Scott Ertz - Staff

Scott Ertz

Scott Ertz

Former Segment Host

Current Host

Current UpStream Contributor

Current Product Reviewer

Current Episode Author

Email Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Google last.fm YouTube

Scott is a developer who has worked on projects of varying sizes, including all of the PLUGHITZ Corporation properties. He is also known in the gaming world for his time supporting the rhythm game community, through DDRLover and hosting tournaments throughout the Tampa Bay Area. Currently, when he is not working on software projects or hosting F5 Live: Refreshing Technology, Scott can often be found returning to his high school days working with the Foundation for Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST), mentoring teams and helping with ROBOTICON Tampa Bay. He has also helped found a student software learning group, the ASCII Warriors, currently housed at AMRoC Fab Lab.

Recent UpStream Articles

NYT says it didn't hack ChatGPT, only exposed copyright infringement

posted Saturday Mar 16, 2024 by Scott Ertz

The lawsuit between The New York Times and ChatGPT maker OpenAI has heated up in the past few weeks. After NYT cited examples of ChatGPT spitting out exact text from NYT articles. This prompted OpenAI to claim that the publication had "hacked" the system in order to get it to do things it shouldn't do. The publication has responded by claiming that it did nothing wrong, only used publicly available capabilities, and exposed ChatGPT as a system of plagiarism.

What did NYT do?

The process by which the NYT was able to prove its case was simple. They just fed the system a single line from an article and asked for the next line. From there, ChatGPT happily repeated the articles word for word. To be able to do this, obviously, OpenAI had full access to the articles. This would be one thing if the articles were public like this one is. However, the articles that NYT staffers were testing were paywalled content.

This meant that OpenAI was, in one manner or another, accessing content that was not publicly available, but only available to subscribers, and either using that as training data for its system or loading it on-demand. Either way, it was purposefully accessing data that it was not supposed to have access to. But, more than that, it was serving that content up exactly as it existed on the NYT website, allowing people to bypass the company's paywall, essentially stealing from them directly.

OpenAI's accusation

OpenAI has accused NYT of hacking the system in order to set the company up for a lawsuit. Their reasoning for this is that no user would actually use ChatGPT in this manner. And while, on the surface, this seems like a silly way to use the application, it is actually very popular. In fact, there are full Reddit discussion groups dedicated to the practice.

The popularity of the action is in the result, not in the practice itself. Of course, no one wants to have a computer system retrieve and display an article one sentence or paragraph at a time. However, when an article is behind a paywall and you do not have a subscription to that site, this method can be used to read that article without paying for it. Just because OpenAI doesn't want people to use the system this way does not mean that people won't.

NYT's response

The company's legal team submitted in a legal filing saying,

In OpenAI's telling, The Times engaged in wrongdoing by detecting OpenAI's theft of The Times's own copyrighted content. OpenAI's true grievance is not about how The Times conducted its investigation, but instead what that investigation exposed: that Defendants built their products by copying The Times's content on an unprecedented scale-a fact that OpenAI does not, and cannot, dispute.

The argument seems solid, as OpenAI's complaint does not seem to be formed on the basis of the manner in which NYT discovered the data but simply that they discovered it. But, either way, NYT has a great case because OpenAI has been aware of the infringement that exists within its system, and that alone is enough. The legal theory comes from the landmark case against Napster where the company was found liable for copyright infringement occurring on its network because they were aware of the activity and took no actions to prevent it.

In this case, OpenAI was made aware early on that their system was capable of directly plagiarising content from the web, including content that was supposed to be unreachable behind a paywall. Because the company was made aware of the issue and continued to allow the infringement to happen, NYT hopes to use the same argument to indicate liability on the part of OpenAI.

read more...

TikTok is back on the chopping block as House passes new security law

posted Saturday Mar 16, 2024 by Scott Ertz

After a few years of silence, the US government once again has its sights set on TikTok and its Chinese-owned parent company ByteDance. Following a security briefing, the US House of Representatives quickly submitted and passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. This bill, if passed in the Senate and signed by the President, would start a 60-day timer for ByteDance to divest its ownership in TikTok or face an outright ban in the country.

