We can move goal posts all we like. All modern companies writing software are using AI. My company is heavy in AI use and we are opening more positions not less. The problem is that these new roles are for much more senior engineers simply because the need for entry level engineers is being replaced by AI. The bigger question is how do you train new senior engineers.

Slop companies were making slop before AI, they are going to continue. There is a huge market for it. Just like spam, scammers, and all other sorts of nonsense. AI might change the pace, but it doesn't change that shit companies will produce shit things and good companies will produce good things. Both will use the same tools.

Often in copyright cases for song melodies, if the artist being sued for infringement could have possibly had access to the music they’re accused of copying, even if it was something they listened to once, they can be accused of “subconsciously” infringing on the original content. One of the most notorious examples of this is Tom Petty’s claim that Sam Smith’s “Stay With Me” sounded too close to Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down.” Smith eventually had to give Petty co-writing credits on their own chart-topping song, which entitled Petty to royalties.

That eventually lead to this https://archive.org/download/a... where programmer, musician, and copyright attorney Damien Riehl, along with fellow musician/programmer Noah Rubin, sought to stop copyright lawsuits that they believe stifle the creative freedom of artists. They did that by just using a algo to make ever possible 8-note, 12-beat melody combo within a single octave. They then copywrighted it and released it to the public domain.

So clearly written page is not required when assessing a music recording. Hell even John Fogerty was once accused of stealing his own music and won the case by playing a guitar in front of the jury.

In 2003, Trump a card holding liberal sent Epstien a birthday card. That was a liberal attack to hurt today's Donald Trump, the most conservative man on earth and our greatest president.

Fucking liberals man, ever time!

Using AI is a wide spectrum.

You can easily use AI to make great video games, just like you can use AI to write any other software. Just like you can use intellisense for code completion and still make great video games.

The thing that determines if a product is great is the people involved in the process who understand the business case, the expected work product, and the spirit of the goal. So I'm 100% for a game company using AI to help it write code and create the building blocks of a game. Like any product code needs reviews, graphics need tweaked, the software needs to be tested and product tested.

So yes, if you one shot a game with AI and do no testing or tweaking it's going to be shit. If you use it appropriately like any other tool you can accelerate your deliverable and make fine products.

I think we will see some games crafted with love that leveraged AI for the parts that are less interesting. For example someone with talent in graphic design and writing who has a wonderful idea for a turn based RPG, but isn't sure how to make Unity work leverages AI to turn that story and art into something fun. It would be great if everyone could find people who believed in their ideas and worked with them, but often all you find are people who tell you nothing will work. Sometimes you have to go it alone and AI is making that easier.

Software development as we know it is ending. AI tools are 'good enough' that any idea can be made fairly quickly with even limited knowledge. This opens up a lot of opportunities for creativity and itch scratching while at the same time impacting the commercial value of software. I'm shocked the open source community doesn't see this as a pivital moment for free software.

For example, recently I wanted to play nethack on my m1 mac. I also wanted to use a tileset. Finding no good OSX arm based clients, I spun one up in a week with a custom tileset that I tweaked to my likings and even added graphical features to represent the true 'size' of items and creatures in the game.

Now I'm fully capable of building that solution by hand, it would have taken a month or two, but I would have needed to find a like minded person who knows how to build graphics and shared the same visual inspirations and goals I had. That would have probably just caused me to end the idea. Instead I scratched that itch and have been playing nethack a ton more and I'm happy. I released the code as open source so anyone who cares to can play with it.

To me that is real value and not 'slop'.

Because it is no way intelligent.

We need a law that makes it illegal for a business to sell any data about someone that has paid them $1 or more.

Allows Facebook, etc. so the industry would survive, but prevents the things you really NEEED to exist online from also screwing you over.

Illegal doesnâ(TM)t mean I donâ(TM)t have the right to record, tho. Government doesnâ(TM)t give rights.

That's right my bet that the ND quarterback will get sacked 3 times in the next game is an important part of the global marketplace and needed to price in this factor to the economy.

exactly, if my use of AI was a metric that was tied to my bonus I'd use AI for everything. Ai to write the slack message i'm about to send, AI to write my OOO message, AI to write the google search I'm about to run.

That's is crazy. I could go into the office, but then I'd be in an office in zoom meetings all day with other offices! So my employer gets to pay me less to work from home in a lower cost of living area. It's crazy that they only have one location and can all collaberate in person!

But if I want to sit in my mom's basement and shit out a 100k LOC project by hand with code I don't understand by using nothing but stackoverflow posts and then throw it over the fence that's ok because it's not AI slop?

I am of course making a joke here, but being anti-slop is one thing. Banning projects for AI or made with AI is being a luddite.

Open source was always neck beards and old geezers. It's not suprising they are also luddites.

Teacher comes up with a question that AI will get wrong. Ask the students why it is wrong.

Ask them what prompt will result in this picture and show the picture.

Ai does things we could not do before.

It can help us solve math problems better than most professional mathematicians. (high bar)
It can draw better than the average human. (low bar)
It can write better than the average human. (low bar)
It can write and perform music better than the average human (low bar)
It can do a google search and summarize the results better than the average human (low bar)
It can direct a phone call better than the standard automation. (low bar)
It can fool idiots by speaking English

Problems with it:
1) It does not understand truth, accuracy, or hierarchical authority.
2) It does not know how to learn on it's own. Instead it is designed to be taught by a human being.
3) It requires far more electricity and water per task than a human being does. Basically, a data center is the rough equivalent of a human town.

AI is not equipped to replace human beings in most jobs.

As far I know, it can be used to help expert mathematicians, hack computers, write personalized porn, and solve many of the very specialized math issues such as protein folding, looking for new medicines, etc.