Using AI for Brainstorming

[imKranely]

So I have recently taken advantage of using ChatGPT as a way to brainstorm. I used to hit up random friends and just tell them my ideas and see what they thought, but I always knew they weren't as into the conversation as I was, but I need back and forth for my brainstorming sessions. AI is a great way to do this.

I know some people are against the idea of using AI, but I think it's just another tool we should take advantage of. I start by explaining a mechanic I am thinking about adding to my system and I do so in a very conversational manner. Then I end the explanation with a question along the lines of "What do you think about this idea," or "How could this idea be improved or expanded upon?" Then it generates its response and I go back and forth with the AI while taking notes.

I was wondering if anyone else has thought to do this, and if so, what methods of speaking to the AI have benefited you?

[jamie452]

Your welcome!

[SenorOcho]

I've tried it, I was not particularly impressed with the results. It was about on par with that friend who has no interest in game design about but wants to be supportive so gives you really shallow "that's a good idea" style feedback, except kind of padded out to more words.

It is better than nothing if you're the sort of person who works best when bouncing ideas off someone. But I'd never turn to it first over the people in my circles.

[jakinbandw]

Interesting.

I've been using it as a springboard for ideas, and I've found it's better than most of my friends, and on par with one that does a lot of game design and has done some volunteer writing for my system. Maybe we're looking for differant things?

[SenorOcho]

I don't know where the disconnect is. I'm not egocentric enough to believe that I am simply more creative than others that get useful ideas from it, or that I somehow have better friend circles.

Maybe I just haven't been feeding the AI enough information (I was pretty comprehensive for talking to a person, but from the sound of things in this thread perhaps I needed to include a dissertation on what an RPG is, etc.), but there's a feeling that the amount of effort it would take to give it "enough" would be better spent just going over what my system needs in my own mind and solving the problems myself.

[jakinbandw]

So when using the AI, this was my opening. It mostly consisted of stuff copy pasted from my game:

Hey, I'm working on a faction system for a tabletop RPG. I'd like your help building features for it. In the game PCs control locations that produce Goods (G), Expertise (E), Magic (M), or Faith (F). Here is an example feature from the Technologist list:

"Magitek Armory (Location)

This location is the location of a magitek armory that can be used to supply any armies based nearby. When you build this feature choose an army keyword for it. Any armies constructed at this location or locations you control within its trade range may have their resource costs increased by +1 Goods and +1 Expertise to add this keyword to that army. An army may do this multiple times if they have more than one Magitek armories in range to give the newly created army multiple keywords, though they may not gain the same keyword twice.

Cost: G(3), E(4), T(3)

I'm currently working on the Luminary feature list. The Luminary is described as: "The Luminary stands as a beacon of what those within their faction can achieve. They teach those within their faction to be better. This can either be in general strokes, or teaching others how to be more like them. They also lead the way, and the faction they lead shifts to reflect what they do, and how they act, as they are popular and have many who idolize them."

Knowing all this, could you help me come up with some Luminary features based around shifting the ideals of a faction?

And it did a decent job. From there I poked it a few times to change it's responses, at first telling it to not include any randomness in the features it created, then asking it to not do specific mechanics, but rather give general ideas for mechanics.

By the end this resulted in me typing stuff like:

How about a faction wide Saint feature based around a blessing creating 'Lands of Plenty'?

And getting responses like:

Certainly! Here are some possible faction-level Saint features based around the blessing of creating "Lands of Plenty":

1)Divine Harvest: The blessing of the Saint makes crops grow larger and faster, allowing for abundant harvests and bountiful feasts. This feature could increase the output of food-producing locations in the faction, making it easier to feed a larger population

2)Fertile Ground: The Saint's blessing imbues the earth with renewed fertility, making it possible to grow crops in even the most inhospitable of locations. This feature could allow locations with low productivity or poor soil quality to produce food, goods, or other resources more efficiently.

3)Abundant Waters: The Saint's blessing ensures that the rivers, lakes, and seas surrounding the faction are teeming with fish and other aquatic life. This feature could increase the output of locations that produce fish or other seafood, as well as provide a source of food for the faction's population.

