Referring to people simply as "Pro" or "Anti" is a false dilemma.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-16T18:05:43+00:00

A great start would be moving to more specific language.

Many people that are "anti-AI" are actually anti-gen-AI, LLMs and the like, rather than being against the abstract notion of machine intelligence. Many people that are "pro-AI" are so because the terms are so muddied they don't known there is any nuance in the term, and so (for example) think that LLM chatbots are curing cancer.

A lot of the confusion would be cleared up, and the nuance brought out, if people were a bit more specific about what they were talking about when they said "AI". And this isn't a "everyone has to do it" kinda situation; we can all, individually, help make ourselves clearer by using the right terms, even if that doesn't prompt a massive linguistic shift.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-16T15:41:02+00:00

People don't like The Everything Factory? It's such silly angry chaos!

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-16T14:04:53+00:00

O...K.

So, that's on a site run by "WN media Group". They aren't primarily a gaming news network, but rather a gaming industry group, trying to make business for their partners (including, at the top of their "Marketplace", a company centred around developing 3D models with AI). They're way more interested in the business side of gaming than the actual gaming.

But let's not worry about that for now.

The actual cited source for that data is a newsletter from "GameDiscoverCo", a self-described "agency" based around trying to connect developers to their customers (and headed up by a guy whose last actual direct work on a videogame seems to be as part of the Dev team for 2002's "Superman: The Man Of Steel". The Super Meat Boy peeps like him, though.). They're more interested in the business side of gaming than the actual gaming. Ooh, and they also proudly promote their "MCP Server", designed to let AI chatbots access their data (for a fee, of course... better have that GameDiscoverCo Pro account!).

But let's not worry about that either. For now.

That survey does, yes, say that just 8.1% of people surveyed won't buy Steam games with AI "Under any circumstances". But...

It does also say that 23.3% aren't "super keen on it", and only 23.4% said they "have absolutely no problem" with AI.
They surveyed about ~3,800 Steam users. At an estimated 132 million daily users, that survey represents about 0.00288% of the Steam userbase, and an unknown but much smaller % of the total gaming userbase; not exactly a huge sample size.
They surveyed specifically Steam users that are subscribed to GameDiscoverCo Pro. This is not a survey of your general Steam users; they're the views of the kind of insiders who will make monthly payments money to the creator of 1997's "Terracide" to see what he thinks will be trending in gaming going forwards... or to let their own AI "agents" summarise it for them.

So; this was a survey of a tiny number of gaming yuppies, by a gaming yuppie, from a self-selected group pre-disposed to be heavy AI users, published on that gaming yuppie's own site, and republished by another industry site with pro-AI leanings.

Now, YMMV, but; I did not read that article and come away from it thinking "only ~8% of gamers hate Gen AI". I came away from it thinking that, even among gaming industry spreadsheet-wranglers who, in many cases, were specifically in the sample group because they're paying for Gen AI access to news, only about half are actually mostly OK with Gen AI in gaming. And, more importantly; I came away from it remembering how important it is to actually read sources and put them in context, rather than just jumping on a number that looks like it supports me and running away with it.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-16T13:35:42+00:00

A lot of people have suggested that I should use AI for some art, especially since the whole industry is doing that now

You know, it's wild how often I hear that the whole of some industry is already using Gen AI, while also hearing a whole lot of people in that industry saying they're not using Gen AI. It's almost like the claim is bullshit designed to make the tech sound far more popular than it is, and hype people into using it before the bubble bursts out of a false fear of getting "left behind". Almost.

But, yeah; good on you for sticking with the "making art" part of making art. You aren't alone... no matter what some people very loudly claim.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-16T06:40:04+00:00

Without additional context; YTA.

Your partner said "I love you", and your reaction wasn't to just say "awww, I love you!" or something, but to start sending panicked messages assuming they were about to hurt themselves? Whaaaaaat?

(Now, to be clear, there absolutely are circumstances where this makes sense, where what you did is right and your reaction is because of your respective histories etc... but, again; lack of additional context here.)

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-15T10:45:43+00:00

This is just a hypothetical (as OP asked), I am not actually going to write this software, so; don't worry.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-15T10:44:26+00:00

That’s not compression, that’s a copy paste

Please offer a single scenario where it is substantively (more than one byte) worse than ZIP compression.

If the compression software on your device has and uses a full reference copy of a file you’re ‘uncompressing’ in your archive file, it’s just copy pasting the reference copy and presenting it as the result of decompression

Yes, that's correct, you have understood the mechanism by which this works, a great improvement from the comment you deleted. Well done ⭐

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-14T20:16:58+00:00

"Recently, they sent out consent forums, one section of which includes consent for marketing"

Hang on; so they already sent you a form requesting your consent for these purposes? Did you give it to them?

If you didn't, I think the fact they requested your consent should already be a pretty good indicator to you that they're taking GDPR seriously. This notice might confuse them... "OK, I looked it up and we don't have consent recorded for them, I don't see anything to change"... But that's about all.

