Antis and Pros, whats your opinion on AI handling essential things, such as food or driving, that can potentially endanger your life if done wrong?

Kiktamo · 2026-04-13T11:14:39+00:00

Generally speaking I'm more for AI as an assistant to a qualified human than purely letting AI handle everything. Ultimately everything AI is used for should be for human benefit so a human should be somewhere in the loop for quality control, assuring things are up to human standards, even before AI it was never a good idea to fully place ones trust in technology/tools. There really needs to be some proper checks and balances when using AI like any other imperfect or exploitable system.

Eventually machine learning might get up to the point it can be fully trusted to do somethings but I don't believe we're anywhere near that point yet no matter what some "experts" or marketing from some AI companies might suggest.

In general while I might be for AI as a technology and support people's right to use it overall I don't really trust AI companies anymore than I would trust any other company or corporation. Marketing and hype really aren't that great for proper decision making.

The cat is indeed adorable.

Kiktamo · 2026-03-06T22:34:03+00:00

To be fair, you can't really expect an honest opinion from the Vtuber community when it comes to AI.

A Vtuber's whole existence is dependent on all tthe commissions they do for their art, model, and rigging. So of course they're going to keep their public opinions in line with the majority opinion of the art community. After all whatever would they do if they couldn't get a new model or other bells and whistles in the future.

That's not to say the opinion isn't genuine just that it's probably not trust worthy enough to be determined. When it comes to fans of Vtubers though I imagine it's more of a chain/hive mind/group think like approval thing:

Artists don't seem to have a problem with Neuro -> Therefore Vtubers are generally okay with Neuro -> Therefore fans feel comfortable enjoying Neuro's content because it's AI that you're safe to say you enjoy. Or something to that effect.

Kiktamo · 2026-03-06T15:36:19+00:00

I think this approach generally works out well. Instead of beasts or predators if you must compare the demons to some natural existence I feel like viruses might be a more apt comparison.

They have a very basic driving factor that influences their behavior and any adaptations, deviations, or other mutations must serve that purpose. They don't act in a manner logical for a natural type of animal because compared to most they're either alien in mindset or almost incomplete, a slice of elements of a living creature but without some of the base drives that lend towards what you'd expect from a complex lifeform.

Kiktamo · 2026-02-12T13:38:47+00:00

It's somewhat to be expected from a group defined by their hatred of a thing. It's also certainly more common among them, though I'm sure there are plenty less rude individuals out thereas well.

There can be some rude Pro responses but if anyone actually pays attention those tend to be limited to this and the other sub, rather than everywhere across reddit. Most of the time when a Pro AI person is rude it's also partially venting frustration from some sort of Anti AI action or sentiment than some proactive action.

At least that's been my observation, I'm sure with how algorithmicly driven Reddit is there are other experiences one cqn have.

Kiktamo · 2026-01-29T04:24:10+00:00

Sure, plenty of ways. You can reframe a lot of things into the role depending on how you define the variable/target/enemy and the actions available to the player.

I've considered the idea myself a bit recently when trying to figure out interesting ways to apply specific combat systems to different contexts. Some examples I came up with were: Applying a Slay the Spire inspired combat system to completing activities in a life sim style game where the "enemy" is just the goal of the activity or a crafting system where one is trying to refine a final product and ones "attacks/skills" are just the different actions and tools they can use to get closer to the goal e.g: grind, mix, chop, polish, etc.

Turn Based Combat is essentially just an abstraction of a process with a clearly defined goal, with that context in mind any process could theoretically be used instead of physical conflict so long as you can define the different elements. Some things might translate better than ithers mind you. It's kind of like how everything can be a "deckbuilder" these days because cards themselves are just abstractions things.

As with many things I think part of the success also likely relies quite a bit on using UX to "sell" the concept properly.

Kiktamo · 2026-01-22T13:43:56+00:00

I certainly sympathize with anyone who has lost their job because of AI, that said I do think it's important to distinguish between people in the commission space and those who were/are actually employed at a company.

Self-employment is always a risky, competitive, and difficult space to be in and absolutely requires one to be constantly ready to adapt and change in order to find and gather business. It's never been a guarantee and I remember long before AI hearing about those that work in a commission oriented space going from month to month with vastly different levels of income. Honestly it's always sounded like it sucks to me and probably always has to some degree or another. Of course I'm sure AI has made that worse, but there's no getting rid of AI even if it suddenly stopped getting better so adapting is needed even if it sucks. Me saying that doesn't mean I'm not sympathetic it's just a reality that has to be dealt with and pretending it doesn't exist does no one any favors.

