▲ 487 ▼ Demands for AI Filter on Steam Grow as Next Fest Is Flooded with AI Slop (respawnfirst.com) submitted 3 weeks ago by inlandempire@jlai.lu to c/steam@lemmy.ml 103 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] chickenf622@sh.itjust.works 19 points 3 weeks ago (18 children) Would still be help filter out some of the slop. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 18 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml -5 points 3 weeks ago* (17 children) I think it would do more harm than being useful. Edit: it's like using a virus scanner that only detects viruses that the developer says its a virus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments replies: [–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 18 points 3 weeks ago (3 children) No, it's a first pass filter. People against AI like myself know it's a publisher declared thing but that's still hundreds of results less I'd have to filter through. No virus scanner promises 100% accuracy, it promises to be part of a solution that still requires user diligence permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) That's the issue with such Ai filter. Its useless if we have to trust publishers tag it correctly. If they do this ai slop, do you trust them doing that? It will bring false security for users trusting the filter would work correctly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There will never be a perfect system. Already users rely on the AI tag on Steam, why not just make it easier to exclude those? You're letting perfection be the enemy of progress. You will never outsmart the most malicious dev or the laziest user. Ever. What you can do is make progress, take in feedback of how that improved things and where it still fails, and then make more progress. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dreamkeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* Nah he's right. If you add an AI filter then companies will just stop tagging their games as AI generated. It's not a matter of anyone outsmarting anyone else it's just common sense. There wouldn't be any progress here, we would actually make things worse. Steam needs to do something on their own, or crowd source it somehow. But they'll never do that. They don't even review games for quality level as it is. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (4 children) I don't think most malware devs care about brand reputation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) I think that has nothing to do with my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn't matter. A steam dev lying has brand reputation to care about. Any company larger than a 3 person indie team has to care about PR if they want to be more than a one hit studio. So I think it matters because its an impactful distinction between reality and your anecdote permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn’t matter. I didn't say virus dev, but an antivirus dev / tool. It's like you trust only an antivirus tool, that relies on what the virus devs report. The antivirus tool represents the Steam filter in my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 2 weeks ago Yeah so it still relies on virus devs report, like we both previously mentioned. That is where and who I meant was lying. permalink fedilink source parent [–] artyom@piefed.social 0 points 3 weeks ago* (7 children) Why wouldn't you want to filter viruses that the developer says is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (6 children) I think you did not understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that only trusts what the developer of a virus declares to be a virus or its safe. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children) Why wouldn't you trust a developer that tells you that their software is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children) I think you didn't understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that ONLY (important part is the word "only") trusts a developer of a virus, that declares it to be a virus, or lies about it and declares it to be safe. I do not want to trust a virus scanner that just trusts the word of a virus developer. Is it really hard to understand my English? Am I speaking Chinese? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) Is it so hard to understand that your analogy is not applicable? This is not an AI detection tool. This is developers declaring "yes, this game was made with AI". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml -5 points 3 weeks ago* (17 children) I think it would do more harm than being useful. Edit: it's like using a virus scanner that only detects viruses that the developer says its a virus. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments replies: [–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 18 points 3 weeks ago (3 children) No, it's a first pass filter. People against AI like myself know it's a publisher declared thing but that's still hundreds of results less I'd have to filter through. No virus scanner promises 100% accuracy, it promises to be part of a solution that still requires user diligence permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) That's the issue with such Ai filter. Its useless if we have to trust publishers tag it correctly. If they do this ai slop, do you trust them doing that? It will bring false security for users trusting the filter would work correctly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There will never be a perfect system. Already users rely on the AI tag on Steam, why not just make it easier to exclude those? You're letting perfection be the enemy of progress. You will never outsmart the most malicious dev or the laziest user. Ever. What you can do is make progress, take in feedback of how that improved things and where it still fails, and then make more progress. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dreamkeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* Nah he's right. If you add an AI filter then companies will just stop tagging their games as AI generated. It's not a matter of anyone outsmarting anyone else it's just common sense. There wouldn't be any progress here, we would actually make things worse. Steam needs to do something on their own, or crowd source it somehow. But they'll never do that. They don't even review games for quality level as it is. permalink fedilink source parent [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (4 children) I don't think most malware devs care about brand reputation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) I think that has nothing to do with my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn't matter. A steam dev lying has brand reputation to care about. Any company larger than a 3 person indie team has to care about PR if they want to be more than a one hit studio. So I think it matters because its an impactful distinction between reality and your anecdote permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn’t matter. I didn't say virus dev, but an antivirus dev / tool. It's like you trust only an antivirus tool, that relies on what the virus devs report. The antivirus tool represents the Steam filter in my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 2 weeks ago Yeah so it still relies on virus devs report, like we both previously mentioned. That is where and who I meant was lying. permalink fedilink source parent [–] artyom@piefed.social 0 points 3 weeks ago* (7 children) Why wouldn't you want to filter viruses that the developer says is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (6 children) I think you did not understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that only trusts what the developer of a virus declares to be a virus or its safe. