Fuck you, Unity.

Japan would rather die. Microsoft, I don’t know what their shit deal is.

I hope so, but frankly we’ll just have to see. The people with the money and power usually win.

This was one of the best laughs I’ve had in a bit, thank you

How is that fucking legal?

There are a lot of jokes to be made about Twitter referencing the disasterpiece movie “Foodfight!” and its villains fighting for “Brand X”.

Where the fuck is the law.

That is not what “the Tetris Effect” means. :P

That’s because they’re fake.

Yes, technically, just like “everything is subjective”. But only ignorant people remove all context like that.

Most of these clearly have no proper etymology and root/suffix/prefix structure, and therefore are clearly made up.

You almost had a good argument until you started trying to tell us that it’s not just a parrot. It absolutely is a parrot. In order to have creativity, it needs to have knowledge. Not sapience, not consciousness, not even “intelligence” as we know it— just knowledge. But it doesn’t know anything. If it did, it wouldn’t put 7 fingers on a damn character. It doesn’t know that it’s looking at and creating fingers, they’re just fucking pixels to it. It saw pixel patterns, it created pixel patterns. It doesn’t know context to know when the patterns don’t add up. You have to understand this.

So in the end, it turns out that if you draw something unique and purposeful, with unique context and meaning— and that is preeeetty easy— then you’ll still have a drawing job. If you’re drawing the same thing everyone else already did a million times, AI may be able to do that. If it can figure out how to not add 7 fingers and three feet.

If you haven’t noticed, the people we’re arguing with— including the pope and James Cameron— are people who think this generative pseudo-AI and a Terminator are the same thing. But they’re not even remotely similar, or remotely-similarly capable. That’s the problem. If you want to call them both “AI”, that’s technically semantics. But as far as pragmatics goes, generative AI is not intelligent in any capacity; and calling it “AI” is one of the most confusion-causing things we’ve done in the last few decades, and it can eff off.

Yeah, well, “AGI” is not the end result of this generative crap. You’re gonna have to start over with something different one way or another. This simply is not the way.

I mean, you make good points.

Trump President for life? So like… six months?

But Democrat-aligned groups saw something else in the Republicans’ about-face: disingenuousness.

Haha, keep dreaming. If a system made by OpenAI is used for robots, it’s not going to work anything like— on a fundamental level— current “AI”. It’s not a matter of opinion or speculation, but a matter of knowing how the fuck current “AI” even works. It just. Can’t. Understand things. And you simply can’t fit inside it an instruction for every scenario to make up for that. I don’t know how else to put it!

You want “AI” to exist in the way people think about it? One that can direct robots autonomously? You have to program a way for it to know something and to be able to react appropriately to new scenarios based on context clues. There simply is no substitute for this ability to “learn” in some capacity. It’s not an advanced, optional feature— it’s a necessary one to function.

“But AI will get better!” is not the fucking answer. What we currently have? Is not made to understand things, to recognize fingers, to say “five fingers only”, to say “that’s true, that’s false”, to have knowledge. You need a completely new, different system.

People are so fucking dense about all of this, simply because idiots named what we currently have “AI”. Just like people are dense about “black holes” just because of their stupid name.

“Limited” is relative to what context you’re talking about. God I’m sick of this thread.