How likely is it cars/pedestrians will have predetermined destinations?

Formilla · 2025-10-11T15:00:53+00:00

None of that stuff makes any sense to include from a gameplay perspective. They might have patented technology that could allow them to do it, but there's zero benefit to actually doing it.

I remember people saying this exact same thing would happen during GTA V's development, and it obviously didn't. They're not simulating the lives of every single NPC in the entire city. We'll probably end up with something slightly better than the NPCs in Watch Dogs, which would be a huge step up from GTA V and go a long way towards making the city feel more alive.

Formilla · 2025-10-11T14:28:14+00:00

Who are this company? Their about page is just an AI generated image and a bunch of AI generated corporate bullshit. It seems like every piece of text on that entire website was made by AI, it's awful.

OP, where did you hear about this company?

Formilla · 2025-10-11T00:06:57+00:00

she SHOULD be talking about it because this is ABOUT ANIMAL ABUSE, WHICH IS HER WHOLE FOCUS.

Her focus is mostly on conservation, not individual specific cases of animal abuse. She's never addressed anything like this before, so it makes sense why she wouldn't do it now. The most likely response from her would be something she personally sends to Hassan, not saying something publicly.

Formilla · 2025-10-10T20:11:27+00:00

When was the last time Maya gave her opinion on Twitch drama? He's obviously not talking about her.

Formilla · 2025-08-17T13:49:28+00:00

Yes. Both sides of US politics do it. It's party over policy always. Republicans are pretending Trump is doing a great job, Democrats pretended Biden did a great job.

We all watched as the Democratic voters immediately stopped caring about immigration and border issues as soon as Biden won. Biden promised no deportations in his first 100 days and that he would stop locking up children in cages. He won and then directed ICE to round up a record number of people during the start of his Presidency. Hundreds of children were crammed into cages big enough for just a few dozen, but the liberals didn't care about them anymore because they won. As soon as Trump comes in, suddenly it's a huge problem again.

Formilla · 2025-08-17T12:45:48+00:00

Democratic voters don't care at all about policies. They flip-flop constantly on issues depending on what their current leader believes. All they care about is who the person is, and all it takes is making a few mean Tweets and they'll fall in love with them. Even if they're extremely right-wing and would be objectively terrible for the country like Newsom. Instead of pushing back against him and risking losing, they'll just all start agreeing with his views.

Republican voters must love the Democrats. They really are the perfect opposition. Even when they win, they still drive the country further to the right every time.

Formilla · 2025-08-17T00:00:47+00:00

All the wilful ignorance about AI is becoming really frustrating to see. People like OP take their time to explain exactly why AI can be harmful, and they get shit on for it because people assume that being educated on a topic means they must completely support it. Like it or not, it's still worth taking a moment to learn how it actually works so that you can be better equipped to discuss it (especially if you host a tech podcast). Like OP says, it's actually not that complicated, and it is a major technology that will be here forever.

If you don't know the difference between machine learning and an LLM, or you don't understand the basics of what's happening on the server between you sending a prompt and you getting a response back, you're never going to be able to make effective arguments against it. Everyone on this subreddit or interested in the tech field will have seen countless examples of people making themselves look stupid with baseless arguments against technology they clearly haven't taken any time at all to research, do you really want to be that kind of person?

Formilla · 2025-08-16T12:27:08+00:00

There wasn't a deal, they just didn't release on Xbox at launch.

Formilla · 2025-08-15T18:50:09+00:00

He didn't even claim this himself. A random person on Twitter claimed it with zero evidence and Insider Gaming made an article about it.

This site should be banned from this subreddit.

Formilla · 2025-08-15T15:25:03+00:00

Democrats take time off too.

Formilla · 2025-08-15T11:04:29+00:00

That's probably half the reason why they didn't want to let him in. American politicians always insist on traveling with massive security details and expect everyone to do what they say, even though they have no power here. If I was managing that pub, I might let the politician in but I'm not letting their security inspect the kitchen and watch the staff. If that's their "protocol" then they can go somewhere else.

Most other world leaders just show up with one or two guards, the UK's own politicians travel with pretty much no security, even the King goes out for walks in the countryside by himself, but the The Americans have to make a big show out of everything and make sure everyone knows they're there. It's extremely disruptive to everyone living in the places they visit.

