Badger_Badgersky

Finaly something that is worth my time. I guess this is a good time to refresh the KCD1.

@MikeOrator Ad Hominem in heated debate is possible with me as my fuse is getting really short with age. Which is not an excuse and I am not proud of it...but I guess we narrowly missed it

@MikeOrator I do agree to a point to what you said. The only problem that we are facing with AI is that it was feed by the human created art for free. I find it pretty ironic that all those corpo entities where shouting theft when piracy was(maybe still is) a thing and it is not a problem suddenly when the roles changed. Anyway good convo:).Thanks.

@MikeOrator If you would read what I wrote and understand it then I would not suggest you are ChatGPT. Just a machine that spouts nonsense.

@MikeOrator
Human need to create art is at the top of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. That is what makes us human and creates culture. AI can help help with fulfilling some of the basic needs (first teo level of the Maslow's pyramid) but it should be bared from replacing us as art creators. According to few research results AI teached on creations made by AI is showing diminish output results. So no, AI cannot use its own creations.With human input there is no AI output. Your lack of understanding why this is not ok to replaced human art vision but it is ok to replace manual labor is a symptom of modern times. Technological junkies without vision of future consequences.

@MikeOrator I am not sure from where you got the assertion that there was some overwhelming fun and dandy approach to it. Because replacing art creation in all its colours is not the same as facilitating or supporting cumbersome tasks like data manipulation, weather/climate prediction models, support for people with medical issues etc. I find it not particularly funny that difference between those is not obvious. Especially that you are aware that mainstream art turned to ***** precisely for the corporate profit motive thanks to algorithms and making art in most of the forms finanacially unsustainable for common people. Saying that becaue of those issues there is no difference if AI will take over is pinnacle of ignorance.You are confusing cause and effect.AI is "creating"skimpy anime girls only because it was created by humans first....not the other way around.Also you do know there is a world beyond skimpy anime girls and mainstream "artists"? AI is a mixer machine that cannot feed itself.It needs human art.

@MikeOrator ChatGPT..is that you?

@zekepliskin Finally someone that is able to add 2+2 in terms of human needs and not only needs of capital.

@mrbone The most I have spend on a single game in last 5yr was £30.My actuall limit is way below £50. It sounds almost like " but please think about the shareholders"...nah man. It does not stop on small dev companies and we both know it. If they have few lines to record I do not see the issue.

@Golem25 I am not being histerical. All the examples that you had given are an actual progress that was uplifting for a regular Grog. I do not dispute that AI will and already has its uses that are very beneficial. What I dispute is its use it curbing the human artistic expression for the sake of corporate profit.We already see that in music industry. Art is a human construct and AI should not replace it. I do not have a lot of hope for regulation. Corpo lobbists will make sure that 0.1% gets most of the fruits from the AI and regula voice actor, singer or painter will get nada.

@mrbone I do not agree with your neolib sentiment and risk/reward approach. Regular workes are also not a charity and they bleed money even more than people who "take the risk and invest". I do not want to spend £+80 for new game and so I do not do it. I wait until it gets cheaper.

@Cherip-the-Ripper Not level headed but corpo headed. Without proper legislation for AI regulation we will be sacrificed on a altar of "free market".

@mrbone Maybe C-suit and shareholders should be paid a bit less? Game price will not stay the same regardless.(edit:typo)

@Bartig That is not how the capitalism works my pure hearted friend.

@Golem25
Luddites fought with progress that ultimately made their life easier. What AI does is parasitizes on human creativity without which it could not exist for the sake of coporate profit. Artistic expression is in a core of being human.Saying that replacing it is progress is ludicrous and blind.This is anti-progress.However AI will have its uses but replacing artistic expression is not a good way of using it.