A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.
Fans slam The Alters after discovering evidence of undisclosed gen AI in images, text, and translation
-
You're expecting it to be used responsibly when we ourselves in general are very lacking in that department. This here is a very good example of the actual use that will happen. A rush job to meet unrealistic deadlines. And that's what *will* happen as is the norm.
-
Damn, I was looking forward to playing this. Glad I read this first
-
They could have used Google translate for these short last minute additions, and not a single fuck would probably notice. I hate this stupid overconfidence in AI.
-
I have done translations and even for my own language I often use an LLM. It's the one thing they are actually amazing at. It's also probably not about "anybody noticing". It can very much be a single developer doing it on their own ChatGPT account and the QA didn't notice it. I really don't care about this stuff though. The AI label should be for gen AI and not revising some text or translation imo.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
When people are talking about dissatisfaction with AI usage, in this context they specifically mean Llama and GenAI. Google translate may use LLMs as part of their translation model, but it doesn't make up the whole pipeline and will work completely differently than copy pasting some text into an LLM and telling it to translate something.
-
We don‘t know the cause in this case. Not replacing placeholder assets was a common mistake even before ai tools.
-
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.So do you just not play video games at all? Because the way you've just presented yourself you're not against using AI in games, you're against any use of AI. 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? Clearly you don't write every dev and ask if they use AI in any capacity, so what do you do? My point is that I think you're taking a stance where you're unwilling to compromise on the use of AI, but only if you're aware that AI was used.
-
We don‘t know the cause in this case. Not replacing placeholder assets was a common mistake even before ai tools.That's kinda the problem. We're already careless with the things we do ourselves. It can't be helped, nobody's perfect. But once we start delegating tasks, we lose the direct experience. Priorities shift, attention moves to something else and the chance of carelessness rises because it's no longer a problem we have to concern ourselves with. Meanwhile, the LLM "learns". What it "learns", nobody knows because it does so mechanically. There's zero understanding. It keeps "learning" every time it's fed something, so you don't have a static program that does what it's told. Instead it's a "living" program that applies what it "learns". And that makes it unpredictable in the long run. This turns the user into a glorified middle manager who has to hover over their employee and make sure they did their job as they should have. And how many middle managers do you know with that kind of dedication, that isn't spiteful at its core? The push against this is that the people depending on it to do the work become less dependable themselves. And unless you're an independent developer without a profit driven publisher breathing down your neck, this will be used in all the wrong ways as a standard instead of it being the exception.
-
So do you just not play video games at all? Because the way you've just presented yourself you're not against using AI in games, you're against any use of AI. 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? Clearly you don't write every dev and ask if they use AI in any capacity, so what do you do? My point is that I think you're taking a stance where you're unwilling to compromise on the use of AI, but only if you're aware that AI was used.>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.
-
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.this is a fantastic point. well put.
-
>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.
-
According to the article as cited in [this](https://sh.itjust.works/comment/19484136) comment, we do know the reason and a rush job to meet a deadline is precisely why.
-
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...
-
That's kinda the problem. We're already careless with the things we do ourselves. It can't be helped, nobody's perfect. But once we start delegating tasks, we lose the direct experience. Priorities shift, attention moves to something else and the chance of carelessness rises because it's no longer a problem we have to concern ourselves with. Meanwhile, the LLM "learns". What it "learns", nobody knows because it does so mechanically. There's zero understanding. It keeps "learning" every time it's fed something, so you don't have a static program that does what it's told. Instead it's a "living" program that applies what it "learns". And that makes it unpredictable in the long run. This turns the user into a glorified middle manager who has to hover over their employee and make sure they did their job as they should have. And how many middle managers do you know with that kind of dedication, that isn't spiteful at its core? The push against this is that the people depending on it to do the work become less dependable themselves. And unless you're an independent developer without a profit driven publisher breathing down your neck, this will be used in all the wrong ways as a standard instead of it being the exception.
-
I don’t think it’s important where the placeholder assets come from, or that mistakes will be more common when someone used gen AI instead of non-licensed stock image from a web search.You're right. It's an opinion and only as important as the one having the opinion decides it to be.
-
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...That's like saying you boycot Nestle but won't stop using any of their subsidiary products unless you accidentally find out that a brand not named Nestle is actually owned by Nestle. You had a bridge to sell to anyone with the naivete to believe it's the only place AI was used. What about your naivity of believing that other games are not using AI, unless of course you stumble on the information about AI usage? Seems hypocritical to criticize others for giving the benefit of doubt while giving the benefit of doubt to all other developers simply because you don't know any better?
