flamingarms

I'm not seeing anyone here praising Microsoft; actually the opposite. Who's praising Microsoft?

And yet, I believe LLMs are a natural evolutionary product of NLP and a powerful tool that is a necessary step forward for humanity. It is already capable of exceptionally quickly scaffolding out basic tasks. In it, I see the assumptions that all human knowledge is for all humans, rudimentary tasks are worth automating, and a truly creative idea is often seeded by information that already exists and thus creativity can be sparked by something that has access to all information.

I am not sure what we are defending by not developing them. Is it a capitalism issue of defending people's money so they can survive? Then that's a capitalism problem. Is it that we don't want to get exactly plagiarized by AI? That's certainly something companies are and need to continue taking into account. But researchers repeat research and come to the same conclusions all the time, so we're clearly comfortable with sharing ideas. Even in the Writer's Guild strikes in the States, both sides agreed that AI is helpful in script-writing, they just didn't want production companies to use it as leverage to pay them less or not give them credit for their part in the production.

From what I'm reading, they're not set to go to market; that's just their goal. Most recent article I found was middle of last year that they had raised more money and were hoping to go to human trials by the end of the year. That aligns with what I remember about Vasalgel from years ago - they had finally made it to monkey trials but their monkey study was not showing a consistent ability to return to virility with the second injection. I seem to remember the proposed reason being that vas deferens in the monkeys/apes they were testing with are actually more delicate than humans' and so humans should still likely be reversible. Last I heard, I believe they were trying to move forward on the human trial of proving that it works as a contraceptive, to be followed by a human trial showing reversibility. Then radio silence and funding issues. My assumption has always been that they struggled to jump to human trials because of the primate study results hurting the likelihood of reversibility. Hopefully they have reworked it to solve that, or maybe the acquisition and new funding is enough to just push through that regardless and see if humans will be fine.

You want Valve to develop a version of Steam that circumvents their own DRM to play local files? What would prevent people from using that to pirate things even more easily? I can imagine they'd have some trouble with publishers as well for doing that. There are already largely standardized cracks for steam and emulators for steam; just use that. Regardless, no solution will work for any game using DRM other than Steam, like Denuvo, so you'll have to rely on pirates for those regardless.

Yeah, I think that's probably best, mate, if the argument is shifting towards "why does being reasonable matter?"

Mate, me asking "how much is reasonable of us to ask of one person?" is not grandstanding; that's just me countering your point. He has used his biggest platform to address issues in the game industry before, just like you want, so my point still stands: how much is reasonable of us to ask of him? Is it his responsibility to address each issue the industry has or is it reasonable for him to pick and choose his battles?

How do you know he isn't? This feels like what happened with Kendrick Lamar during the police violence protests a few years ago in the States. NoName calls Kendrick out for not using his voice during the protests to lead people. Photos come out of him at protests, but covered up to be unrecognizable. Then years later Kendrick releases his latest album, talking about his addiction, new children, and nearly ruining his relationship, and addresses the protest thing with a song called Mirror and says "sorry I didn't save the world, my friend, I was too busy building mine again."

Keighley has gone to bat for the video game industry multiple times throughout his career. He has spent a lot of energy highlighting the work of developers and what actually goes into making a game. He garnered a reputation for asking real, sometimes hard questions to AAA developers, in defense of consumers. He addressed the sexual abuse horror. How much does this dude need to do until it's enough for us? Why are we always so determined to hang shit like this on one dude? Why are we so quick to believe that all we see is all that is happening?

I actually enjoyed the game on the whole. If you're a fan of Myst-likes, you may still enjoy it. But if I remember correctly, that particular puzzle I just looked up the exact solution as soon as I understood how to solve it; I'm not going to let any game waste my time like that lol

Yeah, I feel like we so easily forget that bigger does not mean better. If it's larger than what the development team is capable of touching by hand, then more often than not it's just empty or uninteresting space.