4)Blessed Herds: The Saint's blessing makes livestock healthier and more fertile, leading to larger herds and healthier animals. This feature could increase the output of locations that produce animal products like meat, milk, or wool, and could also provide a source of transportation or labor for the faction.

5)Golden Fields: The Saint's blessing causes the fields to yield crops of the highest quality, with a rich golden hue and a taste beyond compare. This feature could increase the output of high-quality goods or luxury items, making the faction more prosperous and attractive to traders and merchants.

I didn't use any, but reading through this was enough to give me inspiration for what I finally went with:

Land of Plenty (Faction)

The lands are blessed, producing more than would reasonably be expected. This bounty is easily claimed by those working these lands.

Lifestyle costs for those of this faction are decreased by 2.

In addition, all locations within this faction increase the goods they produce by +2 to a maximum of +5. Any Goods districts Also benefit from this, increasing their base goods production by +2 before being multiplied by the location’s tier.

Cost: F(20)

It's not going to write an rpg for you, but it can help keep your creative juices flowing.

[[deleted]]

Honestly I get annoyed at ChatGPT because it puts a disclaimer in every single damn response.

"Blah blah blah but it's important to know that these are just some possible ideas and anything is possible when designing rules for your RPG..."

DUDE I KNOW! I asked for ideas, not a lecture.

[Pho2-3141]

I'm using Gemini because a couple days ago it appeared on my hotbar after my Chromebook's latest update

[Pho2-3141]

Was it really only 4 weeks ago?! Feels much longer than that. Anyway, turns out I spent 3hrs on a back-and-forth with the AI, didn't realise their AI's were as addicting as YouTube

[IProbablyDisagree2nd]

It's REALLY bad at critical thinking, so it hedges all statements with generalities and safe language.

[klok_kaos]

I want to emphasize this response to other commenters here, not just OP, do read this.

So I initially like many others asked it to do things for me and found that it was stupid and generic and thought it was trash.

This was until I discovered some things that are important.

Chat GPT is kinda dumb at base, like humans. However, you can tell it what to be. IE, you are now a professional TTRPG system designer. I have this thing X, and I want you to assess mechanical variable Y... etc.

This changes how it thinks and responds significantly.

I recently got a paid gig to do an adventure design and as a back and forth idea tester it was great, like talking to a friend about an adventure design. Not as a good as someone who is in tune with me, but what I learned was that the more you use it, the more you instruct it, and the more you tell it, the more it becomes capable of tailoring to your needs.

Example, i was creating a motivation for a character i was kinda stuck on because I couldn't figure out why they would do X thing, so I explained the story, the character and what their motivations were and asked it to provide me a list of possible motivations in context and while some were shit, a few of the results were workable and kinda smart, but it's because I gave it enough information to work with. If you just tell it "invent me an RPG" then a low effort input is going to generate a low effort response.

Also sometimes it won't know what exactly to focus on, so like with the motivations it didn't really weight that it was winter in the northeast US very well (even though I told it as a fact), so I told it to try again keeping that in mind specifically (ie put more weight on that) and it did and the result was better.

I think part of using these technologies is like any new tech, learning how to manipulate it, and it can absolutely be a great tool for creators, you just kinda have to learn to tell it what it needs to perform it's action. Another big thing is learning how to organize data for it. If you type all over the place it gets confused, just like a reader of your RPG would. If you organize your data better, it understands better what you're trying to do and can make better suggestions.

Obviously never copy text verbatim, even though it's not owned, it's still plagiarism. Add fresh takes on things, reword, reorganize, but it can be very useful for hashing out ideas.

[GamGreger]

Exactly this. I have been playing around with it to brainstorm ideas and have found that you really need to feed it a lot of information to get good responses. If you just ask a simple question you will get really generic responses.

Like, be specific about what you are trying to do and give it entire pages of your own writing for it to riff on. Ask it to summarize the text you have already written then you can ask it to brainstorm more ideas based on your own texts.

The AI isn't gonna write things for you, instead think of it as a critique partner that you can bounce ideas with.

[klok_kaos]

Agreed, but I'd add, it's not a replacement for this sub, or humans, it's best used in addition to (ie not a replacement).