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children) Why wouldn't you trust a developer that tells you that their software is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children) I think you didn't understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that ONLY (important part is the word "only") trusts a developer of a virus, that declares it to be a virus, or lies about it and declares it to be safe. I do not want to trust a virus scanner that just trusts the word of a virus developer. Is it really hard to understand my English? Am I speaking Chinese? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) Is it so hard to understand that your analogy is not applicable? This is not an AI detection tool. This is developers declaring "yes, this game was made with AI". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 18 points 3 weeks ago (3 children) No, it's a first pass filter. People against AI like myself know it's a publisher declared thing but that's still hundreds of results less I'd have to filter through. No virus scanner promises 100% accuracy, it promises to be part of a solution that still requires user diligence permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) That's the issue with such Ai filter. Its useless if we have to trust publishers tag it correctly. If they do this ai slop, do you trust them doing that? It will bring false security for users trusting the filter would work correctly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There will never be a perfect system. Already users rely on the AI tag on Steam, why not just make it easier to exclude those? You're letting perfection be the enemy of progress. You will never outsmart the most malicious dev or the laziest user. Ever. What you can do is make progress, take in feedback of how that improved things and where it still fails, and then make more progress. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dreamkeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* Nah he's right. If you add an AI filter then companies will just stop tagging their games as AI generated. It's not a matter of anyone outsmarting anyone else it's just common sense. There wouldn't be any progress here, we would actually make things worse. Steam needs to do something on their own, or crowd source it somehow. But they'll never do that. They don't even review games for quality level as it is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) That's the issue with such Ai filter. Its useless if we have to trust publishers tag it correctly. If they do this ai slop, do you trust them doing that? It will bring false security for users trusting the filter would work correctly. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There will never be a perfect system. Already users rely on the AI tag on Steam, why not just make it easier to exclude those? You're letting perfection be the enemy of progress. You will never outsmart the most malicious dev or the laziest user. Ever. What you can do is make progress, take in feedback of how that improved things and where it still fails, and then make more progress. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dreamkeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* Nah he's right. If you add an AI filter then companies will just stop tagging their games as AI generated. It's not a matter of anyone outsmarting anyone else it's just common sense. There wouldn't be any progress here, we would actually make things worse. Steam needs to do something on their own, or crowd source it somehow. But they'll never do that. They don't even review games for quality level as it is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) There will never be a perfect system. Already users rely on the AI tag on Steam, why not just make it easier to exclude those? You're letting perfection be the enemy of progress. You will never outsmart the most malicious dev or the laziest user. Ever. What you can do is make progress, take in feedback of how that improved things and where it still fails, and then make more progress. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] dreamkeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* Nah he's right. If you add an AI filter then companies will just stop tagging their games as AI generated. It's not a matter of anyone outsmarting anyone else it's just common sense. There wouldn't be any progress here, we would actually make things worse. Steam needs to do something on their own, or crowd source it somehow. But they'll never do that. They don't even review games for quality level as it is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dreamkeeper@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* Nah he's right. If you add an AI filter then companies will just stop tagging their games as AI generated. It's not a matter of anyone outsmarting anyone else it's just common sense. There wouldn't be any progress here, we would actually make things worse. Steam needs to do something on their own, or crowd source it somehow. But they'll never do that. They don't even review games for quality level as it is. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (4 children) I don't think most malware devs care about brand reputation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) I think that has nothing to do with my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn't matter. A steam dev lying has brand reputation to care about. Any company larger than a 3 person indie team has to care about PR if they want to be more than a one hit studio. So I think it matters because its an impactful distinction between reality and your anecdote permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn’t matter. I didn't say virus dev, but an antivirus dev / tool. It's like you trust only an antivirus tool, that relies on what the virus devs report. The antivirus tool represents the Steam filter in my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 2 weeks ago Yeah so it still relies on virus devs report, like we both previously mentioned. That is where and who I meant was lying. