- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Does this specify the kinds of AI? Are none of these devs using code completion on their IDEs? Or refactoring tools? Because the bulk of them use AI these says.
Here is a frog, please help me split its hairs
The seal looks like this:
Code completion is probably a gray area.
Those models generally have much smaller context windows, so the energy concern isn’t quite as extreme.
You could also reasonably make a claim that the model is legally in the clear as far as licensing, if the training data was entirely open source (non-attribution, non-share-alike, and commercial-allowed) licensed code.
That said, I think the general sentiment is less “what the technology does” and more “who it does it to”. Code completion, for the most part, isn’t deskilling labor, or turning experts into accountability sinks.
Like, I don’t think the Luddites would’ve had a problem with an artisan using a knitting frame in their own home. They were too busy fighting against factories locking children inside for 18-hour shifts, getting maimed by the machines or dying trapped in a fire.
This is exactly my thoughts. You need to specify. Is a product AI when Windows is used to develop it? Windows is an “AI” product as in assisted to be produced by AI.
Labels are meaningless without sensible rules and enforcement.
I would primarily understand it as being free of generative AI (picture and sound), which is what is most obvious when actually playing a game. I’m personally not against using LLMs for coding if you actually know what you’re doing and properly review the output. However at that point most will come to the conclusion that you could write the code manually anyways and probably save time.
Using ai to generate samples to get a framework of the product would be permitted or not? Is placeholder generation allowed?
Even yesteryear’s code completion systems (that didn’t rely on LLMs) are technically speaking, AI systems.
While the term “AI” became the next “crypto” or “Blockchain”, in reality we’ve been using various AI products for the better part of the past 30 years.
We used to call the code that determined NPC behaviour AI.
It wasn’t AI as we know it now but it was intended to give vaguely realistic behaviour (such as taking a sensible route from A to B).
And honestly lightweight neural nets can make for some interesting enemy behavior as well. I’ve seen a couple games using that and wouldn’t be surprised if it caught on in the future.
Used to?
Removed by mod
Imagine thinking that disliking AI is racist, or a class war wedge issue.
When everyone else is selling poison, selling something actually edible is a pretty good move.
AI free art (aka theft free art) is like cruelty free cotton. A lot of people do, and should, care.
You tout a 80 dollar price, entirely ignoring that indie games are often sub-40. Nice ragebait.
Lmao what is this comment?
Are you really conflating the idea that people want art made by people with racism and hard-right politics?
Well Hitler was a painter, checkmate liberals.
Yeah he also had a single testicle, what’s your point?
Edit: I’m a dipshit, that’s a different user. Probably just shitposting XP
No one wants AI slop.
Are you being serious with this reply? Holy shit.
