Your average female romance:

"He vampired billionairely across the room, his sweetly-softcore rapey vibes engulfed her small feminine self-inserty hair, she looked exactly like [you, the girl reading this], and he was very vampirey and mysterious..."

As seen in the standard spectrum of female romance books, ranging from 50 shades of gray to morning glory milking farm.

Puritans remain shocked, SHOCKED at this being mirrored by their behavior in reality. It must be something that the evil man did. It couldn't possibly be the universal female dream. All those 50 shades of gray sales were obviously some kind of a fascist psy op or something. They must be, or else you'd have to admit to being wrong about basic human nature!

Wait until you find out large plurality of who admits to wanting to be chocked during sex, vs who's massive majority doesn't want to choke women during sex. It will shock, SHOCK you again.

And then you'll continue believing what you believe, and not be moved on bit. Because "it's the current year" after all, and basic human biological impulses surely no longer apply.

Surely?!

Also, male power is the sexiest thing there is. See: female romance books.

But puritans are shocked. SHOCKED.

If you think steam is free for developers while unreal isn't, you should try selling things on steam.

You'll realize that steam is about as "free" as "unreal". As in, not at all.

I was looking for comparisons to other historic whores tanking great men.

Ironically, the GOAT in this female dominated field, like in all other fields is a man. His actions led to destruction of a massive nation.

Much more interesting thing to do math on:

Is this woman the most expensive prostitute in human history?

You should argue this in courts. They consistently found otherwise.

The sole exception is the curious case where generative AI was intentionally prompted by a different AI. I.e. human didn't have direct participation, and never claimed participation. Essentially, it was a test by an activist to see if copyright could be assigned to AI.

Court found that it could not, and basis for decision was that copyright holder must be a person.

Hard disagree on leeches part. They make Unreal Engine, which powers basically all of the most graphically intensive games out today. A significant percentage of games on steam are UE games.

So by your own logic of "things on one store are made with tech developed by the other store's owner", they are not leeches.

I think this "those are hate are everything bad" attitude needs to stop. There are plenty of things to critique Epic for. You don't need to make criticism look less appropriate by claiming that they are also "other bad things that they are patently not".

I remember that 2024 finding. It made rounds in the medical researcher side of X, and consensus seemed to reach the following conclusion: Condition seems to hit almost exclusively if not exclusively near terminal diabetes type 2 patients, in whom the rapid and permanent crash of sugar levels in tissues that have adapted to being massively overdosed by it is the likely cause.

Those drugs literally cure the problem that causes the disease immediately, as there's a significant percentage of near-terminal patients that are near terminal because they can't stop massively overeating just... stop overeating after the first injection. But they obviously don't cure the side effects of the disease, such as damage done by type 2 to tissues. Then rapid and permanent sugar level crash in tissues that are used to being massively overdosed with it for years may cause some additional damage, and in very rare cases, it can hit optic nerves.

The choice in those cases is almost universally "certain death of type 2's consequences within a few weeks or a tiny chance that curing the illness takes out some already damaged tissues out permanently with single digit number of cases recorded going permanently blind while their extremities stop rotting while patient is still alive". So it's a pretty great dice to roll.

Epic's problem isn't with that. It's with the fact that they built a consumer store that focuses on serving the sellers first and foremost.

Sweeney himself stated that this is going to be their competitive edge back in the day when they started the store.

Turns out, sellers may love you lots for making it awful for buyers with no key store functions like being able to post bad reviews, or have discussion forums to point out problems with games, but those same people also are buyers. And a lot of other buyers look for opinions on the game before buying.

May Gaben live forever, because otherwise the "fuck the consumer, it's all about the seller" storefronts like Epic (and basically every other major digital store today) will become a norm. And you'll have to learn to love eating shit. Because that's all that will be on offer.

It's sad, because once Epic's leadership realized that this isn't going to work, they were locked into the model by their deals with their sellers that there will be no steam style consumer friendly features on their store. So they started giving games for free instead. Except that most of those free games are even worse than Epic store itself.

Their latest "please don't pay attention to us not being able to have consumer friendly features" marketing drive has been about pretending that getting launcher start a couple of seconds faster is the thing people care about.

Considering all the bitching and moaning from Epic's leadership about how bad and evil Steam is with their "monopoly", they don't seem to be stopping them putting their launcher on SteamOS.

Weird, that.

Of course you can hold copyright over AI-generated output.

What you cannot hold copyright over is AI-generated output that didn't have human input. That was the subject of the court case you're likely thinking about.

In the early days of Github Copilot, their enterprise/business version came with an indemnity clause where they would cover court costs for Copilot written code if it was ever pulled into litigation; and they even had filtering that would cut off generation if it detected more than a certain number of lines of code that were an exact match from an open source project (I think it was 15 lines? ..might have been as little as 5).

I highly doubt any of these companies care about licenses when it comes to training. I bet everyone from Anthropic to z.ai don't give to fucks. It's incredibly difficult to prove anyway, and I bet these companies have retention policies that wipe out a lot of the intermediate training sets after 2 years or so.

It hasn't made it to the legal system yet. The courts could deal a massive blow to a lot of the AI tools out there. The apocalyptic scenario I would hope for is the big AI companies (Anthropic/xAI/OpenAI and even open model companies like Z.ai) it hit with a legal brick wall for everything they've ingested.

Open models already downloaded would of course not be subject; not really. Like if you're caught using them, but how would you even know? It could create a world away from data centers and back towards individual developers where we have to own our tools (4x DGX Sparks or whatever) just like auto-mechanics.

I doubt we'd see that from the courts though, but you never really know. It could honestly upend everything.

His first theatrical release is already coming, and hilariously he played actor politics very intelligently, to the point where relevant mainstream publications have posted mostly positive things about him.

Because he still hires voice actors. The people who have been by far the most vocal and militant about being replaced by AI. Of all people, he got the most rabid anti-AI crown on his side by selling "we keep the voice actors, but replace everyone else" to them. And it seems to have worked.