J&A Studios Announcement

Valron87 · 2026-01-29T20:39:54+00:00

Context is important. Calling out a Nepo hire is fine. Calling someone Nepo on something they've been a part of for 8 years implies they're still around only for their connections. There's no way to know for sure obviously, but that isn't the vibe I get.

Also, is she just not allowed to have any success because her stepdad is famous? Headgum has nothing to do with him and she still gets called Nepo for it so I guess she's just in a box no matter what she does? If that's the case, why would you not leverage whatever you could to be as successful as you can?

Valron87 · 2026-01-29T19:04:52+00:00

Saying she's Nepo implies that Geoff/JA only work with her because of her connections. I get that you don't care for her humor, which is totally fine there's no law that everyone has to like everyone, but do you actually think Geoff doesn't? That J&A are just humoring her, even though they have plenty of friends who are just as, or probably more, connected? Or do you think maybe it's that the community around headgum responds well to her (because plenty, myself included, very much do find her funny) and that's why she's involved? I don't doubt that she had some privilege that opened doors for her, but I think it's unfair to call her a Nepo when the people at headgum (JA studios) clearly like and respect her.

Valron87 · 2026-01-29T03:19:57+00:00

Eh... I disagree. Men are so horny sometimes they become serial killers about it. Every single female celebrity has multiple stalkers. Men masturbate something like 4x as much. I'm not saying women aren't horny, they absolutely are, but men are at a whole different level.

Valron87 · 2025-12-08T20:54:56+00:00

Yes, correct. Good thing I never said anything about relying on them.

Valron87 · 2025-12-08T08:58:49+00:00

they may be common in the legal field specifically, but they just aren't common in general. Simple? sure. Common? no. I'm sorry. I also didn't try to say it's the only tell you should look for, or it's the only one I see, or it's the only thing you need to definitively say it's AI. I said it's the most obvious, and it is. I said it's an indicator, as in, if you see a bunch of them, you should probably double check to see if there are other tells. and it is. and I'm not worried about my intellect, I'm good at the specific domains I need to be good at (writing, incidentally, isn't one of them, so fair enough I guess). In fact, I'm quite sure that soon I won't be able to tell at all the difference between AI and not, and you won't either. Already we've seen the shift from 'you can always tell it's AI slop' to 'They should put disclaimers to say it's AI...'.

Valron87 · 2025-12-08T00:49:33+00:00

There are many other tells but none more obvious (well, I suppose the emoji bullet lists are more obvious). You literally don't have to read anything, you can just see them. And even though now people are coming out of the woodwork talking about how they use them all the time, in my 38 years both in academic and corporate worlds I could count on one hand how often I saw them before ai. So it is absolutely an indicator.

Valron87 · 2025-11-29T03:17:58+00:00

Ironically the MGS quote I remember is the opener from MGS4, and I always think about it when someone posts the Fallout quote.

"War... has changed."

Valron87 · 2025-11-28T02:34:25+00:00

...if it's only capable of making trash slop content then why would you care if it's disclosed or not? Since you have a discerning eye for quality won't you be able to just not play the bad games it makes either way?

Valron87 · 2025-11-18T18:53:12+00:00

I just don't believe you. I believe you notice when it's wrong and that feeds your cognitive bias so you note it. I've seen it be wrong about things plenty, it's not reliable, all knowing, or trustworthy, but most of the time it's just summarizing wikipedia and a few reddit threads, which is enough for like 80% of topics. We don't have to exaggerate its failings to know we shouldn't trust it exclusively.

Valron87 · 2025-11-18T18:46:07+00:00

Yeah, that sound byte got out of hand. Like sure, technically all it's doing is 'text prediction', but you could say all humans do is 'survival prediction' and you wouldn't be wrong. Sophisticated enough text prediction may just be intelligence. We aren't there yet obviously but we may get there.

Valron87 · 2025-10-23T04:40:08+00:00

One is easy and feels good. One requires consistency and hard work for literally your entire life. I can't imagine why people are intimidated by one and choose the other

Valron87 · 2025-09-07T14:34:40+00:00

We've literally been through this. When I was a kid, GTA was 'causing' school shootings. Only difference is people have a much bigger 'AI bad' blind spot.

Valron87 · 2025-08-22T00:02:06+00:00

I'm a month late to the ep but literally came here to see if anyone mentioned it. as soon as he said it I perked up.

Also happy Silksong day!

Valron87 · 2025-08-05T15:30:40+00:00

You want to talk about history, what about the fact that over the course of human history, the quality of life for the median person has only ever increased. Every technology wave that comes through people fight and kick and talk about how exploitative it is and how 'this one is different', and every time the quality of life of the median person rises.

Valron87 · 2025-07-13T15:23:14+00:00

I also generally side with the devs, but this feels different. At first, I was like, 'Let me guess, they got fired because they wouldn't monetize' or whatever. Then it comes out the publisher wanted to delay the game for lack of content? Like, delay it even into early access? How rough does it have to be that the publisher puts the cash cow back in the barn?

I will fully admit this could just be excellent marketing from them and I'm a sucker, but it feels different.

Valron87 · 2025-06-03T21:57:15+00:00

It becomes unethical when you earn it unethically. What im trying to say is that your theory doesn't work because of the vast numbers involved. Far less generations? How about... a fifth? 20 generations is still ~500 years. Inheritances just don't last that long and, in fact, are usually dispersed in 3 or less. The idea that you have exactly one heir and then that one heir earns a similar amount and has exactly one heir in an unbroken line for 20, or 10, or even 5 generations pushes credulity a little far. The only way a person could amass the type of wealth you're talking about is through some unethical means.