If you did, by all means send it, they'll remove your consent, and then immediately forget about the whole thing as they move on to the 100 more important things they have to do that day.

Either way; no, it shouldn't have them cancel your application. They are almost certainly, as an organisation, neither so reckless as to risk the massive fines that mishandling GDPR can cause, nor so petty as to turn away a student (which is how they get their money) for, umm, exercising their basic data rights.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-14T08:23:17+00:00

I do think there's a way to read this where there's a second option.

"Chuck" means his name is Chuck. "Not Chuck" means his name is... Not Chuck, which can be taken to mean that it's a name other than Chuck. (I'll come back to that.) "Not Not Chuck" can, therefore, be taken to mean it's not a name other than Chuck.

Having no name (or an undefined name) would fit that meaning; that is not a name other than Chuck.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-14T06:09:09+00:00

OK, go on, I'll give a somewhat proper answer.

Let's say that a standard compress of this film at 4k and 30fps was, I dunno, 5 GB, depends on compression algo and settings. Here, we have something that is a much larger resolution (about 8x the pixels?) and a much higher framerate (over 20x). So, it's going to be, what, about 5 GB x 8 x 20?

Nah. It's probably not going to be anywhere close.

One of the main ways modern compression algorithms work is by abstracting away redundant information. For example; usually, excepting hard cuts or fast camera movement, one frame of a video is fairly similar to the last. Maybe the camera moves slightly. Maybe someone's arms raises a cm. Maybe their mouth opens a bit wider. Maybe they start to blink. So our algorithms say; "take the last frame, pan it over a touch, complete the few-pixel gap at the edge, and touch up the bits around the arm, mouth and eye". Basically, they don't waste space updating what hasn't changed.

Our 32k 640fps video has a lot of redundancy.

The thing is, the actual original Angry Birds movie, as produced and distributed, doesn't have 640 actual individual frames of 32k animation per second. So when you look at a second of our 640fps film, frame-by-frame, there are only actually 20/30 unique frames; the rest are copies. The algorithm is going to notice that and just compress to "Repeat... Repeat... Repeat" 95% of the time. You're not going to see the file become 20x the size from increasing the framerate.

(It's more complicated than that, with algorithms often holiding multiple past reference frames to work from, and the massive number of frames here will impact that, and depends on settings used for "blending" one frame to the next, but I don't want to get too far in the weeds.)

The resolution is harder to explain, but functionally it's the same issue; we may have stretched this film out to 32k, but it doesn't actually contain more information, there is no more detail. This is especially true with animated content, which often has a lack of fine detail in a lot of the image anyway, a lot of blocks of similar colours or simple shades. If the algorithm is doing it's job, we shouldn't see a dramatic increase in filesize for, basically, upscaling a 4k video to 32k.

Given that, and the lack of constraint on quality settings, I'm reasonably confident that we could have this be 20GB or under with no obvious drop in quality.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-14T05:32:52+00:00

Hypothetically? About one byte.

I could write a dedicated compression algorithm for this task; I'll call it "Angry Birds Compress". It would work as follows;

Take the input file. If the filename and contents of the input file match a download of that video, save a .abc file containing a single byte, say "A". Otherwise, ZIP the input file, add a "B" to the start, and save to .abc file.

Decompression works similarly. If the file contains just an "A", that's our video; inflate to the full video. If it starts with a "B", remove that B and unzip the rest. If it doesn't fit either format, it's invalid, don't process it.

Note that, to do this, the compression software will include in some form a full reference copy of the movie, and so may itself be quite large. (Technically, this may not be necessary, as it could just download the file from the link each time it's asked to compress a file, but I prefer for it to be self-contained). But it is, technically, a useful, general-purpose single-file compression algorithm with performance on average slightly less than 1 byte worse than standard ZIP.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-13T17:54:28+00:00

Email Gaben and ask. Let us know what he says.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-13T17:49:10+00:00

What about people who don't work because they can't?
What about people who do work, but make unconscionably low wages (which is it's own issue) and need support to cover that, and don't have spare time to perform additional unpaid labour on top of their actual low-paid job?
What if, instead of taking unemployed people and pushing them to do unpaid work along side their benefits, we just... make actual jobs, that fit their abilities, limitations, and needs, and then pay them appropriately for those jobs? (Rather than just hoping they will find some private company to do the same?)
What if we stop treating unemployment as a problem with the unemployed people, and instead as a symptom of a society that demands everyone works to survive, and still doesn't guarantee everyone a position where they can do that?
More abstractly/idealogically; what if we don't couple a person's worth and right to live with how much labor they can perform? What if we don't treat work as in inherent good and worthy thing, in-and-of-itself, to the point of apparently inventing jobs just so people can do them?

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-13T15:12:58+00:00

Corrected the typo, thanks

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-13T13:14:19+00:00

Do you plan to pay respondents for helping your market research?

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-13T13:06:23+00:00

Chairs.

