I think they made the right call too. It’s better for almost everyone. A lot of flight sim types are also techies, so I bet the mods will bias that way.

I’m having a great time, but I also love FO4 and No Man’s Sky. The toe-dip I’ve done into colony building shows that they put real thought into Astroneer-like automated manufacturing stuff, which is my crack, and something I missed in NMS and FO4. It’s also clear from the first city that they know how depressing FO4 is, and wanted to add more variety.

Story and characters are a cut above any other Bethesda game so far, but that’s not saying much. My wife is replaying BG3 next to me, and it makes Starfield’s writing look amateurish by comparison. It’s not the core of the game though, so eh.

Downsides so far have been that the minor planets/moons don’t have much to do, and that inventory management is annoying with how much crafting components weigh.

Ship combat is… Fine. It’s not as intricate as Elite: Dangerous or SW:Squadrons (for sim gamers, weapons are all on REALLY forgiving gimbals, which makes precision unnecessary), but not actively bad like NMS VR. I think it’s a good compromise, because not everyone wants to deal with a realistic sim in what is essentially a minigame.

It’s also complex, which is good, but adds some awkwardness to the beginning.

Scorn was worth a shot if you’ve already played Soma and RE. The mechanics are… Fine. The art is jaw-dropping. It’s like Amnesia if H. R. Giger had been the art director.

Don’t forget a bathroom trash can with a bag.

They’re basically /r/the_Donald.

After all that work they did to screenshot Twitter?

Because the same legion of full-time Eric Cartman impersonators smears the same hateful dogshit over normal comment threads. This is a lot more effective than individually banning every member of the inevitable asshat brigade. There’s room for instances that federate with them, but it probably shouldn’t be the default.

The problem is that the articles from exploring heads take an average of two sentences to reach an obvious and malicious lie. There is no room for discussion under those circumstances.

For those who don’t respect the authority of conservatives as the arbiters of reality, they have no purpose except as a glimpse into the abyss. It’s like having your stream of memes interrupted every few pages by a graphic crime scene photo, only with the dread that comes with knowing that the criminal has a wide support base.

We’ll probably see sooner or later.

Generative design is already a mature technology. NASA already uses it for spaceship parts. It’ll probably be used for bridges when large-format 3D printers that can manage the complexity it introduces.

That assumes that the classes of problems that AI’s can solve remains stagnant. I don’t think that’s a good assumption, especially given that GPT4 can already self-review and refine its output.

I see both sides.

They’re probably going to completely (and intentionally) collapse the labor market. This has never happened before, so there is no historical prescedent to look at. The closest thing we have was the industrial revolution, but even that was less disruptive because it also created a lot of new factory jobs. This doesn’t.

The public hope is that this catastrophic widening of the gap between the rich and poor will force labor to organize and take some of the gains through legislation as an altenative to starving in the streets. Given that the technology will also make coercing people to work mostly pointless, there may not be as much pressure against it as there historically has been. Altman seems to be publically thinking in this direction, given the early basic income research and the profit cap for OAI. I can’t pretend to know his private thoughts, but most people with any shred of empathy would be pushing for that in his shoes.

Of course, if this fails, we could also be headed for a permanent, robotically-enforced nightmare dystopia, which is a genuine concern. There doesn’t seem to be much middle-ground, and the train has no brakes.

The IP theft angle from the end of the article seems like a pointless distraction though. All human knowledge and innovation is based on what came before, whether AI is involved or not. By all accounts, the remixing process it applies is both mechanically and functionally similar to the remixing process that a new generation of artists applies to its forebears, and I’ve not seen any evidence that they are fundamentally different enough to qualify as theft, except in the normal Picasso sense.

Interesting times.

Somehow the same artist:

Genuine question: Based on what? GPT4 was a huge improvement on GPT3, and came out like three months ago.

I seriously doubt this technology will pass by without a complete collapse of the labor market. What happens after is pretty much a complete unknown.

I don’t know exactly where to start here, because anyone who claims to know the shape of the next decade is kidding themself.

Broadly:

AI will decocratize creation. If technology continues on the same pace that it has for the last few years, we will soon start to see movies and TV with hollywood-style production values being made by individual people and small teams. The same will go for video games. It’s certainly disruptive, but I seriously doubt we will want to go back once it happens. To use the article’s examples, most people prefer a world with street view and Uber to one without them.

The same goes for engineering.

Skyrim together, if you’re particularly into jank.

You may have the best luck starting with instances that are widely defederated. Insisting that trans experience is invalid is not considered acceptable in most communities, and instances that accept it are generally siloed.

I sincerely recommend listening to a trans person speak about their experience though. The best way to avoid getting removed from places for hate speech is to stop hating people.

You might like Wesley Willis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jTPbcnqPxQ