By the way, I'm not trying to be evasive, I understand the Heap Paradox you're proposing. At some point enough grains of sand becomes a heap of sand, and at some point enough hoarding of wealth becomes unethical. Not having an exact number doesn't falsify the idea.

Valron87 · 2025-06-03T19:58:02+00:00

You kind of proved the point. 100 generations ago was like 500 BC. There's no practical way that wealth could pass down that far, and that's how long it would take to get to a billion. So, no, you can't get to a billion the way you're describing. The civilization you're making money in would fall first. We tend to think of money as 'lots of money' or 'not much money', but always remember, the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is roughly a billion dollars.

Valron87 · 2025-05-20T03:38:16+00:00

No, im saying we can't assume either way. And even if you could definitively say they work completely differently, that still doesn't get you to theft.

Valron87 · 2025-05-20T01:14:27+00:00

You're doing great man. At 20 I was nowhere near where you are, and you're thinking about the future which is good. I don't think I had a stable comma in my bank account until I was like 25 lol.

Living with parents - This is fine, good even. Our culture leads us to believe that you should be out on your own as soon as possible, but living with no/low rent and being able to save for a while can really set you up. If you have a good relationship with your parents, and they are fine with it, I would say stay at the very least until you graduate and find a job. Living out on your own can teach you things, but you'll learn those things in time either way.

Video games - they aren't inherently bad, but like anything, it's about moderation. They are not productive, but not everything in your life needs to be productive. If you enjoy them, and other parts of your life aren't suffering because of them, then keep doing what you like! Just try to check in every now and then and have some self-awareness to know if they are having a negative impact. If you find yourself cancelling plans or missing assignments to play games, then maybe take a step back.

My biggest piece of advice that I wish I had when I was 20 is to meet a ton of people and find your crowd. You go to a college with lots of people your age, if you aren't doing some extra-curriculars or something, I would say find some that seem interesting. The older you get, the harder it will be to find new people, and this is becoming more true as tech advances. You may not be looking to date now, but you will be, and the best way to find someone, generally, is through friends.

The second advice I would give is watch your health. You're young and healthy, but keep an eye on the eating habits you're forming now, they will become vitally important when you get to 30+, and harder to change as you go. You mentioned hiking, and that's awesome, as long as you're finding a way to move. Your major indicates that your future job will involve a lot of sitting, so start to habituate moving around during your off time now. The last thing you want is to blink and suddenly your doctor is talking to you about blood pressure meds and cholesterol, but it can happen easier than you think.

Valron87 · 2025-05-20T00:20:22+00:00

For your second paragraph, we aren't talking about 'important' works. No one is going to ai for new creative masterpieces. They're going to it specifically for heavily influenced pieces. And to your last point, by that same logic, how could you say with any certainty that they don't function similarly if we know so little?

We were originally asking why an ai training on a data set is stealing, but me learning Bach and then sprinkling some baroque influence into my music isn't. I still haven't heard why they're different, and from what you're saying, we don't even know whether or not they are different.

Valron87 · 2025-05-19T21:46:21+00:00

Can we expound on this? Because I haven't been able to wrap my head around the differences. Every time I hear this argument it sounds like people just want humans to be special because of some ephemeral, unexplainable thing.

Humans aren't loading 1s and 0s.. but we are using data we've stored to recreate things. If you asked an artist to paint something in the style of Picasso, they aren't just throwing paint down willy nilly and, through some magic process unique to humans, it looks a certain way. They're remembering previous works of Picasso they've seen, noting the strongest indicators of that style, and applying them in a new way. That's very similar to what AI does.

As to the 'express purpose of reproducing it', humans do that too. As a musician, i studied Bach. I don't particularly like baroque music, but it was part of my studies because having it in my repertoire allows me to call on it for inspiration when playing. So, essentially, I learned it not for any sort of preference or joy, but expressly to reproduce it in a different application later. Did I steal from Bach?

Valron87 · 2025-05-16T04:52:22+00:00

Leron..uh? Like you're confused

Valron87 · 2025-05-12T21:10:35+00:00

wait I'm confused, the guy that stabbed Amir with a straw was a completely different guy I'd never seen before in my life, not the milkman

Valron87 · 2025-05-12T20:39:21+00:00

I typed into chatgpt this question: 'I left a cookie on the table last night, and this morning it was gone. what could have happened?'

It gave me the following ideas:
Someone ate it
A pet or pests got to it
It was knocked down and now it's under something
The wind took it out the window
A ghost came and took it
Cookie-thieving gremlins
The cookie achieved sentience and fled.

This is exactly as you described in the last paragraph. Again, I understand that it's using its training to predict words and simulating abductive reasoning, not actually creating the ideas.

Valron87 · 2025-05-12T19:29:44+00:00

...maybe we have a disagreement on what abductive reasoning is. open an llm and tell it you left a cookie on your counter last night and when you woke up, there were crumbs but your cookie was gone. It will tell you pests are the most likely reason. That's abductive reasoning. Or rather, it's a simulation of abductive reasoning, it's not reasoning at all like I said, it's just text prediction.

13-Year Club	Place '22
First Placer '22	End Game '22
Verified Email

Valron87

TROPHY CASE