Security concerns with TikTok

TikTok, like any other social media platform, has its share of security concerns. One of the primary concerns is data privacy. The app collects a vast amount of data on its users, including videos watched and commented on, location data, device type, and even the rhythm of keystrokes when users type. This extensive data collection has raised concerns about how this information is used and who has access to it, especially considering that TikTok's parent company, ByteDance, is based in China, a country known for its strict internet surveillance.

Another significant security concern is the potential for inappropriate content and contact with strangers. Despite having community guidelines, the platform has been criticized for its inability to effectively filter out inappropriate content, making it potentially unsafe for younger audiences. Furthermore, the app's "For You" algorithm, which suggests content based on user behavior, can inadvertently expose users to harmful or explicit material. Additionally, the platform's direct messaging feature can potentially expose users, particularly minors, to unwanted contact from strangers. These issues highlight the need for robust security measures and parental controls within the app.

Others have suggested, based on the app's behavior in the United States versus its behavior in China, that the company might be using it to actively cause harm to the US, its citizens, and the overall cultural harmony. One example that is often cited is the behaviors around gender roles. In China, the version of TikTok will not allow a man to act effeminately in a video, while in the West, the platform has been used regularly to talk about and spread information about transgenderism.

Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act

Following a security briefing on the subject, the House quickly submitted and passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. While not said explicitly, it has been surmised that there was some critical high-level security information raised about the platform, its ownership, or its behaviors. The assessment is a reasonable one given the quick turn in positions, and the bipartisan nature of the support.

People like Dan Crenshaw and Rand Paul both opposed the bill in a consistent manner with their general beliefs that the government should not meddle in the markets. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez also opposed the bill, though without solid explanation. However, Representatives from both parties, and those with highly opposing political leanings, supported the bill, including Nancy Pelosi and Lauren Boebert, who would have to try to be more different.

In addition, this is not the first time the US has tried to ban the platform. Donald Trump, while President, tried to accomplish the same thing through Executive Order. The move was opposed at the time, mostly be the Democratic party. The change in sentiment is another indication that new information has been brought to light in recent weeks.

What will happen

If passed through the Senate and the President, a timer would be started that would require ByteDance to sell its shares in TikTok or face a block in the US. For its part, ByteDance leadership has said that users should protest the bill and that they are unlikely to sell. That means that the company and its Chinese ownership are looking to try to call the US government's bluff - a move that looks like it will fail.

If the platform is put up for sale, then former US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is the likely buyer. He has been assembling an investment group to make an offer as soon as the ultimatum is made official. However, it is most likely that TikTok will disappear rather than be sold.

read more...

Adult Swim Games to delist 16 titles, causing trouble for developers

posted Saturday Mar 16, 2024 by Scott Ertz

The reality of the modern gaming industry is one of constant change with ups and downs. Many of those downs come about when a game, which many people poured their hearts and souls into while designing, developing, and playing, is shut down. Everyone in that chain is affected in some way - some more than others. This week, developers and players alike were left disappointed to discover that Adult Swim Games, under the leadership of Warner Bros. Discovery, was planning to delist 16 games from marketplaces in the coming weeks.

The problem with modern gaming

One of the biggest problems with modern gaming comes about because of digital distribution. Digital distribution of games, while convenient and efficient, does come with its own set of challenges. One of the primary issues is the lack of ownership rights. Once you purchase a game, you essentially acquire a license to play it rather than owning the game outright. This means the distributor can potentially revoke access or shut down servers, rendering the game unplayable.

In addition, the shutdown of connected games, particularly those that rely on online servers, poses a significant problem for players. When these games are discontinued, players lose access to the game entirely, regardless of how much time or money they've invested into it. This is especially problematic for games with a strong multiplayer component or those that are entirely online-based.

Additionally, the shutdown often means the loss of community and social connections that players have built within the game. It can also lead to the loss of unique in-game items or achievements that players have earned over time.

When a publisher discontinues a game, it can pose several challenges for the developers. Most notably, developers often invest significant time and resources into creating and maintaining these games, and a discontinuation can mean that this effort goes unrewarded. It can also be demoralizing for the development team to see their work discontinued, potentially impacting morale and productivity. Additionally, the discontinuation can damage the reputation of the developers, making it harder for them to attract players to their future games. Additionally, it can lead to a loss of community trust, especially if the game has a dedicated player base who feel let down by the discontinuation. Lastly, it can also cause distrust between the developer and the publisher for future titles.

