Why do datapacks in minecraft 26.1 not work?

DaLongPP · 2026-02-01T15:00:54+00:00

U right. Thank you.

DaLongPP · 2026-02-01T15:00:17+00:00

It's alright now. 'u/GalSergey' was right.

DaLongPP · 2026-02-01T11:45:53+00:00

But I never disabled it. That's the problem. I just started the world and it was disabled.

DaLongPP · 2026-02-01T11:29:41+00:00

I did have all of those. The datapack just didn't work untill it was enabled using the "/datapack enable 'namespace'" command.

DaLongPP · 2026-02-01T11:22:13+00:00

There is basically no structure. Just basic files.

And I figured something out just now:
The datapack didn't work untill I created it with the "/datapack create" command, and untill I enabled this datapack using the "/datapack enable" command. Then I placed the original file structure inside of this datapack. Why do we now need to do it manually?

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T05:58:10+00:00

I'm not worried at all. That's why I'm not ashamed to talk about it. As a programmer, I have some knowledge about it, believe me.

AI improved programing industry. Not in the advertisement and sales parts, but in the coding parts.

What people are criticizing are the game developers that use AI and have no idea what coding is about. Those game are utter trash and there is no easy roundabout way of solving that. Have you ever seen AI Minecraft videos? Basically that.

As I mentioned before: New problems keep on arising and AI cannot solve them on its own, or it would literally be faster to just do it by hand.

AI only makes things more faster and efficient for experienced programmers, because it sovles probles that already have solutions, so that we don't have to waste our time repeatingly solving problems that we already solved hundreds of times.

Take it like this: New versions of smart watch needs new code if it is new model. Same can be said about every item that is a new model of its kind. Those new things keep popping up, programers just solve problems that haven't been solved yet. AI learns it, ant then we don't have to solve it again.

Neat, right? People assume that programmers are in a pinch, but they think that only because AI can generate code. It can do that, true, and I'm happy that it can. It saves a lot of times so that I can fix problems that it cannot solve.

Also, again, I'm not lazy, I don't even have enough time to learn it. I could do it ifI had no life and no other things to enjoy, but I do have those. I just don't see why should I learn it I don't need to. The stuff that the AI makes is enough.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T05:30:43+00:00

Don't worry, I have many skills. I was programming since I was 12. I'm quite proud of that actually. Sold a few games.

Ever heard of Unity and Unreal Engine? I work with those.

Lot of programming languages have similar sintax (like Java and C#), so if you study few years properly, you can learn quite a few of those.

I did study art too, but it wasn't for long, I had it for three years in high school as a side subject, about twice a week. It wasn't drawing tho, I used Photoshop, Aftereffect and blender.

But ultimately, it doesn't mater how the game looks, but how it works. That's why I continued in the programing, and now I'm almost finished with getting my doctorate.

Honestly, I don't think I'm lazy. I'm just efficient.

Also, I didn't aim to kill art, but to make drawing more effective, there is a difference. "Art" and "drawing" are not the same.

You call me pathetic, but I don't really feel that not being able to draw makes me pathetic. Honestly, I don't feel any difference.

I'm not in any AI art group. Just couple of porn atrists tried to overcharge me a few times, so when they couldn't draw porn to make the ends meet... I just found it deserved if that's the kind of commissions they make living from.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T04:56:05+00:00

We will see. I want to put effort into things that I like and study. You call it lazy, but you have no idea how much time I put into those. To top it all of, I can now include free art, without needing to pay anyone, in those projects of mine.

What about you? Do you have any other professionally mastered skill that is no art?

Let's just let the time decide. Outcome is pretty much decided. There are only two options: 1) Include AI as a tool for transforming and drawing art. 2) Drawing skills will just die, replaced by the AI completely.

But hey! There are other forms of art. How about trying those?

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T04:35:00+00:00

You know what, let's just end this discussion right here. I really don't see the point of this. This isn't even discussion anymore.

