It'll get better?!

If it gets bad enough, giant asteroid 2028 is technically better I suppose.

Valve would have to wade into the legal quagmire that is "determining whether a product has been AI generated, and to what degree". No way in hell they're touching that.

But not from Valve's perspective. There is zero reason for Valve to rethink about it.

When ai came out everyone wanted a way to speak to their computer and have it actually do anything you could do or automate it, it literally can with agents and does it well, I ssh into my pc and use it over terminal all the time for stuff that would be a chore to do unless I was sitting at my pc. (You can use any chat really, telegram, discord, etc.) It literally asks before doing anything, you can have it memorize that it should always make backups or work readonly with duplicates, etc. if you're scared of losing sht, but I've had it recover things for me that I've lost myself very often, never has it been the reason I lost anything.

Also solves any issues I have with ram/cpu usage by finding the cause and giving me options to limit them. My lazy ass would never do that before and just restart and uninstall the potential causes of my new performance issues.

How will copyright not help here? You don't have to use the same code or assets for something to be copyright infringement. It's one thing if you personally don't believe in copyright, but just claiming that it has nothing to do with copyright because it's not a 1:1 copy is just not true.

If you made something that "just happens to look like that other thing", you'll have a hard time defending that in court (especially if you extort them beforehand). Heck, there have been copyright lawsuits over musicians using similar lyrics or melodies since forever.

Training data is based on copyrighted material that is stolen. Someone should be made to pay somewhere. The theft of human thought cannot be allowed to be exploited.

That's pretty meta.

The meta level of this comment is just... Chef's 👌

Keep up the good work 👍

Accidentally buying the wrong game would actually fall under a different area of law: Fraud and possibly trademark infringement. Though, you can't trademark (or even copyright) gameplay/mechanics...

In 1879(!) Baker v. Selden, the Supreme Court ruled that copyright protects only the expression of ideas (the text, illustrations, and phrasing), not the underlying ideas, systems, methods, or processes. This is important. The same rule applies to patents: They only cover the implementation of ideas, not the ideas themselves. Endless case law reaffirms this.

WHICH IS WHY SOFTWARE PATENTS SHOULD NOT EXIST.

I know it's unrelated, just wanted to throw it out there 😀