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) I think that has nothing to do with my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn't matter. A steam dev lying has brand reputation to care about. Any company larger than a 3 person indie team has to care about PR if they want to be more than a one hit studio. So I think it matters because its an impactful distinction between reality and your anecdote permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn’t matter. I didn't say virus dev, but an antivirus dev / tool. It's like you trust only an antivirus tool, that relies on what the virus devs report. The antivirus tool represents the Steam filter in my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 2 weeks ago Yeah so it still relies on virus devs report, like we both previously mentioned. That is where and who I meant was lying. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 3 weeks ago (2 children) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn't matter. A steam dev lying has brand reputation to care about. Any company larger than a 3 person indie team has to care about PR if they want to be more than a one hit studio. So I think it matters because its an impactful distinction between reality and your anecdote permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn’t matter. I didn't say virus dev, but an antivirus dev / tool. It's like you trust only an antivirus tool, that relies on what the virus devs report. The antivirus tool represents the Steam filter in my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 2 weeks ago Yeah so it still relies on virus devs report, like we both previously mentioned. That is where and who I meant was lying. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) Well if a virus dev lied and hurt their rep it wouldn’t matter. I didn't say virus dev, but an antivirus dev / tool. It's like you trust only an antivirus tool, that relies on what the virus devs report. The antivirus tool represents the Steam filter in my objection. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 2 weeks ago Yeah so it still relies on virus devs report, like we both previously mentioned. That is where and who I meant was lying. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] klankin@piefed.ca 1 point 2 weeks ago Yeah so it still relies on virus devs report, like we both previously mentioned. That is where and who I meant was lying. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] artyom@piefed.social 0 points 3 weeks ago* (7 children) Why wouldn't you want to filter viruses that the developer says is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (6 children) I think you did not understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that only trusts what the developer of a virus declares to be a virus or its safe. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children) Why wouldn't you trust a developer that tells you that their software is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children) I think you didn't understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that ONLY (important part is the word "only") trusts a developer of a virus, that declares it to be a virus, or lies about it and declares it to be safe. I do not want to trust a virus scanner that just trusts the word of a virus developer. Is it really hard to understand my English? Am I speaking Chinese? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) Is it so hard to understand that your analogy is not applicable? This is not an AI detection tool. This is developers declaring "yes, this game was made with AI". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (6 children) I think you did not understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that only trusts what the developer of a virus declares to be a virus or its safe. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children) Why wouldn't you trust a developer that tells you that their software is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children) I think you didn't understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that ONLY (important part is the word "only") trusts a developer of a virus, that declares it to be a virus, or lies about it and declares it to be safe. I do not want to trust a virus scanner that just trusts the word of a virus developer. Is it really hard to understand my English? Am I speaking Chinese? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) Is it so hard to understand that your analogy is not applicable? This is not an AI detection tool. This is developers declaring "yes, this game was made with AI". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 3 weeks ago (5 children) Why wouldn't you trust a developer that tells you that their software is a virus? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children) I think you didn't understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that ONLY (important part is the word "only") trusts a developer of a virus, that declares it to be a virus, or lies about it and declares it to be safe. I do not want to trust a virus scanner that just trusts the word of a virus developer. Is it really hard to understand my English? Am I speaking Chinese? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) Is it so hard to understand that your analogy is not applicable? This is not an AI detection tool. This is developers declaring "yes, this game was made with AI". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (4 children) I think you didn't understand the issue. I do not want to trust a virus scanner, that ONLY (important part is the word "only") trusts a developer of a virus, that declares it to be a virus, or lies about it and declares it to be safe. I do not want to trust a virus scanner that just trusts the word of a virus developer. Is it really hard to understand my English? Am I speaking Chinese? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) Is it so hard to understand that your analogy is not applicable? This is not an AI detection tool. This is developers declaring "yes, this game was made with AI". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (3 children) Is it so hard to understand that your analogy is not applicable? This is not an AI detection tool. This is developers declaring "yes, this game was made with AI". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children) My analogy is perfectly applicable. And your replies show you didn't understand. This is not an AI detection tool It is about listing Ai games. My analogy was, what if a virus tool was in fact just a listing tool, and we just trust the word of the developers. yes, this game was made with AI Exactly what I'm talking about. The fact that you thought I was saying its just an Ai detection tool shows you didn't understand the assignment. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child) You are the one who does not understand. And at this point it seems intentional. So I'm just gonna let you keep getting downvoted. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 1 point 3 weeks ago No, you are the one responding to my comparison and did not understand, even with subsequent question and answers. I was very clear about it. permalink fedilink source parent