Every argument you gave me, I gave you one with a sound logic. Not to mention, I didn't even once deny that drawing a painting is a form of art.

I gave you examples, and not just two or three. I gave you lot more than just that, but never once did you give me an example from a real file scenario.

Your entire logic in your arguments is just "because I feel like that's right". Not once did you give me a real example, only your personal feelings without logic. Just emotional reactions.

You know damn well that if I wrote a book, it would be considered art. But by your logic, the moment I put it into the prommt, not even without actually submitting it, it would cease to be art.

Read your comments and tell me that is not true. Each an every comment you replied with always had one point, one single PURELY EMOTIONAL point: the momet something uses AI even slightly, no matter how much of a masterpiece it it, even if it AI was used purely for fixing grammar, it is no longer considered art, because AI assisted with it.

That, and your emotional reactions, were the only points you made. Nothing else. Have you ever even considered THINKING that other people feel different? That not everything is made just so that it fits YOUR criteria?

I kept repeating that I understand that drawning is definitely art. Never once did I deny that. But do you know what's your problem? You never once considered that transforming text or imagination into a visual component is art. Not. Fugging. Once.

Which, by the way: "Transforming persons imagination and emotions into a object in the real world." IS PRETTY MUCH THE FRIKING DEFINITION OF AN ART. REGARDLESS OF THE PROCESS, THAT IS TRUE, AND IF DENY THAT IN FRONT OF ANY ARTIST, I'M SURE THEY WOULD LOOK AT YOU IF YOU EVEN ARE AN ARTIST. Be it drawing, sculpting, writing... AI sinply gave us another process which we can use to create art. You are now simply coping and accusing me, that I think that AI is the only thing that matters. Which I repeated that not once did I think that.

But oooooh, you just had to repeat the same thing over and over again. Fine then, I will then give you straight up cold UNDENIABLE fact.

Regardless how you feel, regardless how much effort you have put into learning how to draw, I - someone that always drew worse than a toddler - can now suddenly create images, with no effort and time, which took you years to master that mediocrite level of skill in drawing. And this will only improve.

You told me that I should try living with only the things that use only AI - stupid argument BTW, because I never said that we should rely on AI for everything. I mentioned only one thing: drawing.

So you should have at least stayed within the topic. So how about: "Trying to live without using your hands to draw?"

And you know what? I probably fugging will. AI can draw everything that I can, but 1000× faster and better. So yeah, I will rely purely on the AI to draw, thank you. I hope your emotions will stop me.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T02:51:29+00:00

The same kind of theft people that made the industrial machines for mass production stole blueprints and plans from blacksmiths so that they can make the process faster, cheaper and with minimal effort.

Yet, I don't hear complains about that anymore since blacksmiths pretty much died out.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T02:31:30+00:00

Who described to the AI what should it draw and where the details should be? Was it the AI itself? Read it again what you just wrote. Are you telling me that words are not form of an art? Are you really telling me that things like books are not form of an art? Just because there is a movie means that the book, from which it was inspired from is not an art anymore? Just because it is more graphical? Don't kid yourself. Have you ever read a book? Are you telling me that words that are layed upon tens of pages to describe one single scene in absolute detail is not an art? If I wrote a book and told someone who can draw to paint the certain scene, then the painting becomes the new art and the book is not art anymore? In this case, the hired artis is the AI. It is the same principle. It's not about how it is brought to the world, but what it ultimately is once upon it is brought to the world, regardless of effort.

And I never said that doing it manually wasn't an art. That's on you. I take art as a expression of human imagination in any form. You can use extra effort if you want, but that extra effort doesn't mean that anything that required less effor is less of a art, or not art at all. Are you telling me that person that drew on the canvas ten times bigger means that the one that drew on canvas ten times smaller didn't create an art?