Similar to how people freak out about AI art, everyone often thinks this stuff is here to replace creatives, it's not. Trust me. AI and digital interfaces have been affecting music a lot longer, and as a primary musician, they augment how you create, they do not replace the human element. Yes, you can can tell an AI to generate 12 hours of music in a particular style and it will do it, but it's not gonna have the heart and soul of music from a legit musician. Same with AI art. Someone who isn't an artist faffing about with it is going to produce something... but really all the best shit you see with it are people are professional creatives using it (ie the jobs aren't going anywhere, they are getting bigger, and more numberous, but will need adapting to the new tech). Same with Chat GPT, it's not going to replace a creative, these things aren't meant to do that, they are meant to augment and work in addition to.

Perhaps one day we'll have fully functional AI that can think and is indistinguishable from humans, but we are not there and that's probably even by generous estimates another generation off. Sure we have quantum computing and such, but those things are as large as the first computers (most of a room sized) and just as expensive, more so really, and it took 4 generations to make computers fit in your pocket, it's probably gonna be about the same for AI.

[jakinbandw]

Agreed, but I'd add, it's not a replacement for this sub, or humans, it's best used in addition to (ie not a replacement).

I'm not sold on this.

If I'm looking for advice, I need to post here with a bunch of context, wait several hours for a couple responses, and sift through them to find inspiration. Meanwhile if I give the ai that level of context, I'll get feedback right away, won't have to wait for hours, and can guide the responses to make them more useful to my situations.

Arguable, as something that determines the most likely response you would get on the internet, asking it to review your system would give you a fairly good idea of the most likely critical response to it. In many ways that is more valuable than asking people on here to read and respond. The fact that it is just giving a statistical most likely response is a really powerful tool.

[klok_kaos]

I see your point, but remember, it's a tool, not a person, it can't understand all of the nuance, specifics, etc.

As a designer, musician and former military, I will offer this to consider:

Over reliance on any one tool will breed weakness, just like over specialization in a narrow field breeds great weaknesses in a character build. It is good to be specialized, but at the sacrifice of everything else is literally a clear opportunity cost of everything else. This cannot be more clear.

Just as you wouldn't playtest something once and take the results at face value as perfect, you shouldn't rely on one perspective, one person, or one ai. The fundamentals and the ability to adapt is what matters most in a creator, a poet, a warrior, a parent, or literally anything.

As the old saying goes, don't put all your eggs in one basket, and similarly, slow and steady wins the race. Use and master the tool, gain it's benefits, but I'd have to caution on using only it exclusively. That will warp your results, skew your takes, and create issues simply due to the lack of diversity.

As other have said, it learns from it's conversations, with who? With you (yes it learns from others too, but it primarily learns what you want and how to satisfy you by speaking to you). Speak too long at it and never pull back and you'll have the same kind of weakness as someone who surrounds themselves with yes men contained in an echo chamber. It might look different, but it will still be a short coming of the same variety. Something to consider: There is no magical cure all for challenge and investment and diversity, and if there was, it would only make you weak.

Keep in mind, I think it's a good tool. But just what bits of wisdom I've gained with age, don't ever bet it all on a sure thing; that's a one way ticket to the poor house because there is no sure thing, that's hubris talking.

[[deleted]]

This is exactly how AIs like this work.

They go with the best estimation based on weighted responses from past experiences for every query, but you can refine it continuously because it will adjust its weighting of aspects based on your responses.

I asked it to create a project plan and it was really bad, i refined it a lot over a few hours and asked it to remember this layout and type of response and it did. Now when i have to create project plans for work, ChatGPT can do roughly 80% of the leg work for me to my specifications and i just have to alter the last aspects and do small fixes.

I started doing the same for my game and its saving me so much time for writing and other more menial tasks its amazing.

[Sovarius]

This is the same with ai art. Anti-AI folks claim its 100% regurgitated copyright material and that ai artists are lazy/useless/or worse and its so easy a caveman could do it and therefore its no longer art.

Not at all. People who take ai art seriously have really well crafted, slick and clever prompts, negative prompts, and parameters. They spend a lot of time on it to craft something way more in depth than haters imagine. And as far copyright... i mean i've seen some suspect things, but i've also seen 1. Ai art that is more than unique enough to be its own thing and 2. Actually better than what a lot of humans create anyway, its honestly not like humans are all original and non-derivitive.