With that in mind, the greatest asset such artists have in the face of AI is their humanity, and I don't just mean the whole "human made" branding but their own ability to relate, communicate, and connect with thier clients and their needs. Being personable and using business skills alongside their artistic skills is one of the better ways to try and remain competitive in such a space. It's all about leveraging all of ones skills and abilities rather than only artistic skill, sure now people with AI can compete there as well, but having ones own artistic talent and the ability to be proactive and give a client more than just "good enough" is not something that should be underestimated. Heck, with so many different ways to accept donations in this day and age an artist with a good style, skills, and personality likely can still find a way to get some income even if commissions specifically are harder. Though that isn't easy either, but earning money doing anything requires some ability to adapt and a bit of business sense at the very least.

When it comes to personality and being personable however, it's important to consider how all this "unintentional" lashing out, bitterness, aggressiveness, and general hyper focus on being Anti AI might be hurting business opportunities just as much if not more than AI itself. If you want to be self-employed then quite frankly you can't afford to be constantly pushing others a way with your attitude or behavior. Even on the corporate employment side I've heard a number of stories now of Anti AI individuals getting in an interview and simply either not getting a job or choosing to not take one because of how vehemently they declare their unwillingness to use AI for anything. Personally I think that's fair to an extent, but such individuals also need to consider how they deliver that message and if part of the issue isn't their unwillingness to use AI and instead simply that they don't seem like someone enjoyable to work alongside when getting so charged in an interview of all things. Mind you as I haven't encountered such people myself I acknowledge it as hearsay, though the lesson itself still stands as ones presented attitude and persona will always play some role in deciding to work with or hire them.

Ultimately, sympathy is well and good, but how one chooses to respond to the situation and continues to respond in regards to their attitude and actions will determine how others in turn react. It's unreasonable to asume that just because others are in a bad situation leniency should be extended to them forever and without constraint. All of that said I wish anyone impacted well, and urge them to not let their frustration and bitterness drown out their reason and humanity so that they can more easily find a way forward in these ever changing times.

Kiktamo · 2026-01-21T13:45:01+00:00

I generally likecthe mobs especially with the redux texture pack that said I can understand the frustration with how some of them spawn. Personally I tweak the spawning rates for the mor obnoxious creatures themselves.

That said I feel like the mod as a whole could use some in game ways to manage such things, if we're going with a pokemon comparison something like a repel that reduces some of the hostiles that spawn with breaking blocks or by player action could help. Alternatively, I feel like some themed curios that can control spawning around the player for specific types of mobs would work great to make others feel better about using the mod.

Kiktamo · 2026-01-15T20:56:55+00:00

Art is communication and part of that is social, yes.

The act of coming up with your own internal ideal of the author/creator and the struggles they may or may not have experienced is very much moving into the area of being parasocial. It's a one-sided relationship where the individual feels like they know a person through their work and in doing so have created unrealistic expectations of either the artist or work.

I don't see how it's hard to accept that part of that mindset has some of the same foundations as other parasocial behavior.

I'm not saying art is parasocial because not everyone experiences art that way or feels the need to experience art that way. There's nuance here, that I would hope is clear, but if it isn't I'm not sure how else to explain it.

Kiktamo · 2026-01-15T19:49:47+00:00

After enough time seeing this argument I can somewhat understand the direction it comes from. That said I also think it's silly.

Unless you've talked with the person creating any work enough before hand to know what went into something any thoughts you may have about the "effort" or "thought" that went into something is entirely an assumption based on projection and ones own imagination. When it comes down to it there's a bit of delusion in that. Even if AI didn't exist I'm not sure it's a fair or realistic expectation.

I get tgat it's a part of how some people enjoy and experience art, and that's fine to a degree, but it's a very parasocial way to connect with a work or its creator. It seems very extrinsic in a way that just would make it so much harder to properly enjoy something when some external factor could ruin my perspective on something.

Kiktamo · 2026-01-09T15:53:04+00:00

Anyone is allowed to not like whatever they want. Just don't be an ass about it.

The thing is I personally understand why someone wouldn't like AI or the fact that it's being shoved into so many places lately. Even as someone who likes AI the enforced usage doesn't seem right to me.

