im_fine_sandy comments on [Meta Discussion] How would people feel about requiring posters to tag games made with AI?

[Meta Discussion] How would people feel about requiring posters to tag games made with AI? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

submitted 6 days ago by SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/freegames@feddit.uk

112 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I see a lot of free games on here that are made with AI, and personally i'm not interested in AI generated content. If other people feel the same way, maybe we could start tagging posts accordingly?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub -2 points 6 days ago (27 children)

I know this isn't what you want to hear but, this is only going to be relevant for a few more months. Everything is going to be built with AI to some extent.

hideshow 27 child comments

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 5 points 6 days ago

No :3

parent

[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (9 children)

Been hearing that for years now, how AI is only a few months away from a variety of lofty goals. Funny how that never seems to fully materialize

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 days ago

At this point, it's already easier to list what DOESN'T contain AI code than what does. It's only going to get more widespread.

parent

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 3 points 5 days ago (1 child)

Having a model run a code review isn't lofty goal, it's available right now and it's very good. Anyone who's done this will agree that it's a tool to improve the quality of the code.

The only reason not to do it is ideological, and it's not a hill worth dying on. We already use linters and so on.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world -1 points 5 days ago

100% adoption (the thing we were both referring to until you randomly started talking about something else just now) is a lofty goal yes, one that has been repeated in LLM marketing for years now. Always a few months away.

To address what you randomly just started talking about: Again, we’re on year five of identical testimonials to what you just wrote. Leave us behind if it’s already “very good”. Constant talk of getting left behind but nobody ever actually leaves

parent

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)

Yes, clearly if you don't keep up with the progress then you won't know what it is.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world 1 point 4 days ago

The progress of what exactly? How much money companies can waste with zero roi? How have your personal finances been since you have “kept up” with AI? Are you making a thousand times more money now? Ten thousand times more?

parent

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 1 point 6 days ago (3 children)

Just one more datacenter bro trust me AGI is here bro we just need to ingest a few million more books bro you'll see bro it's right there. (heavy /s)

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 3 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It really is available right now though?

You're thinking of "built with AI" as in "make a game, bot", but the reality is "run a full code review" and it's here right now and it's very good.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today -2 points 5 days ago (1 child)

Yet another person trying to tell a senior software engineer they don't know what they're talking about. I wish I had a penny...

For starters, AGI - Artificial general intelligence. What we have is not general intelligence. It doesn't understand a thing. Two. I've rejected enough AI written code reviews to know that it is not here right now and can in fact not write good code. It can write code that on the surface performs the task desired at best. And that's still pushing it and flawed and poorly architected.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 2 points 5 days ago

I always find it odd when someone needs to state their credentials to give themselves some credibility - it always has the opposite effect.

Agent code reviews find loads of bugs, some security issues, some user facing, dead code etcetera.

Refusing to use that support is an ideological position.

parent

[–] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone [S] 3 points 6 days ago (15 children)

Given how many people seem to care, perhaps it isn't as irrelevant as you think it is.

parent

hideshow 15 child comments

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 5 points 6 days ago (14 children)

What they're saying is, is that so many, if not all games and software will have been developed using AI in some capacity, that it'll make the tag pointless.

parent

hideshow 14 child comments

[–] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 6 days ago (13 children)

Well, then an AI-free tag for developers who proudly avoid it. I'm sure people will continue to care.

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 2 points 5 days ago (12 children)

I posted this elsewhere but you should read it too:

Having a model run a code review isn’t lofty goal, it’s available right now and it’s very good. Anyone who’s done this will agree that it’s a tool to improve the quality of the code.

The only reason not to do it is ideological, and it’s not a hill worth dying on. We already use linters and so on.

parent

hideshow 12 child comments

[–] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 5 days ago (11 children)

Ideological hills are the only hills worth dying on. Otherwise you're dying over a random patch of earth.

parent

hideshow 11 child comments

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 2 points 5 days ago (10 children)

What a silly thing to say. Ideologies are never worth worrying about because they are by definition unsupported by reason.

parent

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone [S] 2 points 4 days ago (3 children)

It seems you've chosen your ideology poorly, then. My ideology attempts to be supported by reason as often as is possible. Of course, there are things reason alone can't tell you (see: the is-ought gap), but of course one ought to follow the evidence wherever it leads, even if that evidence makes you uncomfortable.

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 1 point 4 days ago (2 children)

I don't do arguments in semantics, but I will note that your definition of "ideology" seems very unusual.

In my view, there's significant evidence that AI tools are very proficient at supporting developers, and that very clearly makes you uncomfortable.

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone [S] 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)

Did your "significant evidence" ignore the massive water use, land use, copyright infringement, and other ethical concerns?

It's not like i'm one of those people from Dune or whatever. I'm not against all machine learning - just these specific tools made by these companies and these specific massive environmental problems. (Among other big issues)

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 1 point 4 days ago

Yes I did ignore those issues.

Game devs certainly will.

Being a developer without using AI is becoming untenable. That's the reality that any developer will tell you. Theres posts here to that effect from career developers bemoaning the changes to the industry every day.

parent

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 1 point 5 days ago (5 children)

What do you think ideology means?

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 1 point 4 days ago (4 children)

I don't do arguments in semantics.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 1 point 4 days ago (3 children)

Insane reply just admit you thought it meant something else lmao

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 1 point 4 days ago (2 children)

Maybe look up a definition for me lmao

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)

I mean sure I guess

of beliefs or principles, especially one on which a political system, party, or organization is based:

"socialist/capitalist ideology"

"The people are caught between two opposing ideologies."

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ideology

There is colloquial use of the term to refer specifically to beliefs/principles held in contrast to what evidence supports, but I don't think you can make an argument for this overriding the general meaning of the term, especially when it comes to (hopefully) educated discussion.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 1 point 4 days ago

Great. Well done.

I don't believe that beliefs or principles (such as those supporting political parties) are hills worth dying on because they are, by definition, unsupported by reason.

parent