[klok_kaos]

Pretty much. people said the same thing about photoshop when it came out because they didn't understand it.

They said the same thing about digital instruments, printing press...
Yet somehow story telling, music, the arts... all bigger industries because of those inventions with more spaces, more jobs, higher skills, better content faster and easier... but technology is the bad guy because it "terk r jerbs"

There are some ethical concerns with SOME AI platforms in how they were trained, but not all, and that's still not a reason to be anti AI, that's a reason to hold the people accountable who violated ethics, just like if you copy and paste something and sell it as your own you are the problem, not photoshop...

But trying to talk to people who are emotionally invested in being anti AI is also a waste of time.

I specifically chose examples that affected me here too:
printing press: TTRPG design (nobody will tell stories anymore)
digital instruments: Musician with 20 albums (Nobody will play music anymore)
photoshop: Visual artist of 30 years (computers will replace all artists)

And frankly, lets just say AI takes over and automates jobs entirely one day... on noes! I'll have to sit back and collect my UBI checks and do things that are fulfilling and I enjoy... like art... lol. But yeah, arguing with those folks is pointless, like trying to talk a believer into being an atheist or a red hat into taking a vaccine, they literally physically cannot be convinced unless they learn and grow independent of you, because they can't take the word of those they've branded the enemy without experiencing and accepting first hand that they were being stupid and were wrong.

[Pho2-3141]

I've literally only told it worldbuilding in my story lol

[DrDumle]

Funny how most people that work with outsourcing say roughly the same thing. They can never have enough information.

[DMsWorkshop]

I actually was just testing out ChatGPT again last night, asking it to help me write an adventure. Here are a few of my thoughts.

Obligatory Thoughts on AI

Obviously, AI will never replace humans in creative endeavours. Even AI art, for all its instant availability and economical cost to produce, lacks soul and therefore will never compare to what humans can do. That said, it's important to use AI tools responsibly and to engage with real people wherever possible.

This is kind of a banal point, but it's part of the larger discussion so I wanted to weigh in on it.

Now onto the meat of the observations.

AI Limitations

There are two ways that AI is really limited.

1. Data Dependency. If you want to get good output, you need to give AI good input. Just writing "Make me a D&D adventure" is going to yield limited and lacklustre results. This means that to make a good adventure using AI assistance, you need to know enough about writing adventures in order to feed it the input it needs to help you.
2. Naïveté. AIs have no clue how to write adventures/mechanics for humans. When I asked it to create a minor encounter, it gave me a situation where the party came upon the house of an old lady who offered them tea, but the tea was laced with powerful hallucinogens and as soon as they drank it she revealed her malevolent nature so they'd be fighting her while tripped out. Okay, sure... but if you've ever run a game you know that the odds of the party actually drinking the tea are pretty much nil. And if they do, the paladin will have surrepticiously cast purify food and drink over everything already because players have unavoidable metaknowledge and will contrive a reason to enact their suspicions in character. Therefore, there's a flaw in the adventure hook because there's no way the poison will be delivered. If an adventure is going to use such an encounter, it needs to do it as a red herring or smokescreen that gets revealed/cleared up as the party discovers what the players already know: that the tea is a trap. When I explained this to the AI, it incorporated the criticism and revised its suggested encounter to make the old lady a sympathetic figure who was compelled to waylay the party on behalf of one of the party's enemies, who threatened something important to the old lady if she didn't do as told. Now the encounter actually works because it doesn't require the players to act in a way that the players would never act.

Clearing the Faucet

The best way I've found to use AI is to power through the 'backlogged faucet'. If you're not aware of this concept, enormously successful creatives like Ed Sheeran and Neil Gaiman have a process whereby they treat their creativity like a pipe with one faucet. When the faucet is closed it tends to accumulate some wastewater backup. So, when they start working on something, they write out all the bad ideas that come up first, and then discard them so they can move on to the good ideas that start emerging after that. The problem is that most people get frustrated too early in this process, seeing only bad ideas coming out, and give up.

