3 ms·

Incremental progress towards what? This is literally going backwards. I can play GTA IV on my Playstation 3 right now. I could almost 2 decades ago. But now I

by bakugo 1y ago

Incremental progress towards what? This is literally going backwards. I can play GTA IV on my Playstation 3 right now. I could almost 2 decades ago. But now I can instead play a version of GTA that resembles what dreaming about playing GTA would be like, in which I can press a button and, after 10 seconds of latency, watch my "character" awkwardly walk into a building as the world melts around him, all while consuming literally 100 times the computing resources that the original game required to run. And this is apparently revolutionary. If this was created by someone I knew, I'd tell them to learn Unity or something and make an actual game.

soulofmischief 1y ago
Then go play GTA IV on your Playstation 3, since you lack understanding about the goals of world models and cannot recognize incremental progress towards that vision, and are only interested in armchair criticism without a full understanding of the scene. Every game company is going to use this tech in some form one day, whether in a production engine or during the prototyping phase. At some point, you're going to have to shed your biases. If you lack the vision or understanding to appreciate the research going into this, you're welcome to come back years from now when a finished product has reached the masses. > If this was created by someone I knew, I'd tell them to learn Unity or something and make an actual game. That's sad. Sad that you don't think actual games will be made with this technology, sad that you're gatekeeping what games even are by using vague qualifiers like "actual" which allow you to retreat from your position as needed, sad that you'd discourage them from continuing to research this amazing new avenue of creative possibilities.
- bakugo 1y ago
  Yes, we know, your groundbreaking AI startup is the future and it changes everything and it's going to take the world by storm and every company on earth will be using your technology by the end of the decade, just like every other tech startup ever. Save it for the VCs. > gatekeeping what games even are by using vague qualifiers like "actual" I really shouldn't need to define this, but "actual" games have gameplay. Slowly moving a character in an AI generated "world" that melts around him, doesn't obey any laws of physics, has no well defined mechanics and generally doesn't make any sense doesn't count as gameplay in my eyes, and I don't think that's a controversial opinion. Once this "technology" allows me to play a real game, with real mechanics that make sense, that isn't just a dream-like version of an existing popular game, then you can call it an "amazing new avenue of creative possibilities." Until then, it's just a gimmick that doesn't serve much of a purpose beyond impressing the uneducated for a few minutes.
  - soulofmischief 1y ago
    This is a hell of a lot of bias and assumptions. I don't think you have any desire to have a fair conversation about this, you're just using this conversation as a soapbox to yell at the sky about things you don't understand. Your comment is so riddled with strawmans, hypotheticals, gatekeeping, insults and accusations, I don't think there is any value to be had talking to someone in your state. Once you understand this technology better and lose the bad attitude, maybe we can try this again.
    - bakugo 1y ago
      This is the most childishly pretentious way of saying "I've lost the argument so I'm just going to insult you" I've ever seen, congratulations.
      - soulofmischief 1y ago
        My calling out your ad hominem and straw man, gatekeeping, etc. is not insulting you. I said nothing that should be insulting. And there is nothing wrong with refusing to engage with a bad faith argument that is riddled with fallacies. Now you're calling me childish and pretentious, is this how you usually respond to criticism of your argumentative approach? To me this looks like projection. Discussions are not about winning or losing, and you shouldn't approach them in such an antagonistic manner. Again, if you want to actually address my prior argument without insults, fallacies or deflection, then let's get back on track. Otherwise, you're continuing to be aggressive and I will again suggest that we end this discussion here.
        bakugo 1y ago
        Seems like you were unable to understand my comment and were left confused and angered. I don't think there is any value to be had talking to someone in your state. Once you're capable of understanding what I say better and lose the bad attitude, maybe we can try this again.
        1y ago

by bakugo 1y ago

soulofmischief 1y ago

Then go play GTA IV on your Playstation 3, since you lack understanding about the goals of world models and cannot recognize incremental progress towards that vision, and are only interested in armchair criticism without a full understanding of the scene. Every game company is going to use this tech in some form one day, whether in a production engine or during the prototyping phase. At some point, you're going to have to shed your biases. If you lack the vision or understanding to appreciate the research going into this, you're welcome to come back years from now when a finished product has reached the masses. > If this was created by someone I knew, I'd tell them to learn Unity or something and make an actual game. That's sad. Sad that you don't think actual games will be made with this technology, sad that you're gatekeeping what games even are by using vague qualifiers like "actual" which allow you to retreat from your position as needed, sad that you'd discourage them from continuing to research this amazing new avenue of creative possibilities.

bakugo 1y ago
Yes, we know, your groundbreaking AI startup is the future and it changes everything and it's going to take the world by storm and every company on earth will be using your technology by the end of the decade, just like every other tech startup ever. Save it for the VCs. > gatekeeping what games even are by using vague qualifiers like "actual" I really shouldn't need to define this, but "actual" games have gameplay. Slowly moving a character in an AI generated "world" that melts around him, doesn't obey any laws of physics, has no well defined mechanics and generally doesn't make any sense doesn't count as gameplay in my eyes, and I don't think that's a controversial opinion. Once this "technology" allows me to play a real game, with real mechanics that make sense, that isn't just a dream-like version of an existing popular game, then you can call it an "amazing new avenue of creative possibilities." Until then, it's just a gimmick that doesn't serve much of a purpose beyond impressing the uneducated for a few minutes.
- soulofmischief 1y ago
  This is a hell of a lot of bias and assumptions. I don't think you have any desire to have a fair conversation about this, you're just using this conversation as a soapbox to yell at the sky about things you don't understand. Your comment is so riddled with strawmans, hypotheticals, gatekeeping, insults and accusations, I don't think there is any value to be had talking to someone in your state. Once you understand this technology better and lose the bad attitude, maybe we can try this again.
  - bakugo 1y ago
    This is the most childishly pretentious way of saying "I've lost the argument so I'm just going to insult you" I've ever seen, congratulations.
    - soulofmischief 1y ago
      My calling out your ad hominem and straw man, gatekeeping, etc. is not insulting you. I said nothing that should be insulting. And there is nothing wrong with refusing to engage with a bad faith argument that is riddled with fallacies. Now you're calling me childish and pretentious, is this how you usually respond to criticism of your argumentative approach? To me this looks like projection. Discussions are not about winning or losing, and you shouldn't approach them in such an antagonistic manner. Again, if you want to actually address my prior argument without insults, fallacies or deflection, then let's get back on track. Otherwise, you're continuing to be aggressive and I will again suggest that we end this discussion here.
      - bakugo 1y ago
        Seems like you were unable to understand my comment and were left confused and angered. I don't think there is any value to be had talking to someone in your state. Once you're capable of understanding what I say better and lose the bad attitude, maybe we can try this again.
        1y ago