Chebucto Regional Softball Club

No, it's like saying I boycott Nestle and will stop using their subsidiary products *when I find out that they're Nestle subsidiaries.* I don't know if other games are using generative AI. Maybe they are. If I find out they are, I will not buy them. If I don't find out that they are, *how would I know that they're using it?* The fact that I'm not able to detect it 100% of the time doesn't make me okay with it when I don't know it's there. What in any of my comments has made you think I have a " I don't care as long as I don't notice it" attitude???

No, I just don't know that I should avoid a product if I don't know the ethical problems with it. That's how boycotts work...

>How can you be sure that in any game AI wasn't used to generate some sort of an internal document or asset that would never be in the final product but was integral to the creation of the final product? I never claimed to be omniscient. I simply don't support a company after I find out that they have unethical business practices. It isn't that hard go figure out.

Correct! If you're not going to support artists and writers, the *least* you can do is not support the industry that's actively destroying thr fields of art and writing.

Boycotting because they used generative AI to make their game instead of hiring writers. Even if this was the only part of the game they used it on (if you believe that, l have a bridge to seII you), I'm not going to give someone money if they couldn't even be fucked to hire some sci-fi writer off of fiverr to write their fill text with it. I personally know artists and writers who are having to get jobs at fucking Walmart because of this shit. I'll be less irate about generative AI once we have universal basic income so that real artists can continue to generate real art alongside these soulless husks.

Didn't equate them. You must be better. Sorry GPT has fried your brain so badly that you can't read two paragraphs

Damn, guess I'm writing a whole response anyway Nope. Procedural generation requires a lot of creative and technical input on the part of the developer. It's not used to offload creative or intellectual work, it *creates* creative and intellectual work. The intellectual work is something I forgot to mention in that reply, but the loss of that effort is almost as important as the loss of the creative work. Let's compare the topic of this discussion with the game I'm currently playing, Kerbal Space Program. Contracts in Kerbal Space Program's career mode are (for the most part) procedurally generated. There are a few mission types, usually asking the player to bring a part or set of parts to a particular location and perform some action with them. Attach a part to a satellite in orbit around Duna, take pressure readings in flight over Kerbin, plant a flag on the Mun, etc. This is not offloading creativity onto the machine, this is using procedural generation to provide the player with an endless variety of objectives. Producing this system of procedurally generated missions required creativity and forethought from the developers. I don't work at Squad, but I imagine it took a number of manhours to set all of the parameters and limitations for the system, and to test it to make sure it works, and that it doesn't generate any missions that are impossible to complete. Contrast that with the AI generated text that is the topic of this discussion. The creative input for that text up there was something along the lines of generate some sci-fi technobabble that would fit in a starship's event log" and "do it again, but don't talk about the ship, just talk about astronomical data." They could have gotten a freelance sci-fi author to write these few bits of text, or even just sat down for 10 minutes and wrote it themselves. It would cost them nearly nothing, and in exchange they would have a piece of text that fits within the world and was written by a human. Instead, they *offloaded* that creative work onto a machine. They didn't make more work for themselves like a developer that uses procedural generation, they made *less* work for themselves by asking a machine to do it instead. I could make a similar contrast between this and basically any procedurally generated system in games. Minecraft, Daggerfall, Borderlands, FTL: Faster than Light, Slay the Spire, Dead Cells, all of these games use procedural generation to *complement* the creative and technical work they put into the games, not to avoid having to do that work in the first place.

I'm going to grant literally all of this. *When did I demand an equivalence?*

I was about to type out a whole response, but I need to learn when to cut it short. Generative AI is demonic, using it offloads your creativity, humanity, and soul into an unthinking, unfeeling machine. Anything that uses generative AI is inherently worse because it was not made by someone with agency or creativity. You're advocating for putting artists and writers out of work.

So the reason behind that was to point out that, by your logic, slavery *would* be excusable. That's the argument you're making. It doesn't hurt the end product, therefore it's fine for the producer to use it.

I like how I saw this reply coming and accounted for bit and you *still* left it

What am I projecting??? Why is it that now that I *am* asking you to explain things, you won't?

>If it doesn't make games bad, then the complaints are simply invalid and bandwagoning, and developers cannot be faulted for using it. LOL "If slavery doesn't harm the economy, then the complaints are simply invalid and bandwagoning, and plantation owners cannot be faulted for using them. LOL" I know Lemmings have a lot of trouble reading, so I'll get this out of the way now: no, I'm not saying that generative AI *is* slavery, nor am I saying they're *equivalent.* I'm drawing one *similarity* to make a point. That's called a *simile.* The point being, that one supposed criticism isn't valid doesn't mean that *no criticisms* are valid.

When did I demand an equivalence??? This is what using ChatGPT does yo your brain, it destroys your reading comprehension

There's a number of reasons, not least of which being that generative AI works by processing vast amounts of prior work (without their creators' consent) to make a facsimile of it, while procedural generation only manipulates assets the developer creates. Procedural generation isn't putting artists and writers out of business. Also, procedural generation isn't making Idiocracy a reality, with fucking English majors unable to read Dickens without asking OpenAI to interpret the text for them. "They do similar things" doesn't mean they're equivalent.

Sharing one thing in common does not make two things equivalent You're welcome to try again

I feel like it does. theunknownmuncher thinks it's somehow inconsistent to be against generative AI while being ok with procedural generation, which implies that they think they're equivalent in some way

Damn, I was looking forward to playing this. Glad I read this first

If you don't know the difference between procedural generation and generative AI, you are not qualified to have an opinion on the subject

Dong change Duke at all, just make the antagonist a gooner incel