Warner Bros. Discovery breaks the trust

Many, if not all, of the problems above have been surfaced by the latest move from Adult Swim Games. The company, which is a subsidiary of Warner Bros. Discovery, has contact developers of at least 16 titles to inform them that their games will be delisted from digital marketplaces. While this is not a unique situation, it is unfortunate. And, for some, it creates some new and challenging dilemmas.

Some of the games will be delisted and retired from public life entirely because the rights to the games themselves are owned by Adult Swim Games. This means that the games are gone and potentially lost to history. For others, the rights will revert back to the developers. However, it won't be easy to decide what to do next because, while the games might revert, the game listings will not. This means that, if the developers want to keep the games online, they will have to relist them in the stores.

This might not sound like a big deal, but think about what will be lost. Matt Kain, developer of Fist Puncher for Adult Swim Games, said in a comment on an article,

I'm one of the creators and developers of Fist Puncher which was also published by Adult Swim on Steam. We received the same notice from Warner Bros. that Fist Puncher would be retired. When we requested that Warner Bros simply transfer the game over to our studio's Steam publisher account so that the game could stay active, they said no. The transfer process literally takes a minute to initiate (look up "Transferring Applications" in the Steamworks documentation), but their rep claimed they have simply made the universal decision not to transfer the games to the original creators.

This is incredibly disappointing. It makes me sad to think that purchased games will presumably be removed from users' libraries. Our community and our players have 10+ years of discussions, screenshots, gameplay footage, leaderboards, player progress, unlocked characters, Steam achievements, Steam cards, etc. which will all be lost. We have Kickstarter backers who helped fund Fist Puncher (even some who have cameo appearances in the game) who will eventually no longer be able to play it. We could just rerelease Fist Puncher from our account, but we would likely receive significant backlash for relaunching a game and forcing users to "double dip" and purchase the game again (unless we just made it free).

Again, this is really just disappointing. It seems like more and more the videogame industry is filled with people that don't like and don't care about videogames. All that to say, buy physical games, make back-ups, help preserve our awesome industry and art form.

When the game is delisted, if ownership is not transferred, that is a lot of data and a lot of history being lost, both for the community and the developer. It's a disappointment to many, but it is one of the unfortunate side effects of working with a third-party publisher. You give up a lot of autonomy and ownership over your work in order to get more exposure and distribution. But, if the developers can leverage things right, they can take the notoriety and repair the situation for their next endeavor.

read more...

Epic Games and Apple continue fight on same front in the EU and US

posted Saturday Mar 16, 2024 by Scott Ertz

Apple hates Epic Games - there is no doubt about that. The company has created policies and procedures to target the popular game studio and publisher specifically. In fact, Apple's heavy-handed approach to their platforms and to Epic Games in particular has led states, countries, and even the EU, to look into their practices and craft new laws around them. In the past few weeks, some of the original actions that spurred the whole battle between titans came back up when Apple banned Epic's developer account for a day, but quickly reversed course.

The history of the fight

The battle between Epic Games and Apple started when Epic openly violated Apple's rules about allowing in-app purchases through third-party payment systems. Apple has always required developers to use their App Store payment system for a 30% fee. Epic had enough and integrated their own system, offering a discount for those who used it. Apple nearly immediately terminated their developer account and pulled Fortnite from the App Store. Google quickly followed suit.

Epic then went on a rampage that made their name seem tame by comparison. They sued Apple and Google in every jurisdiction they could find cause. The tussle quickly grew well beyond the original scope, bringing in discovery from Google and Apple that revealed a lot of previously undisclosed corporate information. It even went so far as to subpoena data from other unrelated companies, such as Valve.

The results

In the US lawsuit, Apple won against Epic in all but one count, but that one was a big win for Epic. The ruling required that Apple allow developers and publishers to use payment systems that are not owned by Apple. This meant that the action that had originally kicked off this whole battle would now be perfectly allowed and required. Apple worked really hard to profit off of the loss, but Epic is fighting that one, too so that Apple cannot take a 27% cut of payments they are not involved with.