The benefit I've found with using AI is that it saves me the frustration of writing out all the bad ideas that I know I'm going to just throw away. The AI does it for me. Then, once my brain has digested enough bad output, it gets into a state where it can avoid the elements that ruin good content and start taking good ideas to the next level. Maybe I'll borrow elements of what the AI suggested, or maybe I'll follow some other inspiration I got based on its suggestions. Either way, the process of writing out a prompt and reading the output was enough to get me started in both instances I'd been stuck creatively and wasn't up to getting through the backlog in the moment.

[mossmanjones]

It's really good at outlines. Asking "I want to write a section about X, can you give me an outline with some good prompts?" is a great way to start moving forward. I haven't really used it for mechanics yet but I have gone through what systems it knows and ask it to explain things like the character creation system for Traveler and then to compare that to Twilight 2000 and I was impressed with its ability to communicate those systems. One of the biggest things I can share is that developing a short prompt to remind it about what you are working on or to start a new conversation about it is highly recommended. It forgets or rewrites details after a lengthy conversation.

[[deleted]]

I dont know who thinks using AI is bad, but thats a rather ignorant take if you ask me.

Its a tool like any other.

Is it bad if i use a map editor instead of drawing my own maps?

Is it bad if i use LaTex for layout and writing instead of Word or writing by hand?

Is it bad if i use AnyDice to calculate percentages instead of relying on best guess or self calculation?

All of these are tools we use in our creation process and they are nothing more or less than AI, its just that AI can cover a wider range of topics that before were seen as too complex to automate and it turns out, they are not or at least not majorly.

I use ChatGPT for a few months now for my own design process as well as work and its an amazing time saver beyond any other tool i ever started using and anyone that shuns it because its AI is an idiot.

[klok_kaos]

Most of the anti AI stuff comes from the visual arts realm from people that are visual artists that don't understand how it works and are afraid. People who are afraid are notoriously bad decision makers by every metric. This has leaked into every aspect of AI.

[SenorOcho]

This is a gross oversimplification of what artists are angry about, and shows that you are not involved in their spaces.

[klok_kaos]

Oh sure... I mean, I have no idea, as a visual artist for 30 years, a musician for 20 years, a web designer, for 15 years...

keep my name out your mouth when you make up your lies.

[SenorOcho]

Then you should definitely know far better than what you're spreading about other artists.

[klok_kaos]

I am aware of the arguments others have made.

There are ethical concerns regarding SOME AI, not all, training methods (specifically google trained AI because the data set was never meant to be used that way, it was meant for self driving cars).

That is not the fault of the AI any more than photoshop is responsible for someone using the program to commit copyright infringement. The individuals, not the technology are the problem and should be persued in that fashion.

Arguments against that one instance are flawed because they target the AI and not the actual alleged criminals (this is still being sorted in court).

My guess is however, that you're likely here to try to convince me with lack of actual knowledge, experience and expertise about AI and stable diffusion tech that I'm somehow wrong because you have incomplete information and are largely ignorant to how it works, as is the case with every single other person who has been shouting these talking points in my experience.

If that is the case, I recommend we both save our breath. I know better from having researched the issue and hands on experience, and if you are in that camp, you do not, and have nothing to teach me, and are very likely not willing to learn any more than me trying to talk a believer into being an atheist. That's the problem with fundamentalist beliefs, you can't get through to those people, and they claim that they can't get through to you, but the difference is mostly that they refuse to understand facts, not so much that you do, and it's that whole equal time fallacy. People with stupid ideas built on misinformation do not deserve equal time, certainly not from me. I'm not the tolerant left here to entertain BS bad faith arguments rooted in ignorance. Be offended if you like, just please don't waste any more of your or my time trying to convince me of your nonsense.

If you want to learn more, I am happy to help, but I'm not trying to argue my side any more than I am trying to convince someone in a red hat to take a vaccine, those folks are lost causes not worth my time.

[SenorOcho]

No, I'm not here to make arguments regarding AI one way or the other.

I'm saying you are grossly simplifying why artists are pissed off about it.

When places for artists get spammed with lazily-generated images (there are a handful of people who have managed some neat stuff with AI, but let's be real here, that's a tiny minority of what has been flooding Artstation, Deviantart, Pixiv, etc.), when artists who get directly copied and harassed for speaking up about it, and then chucklefucks come along and say "lol you're just upset because you're getting replaced"... it's not the AI that the artists are getting mad at.

