Realistically the artists working on it have a say into what graphics settings are allowed, and they already deal with the fact some people will need to run on very low settings, also affecting their ideal viewing conditions. If the newer DLSS really makes such sweeping changes they would either ask Nvidia for improvements, disable it, or heavily dissuade it.

But player autonomy is also important, so it’s a balancing act. If the players end up wanting it and you take it away from them, it still won’t make sense to strip it out at the end of the day.

This ten times. It’s why the online discourse around AI is often so one sided. Anyone walking into a room where people are all nodding along to the same shallow, unnuanced statements, and throwing stones at anyone that points that out or tries to share their own contradictory to the group’s experience, even doing so in complete good faith, isn’t going to engage for long. And so that discussion is never going to turn nuanced since all the people interested in that have been ousted.

And it sucks, because there are real harms in AI that must be guarded from for which we need widespread support. But the hostility and closed minded discussions just causes people to tune out and contrarily be more open minded towards AI as a response to the closed mindedness.

I mean, your post says “Forcing windows down Xbox gamers throats”. So people that are already in the locked down Xbox ecosystem, not people that already know that and avoid Xbox. Xbox is just Windows but locked down. It’s both Microsoft.

I completely agree people should just go for a PC, but if someone was buying Xbox already, they aren’t in the mindset. So if they’re going to buy Xbox anyways, having a device that’s not locked down to some console OS means they can switch at any time and rid themselves of Xbox, since it’s your device. To me that’s definitely an improvement over the status quo, even if other better options were already available.

The contracts for the Steam Machine were already locked in before RAM and GPU shortage even started, which means they will (like other consoles) be able to provide a reserved amount of devices at a fixed and lower price. But likewise, this also means that for any console that did not have contracts locked in before shit went down, will suffer massively from this. Thus looking at current prices for hardware isn’t indicative of how much prices will rise. Steam Machine could be the most affordable gaming device of the next decade.

But Valve also isn’t stupid. PC has the unique position where it has one of the longest backlogs of backwards compatible games and applications. Which means you don’t need top of the line hardware. People are still gaming on 10 year old PCs, so the hardware for those will be much more affordable and still be able to play most games. Especially indie games with their insane price to performance to quality ratios. If top line gaming on PC becomes economically unviable, it will simply move down a notch.

You realize PC is not just Windows, right? It’s Windows, Linux, Mac.

Windows might be the most used PC platform but game developer are well aware attaching their success to Windows is not the right move. And that’s exactly the kind of freedom PC gives that consoles do not.

That’s in part because they see their future through the lens of them oppressing objective developments, so EVs and batteries will never happen in that fantasy. They took a liking to AI for example despite it being relatively new development purely because it helped them in that department. They will only embrace something if it’s ‘their’ idea, and they have a lot of shitty ideas.

While that’s true, it clearly worked and massive channels used it. So why is YouTube’s avoiding any responsibility and trying to kill it as quickly and silently as possible? Like, I get that sometimes you’ll have to drop support for things (even things you unofficially support), but there should be a phase out period during which people can either backup and re-upload videos with those captions to preserve them. They could and should honestly provide a heads up for that or even help them out.

Now they are literally decimating people’s hard work and on top of that pissing off actual partners. Not saying it will be successful, but cutting into people’s business like that is the kind of thing you can get sued over. So it doesn’t even make sense to take that risk from what we know.

An important feature is that you can basically download (and thus, own) the music you pay for (in many formats too).

I think you might misunderstood what Bandcamp is aiming for here. They’re explicitly trying to still allow it when humans are using it (responsibly) as tools. This is essentially a ban on AI where no human is involved (or not involved enough), where the music produced is focused on quantity over quality (slop). That’s a fine and nuanced distinction for a music distribution platform in my opinion.

I doubt they would just blanket scan all music and ban that which they think is AI (aside from how that’s practically impossible). That’s the kind of thing a lazy big tech company would do. I wouldn’t be surprised if this will just end up being on a report basis, at the very least with human verification once steps like banning would be taken. Because otherwise it would be pretty disastrous for the reasons you mentioned, since it would ban legitimate artists. Not to mention the bar of “substantially AI” would need to be judged by someone.

Ah, no worries, none taken. Have a good one.

Not quite sure what you’re trying to say. The article literally says:

Bandcamp’s policy targets the latter end of that spectrum while leaving room for human artists who incorporate AI tools into a larger creative process.

Which is what I’m applauding and affirming, so I’m not sure what you’re saying I’m saying is opposite to what the article says.

Good on them on recognizing that slop is undesirable and shouldn’t be encouraged, but that a full ban also kills the nuance of creative freedom and creates painful situations where a single AI tool anywhere in the process (even indirectly) gets hard work rejected, which could hamper aspiring creatives in their ability to (start to) get their work out there and (start to) make a living when they are not what (most) people have issue with.

Honestly, asset flips or pure ai slop are often not something you would consider a ‘real game’. They are closer to a scam than anything. And they certainly wouldn’t be published by a reputable publisher. I think that’s also what OP was referring to, a game that meets some minimal level of development and involvement.

It’s kind of a chicken and the egg problem though, that happens on any new place, so it’s tough to sell them on that unless they already like what’s being talked about. I think it’s probably better to stick to the fundamentals of the fediverse and what makes it better than a centralized platform. In this phase of Lemmy’s popularity we need people that stick around and build communities, and they can only really be enticed to do that based on the merits of the platform.

There’s truth to that currently yeah. I think my points still stand as well though, and in the long run you will still be out worse even if the upfront cost is currently cheaper. It also just seems contrary to the free and open nature of Linux, but if you don’t already own something you can upgrade and are currently strapped for cash, fair enough. But that’s also not going to change if you sink 400-500 dollars into it and that’s your budget for the next 5 years.

Or just… don’t buy consoles at all. Buy a mini PC (which you can upgrade too) or wait for the Steam Cube? Which would both be cheaper in the long run. Because why still funnel money into a company that seems to be adamant that it owns that machine (and lets be honest, could try and use any kind of kill switch or safeguard to stop you from doing so) and will wield your money as a weapon against you.

It’s like soliciting a stalker because you enjoy receiving random gifts in the mail with totally no strings attached.

Hate to say it, but you might be missing out on something you won’t ever be able to experience again afterwards. It’s like with episodic releases of TV shows, half the fun is sitting with friends discussing and overthinking what just happened while you wait for the next episode. Being there too long after community wide revelations, you can’t experience that head space of mystery and surprise again. Deltarune handles the episodic releases very well honestly, I’d understand if it was a series of bad partial releases.

There’s always just people that mess up on the form. But they also monitor the sign rate and saw some periods of higher than normal signing in the middle of the night in the EU - indicating someone might have ran a bot to sign with invalid information. The EU only validates the signatures once the petition is closed, so they need a safe margin where even with a significant amount of invalid signatures, they still make it. Afaik 1.2 mil is about what they would expect for a normal vote of this size to be safe, and 1.4 mil is basically more than enough to compensate for any bad actors.

Ross explained it in his last video - there are reasons to be skeptical and unsure if it’s truly there until at least 1.4 mil signatures. And more votes is never bad. So both need more attention. If it reaches people in the EU it will also reach those in the UK.