4 ms·

> Also from a store perspective, any game where shortcuts like this are used tend to be shit games. Yeah, they indicate that they have already submitted multip

by vlunkr 3y ago

> Also from a store perspective, any game where shortcuts like this are used tend to be shit games. Yeah, they indicate that they have already submitted multiple games with AI generated assets, and submitted this one "with a few assets that were fairly obviously AI generated." Maybe I'm being unfair and they are making really good games, but these are not good indicators to me.

LanceH 3y ago
These tools have only now become available. I can imagine a game where these tools are used to develop a large world and backstory previously not possible. The main images and text may be hand crafted, but you might walk down a street where the other building are all unique, have names, and descriptions. It could really flesh out some of the procedurally generated games out there. Or it could be terrible. Or it could be good for being so terrible. It shouldn't be rejected entirely just yet.
- eropple 3y ago
  It's not being "rejected entirely". That is mendacious editorializing. Generative AI products are being rejected unless you affirm that you have rights to the entirety of the training data set. What's wrong with that?
  - Animats 3y ago
    That you probably don't need rights to the training set in the US, unless Congress changes copyright law. This is being litigated.[1] Humans can look at a collection of copyrighted images and draw a new picture. The legal basis for holding AIs to a higher standard is weak. Current litigation: [1] [1] https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/16/23557098/generative-ai-art-copyright-legal-lawsuit-stable-diffusion-midjourney-deviantart https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/16/23557098/generative-ai-ar...
    - mcpackieh 3y ago
      > That you probably don't need rights [...] And if Valve doesn't want to take this risk? To reiterate eropple, what's wrong with that?
    - eropple 3y ago
      > That you probably don't need rights to the training set in the US Even if that is true--and it's not sure to be--Valve is within their rights to demand additional coverage. > Humans can look at a collection of copyrighted images and draw a new picture. The legal basis for holding AIs to a higher standard is weak. Horseshit and worse words. Computers aren't people. They create derivative works from pushing inputs through mathematical models. The inputs are unerasable and the claims to the otherwise by the AI hustler class exist only to be able to profit off human effort without paying for it.
      - Animats 3y ago
        > Valve is within their rights to demand additional coverage. As a near-monopoly gatekeeper, Valve is vulnerable to antitrust charges. FTC is apparently about to go after Amazon.[1] US antitrust policy did far too little for too many years. EU competition policy is more aggressive.[2] The EU competition authorities already fined Valve for selling geo-blocked content that only worked in some EU countries. That's a violation of the basic Single Market rules of the EU. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/06/ftc-prepares-the-big-one-a-major-lawsuit-targeting-amazons-core-business/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/06/ftc-prepares-the... [2] https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/ict/cases_en https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/ict/cases_en

by vlunkr 3y ago

LanceH 3y ago

These tools have only now become available. I can imagine a game where these tools are used to develop a large world and backstory previously not possible. The main images and text may be hand crafted, but you might walk down a street where the other building are all unique, have names, and descriptions. It could really flesh out some of the procedurally generated games out there. Or it could be terrible. Or it could be good for being so terrible. It shouldn't be rejected entirely just yet.

eropple 3y ago
It's not being "rejected entirely". That is mendacious editorializing. Generative AI products are being rejected unless you affirm that you have rights to the entirety of the training data set. What's wrong with that?
- Animats 3y ago
  That you probably don't need rights to the training set in the US, unless Congress changes copyright law. This is being litigated.[1] Humans can look at a collection of copyrighted images and draw a new picture. The legal basis for holding AIs to a higher standard is weak. Current litigation: [1] [1] https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/16/23557098/generative-ai-art-copyright-legal-lawsuit-stable-diffusion-midjourney-deviantart https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/16/23557098/generative-ai-ar...
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    > That you probably don't need rights [...] And if Valve doesn't want to take this risk? To reiterate eropple, what's wrong with that?
  - eropple 3y ago
    > That you probably don't need rights to the training set in the US Even if that is true--and it's not sure to be--Valve is within their rights to demand additional coverage. > Humans can look at a collection of copyrighted images and draw a new picture. The legal basis for holding AIs to a higher standard is weak. Horseshit and worse words. Computers aren't people. They create derivative works from pushing inputs through mathematical models. The inputs are unerasable and the claims to the otherwise by the AI hustler class exist only to be able to profit off human effort without paying for it.
    - Animats 3y ago
      > Valve is within their rights to demand additional coverage. As a near-monopoly gatekeeper, Valve is vulnerable to antitrust charges. FTC is apparently about to go after Amazon.[1] US antitrust policy did far too little for too many years. EU competition policy is more aggressive.[2] The EU competition authorities already fined Valve for selling geo-blocked content that only worked in some EU countries. That's a violation of the basic Single Market rules of the EU. [1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/06/ftc-prepares-the-big-one-a-major-lawsuit-targeting-amazons-core-business/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/06/ftc-prepares-the... [2] https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/ict/cases_en https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/ict/cases_en