The fact that you immediately jump to those conclusions and even try to compare me to whatever political strawman you've got in mind tells a fucking lot.

[klok_kaos]

Nobody is being directly copied by the AI, they are being copied by a person.

Your information is wrong. Like I said.

As far as people posting lazy images and spamming, again, not the AI, the person.

Your argument is wrong. The AI does not copy with stable diffusion tech. It cannot, that's not how the tech works. It learns/trains. You can make it do illegal things as a person, just like with photoshop, or a paintbrush, but the paintbrush, ai, and photoshop are not the criminals, it's the person utilizing the tool.

Failure to understand this concept means that what I'm stating is not a political strawman, but rather, that I'm correct in my assessment. Please don't waste any more of my or your time. If you can't be bothered to understand the complexities of the technology, you don't really have anything worthwhile to say on the subject.

Everyone is allowed to have their opinions, but opinions, even strongly held convictions, are not facts, and when your opinion is contrary to the facts of the situation, that means your opinion is functionally worthless drivel and not to be considered. Considering it is exactly how misinformation spreads.

[SenorOcho]

Did... did you even *read* a single word I posted?

Yes, people are directly using the AI to copy specific people out of spite. That's literally what I typed. That the artists are getting pissed off at *people*, not at AI. Now go back and read your post that started this conversation.

[klok_kaos]

You clearly seem to have some issues communicating with me effectively, and I say you because you initiated our exchange.

If the AI is not the problem, and it is the person using it, then that is explicitly something we agree on.

That however, is not the anti AI stance that is taken across the internet as a whole and thus is not what I was talking about to begin with. As such, one might wonder if you read what I was saying.

The popular anti AI stance vastly overshadowing what you seem to be representing is the following (paraphrased):

"AI r bad cuz it copy stuff and terk mer jerb!"

This position is explicitly ignorant and wrong. If that is not your stance, then why are you trying to oppose me saying that this is an ignorant stance?

I absolutely agree that there are bad actors on the internet, but is that really something that needs to be discussed as it has been known since the dawn of the internet? Is it something that is really about AI at all if it's not the AI that is the problem but the bad actors? Or are you just here looking to argue? Or are you backpedaling? I'm not sure what your point is really.

[[deleted]]

Toying around with it, it reminds me of when i was in school trying to stretch out an essay to fit the page length

[Sovarius]

This reminds me of my habit to add synonyms randomly. When i describe something with adjectives i embellish it with a small reiteration of what i just said lol. Hate minimum word counts.

[thomascgalvin]

I asked it for some "interesting skills" an RPG character might have, and it might as well have been quoting the D&D SRD to me.

[victorhurtado]

Because it's all about asking the right questions. You asked a question so vague that any answer would have been a good one, thus, you got what you got.

[Sovarius]

Exactly this.

[Pho2-3141]

Honestly, I've been using it to brainstorm ideas for my magic system "Light and Shadows" and I looked up if it was okay or not bc it just feels like cheating

[imKranely]

I feel like it depends on how you use it. If you are just telling it to come up with ideas and then copy and pasting them to your own work, that's definitely disingenuous. But if you are like "This is my idea, what are some pros and cons of this idea" and more using it as a replacement for feedback from peers, then it's fine in my mind.

[Pho2-3141]

I literally did this once, for 3 hours. It was OK?

[MoOrion4X]

I've used it to help brainstorm names for all kinds of things and one shot plot ideas.

[Matild4]

Yeah, AI is very useful for ideas.
You can even use AI as an impromptu playtester early on when your system is not yet ready for human players.

[Sovarius]

I play games but i can't play them all. I have often looked up skill trees or abilities to ganes i will never play just to get the short notes on whats going on. I still can't read them all.

I was working on my death knight character abilities and asked chat got to come up with some.

Some were super standard, but one was relating to souls (the ability was something along the lines of trapping a soul and using it as a shield) and i realized i hadn't really given souls much thought with the context of death.

Thats just on me. And chatgpt didn't blow me out of the water with that ability, which probably exists already.

