mke
Yeah, I think it's just funny comparing it with the usual situation on Linux, where there's even less restrictions. I believe you can actually put a newline in a file name, for example, though I'll need to check and come back later.
I'd need to rename a massive amount of files if I ever wanted to go back to Windows.
P.S. yup. Generally, just avoid /, null, and you're good to go.
Even the poisonous swamp hides beauty within... doesn't mean you're guaranteed to enjoy visiting, though.
I think the big difference is that you seem to think that AI has peaked or is near its peak potential, while I think AI is still just getting started.
That's a fair assessment. I'm still not sure if popular AI tech is on an exponential or a sigmoid curve, though I tend towards the latter. But the industry at large is starting to believe it's just not worth it. Worse, the entities at the forefront of AI are unsustainable—they're burning brightly right now, but the cash flow required to keep a reaction on this scale going is simply too large. If you've got time and are willing, please check the linked article by Ed (burst damage).
I mean, maybe I could have phrased it better, but what else are you gonna do?
My bad, I try to trim down the fat while editing, but I accidentally removed things I shouldn't. As I said, it's a nitpick, and I understand the importance of helping those who find themselves unhirable. Maybe it's just me, but I thought it came across a little mean, even if it wasn't your intent. I try to gently "poke" folks when I see stuff like this because artists get enough undeserved crap already.
I've no idea where you're getting these predictions from. I think some of them are fundamentally flawed, if not outright incorrect, and don't reflect real life trends of generative AI development and applications.
Gonna finish this comment in a few, please wait. Edit: there we go.
One by one, somewhat sorted from "Ok, I see it," to "What the hell?"
Wall of text
Generative AI is going to result in a hell of a lot of layoffs and will likely ruin people’s lives.
It's arguably already ruining many artists' lives, yeah. I haven't seen any confirmed mass layoffs in the game industry due to AI just yet. Some articles claimed that Rayark, developer of Deemo and Cytus, fired many of its artists, but they later denied this.
AI is going to revolutionize the game industry.
Maybe. If you're talking AI in general, it's already been doing so for a long time. Generative AI? Not more so than most other industries, and that's less than you'd expect.
AI is going to kill the game industry as it currently exists
I doubt such dramatic statements will turn true in time, unless you're very generous with how openly they can be interpreted.
Generative AI will lead to a lot of real-time effects and mechanics that are currently impossible, like endless quests that don’t feel hollow, realistic procedural generation that can convincingly create everything from random clutter to entire galaxies, true photorealistic graphics (look up gaussian splatting, it’s pretty cool), convincing real-time art filters (imagine a 3d game that looks like an animated Van Gogh painting), and so on.
There's a bit to unpack, here.
- With better hardware and more efficient models, I can see more generative AI being used for effects and mechanics, but I don't think we're seeing revolutionary uses anytime soon.
- While time could change this, model generation doesn't seem too promising compared to just paying good 3D artists. That said, they don't need to be perfect, good enough models would already be game (ha ha) changing.
- Endless quests that don't feel hollow... might be entirely beyond current generative AI technologies. Depends on what you mean by hollow.
Generative AI will eventually open the door to small groups of devs being able to compete with AAA releases on all metrics.
That's quite the bold statement. On some aspects, I'd be willing to hear you out, but on all metrics? That's no longer a problem of mere technology or scale, it's a matter of how many resources each one has available. Some gaps cannot be bridged, even by miraculous tech. For example, indies do not have the budget to license expensive actors (e.g. Call of Duty, Cyberpunk 2077), brands (e.g. racing games), and so on. GenAI will not change this. Hell, GenAI will certainly not pay for global advertising.
Generative AI will make studios with thousands of employees obsolete. This is a double-edged sword. Fewer employees means fewer ideas; but on the other side, you get a more accurate vision of what the director originally intended. Fewer employees also will also mean that you will likely have to be a genuinely creative person to get ahead, instead of someone who knows how to use Maya or Photoshop but is otherwise creatively bankrupt. Your contribution matters far more in a studio of <50 than it does in a studio of >5,000; as such, your creative skill will matter more.
Whoa, whoa, slow down, please.
Generative AI will make studios with thousands of employees obsolete.
