If "everyone will be using AI", AI will turn to shit.

They can't create originality, they're only recycling and recontextualising existing information. But if you recycle and recontextualise the same information over and over again, it keeps degrading more and more.

It's ironic that the very people who advocate for AI everywhere, fail to realise just how dependent the quality of AI content is on having real, human generated content to input to train the model.

I wish they'd replace Tim Sweeney with AI. Would genuinely have better takes on most topics, too. Sigh.

Consumers have already decided mobile gambling slop is the most successful investment in the gaming industry. I don‘t trust consumers to know what‘s best for them.

consumers

This is very much a pet peeve, but be careful about how you use "consumer" versus "customer". They each imply completely different power dynamics.

relevant article https://www.theringer.com/2025/11/04/tech/ai-bubble-burst-popping-explained-collapse-or-not-chatgpt

AI storytelling is an amalgam of several different narratives, including:

Inevitability: AI is the future; its eventual supremacy is both imminent and certain, and therefore anyone who doesn’t want to be left behind had better embrace the technology. See Jensen Huang, the CEO of Nvidia, insisting earlier this year that every job in the world will be impacted by AI “immediately.”

Functionality: AI performs miracles, and the AI products that have been released to the public wildly outperform the products they aim to replace. To believe this requires us to ignore the evidence obtained with our own eyes and ears, which tells us in many cases that the products barely work at all, but it’s the premise of every TV ad you watch out of the corner of your eye during a sports telecast.

Grandiosity: The world will never be the same; AI will change everything. This is the biggest and most important story AI companies tell, and as with the other two narratives, big tech seems determined to repeat it so insistently that we come to believe it without looking for any evidence that it’s true.

As far as I can make out, the scheme is essentially: Keep the ship floating for as long as possible, keep inhaling as much capital as possible, and maybe the tech will get somewhere that justifies the absurd valuations, or maybe we’ll worm our way so far into the government that it’ll have to bail us out, or maybe some other paradigm-altering development will fall from the sky. And the way to keep the ship floating is to keep peddling the vision and to seem more confident that the dream is inevitable the less it appears to be coming true.

speaking for myself, MS can thank AI for being the thing that made me finally completely ditch windows after using it 30+ years

Don’t forget, “Turns out it was a losing bet to back DEI and Trans people”.

This is something scared, pathetic, loser, feral, spineless, sociopathic, moronic fascists come up with to try to win a crowd larger than an elevator; Assume the outcome as a foregone conclusion and try to talk around it, or claim it’s already happened.

Respond directly. “What? That’s ridiculous. I’ve never even seen ANY AI that I liked. Who told you it was going to pervade everything?”

That reminds me how McDonald's and other gaat food chains are struggling. People figure it's too expensive for what you get after prices going up and quality going down for years. They forgot that people buy if the price and quality are good. Same with AI. It's all fun if it's free or dirt cheap, but people don't buy expensive slop.

The nuance is that Tim doesn't give a shit what players want, him and his cronies don't want it because it's harder to convince someone to play AI slop when they know it's AI slop before they even try it 😂

They want it? I don't know, the review score of Black Ops 7 begs to differ.

Personally I'll give money to a hard working indie dev that may use AI to help in their work spiradically over a big company shoving AI in everything to replace workers.

It might make players demand lower prices if some cheap AI slop is used in the game. That's the thing publishers want to avoid. They want to sell cheap slop for full price and pocket the difference. That's what it's about in the end.

Yah the more I use AI the more I can detect the absolute bullshit people on both sides spew.

It's the most amazingly complicated averaging machine we've ever invented. It will take the most interesting source materials, the most unique ideas of other people, the most creative materials, and it will find a way to find the safest, most average common qualities between those things. This isn't a model problem or input problem, it's fundamental to how generative AI works.

It helps with searching for things online, it helps create guide plans for taking on new tasks like learning some new skill. It's far better at teaching how to do something like coding than it is left to just code on its own and you copy and paste. It can certainly do that, but you spend so much time correcting it and fixing it that you do far better learning the code yourself and how it works.

Same with art, the people who are using it to best effect are themselves already artists and they use AI to thumbnail compositions or rough layouts, color tests and such, and then just do the work themselves but faster because they already know roughly what direction they're going.

But using it to write your scripts, to copy/paste code, to generate works of art... it's literally just giving you other people's ideas mashed together and unseasoned.

I'm not even opposed to AI in games. I'd love to see more granulated disclosures, but Steam-style disclosure should be the bare minimum.

Some douche nozzle from epic games said Stream needs to scrap their AI disclosure requirements because soon all games will be AI.

ETA Article link: https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/epic-ceo-wants-valve-and-steam-to-stop-requiring-devs-to-disclose-generative-ai-usage

Yeah it was hard to parse for me too

"valve ignores requests to remove ai disclosures"