“Finish high school, get a job, get married, have kids, go to church. Those are all in your control,” -Ben Shapiro
...all within the comfort of your parents home (if they even have one big enough for you, your wife, and your kids). Because that's all they can afford.
Also: WTF does going to church have to do with anything‽ That's not going to land you a good job (blessed are the poor)! There's no marketable skills to be learned from going to church either (unless you want to socialize with pedophiles and other sex offenders in order to better understand Trump's social circle; see: "pastor arrested").
No! Which is why anyone and everyone should record every little thing they do. Everywhere they go. Everyone they talk to. Even conversations with their lawyers and doctors.
They have nothing to hide so it's OK! Walk right up behind them and start recording. It's fine!
When they leave their laptop somewhere without locking it, make sure to upload their browser history for the public to view.
Listen: Our endless output of porn is the reason why aliens continue to leave us alone! They don't want to mess up this good thing that just keeps coming.
This doesn't really have much to do with AI. It's just a malicious browser extension that's harvesting people's data. It's probably harvesting their emails and anything else that goes through the browser too.
This is kind of interesting because it's exactly the sort of "hard problem" that AI researchers have been trying to solve for a long time now. For a prompt like this to work, the inference step needs to be really fucking good at directing the rest of the model(s).
For reference, anyone that uses AI image generation regularly would view this anyone that tries this as completely ignorant of how the tech works or just, "wishful thinking."
Someone with experience would generate one letter image at a time. Otherwise you'll run into all sorts of problems such as all the animals looking like cats 🤣
In situations like this, it's best to remember why dead languages are dead: Nobody speaks these languages anymore because everyone kept accidentally casting spells!
This is hilarious because the whole reason why the Trump administration appointed military lawyers as immigration judges was to deny more amnesty cases. The idea being that because they're also soldiers, they must have less compassion and are less likely to believe immigrants are in danger if they return to their country of origin.
Turns out that because military lawyers have seen more of the world's dangerous places than your typical immigration judge, they're much more likely to believe that any given immigrant is telling the truth about their home country being dangerous.
8% of total global aviation emissions doesn't put it in second place. It's not even in the top 100. I don't think it ever will be... Because building huge data centers takes years and by the time there's enough data centers to make a huge dent, the previous AI data centers will have been used to make fusion power a reality.
Today's fusion reactor designs were all made thanks to AI. The kind running in big data centers.
It takes a lot of computing power to simulate fusion reactor designs!
The one that lies only has a 1 in 10 chance of making up a number that will pass the check! Cool shortcut: If it starts with a 1, 2, 7, 8, or 9, they're lying. Those are reserved for things that aren't credit cards 👍
I use gen AI every day and I find it extremely useful. But there's degrees to every model's effectiveness. For example, I have a wide selection of AI models (for coding) at my disposal from OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, etc and nearly every open source model that exists. If I want to do something simple like change a light theme (CSS) to a dark one, I can do that with gpt5-mini, gpt-oss:120b or any of the other fast/cheap models... Because it's a simple task.
If I need to do something complicated that requires a lot of planning and architecture, I'm going to use the best model(s) available for that sort of thing (currently, Claude Sonnet/Opus or Gemini Pro... The new 3.0 version; old 2.5 sucked ass). Even then I will take a skeptical view of everything it generates and make sure my prompts are only telling it to do one little thing at a time, verifying everything at each step.
What I'm saying is that AI is an effective tool depending on the use case/complexity. Do I trust the big game publishers to use AI effectively like this? FUCK NO. Huge negative response to that question.
Here's how I suspect that they'll use generative AI:
Instead of using a gen AI model to interpolate steps between frames (which is most effective at 2D or 2.5D stuff), they will use a video model to generate the whole thing from scratch, 8-10 second clips at a time. Complete with all the inconsistencies and random bullshit that it creates. The person in charge will slap a "good enough" sticker on it and it'll ship like that.
Instead of viewing the code generated by AI with a critical eye, they will merely rely on basic unit tests and similar. If it passes the test, it'll ship. We can expect loads of "how did this even happen?" bugs from that in the near future (not just in games).
Instead of using image models to generate or improve things like textures (so they line up properly), they'll have them generate whole scenes. Because that saves time and time is money! And that's all that matters to them. Even though there will be absolutely insane and obvious inconsistencies that piss off gamers.
Instead of paying people to use AI to help them translate text, they'll just throw the text at the AI and call it a day. With no verification or improvements by humans whatsoever.
They'll pay 3rd parties for things like "AI cheat checking" and it will ban people left and right who were not cheating but will do nothing to stop actual cheaters (just like every anti-cheat that ever existed).