Generative AI is failing to deliver significant gains to most industries. This article does a wonderful job of showing that GenAI is actually quite limited in its applications, and its benefits much smaller than a lot of people think. More importantly, it highlights how the market itself is widely starting to grasp this.
Fewer employees means fewer ideas; but on the other side, you get a more accurate vision of what the director originally intended.
Game development can't be simplified like this! Famously, the designers and artists for genre-defining game Dark Souls were given a lot of freedom in production at the request of director Hidetaka Miyazaki himself. Regardless of what you think of the results, including the diversity of other's visions... was the director's vision!
Fewer employees also will also mean that you will likely have to be a genuinely creative person to get ahead, instead of someone who knows how to use Maya or Photoshop but is otherwise creatively bankrupt. Your contribution matters far more in a studio of <50 than it does in a studio of >5,000; as such, your creative skill will matter more.
Again, that's assuming a lot and simplifying too much. I know companies that reduced their employee count, where what happened instead is that those capable of playing office politics remained, while workers who just diligently did their part got the boot. I'm not saying that's what always happens! But none of us can accurately predict exactly how large organizations will behave solely based on employee count.
A lot of people will have to be retrained because they will no longer be creative enough to make a living off of making games.
I admit, this is just a nitpick, but I don't like the way this is phrased. Designers still have their wisdom, artists are still creative, workers remain skilled. If hiring them is no longer advantageous due to financial incentives to adopt AI, that's not their fault for being insufficiently creative.
Well, sounds great. I almost wish more companies would advertise to that market, really.
It's like... I know you're lying, and I know you probably don't actually care, but some of your competitors couldn't even be bothered to do this much. Those companies thought shitting on things I care about to maximize profit was the better strategy. I'll take that into consideration in my future decisions.
And if the situation changes, if they turn around and go full in on generative AI, we'll just have to consider that too. That's life.
Of course, I believe using alternatives that are more resistant to these kinds of market trends (community built software, perhaps?) would be ideal, but it's not always an option.
The last few pages of the transcript are chilling. I don't know who this helmsman, AB-1, is, but I deeply feel for them.
(Implied) heavy content
CAPT: come on @AB-1. gotta move. (we) gotta move. you gotta get up. you gotta snap out of it- and we gotta get out. AB-1: okay. CAPT: come up. AB-1: okay.
AB-1: help me. CAPT: don't panic. don't panic. CAPT: work your way up here. AB-1: I can't.
AB-1: help me. CAPT: you're okay. come on. CAPT: don't freeze up @AB-1. come on.
AB-1: I can't *. CAPT: yes you can *. AB-1: my feet are (slipping/slippery).
AB-1: I need a ladder. CAPT: we don't have a ladder @AB-1. AB-1: (a line). CAPT: I don't have a line @AB-1. AB-1: you gunna leave me
AB-1: (I need someone to/help somebody) help me. (you don't wanna/you gunna) help me? CAPT: I'm the only one here @AB-1.
AB-1: (I can't). AB-1: I can't. AB-1: (I'm gone/I'm a goner).
Always sweet to see folks incentivize each other to engage with content!
For anyone still daunted by the article, I expect the DEFCON channel will upload this talk soon, which might be more up your alley.
I've seen this, and what bothers me most is when you get that nasty feeling they're not looking for a therapist, but validation. Yeah, your ex-wife sucked, man. She was totally in the wrong about everything always, sorry you had to deal with her for so long. I'm sure you're in the clear and there's nothing you could be blamed for, it's easy to tell from this one-sided retelling of your personal conflicts.
When anyone's first topic of choice for casual conversation is how much their last partner was in the wrong, it's... difficult not to be dubious.
I think that's because your instance hasn't updated to Lemmy versions that add this yet.
It helps people and discourse, so it's appreciated. Stalking and tagging downvoters is probably going too far, though.
When the color of their skin is otherwise irrelevant, I get you, but in this instance I think it's relevant because Trump seems like a racist idiot. It's salt upon injury, not because a rare black man who happens to be articulate owned him, but because a rare articulate man who happens to be black did. The point is the same, but the latter doesn't perpetuate racism. Context matters.
Maybe I'm too naive, but that's how I interpreted OP's comment.