In this case though, it does seem more branding than technical. Until very recently, AI and ML were related but not synonymous. But once ML got lucrative, its proponents rebranded their work as 'AI' since that term is so much more intertwined with pop culture.

I could maybe, depending on what it actually _is_, seeing a use for something like this for networked embedded devices like the kind you see in industrial or utility setups. Think power grid, water system, or other industrial monitoring... situations where you really don't want to to take the device's word that it isn't comprimised.

I think that is the problem. The people who are really into AI generated games are the same 'idea people' who used to start kickstartres with 'I have a revolutionary idea for a game! all I need is money for programmers and artists!'. Their lack of experience in any relevant field (other then maybe playing games) mean their ideas are generally terrible.. and now they have tools that will not only do all the work, but tell them how brilliant they are.

Then again, that is kinda like citing spam statistics are proof that AI is the future of email. The vast majority of games are slop,.. they are cheap to produce and distribute, so they tend to dominate the stats. Even before AI became cheap and good enough, studios that pumped out large quantities of low effort 'games' were flooding distribution channels and advertizers.

I am thinking back to how they determined that the health care accounts were fraudulent by essentially sending unsolicited spam to people and seeing who responded... 'lets make our attempt to reach out sound as much like fraud as possible and if they don't respond they must be fake people!'

Yeah, my mind also immediately jumped to 'ok, this is going to be a rust rewrite, isn't it?'
 
Kinda feels like the rust evangelist community is converging with the AI slop one. It was always more of a social movement than technical one, so kinda make sense they are trying to drop the actual programming part as quickly as possible.

Are they thought?
 
At my company, like many, we have a pretty varied range of people from fresh out of college to nearing retirement after decades in the field. I mostly see the older developers get enamored with AI. The younger ones do not seem nearly as interested in it. We even do have a few modders in the group, and I mostly see the middle aged ones thrilled to be producing AI slop and dumping it to the community.

Closer to the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy tradition. All they need are the words "Don't Panic" on the front cover.

If it doesn't, it has no real value.

Almost nothing on Wikipedia is true, but all of it is "verifiable" in that there's at least one published source making the claim. Even if 99.9% of all other sources say the opposite.

(The Haka is not, for example, a war chant. Which is attested to, but because it's claimed to be online, it is "verifiable".)

The number of errors is huge, the number of "official editors" who know anything about the subject is extremely small, and this has always been the case. This is why nobody reputable cites Wikipedia. Wikipedia is where you go to find out what is potentially interesting, but you ALWAYS obtain the facts from elsewhere, if you've any sense.

Your best engineers will be AuDHD, and AuDHD folk don't do well in these sorts of synthetic tests.

I can code in 20+ languages for over 12 different OS', write code that's good enough for CERN to run for particle accelerator data collection for a decade, have accelerated systems by an order of magnitude by understanding the poem space better than their previous engineers, but I am abysmal at exam style settings.

The software industry is riddled with SEs who write abysmal code but can pass a coding test easily. They're the folk that you have always needed to reject but didn't because they ticked a box.

I don't think anyone exclusively blames trump for the current state of things, but he did lean in heavily into making things worse as a religious issue.

On the other hand, historically other big spikes in prices have not really resulted in much investment in alternatives... just higher prices and profit margins, with people going back to what they were doing at the new normal.

There is also more than one human, so plenty of room for someone to have said something 50 years ago and someone else says something today.