Ech

It’s an ironic line to start with.

“America’s allies still don’t realize they’re not allies anymore.”

The technical term was created to promote the misunderstanding that LLMs “think”. The “experts” want people to think LLMs are far more advanced than they actually are. You can add as many tokens to your context as you want - every model is still, fundamentally, a text generator. Humanizing it more than that is naive or deceptive, depending on how much money you have riding on the bubble.

Leapfrogged? It never left. LLMs were made to make shit up.

Except it’s not libel. It’s a one time string of text generated exclusively for him. Literally no one would have known what it said if the guy didn’t get the exact thing he wants “deleted” published online for everyone to see. Now it’ll be linked to his name forever, but the llm didn’t do that.

I haven’t delved too deep into the shitshow that followed that game, and I know it’s convoluted as hell, but it seems like that’s referring to previous associates of the studio, not the studio itself. The page mentions Martin Luiga in association with it, for whatever that’s worth.

I can sympathize with that. The whole game is intentionally bleak and rough, which can be pretty off putting (though it does make the few nice parts exceptionally nice). The devs made a pretty overt choice to focus more on being fairly confrontational art rather than being particularly accommodating to the player.

That’s not an inaccurate description. Though context is important - most of the characters know yours through behavior and actions that neither you or the character remember. A lot of the game is playing with how you handle that.

“All of them? All of them. All of them is good.”

Gris is great. Small, but beautiful.

Sayonara Wild Hearts. I love that game and often load it up when I’m feeling out of sorts.

It’s pretty telling to focus on the dev’s right to reject inclusivity while simultaneously rejecting and deriding everyone else’s right to judge them for that.

And if it was such a useless change, why didn’t the dev reject it for that instead of saying it was “political”? He’s the one that declared the word itself, not the utility of the change, was the problem. Calling everyone else “trolls” for pointing that out is just disingenuous.

They refused to use the right pronoun. One is a mistake. The other is a choice.

Perhaps this is what you mean, but it’s even worse than just unpaid hours for current employees. His implicit goal is to generate a slave-class of people (which is what actual AI would be) that he can make more of or delete at his whim, and eliminate to livelihoods of any current employees (besides him and other execs, of course).

Mine’s the grim reaper hallway meme and half finished games.

Gabe Sparrow: “But it does run.”

“Such a fool! He should obviously let the treacherous gas bag fleece him blind while he silently smiles and nods obsequiously. Now he’s ruined his chances!”

I don’t know much about the man other than bits and pieces of how he’s handled this horrific invasion, but from what I’ve seen, he has continually shown more honor and backbone than most other politicians I’m familiar with. I don’t expect things will end well for their country at this point, but I think he is a credit to himself and his people.

“Blistering” suggests it had merit.

The topic is about helping Ukraine, not the US. Why in the world would you assume they were suggesting the latter?

Probably, but it hasn’t been on the table yet. Saying that it was is just going to hurt valid criticism.