Echo Dot

I can’t switch to purely Linux because I need windows in order to be able to do my job. The fact I also play games on the computer is irrelevant.

I don’t understand what you’re not understanding.

I feel the same way about women who drink prosecco. Kill them all.

Because then they’ll block steam in Russia.

I’m not defending Valve here they need to have more values, but realistically this game was never going to be available for sale in Russia. No matter what they did.

Even all the design agencies use Macs, no one in the business world uses Linux. Except for servers obviously.

I really need to upgrade my setup, but I don’t really feel like selling one of my kidneys so I can afford 8 gigabytes of RAM (it’s not a good kidney so I’m being realistic).

Anyway my current system has windows 11 on it anyway so I might as well just keep using that but as soon as I have the option to leave I’m going to.

I need to keep windows 11 around for work but as soon as I can build a system that can hold to two whole operating systems at a time I’m going to go over to dual booting. Unless the steam machine turns out to be cheaper than anyone’s realistically expecting, in which case I might just go that route. The current RAM prices mean that’s probably unlikely.

Ah yes the classic purist arguement.

If the applications I want to use don’t support Linux then apparently that’s their problem. I wish I didn’t have to live in the real world, but unfortunately I can’t pay my mortgage in moral righteousness. If I can’t use the programs I need to use my job, because I’ve decided to switch to an operating system that they don’t support, I’m the one that’s going to suffer.

So no you can’t just ditch applications that don’t have Linux support.

In the real world you have to dual boot and that’s a pain in the arse because it means Microsoft are still going to be getting some money from me.

It took me ages today to work out how to map a drive letter because they’ve changed where the menu button is. You used to be able to do it from the taskbar at the top, but now it’s hidden in a right click menu in a different part of the file browser to where it used to be. I don’t understand the point of changes like that, by all means add more options but keep the old ones around for consistency.

We’ve been switching over to Windows 11 and it’s broken so many of our old applications.

We have stuff that’s like 40 years old and it just won’t tolerate Windows 11 so all those programs have to be run in a virtual environment. They were fine with Windows 10 so I’ve no idea what about Windows 11 they don’t like. I wouldn’t mind so much if there was an obvious advantage to Windows 11 but therr literally isn’t, there’s not a single feature in Windows 11 that would help us do business better.

But I think Windows 11 is on track to be the crap version, so Windows 12 will hopefully be better although given the current direction Microsoft moving that might not be the case, and they may have finally broken the crap then good cycle.

Isn’t “Furer” just the German word for leader? I’m pretty sure the word existed before Hitler and the Nazis I don’t think they invented it.

That’s not what we’re talking about.

The assertion was that even text completion constitutes AI. Which is a mad claim because if you’re going to say that text completion is AI then basically everything is AI.

People who lived in the 1960s did not by definition live in the 21st century so their definitions of what things may or may not be is immaterial.

We know what we mean by AI, and attempting to redefine that in the service of some kind of all “sides have a point” fence sitter, is a brainless arguement and is is definitively unhelpful. Defining AI strictly by “a definition of a system that does a thing based on an input”, is both overly broad and demonstrably unhelpful. It’s like arguing that a building that has been reduced to ash by a fire still contains the same constituent elements. Intellectually it’s correct, practically it’s ridiculous.

Broadly, you are attempting to define AI as anything that any computerised system does. How can you not see that that is an overly broad definition that entirely skirts anything remotely close to the realms of helpfulness.

I’m saying that code completion does not constitute AI and certainly isn’t LLMs.

I then provided an example of why that isn’t the case.

You decided to respond to this by pointing out that some LLM may be involved in some code completion. Although you didn’t provide an example, so who knows if that’s actually true, it seems sort of weird to use in LLM for code completion as it’s completely unnecessary and entirely inefficient, so I kind of doubt it.

I just want to point it out for a minute, because it’s sort of feels like you don’t know this, code completion is basically autocomplete for programmers. It’s doing basic string matching, so that if you type fnc it also completes to function(), hardly the stuff of AI

I feel like you have never actually developed a game. Because what you’re arguing is just weird. It makes no logical sense.

A grey box is the very most basic of what a game will ever be, it never bears any resemblance to the finished product. It is the basis most fundamental interpretation of game mechanics and systems. The gray box has no bearing on the final result of the game.

No grey box contains any aspect of artistic intent, the art team are never even involved in its creation it’s always just developers doing things. Go look up some game blogs.

That’s my point. These random definitions of AI that have been come up with by the most pedantic people in existence are not in any way helpful. We should ignore them.

They seek to redefine AI as basically anything that a computer does. This is entirely unhealthful and is only happening because they need to be right on the internet.

These irritating idiots need to go away for they serve no purpose.

The AI label needs to be present if the finished product contains AI generated assets. So AI generated code, or AI generated art.

In the example above you grey boxed in AI but then replaced all the assets with ones that humans made. There is no distinction there between doing that and just having literal grey boxes.

You couldn’t require an AI label in that scenario because it would be utterly unenforceable. How would a developer prove if they did or did not use AI for temporary art?

So yes you can draw a line. Does the finished product contain AI generated assets. You don’t like that definition because you’re being pedantic but your pedantry interpretation isn’t enforceable, so it’s useless.

By that definition a calculator is AI.

Emmet has been around since 2015. So it was definitely not LLM backed.

No because AI replaces a human role.

Code completion does not replace a human role, that’s like saying that spell check is AI.

Since you would never see it that’s pretty much irrelevant. Clearly this is about AI generated art and AI generated assets

Whether or not you use AI to grey box something is a pointless distinction given the fact that there’s no way to prove it one way or the other.

I’m sure everyone has always explained this to you given the number of down votes, but algorithms aren’t equal to AI.

Ever since the evolution of AI people seem to have lost the ability to recall things prior to 2019.