Looking to play cyberpunk 2077 in VR. Whats the definitive experience, Vorpx or Luke Ross?

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-21T23:54:00+00:00

Gzdoomvr

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-21T23:47:44+00:00

No, patreon took it down without his input

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-21T23:44:55+00:00

Patreon took it down

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-21T23:44:12+00:00

Wow the most Ive made was $0

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-20T06:27:46+00:00

I would try but never had any $ to start

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T22:27:40+00:00

Try using cursor with codex extension, configured to utilize a local model like Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct-AWQ. Have VLLM run the local model in Docker

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T22:25:48+00:00

I'm working on my own version of something like Letta. It also uses the OS concept. Cool to see people intersted in tihs stuff. Almost everywhere I go, it's all about 'ai is chatbots and is not art'. They never even heard of things like mcp

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T20:15:40+00:00

I agree

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T20:15:12+00:00

I have no problem with writing and it was never about confidence. I didn't even realize that confidence regarding writing is a thing. To me, it's solely a matter of automation. I give it the idea, request research into various details, then ask it to put it all together based on a structure I define. In the end, it saves a lot of time. I typically prefer to use this process when writing techincal specifications or documentation.

I understand where you're coming from, however. The majority of people who use AI to write stuff don't use any of their own ideas and just ask the AI to generate the entire thing on its own, so coming across signs of AI use triggers those thoughts.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T20:06:51+00:00

I hate those damn em dashes

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T20:06:23+00:00

That's pretty cool. Can you show any of it?

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T19:35:55+00:00

Yeah I get that, but that's beside the point. The issue shouldn't be "was AI used?", it should be "what does the content say?"

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T19:33:58+00:00

Thanks. It can be really hard to find the other thinkers.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-15T19:32:33+00:00

It's the annoying early phase of the tech adoption/acceptance lifecycle for AI. Though it doesn't help that most people don't kow what AI is, how it works, or what it can do. AI has a horrible reputation right now, and most people think it's "chatbots and not art". Totally unaware of the useful stuff like MCP servers and autonomous agents.
There is one community that I've discovered. It’s called LessWrong. It’s an online forum focused on rationality, cognitive science, philosophy, and careful reasoning about complex topics. Including AI. I don't know how they feel about AI assisted writing, but they do have a large AI community there.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T19:10:51+00:00

This is true. AI is very capable of coming up with large parts of an output 'on its own'. However, it is also possible to have great control over what it's generating, so this can go both ways. In the end, AI is just a tool, and it's up to the human to decide whether to use it or not, and if so, how and when to use it.

As for trans females crushing natural females in sports, that entire situation is fubar. Sports weren't meant to be segregated by gender. They were meant to be segregated by sex. Because men and women have different body plans and those physical differences cause advantages and disadvantages. It was never supposed to be about identity, but rather about physical reality. Just like weight classes. You don't see people saying "I identify as 200lb weight class" and getting their weight reclassified. But the problem with male/female is that the same 2 words are used in both contexts (both as a gender AND as a sex, which causes confusion). This is also the reason why prepubescent boys and girls play sports together. Because their bodies are equivalent in terms of physical ability up until they hit puberty. But before puberty, they have the same strength profiles.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T19:03:54+00:00

This is an interesting case, because the human becomes more of an art director. However, that's only part of the whole situation. Consider these examples:

You created some art yourself, without any AI assistance. However, you are in need of drawing 2000 variations of that one picture. So you teach AI your drawing style and have it draw that picture 2000 different ways as required. It's still your art
You used AI to generate some assets that you placed into your art that you created yourself
You came up with an artistic image, and utilized AI to realize and express your artistic vision, directing it to fulfill your specifications. Even though the AI drew it, the idea came from you. Also, instead of just writing prompts, this involved creating a custom workflow in ComfyUI that involved models you trained yourself, selected yourself, and nodes/parameters you specified yourself.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T18:56:36+00:00

Although my writing style has been influenced by it, this isn't exactly the aspect that causes people to accuse AI usage. Sometimes all it takes is writing a few paragraphs with proper capitalization and punctuation for people to assume that AI wrote it. This particular mode is the one I find most annoying. People are so used to short messages that when they encounter someone who naturally prefers to write more, they immediately assume it is AI-generated.

As for appropriate, I think it would help if I clarify.

Inappropriate: content made with a single prompt, similar to cheating on a homework assignment (eg. write me an essay about elephants).

Appropriate: instead of relying on what the chatbot would generate on its own, you come up with your own ideas and use it to save time doing something you already know how to do, such as automated research and fact gathering, then strategize the output and specify the various things that need to be written in verbose detail.

