:IIRC Eddie Murphy was the original choice for Ghostbusters but had a schedule conflict or it didn't work out, so I'm guessing they had to change it from that. He took Beverly Hills Cop over it was what it was. There were a ton of casting fall-throughs though (I don't think this is even all of them), so they should have been used to it I'd think.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 16:16
|
|