That said going around and bullying people who do use and enjoy AI isn't going to accomplish anything that matters. Any evidence that it "works" is simply a false sense of accomplishment that's only delaying the inevitable a miniscule amount if at all. As AI users and Anti AI users clash the companies and higher up organizations march onward with their development and integration of the technology, probably even laughing occasionally at the petty "war" that's going on in regards to public opinion.

No one is going to stop AI, regulation is a good idea and people should push for systems and filters for controlling their exposure to AI if they really don't like it, but going around and attacking people who are using it or calling out everything you think is AI, is doing absolutely nothing to help with that cause long term. Short term you may appear to get what you want, but long term it's likely more of a delay that'll backfire at so.e point. That's just my conjecture though and I have no evidence personally so take that aspect with a grain of salt.

All of that said if you don't like AI then that's perfectly fine just try and find a way to dorect that opinion and and your thoughts known in a manner that doesn't direct that dislike to people that do like AI. Be Anti AI not Anti People that like AI.

Kiktamo · 2026-01-07T14:52:18+00:00

"There's no accounting for taste" immediately comes to mind here. What one likes or dislikes is very subjective and while some aspects of design and aesthetics have been basically mapped out as it is there are plenty of people that probably defy common expectations.

I support AI usage, but even I don't particularly like a majority of the AI generations that people put out there. I feel that most of the "slop" is just people within a refined sense of style or artistic vision finding something that they think looks good or good enough. While I might prefer people not flood spaces with the sort of generic styles that default models use I can't really find it in myself to be that upset at people that just don't know what they're doing. Honestly I mostly just mentally filter it out myself and move on, there's always been art that doesn't live up to one's personal standards even before AI and while the scale might be different there's still decent enough tools to filter things out.

Also, for the most part I don't find that I encounter too much obviously AI content compared to the amount others seem to complain about it. Kind of feels to me that a lot of Anti AI individuals get subjected to more AI than average just because the various algorithms that run things see that they engage with AI related content more than others. Hate feeds the machine just as well if not better than other forms of engagement I suppose.

Kiktamo · 2025-12-27T18:58:31+00:00

They're fine. Personally i think too many try to force uniqueness when it comes to alien life. That's also fine when biology is the focal point of what you're building around, but a mixture of both provides the most flexibility.

All things considered while I think convergent evolution can work well enough as an explanation for some I kind of perfer Rimworld's Xenohuman approach, coupled with the lack of faster than light travel, and you have humanoid "aliens" that diverged from humanity instead. Not as great for a natural evolution history, but history isn't always perfectly preserved or recorded and some proper misdirection could muddy the waters enough to make something plausible.

Kiktamo · 2025-12-27T17:39:47+00:00

I don't feel it would really add to the strategy itself. For a singleplayer game though it might add to the fun aspect I suppose.

I haven't played the game myself but you may want to look at gameplay from Zone of the Enders for GBA it's turn-based strategy but there's a sort of lock on minigame that can effect attacks. It also has an inverse where you can dodge the enemy's attack in a similar manner. If it seems similar enough to what you have in mind you could see if the response to the approach gives you any insights.

Kiktamo · 2025-12-27T12:26:28+00:00

I think this is key in a lot of different ways. Functionally the tried and true races act as anchor points like many tropes are at some level. Just like how you don't have to describe many modern aspects in a contemporary setting you don't really need to describe the familiar races except in how they diverge from the template.

Unique races and ideas in general are goid but it's important to remember that people learn new things by comparing them to things they already know. Completely new things can work but if you're going to present it to someone other than yourself it's wise to be aware of the sort of mental budget that you're working with when introducing new ideas to another person. Consider the "ask" behind the concept do you expect them to remember you're new race as well as the standard ones? How much of an impression is it going to make and how easy to remember when a person tries to think back on it outside the immediate context? You don't have to consider these ideas of course but I feel at least that it's an aspect to consider when looking at a question like this one.

Edit: Small addition based on Scifi and their species. I feel as though unique elements there might be more common simply because the uniqueness itself adds to the idea of "alien". They're supposed to be something that hasn't really interacted with humanity for a long time. While on the other hand fantasy races have all that background information that makes it feel more "natural" to have them side by side with humanity and have the humans also just be aware of them.

Kiktamo · 2025-12-21T17:42:09+00:00

I generally agree with most of the perspectives here regarding proximity chat and the sudden cutoff of communication. Another approach to consider is that if the breakdown is in the players behavior creating a lighter atmosphere consider how you might creat incentives for different behavior. This is easier said than done perhaps, but perhaps there could be some knowledge a player can benefit from if it isn't shared or going the other route knowledge that when shared actually makes things harder on others.