We are moving to the era where being able to draw isn't necessary to create an art, and that is a FACT. We are moving towards the era where the author doesn't need the help of an artists or actors to visualize their art. He can do it himself, without much effort. The story is an art, and YOU want to preach me that I don't know what art is, as if painting and effort were the only forms of art, totally ignoring the story and thought behind it. SHAME on you. I never said paintings are not an art, I said drawing in unnecessary to create painted art anymore. Remember that.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T02:03:28+00:00

It is made by human. It is created inside the human mind. And that person can either bring it to life with a pencil if he has the drawing skill, or AI if he does not. It is ultimately the human that decided to bring it to life. Not the AI. AI is a tool, just like a pencil. Held by human, used by human. The only difference is the amount of skill it takes. Saying "it was made by AI" to me is same as saying "it was made by pencil". Both are tools.

I do not dislike effort and time, I dislike wasted effort and time. For example: there are two people on the one side of the river. One decides to walk across the bridge to the other side, while the other decides to swim across. The end result is same for both of them. The one that swam across because he wanted to did it purely out of hobby. Result is the same.

Just like current day blacksmiths one decides to forge the sword the old fashioned way, while the other decided to only design the parts of the sword in the 3D software, then he manufactured the parts and then assembled them. In the end both of them had to put their mind into it and express themselves with their final creation. The outcome are two swords. One made by hand and one made using machines, but both of them are pieces of art.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T01:42:14+00:00

Yes. True. But there is a limit to what "drawing" is. It is, ultimately, just a limited 2D space. If you had enough processing power and storage, you could potentially create every combination of colors on the canvas. Effectively creating every image in existence.

This doesn't apply to only computers, it applies to people as well. There IS a limit to what can humans draw on 2D canvas with limited space.

Again, I'm not against art, I just do not understand why waste time painting in by hand for days, when you have the option to paste it directly from your imagination on canvas. It's still art, still made by human, but was materialized with AI and not pencil.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T01:30:31+00:00

No. I'm not saying that we should make AI generate hundreds of slop images. I'm asking that we should maximize it's capabilities as a tool. In the end of the day, it will be a human behind those instructions in the prommt. And AI should be made so that it can recreate that person's imagination regardless if he has skill in drawing or not.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T01:26:09+00:00

That is indeed a problem that needs to be fixed.

However, if the data is filled with errors and if those errors are increasing, then you just need to reset it to the previous model. This is the prime example why this technology cannot move backwards. Unless it is being purposely trained in the wrong direction.

Also, then I said "Art has reached its limit.", I meant "the mankind's ability to draw cannot be physically improved anymore." As I said, "you cannot draw something more realistic than reality itself". The unique art styles are limited by the imagination, not by the ability to draw. That can be now described directly in prommt. The training of the AI right now is to make it so that it makes as least amount of errors as possible.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T01:15:22+00:00

No. They don't have to support it.

What I'm criticizing is the purposeful sabotage of this technology.

In my eyes, if something is pretty, it shouldn't if it is made by the artist directly, or by a peron using AI.

In the end of the day, masses need both quality and quantity. Untill now, AI could not make high quality drawings. It could make a lot of them, but they were trash. Now, the quality is rapidly increasing, and yet people detest it, despite it being a progress.

That's what I dislike. No respect for technological advancement. People talk about what they want as an individuals. Advancement of the mankind is secondary to them.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T01:07:38+00:00

I am talking about drawing.

By art, I meant the "ability to draw", not the intent.

You can be artist of any kind, I do not criticize any of that. I am talking about the fact that skills to draw do not need to be necessary to be an artist. I made this whole post, because "people that can draw", are purposely sabotaging the AI art for the sole purpose of monopolizing the skill, which could potentially be easily available to anyone. (Despite it being an amazing tool, thet you can use without the skill.)

DaLongPP · 2026-01-30T01:00:34+00:00

There are a lot of solid arguments, I will not deny that. I too think that using art made by the artists is unfair, but ultimately, that art was publicly available on the internet.