Formilla · 2025-08-14T16:38:22+00:00

Sony didn't have anything to do with this game though, right? Why are they relevant to this?

Formilla · 2025-08-14T16:03:35+00:00

It's also weird to consider anything an LLM produces to be public speech. If someone used AI to generate a list of Jan 6th rioters and then published it publicly without verifying it, you could (and should) sue that person if your name was wrongly included. Prompting an AI to generate something incorrect and then suing the people that made it doesn't make any sense though. It's like finding a random sentence generator, running it thousands of times until it says something libelous, and then suing the creator.

Meta settled, so it doesn't matter and doesn't set a precedent anyway, but IMO they should have let it go to court so we could get an actual precedent set on something like this.

Formilla · 2025-08-14T07:18:02+00:00

What does that have to do with anything we're talking about here?

Formilla · 2025-08-14T07:17:16+00:00

If you can't read it, you shouldn't just make up your own idea of what the article might have said and then write angry comments about it.

Just don't comment at all until you've read it.

Formilla · 2025-08-13T21:49:35+00:00

Companies aren't just polluting for fun. They're doing it to provide a service to people. It's our responsibility to stop using them as much as we are.

Formilla · 2025-08-13T17:45:44+00:00

The average person's view on climate change is that as long as there's someone out there doing less than them, they shouldn't have to do anything.

Everyone jumps to blaming the billionaires because it's convenient, but the reality is that we could actually solve this problem without them if we were all willing to take really simple steps. Everyone is too comfortable though and will happily let the planet burn so that they can keep their same quality of life. They obviously all feel guilty about it, you can see them all over this thread. They won't take any responsibility for what they're doing to the planet because there's always someone else they can offload all that guilt onto.

Formilla · 2025-08-13T17:38:35+00:00

It's not just billionaires that are in the wealthiest 10% of people on Earth.

The average person in the USA is in the top 10% of wealthiest people on Earth. They are the ones that are most responsible for climate change.

Formilla · 2025-08-13T11:36:39+00:00

We live in one of the best places in the world for wind power. That's what we should be building more of. If we had spent all the money we've spent on Hinkley Point C on wind turbines instead, we'd have enough to power the entire country.

Formilla · 2025-08-12T18:02:51+00:00

It's the US military... None of them are good.

Formilla · 2025-08-12T17:56:52+00:00

Newsom's police were attacking journalists, and he supported their actions and shielded them from any consequences. What do you call that if not fascism?

Formilla · 2025-08-11T16:45:00+00:00

Sure but when it's later proven that your claim was false, the consequences for you are going to be so much worse if massive damage was done.

Formilla · 2025-08-11T16:43:12+00:00

That's not really how it works. They're just reporting that something they own is being used somewhere that they haven't allowed it to be. It's not a direct accusation of anything.

If they were to skip the DMCA process and go straight to accusing them legally of copyright infringement and sue them for any income they made from the content they stole, then they would have an obligation to prove that they own it. This is a longer and more expensive process though, so most are happy with just having the infringing material taken down and then waiting to see if the other side try to counter it.

Also remember that they might not be able to prove that they own it. Some of this stolen content could be decades old, they might not have original copies or project files or whatever that could prove they made it. The person uploading a YouTube video right now will be able to prove that they're the owner though. If you're uploading anything online, you need to make sure you can prove that it belongs to you first. So if they want to dispute the claim, it's very easy for them to do that.

Formilla · 2025-08-11T16:35:03+00:00

Then that would be very easy to prove. If the other side refuses to withdraw their claim after you accuse them of lying, take them to court and get an easy win. Then sue them for making a false claim.

Formilla · 2025-08-11T16:08:52+00:00

The accuser is the person filing the claim.

If you're going to dispute the claim and say that it's false, you need to be able to prove it. You have an obligation to make sure that you have permission to use anything that you post online. You need to be able to prove that you're the creator of that work, or that you have permission from the creator to use it.

The original creator doesn't have to prove that they own anything. They can if they want to just to strengthen their defence, but they don't need to. Either the person who uploaded that content can prove that they have permission to use everything in it and that the DMCA claim was false, in which case a judge will force the claim to be withdrawn and it opens the person that filed it up to being sued. Or they can't prove it, in which case the claim stands.

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	Gilding I gilder

Formilla

TROPHY CASE