People (not me), seemed to really like Thank Goodness You’re Here. Undertale is a popular one. Date Everything seemed funny from what I saw of it, and if playing with friends things like peak, baby steps, or getting over it. Lots of different genres there, but steam also has a tag for comedy games. Even if you don’t end up buying it on steam, you can always check that out in case you don’t get enough options via comments.
Exactly this. There was a pretty infamous outage in 2024 and a couple smaller ones in 2023. I don’t think I know a single working adult that hasn’t had at least one payroll delay for some stupid reasoning. I helped someone troubleshoot an issue that caused all of peoples second paychecks to be delayed. During onboarding they’d tell people to expect a delay in their 2nd paycheck and people just never complained for years. Banking is such a fragile part of infrastructure. It’s strange to imagine someone quitting the second the paycheck didn’t hit their account. I’m anti capitalist as hell and companies are not your family etc etc, but at least make a phone call or something first.
Devastating that Apple did this and still manages to have the worst AI out there. Was really hoping it was so far behind because it only used “ethical” or licensed data. I guess it’s bad just because. That’s extra embarrassing.
Oh, I’m aware of that. Just that courts will not rule against things that involve the use of AI in general. You cannot take the output directly from, but once a human gets involved they will allow it. There’s too many monied interests to allow the restrictions.
The question should be whether the final product is worth what was sacrificed to make it. That line is different for everyone, but it’s important to keep that in mind. Plenty of companies I boycott make acceptable products but are supporting a genocide.
I don’t think generative AI use is worth it however it’s employed and regardless of the quality of the final product. If enough people agree maybe they’ll stop using it.
This would never hold up in court, in part due to regulatory capture, but I think this is the only thing that would stop them.
This link was shared on Lemmy just recently about this book. I watched some of the persons other videos, and though we have different tastes it seems like they can identify “bad” books.
What a completely accurate description. The nuance of the issues being subtle yet catastrophic is always the part that I find the funniest, because how are they so incapable of seeing how that might be a universal issue? Thank you for the chuckle.
Ridiculous that Grammarly even attempted to do this. The article was good, but at the end, though they hedged, they fell into the same trap everyone seems to. AI is not better at coding than it is at writing and their tinkering with this does not suggest that. Grammarly had a bad product, but realistically, there was likely just no effort put into this aspect of the software. Maybe I’m way off base, and I don’t support AI either way, but I just think it was a poor way to end the article. Programmers think it’s good for art, artists think it’s good for programming, it’s almost like it’s easier to see flaws in a field you’re familiar with.
I keep seeing this, but I think people forget what things were like before we had a formalized education system. They were not good. The modern system can certainly be improved, but it has overall improved upon itself essentially since its inception. I’m not sure if there’s some kind of golden age of US education people are imagining, or they’re just pointing out current flaws, but it really is (unfortunately or not) the best it’s ever been.
That’s really not fair to universities or the inventors. Knowledge is not inherently evil, and things that have far reaching positive impacts can be used for nefarious purposes. Modern society has perverse incentives, but individuals adding to a corpus of humanity’s knowledge are not the ones at fault.
Often times these purchases are not for the product itself, but how it can be incorporated into an existing product. I imagine if Meta makes bot accounts for people to follow/engage with, they can increase user retention and therefore ad revenue.
Yang is a grifter and no one should listen to him. Companies will happily use any excuse to fire employees and create a perception of job scarcity so that they can rehire workers who are scared and desperate and willing to take less compensation for more work.
All of that said, AI is definitely being incorporated quite heavily into a lot of products. It’s already caused issues with services we all rely on, and I hope we are able to hold companies accountable and stop patronizing them wherever possible. AI cannot do a lot of the things they are pretending it can and we are paying the price, not the companies responsible.
I believe it’s the personal blog of the dev in question, Scott. I don’t have any reason to believe it’s AI, though he does mention using ChatGPT I don’t see it suggested he has AI write his blogs.
Let’s pay people to use AI to pay people to do the job we used to pay people to do anyway, but this time it’s rent seekers all the way down. Can’t wait.
Yes! Exactly this! Does anyone remember those big “SALE” signs stores used to have? It just said the word sale in big bold letters. Nothing else. It’s a sale. I really don’t need a fancy graphic to encourage me to potentially save money if I was going to buy the games anyway or to get new games on the cheap.
There’s a post elsewhere with an excerpt from a job posting for GOG devs that paints a bleaker picture. In the post they state you need to be familiar with AI tools and encourage the use in your team. I think they’re in it too deep at this point.
I don’t think training on all public information is super ethical regardless, but to the extent that others may support it, I understand that SO may be seen as fair game. To my knowledge though, all the big AIs I’m aware of have been trained on GitHub regardless of any individual projects license.
It’s not about proving individual code theft, it’s about recognizing the model itself is built from theft. Just because an AI image output might not resemble any preexisting piece of art doesn’t mean it isn’t based on theft. Can I ask what you used that was trained on just a projects documentation? Considering the amount of data usually needed for coherent output, I would be surprised if it did not need some additional data.
If you acknowledge the problem with theft from artists, do you not acknowledge there’s a problem with theft from coders? Code intended to be fully open source with licenses requiring derivatives to be open source is now being served up for closed source uses at the press of a button with no acknowledgement.
For what it’s worth, I think AI would be much better in a post scarcity moneyless society, but so long as people need to be paid for their work I find it hard to use ethically. The time it might take individuals to do the things offloaded to AI might mean a company would need to hire an additional person if they were not using AI. If AI were not trained unethically then I’d view it as a productivity tool and so be it, but because it has stolen for its training data it’s hard for me to view it as a neutral tool.
The issue is that would impact Congress members that are actually fighting for the average American the most. Those Congress members would theoretically be elected due to grassroots support and are not trust fund babies that have wealthy donors able to keep them afloat. Your McConnells and pelosis could happily outlast the more progressive members.