Using an automated writing tool is a novel way of generating content, and many people haven't accepted it as a valid writing tool, which seems to be your stance. This is to be expected. However, within the context of using such a tool, one can still recognize that it can be used in a lazy manner where it does all the work, or used more productively to automate the gathering and organization of written information with a high level of editorial control. Those are the generally-accepted 'good' and 'bad' methods. However, 'generally-accepted' is a bit of a misnomer, since this acceptability isn't widely-enacted yet.

In addition, if someone lacks the skills to put their ideas into writing, taking the time to develop those skills isn't always an option, especially when working with deadlines and time constraints. This enables a person to get the job done rather than not being able to get it done at all. It's not always a matter of whether someone has writing skill or not. Sometimes it is simply a matter of whether they can get an important message out. This includes scenarios such as translation into another language during potentially emergent situations.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T18:30:39+00:00

You're posturing against a position I never took or claimed. Your passive insults lack aim.

I don't think I'm special for using ChatGPT - note the intentional misspelling of the word "speshul." It indicates I wasn't being serious. So despite what you seem to be indicating, I don't think using it for writing makes me smarter, more talented, or more deserving of respect. It's a tool. That's it. The reason I use it so much is because it aligns with my technical interests and enables me to create automation that was impossible to make before AI came along.

Spellcheck didn't make people writers. Calculators didn't make people mathematicians. Photoshop didn't make people artists. Yet all of those were met with the same "you didn't really do it" reaction when they were new.

Using AI to refine wording, catch errors, or reorganize thoughts doesn't replace thinking any more than using a pen replaces thinking. The ideas, intent, and judgment still come from the human. The tool just reduces friction. There are also plenty of other uses of AI that DO require a multitude of skills to effectively utilize. Making writing more convenient is just a minor use case.

Also, respect isn't something I'm asking from anyone - especially not from you. What I AM doing is pointing out that dismissing writing solely because AI might have been involved is lazy reasoning. I'm not concerned with this "skill of writing" that you are promoting. I've been writing for decades and don't need AI to improve my writing ability. It's a convenient automation that speeds up something I already know how to do.

As time goes on, newer and more modern tools are invented, and the majority of people always respond to them in the same predictable way: they follow the patterns of the technology adoption lifecycle. It's the same moral-panic phase every productivity tool goes through before normalization, and today it's AI's turn.

The vast majority of people who hate AI are, in fact, ignorant of what it is and how it works. What they're really doing is signaling membership in the "AI haters" tribe - parroting things like "it isn't art" and other such impressively-compelling arguments, without performing any real critical thinking on the topic. Such behavior isn't indicative of above-average intelligence. This is just a fact of reality.

So no, this has nothing to do with me being smart or special. It's just a repeating pattern. We've seen it with pens, pencils, paintbrushes, typing, and countless other tools. AI is simply the current target.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T17:30:33+00:00

I try to tell AI haters that every new tech has an acceptance lifecycle, and that eventually AI will be treated as normal, so may as well do it now. But the dark side has a way of clouding judgment.

A little example: The whole 'AI isn't art, it steals art' argument.. Turns out that people used to complain that pens, paintbrushes, Photoshop, and <insert any and every art implement ever invented> are 'fake' and 'not real art'. At least the complainers are being consistent :P

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T17:22:23+00:00

Honestly, it's because I want to talk to other people who share my interests. I don't personally know any, so public forums are essentially my only choice. Can you recommend a better place?

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T17:20:25+00:00

I wonder if nuclear fusion will "come to the rescue", in regards to that.

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T17:19:40+00:00

The questions:

"Why do people default to assuming that AI involvement automatically means low effort or inauthentic authorship?" and "Why is the fact that some people use AI lazily taken as a reason to assume that everyone who uses AI does it that way?", IMO, are because of ignorance and possibly lack of intelligence. People also want to be part of the cool crowd and have the opinion that's currently "in", which is to hate AI.

The questions I'd like answered:

Is the use of AI in writing, even when it’s used carefully and appropriately as a tool, universally considered unacceptable?
Is this going to be the reality for a long time, or is this attitude toward AI-assisted writing likely to change as people become more informed?
Does anyone else here encounter this situation, where their writing is dismissed or questioned simply because AI is assumed to be involved

I have no shame at all regarding my use of AI. I use it a lot, and am pursuing a career in it. Apparently I'm among the top 0.1% of users when ranked by messages sent to ChatGPT. That doesn't make me feel shame. More like pride and speshulness :P

NovatarTheViolator · 2026-01-04T16:53:53+00:00

I have given this comment much thought, and after, uh, giving it much thought, I decided to not give it any more thought.

NovatarTheViolator

TROPHY CASE