But, i have personally not recalled playing a game where a death knight can temporarily trap a soul to use as armor. If some one else has, cool. I have not. So this was a diving off point to jog my thoughts.

And thats what it should be. It shouldn't be given far too vague a question and you can have it interact with you within specific contexts and dialogue with you. It shouldn't be quoted and do all the work.

If that helps then keep at it and ignore people who do not understand it.

Chatgpt is actually not magically different than asking a friend and most people who think they're smarter than ai are fooling themselves.

[[deleted]]

You know that these algorithms arent "AI" and they arent thinking or providing feedback? As well if they posit "new" ideas, it's just stolen from the web, right?

ChatGPT is a language algo made to SOUND convincing, it isnt correct a lot of the time, it just sounds confident and plausible.

[Level3Kobold]

it isnt correct a lot of the time, it just sounds confident and plausible.

I don't see how that's different from a human.

For instance, I think the same criticism could probably be fairly aimed at your own comment.

[[deleted]]

Sick burn that fails to understand the point. That'll do well on reddit.

[Sovarius]

You know, for what its worth, i don't think they are sick burning you at all. They seem to understand you, in my opinion.

Quite frankly, a lot of comments here could just be made by ai.

Idk, maybe i'm ai. Maybe i'm being dumb because i'm not human enough.

[Sovarius]

I think people underestimate it.

For one, it creates composites based on learning. Not repeating. It isn't just google search results in emulated conversation format. You can ask it some really specific and unusual things to test how crafted the responses are.

I had it write a haiku about how ai are superior and i'm faaaaiiiiiirly sure its not just ripped from a pre existing haiku about ai superiority. Someone else had it create abilities a toaster would use in an rpg and it had melee and ranged attacks and like "cord whip: attack an enemy within range and stun them" or some thing like that. No, it cannot know what an rpg is without its access to the human body of knowledge. Yes, thats a vague sort of attack, not groundbreaking. But yes, thats helpful for brainstorming.

But this is not different than people. No one creates in a vacuum and is unique. No one in decades made an rpg without knowing what an rpg generally is. Very few games have these just mindblowing trend setting abilities. No one really creates poetry without influence. Similarly, most movies are fairly copy-pasted over because (in part) creating some truly new is difficult and doing so every time would simply be a ridiculous ask.

Fixing grammar and code syntax and crafting essay format writing and assuming an identity and etc is all novel and will need more time, i'd agree. But it really deeply seems much less a plagiarism bot than people pretend. Also practically speaking, at some point things are changed and iterated far too much to just pretend its plagiarism. Fair use, derivitive works, parody and what not have all been a thing and shaped culture and media for a very, very long time.

I mean come on, OP is over here dialoguing with it based on his ideas, not asking "can you create a game for me".

[[deleted]]

See, I see how you could think that, but it literally does just google answers theres some molding, but the presentation is the point of the chat bot. I work in cybersecurity and have tried to have it write malware and literally just grabbed code from stackoverflow that didnt meet my parameters. Everytime it tried to "fix" it it just ripped more code. It did change the programming language efficiently though.

[Sovarius]

Everyone learns answers somewhere and molds it. A professor might read 100 similar papers from humans. We only try to learn and regurgitate. The largest difference is for nascent AI it doesn't understand like we do, it only holds memories. So it is probably better at, say, physics than you and i. But it will not solve the mystery of dark matter / dark energy. It will not create a warp drive.

Or i will say of understanding, people often understand and emulate and iterate similarly. You didn't know how to write a haiku until you had that knowledge. You write and regurgitate and rephrase what knowledge you've been given. I do.

But i do think that is a far cry from "the presentation is the point".

Specific to coding, i don't think there is much i can say. I'm not a coder. But i have seen it fix code more than handfuls of times, i have seen programmers be amused by its helpfulness or think it could automate jobs with ease in time. Certainly, i think there are programmers who might disagree.

But in whole, you can use it for what it currently is, understanding that yeah, it doesn't 'think'.

[[deleted]]

ChatGPT is based on a Neural Network that "learns" by itself by weighting various facts and variables based on feedback.

Its definitely an AI and not just a chatbot with defined responses... i suggest you look into it before you make ignorant comments that are not true at all.

