• 1 Post
  • 53 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle














  • Props to you for using strikethrough instead of deleting in your edit so the context still makes sense. I think you bring up an interesting point about competitive fps games. I imagine companies structure their development similar to games-as-a-service because they are essentially two flavors of the same thing, right? I had never really considered whether the growth of the competitive scene was part of the drive towards GaaS and away from tight single player experiences.

    I think underlying all of this is that publishers want a guaranteed profit margin. That doesn’t exist in art, of course, but they still want it. And if that means choosing what they think is a safe bet, they’ll choose it. I think Bungie made GaaS look way easier than it actually is, and maybe the competitive scene contributed to that too. “Look at all the money these hero shooters are making, let’s get a piece of that pie.” Formulas just never quite work out that simply in real life.






  • And yet, I believe LLMs are a natural evolutionary product of NLP and a powerful tool that is a necessary step forward for humanity. It is already capable of exceptionally quickly scaffolding out basic tasks. In it, I see the assumptions that all human knowledge is for all humans, rudimentary tasks are worth automating, and a truly creative idea is often seeded by information that already exists and thus creativity can be sparked by something that has access to all information.

    I am not sure what we are defending by not developing them. Is it a capitalism issue of defending people’s money so they can survive? Then that’s a capitalism problem. Is it that we don’t want to get exactly plagiarized by AI? That’s certainly something companies are and need to continue taking into account. But researchers repeat research and come to the same conclusions all the time, so we’re clearly comfortable with sharing ideas. Even in the Writer’s Guild strikes in the States, both sides agreed that AI is helpful in script-writing, they just didn’t want production companies to use it as leverage to pay them less or not give them credit for their part in the production.


  • From what I’m reading, they’re not set to go to market; that’s just their goal. Most recent article I found was middle of last year that they had raised more money and were hoping to go to human trials by the end of the year. That aligns with what I remember about Vasalgel from years ago - they had finally made it to monkey trials but their monkey study was not showing a consistent ability to return to virility with the second injection. I seem to remember the proposed reason being that vas deferens in the monkeys/apes they were testing with are actually more delicate than humans’ and so humans should still likely be reversible. Last I heard, I believe they were trying to move forward on the human trial of proving that it works as a contraceptive, to be followed by a human trial showing reversibility. Then radio silence and funding issues. My assumption has always been that they struggled to jump to human trials because of the primate study results hurting the likelihood of reversibility. Hopefully they have reworked it to solve that, or maybe the acquisition and new funding is enough to just push through that regardless and see if humans will be fine.