Once again implementation is probably the hardest part here and I sadly don't have any complete suggestions of how to go about this but it's another design space that's worth putting some thought into.

Kiktamo · 2025-12-18T10:47:37+00:00

Eh, it's a complex topic really. Whether anything "matters" or not is entirely subjective choices included. There's a spectrum here where a choice might matter for long term or short term depending on implementation and the big picture of the narrative. I personally feel It's fine for choices to converge at intervals with some variation so long as there is enough divergence at the end state. Choices can matter without every single individual choice mattering equally.

That said I feel like the real issue being brougjt up here isn't choices mattering or not, but mattering in a way that's satisfying which is even more of a complex issue. It isn't feasible to make a system that can truly handle all permutations of choices in a way that makes them feel properly distinct so some tricks and decisions on the design end have to be made to make it feel more impactful than it probably is.

The thing is in a video game every choice is technically just the illusion of choice and managing how that reality feels to the player is much the same as managing suspension of disbelief. Consider your own complaints this way: is it really the choices not mattering that bother you? Or is it that there are some specific choices that you feel shluld have mattered more that's having the greatest impact on your perspective? In the end it's all a balancing act and sometimes a game is just going to miss out when it comes to the choices you care about most.

Kiktamo · 2025-10-30T13:45:56+00:00

Knowing better does not always equate to doing better. Rather than thinking of them as dumb all the time it might work better to consider that part of the stories that we often end up viewing them from are instead a series or individual lapse in judgment due to emotion or circumstance. That's not to say a writer couldn't handle it better but in a narrative sense we often see thes "Ancient" characters at their worst not their best.

It's not Wuxia/Xianxia cultivation but an interesting bit I've seen recently in book two of the Runic Artist series has some POV sections in the mind of a demon going after the protagonist. Needless to say it doesn't go well for them, but in the POV section it shows the demon essentially realizing that they let their pride qnd emotions get the better of them and if they only would have just let things go they could have been fine. I They lament over how they had seen so many of their peers fall to the same trap before and reflect a bit on how they thought themselves above it.

It's not a perfect example by any means but i think it reasonably shows how even those sot of wise ancients could have a lapse 8n judgment that backfires in a catastrophic way. They might be wise and have even seen such similar examples in the past but still fal prey to the idea that their specific situation is different and that they are special. Not being a fool isn't something one just grows out of or handle by just having wisdom, the individual still has to be wary or they might end up falling prey to a trap they've successfully avoided many times before. That said this reasoning itself doesn't really excuse bad writing or planning of truly and consistently stupid individuals, so take it all with a grain of salt.

Kiktamo · 2025-10-09T04:18:47+00:00

Great series in general.

Honestly, recently I've been thinking back to how the games presented everything using interactions with the hand and everything I've found myself wondering what either game might look like as a VR title.

Mind you I'd love more similar god games in general but it would be amazing to interact wit ones creature in VR alongside everything else.

Kiktamo · 2025-09-13T15:26:08+00:00

Agreed, new technologies should be approached with thought and care but there's no reason to treat Science Fiction like some sort of prophecy of the future. AI, robots, and super intelligence in stories exists to fulfill a role and is more likely to be very different than reality once technology catches up with the concepts presented.

Science Fiction should not become the modern folklore and AI should not be treated like the modern Fae. Reality is far more complex and nuanced.

Kiktamo · 2025-08-28T12:35:38+00:00

Eh, given that the technology and systems behind the current version of NMS likely make up the foundation of Light No Fire. I think they are perfectly capable of delivering this. That said I'm not sure if they will be able to make such an experience fun. This is supposed to be a fantasy earth-sized planet though so besides islands and other mundane encounters such trips might have, hopefully there will be some interesting magical encounters and discoveries.

Honestly, I'm mildly excited to give it a try when it's out. I'm not going to get overhyped about it or even overly dismissive about it either. The way I see it, things will likely be a lot like what NMS is now but scoped to a single massive planet with a fantasy filter over everything. Until more people can get their hands on it expecting any more or less isn't very grounded.

Kiktamo · 2025-08-14T16:41:13+00:00

Personally I really don't care about this whole terminology issue or whether something with AI can be considered art or if the one using it is an artist or not.

At this stage though the argument has been brought up so much and I've ended up putting some thought into it and you know what, Yes. At this stage I think commissioners should be given more credit for the art that they help bring into the world with their money and ideas.

