I don't see any significant differences between ChatGPT and Cleverbot, if I'm honest. It might have a wider array of responses to pick between, but it's still making the same mistakes.
It would be foolish to ignore past tech bubbles, and how people back then claimed they'd fix all their problems in the near future and you need to jump on now or you won't survive (and how none of them survived).
It's amusing to me how long people have been saying "yes, AI is crap, but it might not be crap some day, so just you wait!" Despite all the money tech companies have thrown at AI, it's still as crap as it ever was, and I don't see any reason to think it'll get better.
Meanwhile, Crunchyroll doesn't care if it's crap, so long as they can get around the cost of paying humans (which is another can of worms). If they're willing to buy this level of quality, what incentive is there for quality to improve?
He wants a movie with a black man and an Asian man who hates America teaming up to fight corrupt criminals? When the last one got 17% on rotten tomatoes?
...Does anyone even want this? Even if we ignore the controversies (like Jackie Chan serving on the CPPCC, Chris Tucker flying to Epstein's island, and Brett Ratner harrassing a dozen women we know about), who actually looks at Rush Hour 3 and waits 18 years for a sequel?
Would you believe me if I said I didn't check your comment history before posting that? I just assumed that a programmer who plays Pathfinder also uses Linux.
It just occurred to me that Pathfinder is to D&D what Linux is to Windows. More technically complex, less moral baggage, less mainstream and its fans won't shut up about it.
I have to believe Jerry, the exec who's bad at his job but the CEO likes him, has 16 strikes. One more strike, and the CEO will be forced to update the policy again.
A tweet from 2019 where someone did a time travel campaign, but accidentally added a mountain that wasn't there in the present. The players were wondering what happened to the mountain, and the DM was wondering that too. Eventually, they ran a poll, and decided it got up and walked away.
This community, back on reddit, went absolutely nuts over that. There were a LOT of memes.
Yeah, I think 5e tools uses the first ever printed version, while WotC reprint and edit the lore in the Monster Manual a LOT. D&D Beyond would probably be a third entry entirely. I'm glad we're on the same page now (or rather, we were on the same page, but the books were different).
I don't know what to tell you. I went to 5etools, looked at the 2014 lore, and directly copy-pasted that exact quote. You can check yourself. If I wrote it, I'd have spelt unrecognisable with an s instead of a z. Maybe it got errata'd at some point?
Note that a feature applying while motionless doesn't mean it is motionless. And based on the rules, no, there are no other ways to notice the monster if it is motionless. Motion is the only way to spot a mimic, because if it's not moving, you can't distinguish it.
Look at the comment above mine. THAT was an um actually. OP described a perception check for a mimic, the comment I replied to said "um actually, there wouldn't be a perception check", and I replied with why there would be. Why are you making me the villain for defending the post?
In Dark Souls, mimics breathe slowly. Like, 17 seconds per breath. It's tough to spot, but you can spot it if you're cautious. Since it's proven to catch people off guard, but CAN be spotted, I figure, why not use what works?
Of course it doesn't guarantee it. That's why you roll dice.
Does evolution apply to aberations? And would evolution not grant the same benefit to every living being as well? Not to mention, co-evolution would lead to better mimic detection, surely.
I don't see why I have to deal with your fiction over mine.
Yessss... All according to plan...