They will use AI bots for astroturfing and ad campaigns.
They will use poorly-made AI chat bots for completely unhelpful, useless support. People will jailbreak these and use them for even more nefarious purposes inside of games (because security folks won't be paying as much attention in that space).
There's a lot of room in gaming for fun and useful generative AI but folks like Tim Sweeney will absolutely be choosing the villain route.
You bring up a great point! When someone does that: Painting a replica and passing it off as their own, what law have they violated? They have committed fraud. That's a counterfeit.
Is making a counterfeit stealing? No! It's counterfeitting. That is it's own category of law.
It's also a violation of the owner's copyright but let's talk about that too: If I pay an artist to copy someone's work, who is the copyright violator? Me, or the artist that painted it? Neither! It's a trick question, because copyright law only comes into force when something is distributed. As long as those works never get distributed/viewed to/by the public, it's neither here nor there.
The way AI works is the same as if you took a book you purchased, threw it in a blender, then started pasting chunks of words out of it in a ransom note.
Woah! Piracy is not considered stealing. The MPAA and RIAA made that argument over and over and over again in the 90s and early 2000s and they lost. Thank the gods!
You would download a car!
If piracy was stealing, we'd all be waiting for our chance to watch TV shows in a queue of thousands.
Copyright violations are not theft. They never were and they never will be. Because no one is deprived of anything when something is copied. In theory, there could've been a lost sale as a result but study after study has shown that piracy actually improves sales of copyrighted works.
When an AI is trained on images that YOU—the artist—posted to the public Internet for the world to see it will either increment or decrement a floating point value by like 0.01. That's it! That's all it does.
How can that be considered "stealing"‽ It's absurd.
Don't say, "stolen". It's the wrong word. "Copied" is closer but really, "trained an AI model with images freely available on the Internet" is more accurate but doesn't sound sinister.
When you steal something, the original owner doesn't have it anymore. AIs aren't stealing anything. They're sort of copying things but again, not really. At the heart of every AI LLM or image model is a random number generator. They aren't really capable of copying things exactly unless the source material somehow gets a ridiculously high "score" when training. Such as a really popular book that gets quoted in a million places on the Internet and in other literature (and news articles, magazines, etc... anything that was used to train the AI).
Someone figured out that there's so much Harry Potter quotes and copies in OpenAI's training set that you could trick it into outputting something like 70% of the first book, one very long and specific prompt at a time (thousand of times). That's because of how the scoring works, not because of any sort of malicious intent to violate copyright on the part of OpenAI.
I don't know about the carbon emissions, the water thing in the article is extremely misleading. It claims that AI is using up more water than the entire yearly consumption of bottled water. The water usage estimates include the water used to cool the power plants generating the power (running the data center).
The last study on this said that the actual usage of water in the data centers is 12% of the total water usage estimate. Data centers don't normally use that much water. It would be like Niagra Falls pouring water over every data center.
Simple reality check: If you look at the cooling system outside any given data center—if they're using as much water as d article suggests—they'd be emitting a massive cloud of water, 24/7. It would be so much, they'd need a cooling tower on par with a nuclear power station.
So what's with the statistic? If you look at any given power plant on Google Maps you'll see cooling ponds all around it. That's the water they're talking about. It's part of the build of the power plant. It's not using potable water that would be going into people's houses.
Having said that, 12% of the water usage is potable water—in the worst-case data center/power plant matchup scenario. Where you have an older data center that doesn't use modern closed loop cooling systems that don't lose as much water to evaporation. I don't know what the statistic is, but I can sure you it's a lot better than 12%. A wild guess would be 4-6%.
Background: I was a security consultant for many years and traveled all over the US going into many data centers (sometimes, by breaking in! Hah). Inside, they're loud AF (think: standing next to a jet engine) and outside they'll have some big ass cooling units that are also kinda loud but not as loud as some of these articles make them out to be.
That was about 7 years ago but I doubt much has changed since then. I guarantee that those data centers are still being used and have been renovated to support AI-style hardware. The power from the utility was just increased and more cooling units were added. I seriously doubt they did much more than that.
From what I've read about the new "giga scale" data centers, they're much more efficient (and quieter... Outside). Those are the ones we want. If we replaced all the old stuff with new stuff, the statistics in articles like this would drop by and order of magnitude (just a guess).
...all within the comfort of your parents home (if they even have one big enough for you, your wife, and your kids). Because that's all they can afford.
Also: WTF does going to church have to do with anything‽ That's not going to land you a good job (blessed are the poor)! There's no marketable skills to be learned from going to church either (unless you want to socialize with pedophiles and other sex offenders in order to better understand Trump's social circle; see: "pastor arrested").