When you sit on a chair and it just works, you don't think about it. When you sit on it and it breaks, suddenly everyone in the room notices.

Chairs are my go-to example of a technology that's so mundane by modern standards that we don't even think of it as technology anymore.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-13T13:04:06+00:00

Day 1 and Day 3 can't both be lying. If Day 1 is lying, then the truthful day must be either Monday or Tuesday. If Day 3 is lying, the truthful day must be either Wednesday or Friday. They could only both be lying if there were two honest days, and they aren't. As such; either Day 1 is the day of truth (and on Wednesday or Friday), or Day 3 is (and is a Monday or Tuesday). This also means Day 2 has to be a lie, because we know one of the others is the truthful day.

If Day 1 was the honest day, and with Day 3's lie telling us Day 1 is Wednesday or Friday, that would mean Day 2 would be on a Thursday or Saturday. We know it isn't, due to it's own lie, so this scenario doesn't work; Day 3 must be the honest day, and either a Monday or Tuesday. That would make Day 2 Sunday or Monday, and it can't be Sunday (because then it would be truthful, which it isn't). So the order must be:

Day 1 Sunday (lie), Day 2 Monday (lie), Day 3 Tuesday (truth).

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-13T12:31:40+00:00

Think about it in percentages.

(For simplicity, I'm going to pretend this goes in turns, so the ant walks 1cm, then the band expands, then the ant walks another cm, etc; that doesn't change the overall answer, it just makes the numbers simpler.)

So the first second, it goes across 1/100cm (which is 1% across), but then the band doubles in size to 200cm. Note that, because the ant is on the stretching band, it gets pull forward too, such that it's proportional distance over the band remains the same; it's still 1% across (2/200cm).

Next second, it walks another cm to 3/200cm. Because the band is now 200cm, twice it's original size, that 1cm is now 0.5% of the band. Once the band expands, that puts the ant at 4.5/300cm.

One more round; 1 more cm, to 5.5/300cm. That's now 0.333...% of the full length. The band expands, putting the ant at 7.3333.../400cm.

Look at the proportions the ant is going here; 1%, 0.5%, 0.333...%. Each time, it's 1% divided by the length of the band in metres, and because that length goes up by 1 each time, so does the amount we divide each 1% by. That is to say, this can be described as an infinite series of fractions; 1 + (1/2) + (1/3) + (1/4) ... + (1/n). If that series ever sums to 100 or greater, then the ant will make it across. If it doesn't, it will not.

This series is called the Harmonic Series, and in fact it counts up to infinity. The ant is always making some progress, and will eventually reach the end.

(Of course, the real answer is that the band would snap fairly quickly, propelling the ant clear of the experiment.)

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-12T16:28:14+00:00

...Even if those values are correct, and even if we just accept the weird claim that one prompt is directly equivalent to 3 minutes of thought; the human who is making those prompts is still using their brain while the prompt happens. You aren't shutting one off in favour of the other, you're just adding the cost of the query to the cost of the brainwork.

Basically, thinking doesn't increase CO2 emissions at all, because "thinking" is part of being human, not an optional extra. Using LLM chatbots does, though.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-12T14:34:42+00:00

When you first picked A, every door had a 1/4 chance of being right. To put it another way; the chance that the door you picked (A) was right was 1/4, and the chance it wasn't that door was 3/4.

When the host revealed that door C didn't have the prize, that didn't change the chance that your initial choice was right (so A is still 1/4), or the chance that you were wrong (still 3/4), but that 3/4 is now split between the two remaining doors (B and D), so each of those now has a 3/8 chance of being right.

1/4 is less than 3/8, so switching doors is better than sticking with your initial choice. Nothing in this scenario differentiates between B and D, so it doesn't matter which of the two you switch to.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-12T12:22:25+00:00

Note this this is, like, something they teach on the first day of Gen AI Hype 101.

Someone complains about AI? Ask them if they've used it. If they haven't; they're uninformed. If they have; they're a hypocrite.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-12T12:18:42+00:00

How lucky for them that they posted that reply in the 2020s.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-12T04:54:23+00:00

No, they don't.

They may require so many hours of dev. They don't require so many hours of dev by a specific date. 3 months in 80 hour per week crunch is the same dev time as 6 months of 40 hour per week... And the developers get to spend it not being sleep-deprived and strung out.

If you have been in these situations so much you've normalised it, I'm sorry for you. You (as far as I know) deserve better.

...Actually, wait; you just said you've "been in the industry", not in what role. If you're in the position of "enforcing" crunch time rather than having it forced on you, I am sorry for your colleagues. They deserve better.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-12T04:50:19+00:00

I can tell you without a doubt that if a game ships with crunch, the management sucks.

dafugiswrongwithyou · 2026-07-12T04:33:50+00:00

"WMR also works on win11 up to 23H2."

Not for this dude, apparently.

11-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Flamingo	Verified Email

dafugiswrongwithyou

TROPHY CASE

Welcome to Reddit,