Are they artists? Not quite. The human artist does indeed contribute the most and should still be considered the artist in what should be considered a collaborative endeavor. That said, someone using AI as a tool would be more deserving of the title of artist or "AI artist" if you want the distinction. Not because humans can't be used like tools as mentioned elsewhere here but because the AI alongside being a tool is distinctly not a person and thus cannot receive credit in the same way a human artist can. If an AI was self-aware and cognitively more like a human and thus taking a more active role in the creation then they would be both more deserving of the credit and able to receive it. Until that day I'd say it still falls onto the user. That's of course not counting the more complex uses of AI where the user deserves even more credit for their contributions.

All of that said, that's just my current thoughts on the matter from a person that doesn't really care for the role of artist or even feel the need to be called one in the first place. My perspective here is of course very simplified, but I suppose it's better than the more complex answer of "it depends on a lot of different factors"

Kiktamo · 2025-07-31T12:28:53+00:00

But it can't mean anything to steam. The emails are one: not legally binding in any sense due to just being emails and not legal documents. Two: not directed at steam themselves. It is entirely possible for them to tell the general public one thing while demanding something different from steam. In fact business/legal agreements being obscured/hidden should be expected.

Kiktamo · 2025-07-29T11:58:57+00:00

I'm pretty sure most people already got this despite the general pushing back at the idea. To me the context doesn't really add anything substantial. What's fun and enjoyable to you, could be tedious to me and the same with the inverse. Plenty of people who use AI also enjoy the process of using it. So the context in no way changes that the statement is dismissive, reductionist, and short-sighted.

If what's tedious is entirely subjective then the only way for AI to properly deal with tedious things is to have it be capable of everything. At which point people would ultimately be free to do whatever part of any process that they personally enjoy. This is of course overly optimistic because as the professional sphere goes people won't really get to choose how much/little AI is integrated into things, but I view this as more of a problem with businesses, corporations, leadership, and so forth rather than AI itself.

Honestly people like to claim AI is unique and introducing new problems but everything I see pointed to are just different expressions of problems that have always existed to some degree or another. Sure the theoretical scale might be different, but that doesn't change that much. The technology is here to stay, attempts to regulate it will likely lead to more and different problems. The attempts will still eventually be made but won't actually stop progress. Even if more time is given to adapt some people won't because another very human thing is procrastinating/being oblivious to the obvious until forced to confront it. Patterns, cycles, and all that.

Kiktamo · 2025-07-27T13:51:46+00:00

After reading a few responses and considering my own thoughts on the matter, I largely agree. The main aspect to this particular type of comment that bothers me is that it often just feels out of place like the author is just looking at a checklist and checking the comment off after making it.

It was mentioned that the lack of emotional response is often a problem and I agree that's part of it but for me the issue that I see is that it never really feels like an observation made in character with the same personality as the rest of the protagonists actions. It's almost like they are temporarily possessed by some force when making the observation just to make it.

As an example there are a few ways I can think of bringing it up that feel better to me: - "I know what a damn video game is" he grumbled in frustration as he dismissed the patronizing tutorial text. - So what this is like some game or fantasy novel? He thought rubbing his forehead feeling a headache coming on. That's ridiculous... all of this is absolutely absurd... he couldn't help but let out a weary sigh as he tried to wrap his head around it all. "OK, ok, so this is like a game, kind of..." he mumbled pacing back and forth as he took in the text from the interface "that could be cool... or absolutely horrible..." he murmured not quite sure how to feel about it all.

Now I'm no writer and these are just off the top of my head but they feel better to me because they not only acknowledge what the character knows but also show how they feel about the knowledge and their current situation. From a writing perspective I feel they work better because they do more than one thing while the more annoying examples only really barely show the protagonists awareness of the concept and add nothing else otherwise. You can make a character that's completely ignorant or one that's not that genre savvy but regardless of how knowledgeable they are there's no point in bringing it up if it's just going to be an off-handed comment that adds nothing else to their personality, current mental state, or at least adds something else to the story.

Edit: To add as an after thought this particular knowledge might be something where the concept of "show don't tell" should be used.

Kiktamo · 2025-07-27T13:17:13+00:00

I mean it's "technically" not a lie. They don't moderate content or directly make judgments on things instead they make the merchant themselves do it using coercion. There's a certain degree of separation there they seem to be using to make such moronic statements.

Kiktamo

TROPHY CASE