this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
94 points (87.9% liked)

Games

40425 readers
1387 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm with Tim Sweeney here - why restrict creativity with arbitrary restrictions like that? We already have some amazing 1-person games, how many more we'd have with this immense productivity boost? I'm excited for more games even if that means more trash out there, I have the brain power to sift through it if it means another Stardew Valley.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The problem is more that generative AI is trained on the actual work done by other, actual people. And we have no legal framework so far how those people should get paid in turn.

Plus, let's not for a moment imagine that Sweeney is saying this out of a firmly held personal belief. He's entirely based on his reactionary stance to Steam. Steam goes against generative AI -> Sweeney is in favor of it. If Steam would say they're against eating live babies, you can sure as hell bet he'd sing praises for that, too.

[–] svellere@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I agree with both your statement about AI training and Sweeney. However, I do believe there is a legitimate argument for using generative AI in game development, and I therefore also think Sweeney has a legitimate point, even if he's doing it as a reaction to Steam.

Something oft acknowledged as okay in art (or any creative endeavor) is inspiration. Legally, we can really go even further, saying that copying is okay as long as the thing being copied is sufficiently transformed into something that can be considered new. Say, for example, different artists' versions of a character such as Pikachu. We might be able to recognize them all as Pikachu, but also acknowledge that they're all unique and obviously the creation of one particular artist.

Why is this process a problem when it's done with technology? I, as a human, didn't get permission from someone else to transform their work. It's okay when I do it, but not when it's done algorithmically? Why?

I think this is a legitimate question that has valid arguments either way, but it's a question that needs to be answered, and I don't think a blanket response of "it's bad because it's stealing other people's work" is appropriate. If the model is very bad and clearly spits out exact replicas of the inputs, that's obviously a bad thing, just as it would be equally bad if I traced someone else's work. But what about the models that don't do that, and spit out unique works never seen before? Not all models are equal in this sense.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Why is everyone have to be paid for everything? The real dillema is wether AI is learning or is it remixing and the science is on the side of learning while all grifters on the side of remixing. All of these lawsuits like the gettyimages one are for profit. They are grifting off this and people so blindly fall for this propaganda thinking they are protecting "the little guy" when big majority of world's copyright is owned by mega corporations. Fuck that.

[–] sirdorius@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I wonder if you would be so adamant to defend AI if it could copy your work, and even your exact style by prompting your public name. I am going to bet on no

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm a software engineer and AI can already do a lot of my programming and it's great! Most of my software is FOSS - so your bet is very wrong.

If somehow AI kills programming and puts me out of job then that's great! I'll find another job and we'll be living in objectively better world because code is suddenly infinitely more accessible and powerful :)

So, to me this protectionism thought process is very alien. Especially when it comes to something relatively meaningless as entertainment.

[–] sirdorius@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago

When you chose a FOSS license you explicitly say that you are ok with derivatives of your work. These artists never distributed their work under a license where they allowed AI to be trained on it and make derivatives of it.

AI is far from replacing programmers. It can replace some simple boilerplate, but is nowhere near understanding the logic behind applications. So you simply say this knowing you are safe for tens of years more.

[–] barryamelton@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Because it is copyright laundering, which is ilegal. We are just too early in the tech to have it established. But see cases open against Microsoft's Copilot.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm surprised people here on open source, free software project are defending copyright so fiercly. AI is learning not copying and even if you disagree - fuck copyright and fuck protectionism. There's so much shit to do in this world and we're back to "looms will end the world" nonsense. The propaganda machine is rolling hard on this one.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Open source software has specifically devoted much of its efforts to ensuring it never breaches those copyrights.

They might look at Oracle SQL DB and say "Damn, that looks so useful and well-written. Well, I guess we could copy its codebase and pretend we wrote it ourselves...but it's probably safer to re-implement it from scratch." Then you get alternatives like MySQL.

That's a fast example that probably ignores extended history of database wars, but you get the idea.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Dude the whole foss movement was founded by one dude who hated copyright. It's even called copyleft. Lol

[–] stillwater@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

And yet he didn't go around stealing other people's work to profit off it

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

Neither does AI. It's learning from art the same way I learn from Microsoft's office when I make Libreoffice.

[–] barryamelton@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You dont seem to know what you are talking about, or are dissingenous.

Copyright is the tool that allows to enforce GPL. The same with other free and open source licenses.

You seem to be leaning towards "permissive" libertarian licenses like MIT and BSD. Those don't care much about the end users (I got your code, now fuck off I can do whatever I want with the modifications, including never sharing them back and making the whole thing closed source).

But for GPL and licenses that protect the rights of developers (including the right to ask follow-up developers to keep the code open for the benefit of users and developers), copyright laws are the tool that enforces that.

The term "copyleft" is just a meme.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

You seem to be awfully ignorant of the history and I suggest you get back to it. Copyleft and free software is fundamentally anti copyright. Copyleft and GPL is legal play against copyright because guess what - we don't have the power to change the entire legal framework. I've been foss dev for over 20 years now so might as well fuck off lol