While Epic has not gotten everything they wanted in the lawsuits, they have gotten a lot closer in subsequent legislation. The European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA) is the biggest win for the company, as the EU now has a legal definition for a "gatekeeper" and has specific rules around their behaviors. In the case of Apple and Google, they were required to allow third-party app stores on their platforms. This would allow Epic to get Fortnite back onto iOS devices more directly and without the need for a Game Pass subscription.

The latest developments

Last week, the DMA finally went into effect and it had some unexpected consequences for Epic. The company's division in Sweden, which falls squarely inside of the EU and therefore within the purview of the DMA, had its Apple Developer Account terminated. Apple claims that it is because Epic Games is "verifiably untrustworthy." In a blog post, Epic Games laid out its case against Apple, saying,

In terminating Epic's developer account, Apple is taking out one of the largest potential competitors to the Apple App Store. They are undermining our ability to be a viable competitor and they are showing other developers what happens when you try to compete with Apple or are critical of their unfair practices.

The DMA was designed to eliminate the very power imbalance that Apple is proving exists today: they claim to have total control to block competing stores and apps. We will continue to fight to bring true competition and choice to iOS devices in Europe and around the world.

In fairly quick response, Apple reinstated the developer account. This move was likely in anticipation of further scrutiny, regulation, and possible fines from the EU. The timing and rationale were certainly suspicious, with Apple admitting that it was, at least partially, a retaliatory act against the company. A reinstated account means that Epic's mobile Games Store ambitions are back in action.

read more...

Warner Bros. and Paramount end their merger talks without action

posted Sunday Mar 3, 2024 by Scott Ertz

The past few months have been filled with rumors and speculation about the potential merger of two of the major corporate streaming and media giants: Warner Bros. Discovery and Paramount. The merger, if it had come to fruition, would have created a major rival for top streaming company: Netflix. But, talks appear to have ended before any action was taken.

Warner Bros. Discovery

Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) was formed from WarnerMedia's spin-off by AT&T and merger with Discovery, Inc. on April 8, 2022. The company's properties are divided into nine business units, with one of the most high-profile units being its streaming division. The merger of the two companies ended in the merger of their streaming services, HBO Max and Discover+, into the MAX service. This service combined the wholly-owned intellectual properties of both companies with additional licensed material.

Warner Bros. Discovery creates and distributes a differentiated and complete portfolio of content and brands across television, film, and streaming. It owns and operates some of the most popular and diverse media brands and products, such as Discovery Channel, HBO, DC, CNN, and Warner Bros. Pictures. These brands help support the company's streaming ambitions. Those ambitions have operated in the red since inception, with the exception being this past quarter where streaming finally turned a profit for WBD.

Paramount

Like Warner Bros. Discovery, Paramount is a large media company that represents a wide variety of content and distribution. The company's streaming service, Paramount+ (formerly CBS All Access), is the central repository for much of the company's intellectual property. The service offers existing content from brands like CBS, Nickelodeon, and BET.

In addition, the streaming service has its own intellectual property. Several Paramount+ Star Trek series have been exclusive, as well as series like the Frasier reboot, and even the Halo series. Like MAX, Paramount+ has never turned a profit, including in this most recent quarter. The company has failed under 2 different brands to gain enough subscribers to make the brand a financial success.

A merged company could improve streaming

If WBD and Paramount had come to an agreement to merge, the combined streaming service could have actually put up a fight against Netflix. MAX currently has 97.7 million subscribers and Paramount+ has 67.5 million. Together there would not be 160+ million, as there are duplicates between the services, but it would get the service closer to Netflix's 238.3 million subscriber count.

The future of Paramount

While the talks seem to have stopped between WBD and Paramount, bringing an end to this current chapter, it doens't mean that the story is complete. In fact, the two companies could return to the table in the future. Or, new talks could emerge between PAramount and another company. Thi sis because Paramount has an exploratory comittee dedicated to finding a suitable buyer for the struggling company. Some brands would likely be off the table. For example, the idea of NBC and CBS being owned by Comcast seems farfetched. But, a non-US company could be interested in the brand, or another suitor like Skydance could enter the conversation.

Either way, Paramount seems dedicated to the idea of ending its solo run and joining another media brand in one way or another.

read more...
We're live now - Join us!
PLUGHITZ Keyz

Email

Password

Forgot password? Recover here.
Not a member? Register now.
Blog Meets Brand Stats