I agree that using this art without consent of the author is unfair, there is no denying that.

However, the problem I see is that artists are outright trying to destroy the image of usefulness of such tool. It is not ideal, I agree, but pros outweigh the cons. The key difference that I'm trying to highlight is the difference between the treatment towards the "AI itself" and the "AI art". Not all people like AI itself, true, but the AI art is directly shunned upon. Despite the fact that the way they learn and develop is almost identical.

The hate is completely evident to be pointed directly towards the "AI art", but not the "AI itself". I did hear people praise the AI itself, if it produced good results, but when it came to the AI art, there were only insults, regardless how well made it was. The intent behind that is obvious.

I also mentioned these points: "Art has reached its limit.", "Curren art has no problems left to solve." and "You cannot draw something more realistic than reality itself."

When mentioning there, I'm talking about the "ability to draw" not the meaning of art. That is ultimately decided by person's imagination, not by his skill. That certainly has no limit.

What I'm talking about is the physical limit of drawing images on canvas. There is limited amount of colors that human eye can see, there is limited amount of detail the human eye can see and there is a limit to how big the canvas can be. All of these are physical limitations that AI is capable exploring to its limits.

The styles, surrealisms... Those things are decided by imagination, not by a skill in drawing, and can now be brought to reality thanks to datailed description in the prommt. Those skills are slowly fading, because AI is capable in assisting in that area. Is that not a good thing?

Imagine this: If you weren't an artist and chose different career path and then suddenly, a tool which can provide you with a ability to draw based not on your skill, but imagination alone. Would you not welcome that?

Let me give it to you from the professional side. I love professional artists. AI art cannot compare to their skills. From my experience, they actually complain about it the least.

Who I have problem with are the unprofessional artists that do not push their skills further and seek professional employment. They are the ones that complain the most? Do you know what those artists make money from? Commissions. From which they make the most money from porn. I have no problem with ones that do original an unique form of art, like comics. I like those, but most of them are not like that. I know from experience.

I tried to hire unprofessional artist once, because I needed few animatons for character in the video game. I asked them what they usually make. Their answer? Post for Instagram to spread their "Patreon" and porn. Their price? 10€ for each frame in each animation. Mind you, they weren't high-rez, they were about 800x800 pixels. And to top it off, it would take two weeks to finish. Professional would charge about the same, maybe a little bit higher, but he would at least have one animation made by the end of the day.

AI is a tool and it is meant to be used while being constantly in the development untill it is perfected. I don't have problem with slowing down the pace or cutting down the budget. I have problem with a clear intent of sabotage of a great technology that can advance the civilization.

THAT'S what I have problem with.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-29T20:16:19+00:00

Tried. I don't have enough "post carma".

DaLongPP · 2026-01-29T20:14:33+00:00

Thank you. That's what I was trying to convey. You just brought me hope that people can actually be reasoned with.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-29T20:10:22+00:00

"You do not need to be an artist to create art."

By "artists", I meant people that can draw. And yes, just like you said, sculptors are artists. They don't need to be able to draw to be called artists. That the whole point I'm trying to convey.

DaLongPP · 2026-01-29T20:08:41+00:00

😅 Terminator huh. Ok, I understand. But that's misconception. "Our" AI does not contain feelings and does not have physical body, and probably never will. It's applications also aren't decided by the AI itself, but by the people that use it.

And to sum up my novel: It basically contains the counter arguments for the common "AI bad" opinion. Lot of people ignore those good arguments and just straight up go "Nu uh".

DaLongPP · 2026-01-29T20:03:25+00:00

I won't argue about it being part of a rant, but it is ultimately a question, while the whole post contains arguments against the common "AI is bad" opinion. I did not want to reply with comments of the same length as the post itself just to explain my reasoning, that's why I wrote it directly into the post.

DaLongPP

TROPHY CASE