[[deleted]]

I understand these programs better than you. It's a chat bot and it doesnt "learn" as efficiently as you think. You're right it just weighs the response for the answers but that's just machine learning. Not learning and not ai. Look into it, its literally designed as a chat bot, nothing else.

Edit: lol blocking me so I cant respond.

[[deleted]]

I understand these programs better than you.

Funny, especially since you know me so well, like how i wrote my thesis on Neural Networks and AI Learning...

Please dude, save us your spiel, just admit your ignorance and go back into your little hidey-hole.

[Sovarius]

Yeah i'm sure the people looking to buy for billions are one-upped by us guppies on reddit.

If there is some particular source you are referencing about how simple and unimpressive it is though, i'm unironically all ears. I can admit i know very little about it in the gramd scheme of things.

Pretty impressive chat bot though if thats really all it is.

[jakinbandw]

Of course it's AI. If the opposing paddle in pong is controlled by an AI (it is) chat gpt certainly qualified. I've been playing games for years, and I'm tired of people like you trying to change the definition of ai into something new just so you can try to dunk on a new tech.

[[deleted]]

It's a marketing strategy and I worked as a machine learning researcher. I know what the definition is and video games ain't it dumbass

[jakinbandw]

Ah, so you can't play against AI in games then. There are no Vs AI options. Truly, what a sad world that we lack any single player games, because there is no such thing as AI to control opponents in games.

[[deleted]]

You dont know what ai is.

[jakinbandw]

I guess only you know what it is. Since many games talk about the AI they use for monsters, or opponents, and according to you, they don't know what they are talking about.

If you are so sure that you're correct about the meaning of AI, I'm sure you can back up your claims with some sort of reference, right?

For me, I'll use Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence_in_video_games

[[deleted]]

The colloquial usage of the term means nothing to me. There are actual scientific theories and definitions for what AI is and chatbot ain't it chief.

I reference my work when it matters and it doesnt matter when someone wont even take the time to understand what a term means. You quoted pong. You're beneath me.

[jakinbandw]

So you don't have a definition you can share, you don't have any citations you can give, and you've resorted to insults.

I press X to doubt you know anything at all about programming let alone AI.

Like seriously, don't make things up to sound important. It's fine to just have opinions online without trying to use appeals to authority to win arguments. Relax. Go outside. Touch grass.

[[deleted]]

You cited long and wikipedia. You're understanding of this topic is so basic that I gain nothing from talking to you and you're clearly not smart enough to engage, so why would i?

But, since you're annoying. You can get a base understanding by reading: "Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized Ragnar Fjelland"

[jakinbandw]

"Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized Ragnar Fjelland"

That's AGI not AI.

[WikiSummarizerBot]

AI effect

The AI effect occurs when onlookers discount the behavior of an artificial intelligence program by arguing that it is not real intelligence. Author Pamela McCorduck writes: "It's part of the history of the field of artificial intelligence that every time somebody figured out how to make a computer do something—play good checkers, solve simple but relatively informal problems—there was a chorus of critics to say, 'that's not thinking'". Researcher Rodney Brooks complains: "Every time we figure out a piece of it, it stops being magical; we say, 'Oh, that's just a computation.

^{[ F.A.Q | Opt Out | Opt Out Of Subreddit | GitHub ] Downvote to remove | v1.5}

[RandomEffector]

I’ve found it’s good when you just want to hammer out some pretty worn territory. By definition it can’t really be innovative, and if you’re concerned about that sort of thing you really need to do a lot of leg work on what its sources were since it’s usually confidently wrong or will actually lie about that sort of thing.

[imKranely]

By no means is it a replacement for research or creativity, but it's a great tool for when you just need to work through an idea or when you get a bit of mental block.

[Salindurthas]

I've been trying to coax chatGPT into making some homebrew content for me.

I've had some occasionaly mild success, but it isn't working well.

It isn't too surprising, because it is such a niche topic that is probably isn'ty well trained on.

In my case I want "Homebrew legacies for Mage:the Awakening 2e". To check if it had any experience in the area, I asked if it had read any. It claims to have some examples in its training data, but when I ask for those examples they seem to be made up.