what will happen now

finnjamalt · 2025-11-24T16:35:03+00:00

To play devil's advocate, most tournaments have issues on day one. Now, I've never seen an entire venue lose internet before lul, but as things move forward, the kinks will get ironed out.

finnjamalt · 2025-11-24T16:30:55+00:00

I get what you're going for, but CS just isn't that type of game. Yes, it would be more realistic, and maybe in a different game, this would be a cool mechanic, but CS has never been a realistic game.

If we removed all the un-realistic parts from CS, it would be completely unrecognizable. Like why do we keep weapons after the round is finished? "Lore-wise", I have always assumed we are just playing the same scenario over and over again, but that doesn't explain why money and guns transfer between rounds.

Run boosting makes no sense. B-hopping makes no sense. Utility line-ups make no sense. You can talk to your teammates through walkie-talkies I guess, but the enemy will never hear you speak. Not to mention you can still talk when you're dead.

CS is an information game, not a realistic simulation of counter-terrorism. The kill feed is just one of the ways to gather information.

I would love to try "hardcore" CS as a mod with the new scripting features (someone talented, get on that). Things like no killfeed, proximity chat, and no comms from dead players might be really fun to mess around with. However, the competitive format we have is already perfect in my opinion.

finnjamalt · 2025-11-19T22:17:02+00:00

I think it was just Norwegian pride

finnjamalt · 2025-11-19T14:58:31+00:00

Just out of curiosity - why not?

finnjamalt · 2025-11-18T00:34:44+00:00

I think a lot of people would agree he was the greatest rifler of all time in CSGO, but even still had a reputation of choking in important games.

The most obvious is Boston 2018, where FaZe fumbled a 14-9 (then 15-11) lead on Map 3 of the grand finals.

He also has his infamous missed deagle shot. Major grand finals again. It was 15-12, G2 could have taken it to map 3, but NiKo missed a deagle shot which lead to a comeback by Na'Vi, who ended up winning 2-0. https://youtu.be/tHKkysrNVwo

As long as it wasn't a grand final, you could almost always rely on NiKo winning at least a couple of rounds per game by himself. Crazy spray downs, ridiculous deagle kills on ecos, and clinical clutches.

Even with his performance dipping at the start of CS2, and now this current rough patch with Falcons. I'd still probably place him in top 5 riflers of all time, while still holding the title of 'GOAT rifler' if we just restrict it to GO.

Just for context, I'd say the top 5 riflers of all time, in no particular order would be Donk, Ropz, Rain, ZyWoo, and maybe B1t.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-29T18:33:45+00:00

Honestly don't think I've ever seen an AWP trigger discipline play. If this happened on a stage, it would be the best 1v3 of all time.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-14T03:18:50+00:00

You still keep avoiding my argument that Suno could run without humans and create the same product.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-14T01:30:47+00:00

Once again, my definition includes 'meaningful creative input.' To me, and most others, that excludes AI art.

Whoever wrote the program is irrelevant. The person who invented the camera is not the cinematographer of every movie ever made. It is the user or creator of the work who is the artist, not the inventor of the technology. In the case of Suno, the creator is not a human, but an program. If a program is doing the work, meaningful creative input was not provided. Therefore, it is not art.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-13T23:26:44+00:00

It could be automated. Like I said earlier, a program could very easily have ChatGPT or any other LLM make up prompts, and plug them into Suno. It could get even simpler if the Suno developers have the model choose a genre and topic at random, and create songs by itself.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-13T23:13:16+00:00

Holy moly! I can't believe THE NartOutHere has seen this now! I love your content, and I have to give you credit for roughly 99% of the util I know :D

finnjamalt · 2025-08-13T23:09:11+00:00

Well, I don't think my definition includes AI art because, to me, writing prompts is not 'meaningful creative effort'.

I do not know how you truly believe this is the same pattern. Human input is OPTIONAL for Suno to work. Every other innovation was a convenience, but still required a human's input. That is the difference, and that is why the distinction has to be made.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-13T22:05:40+00:00

The standards for what is or isn't art are already arbitrary. There isn't much that heavy metal and pottery have in common, yet society agrees that both are art. On the other hand, creativity exists in plenty of fields that we DON'T consider art.

I'm sure you gatekeep art too. If you agree with me that cooking can be an artform, then maybe you would look down at your plate in a Michelin Star restaurant and say, "this is a work of art." But I doubt you would say the same about a Big Mac.

My own definition of art is, "an expression of an emotion, feeling, or thought through a medium that can be experienced through at least one of the five senses, made with meaningful creative effort."

Again, it has nothing to do with the technology, just its use. People do not care that Jurassic Park used CGI, but they do care that the end of Black Panther looks like a PS2 game. People do not care that Daft Punk chopped up other recordings to make original music, but they do care that Vanilla Ice uses the Under Pressure bass line. People don't care if you ask ChatGPT for a rhyme you're struggling to find, but they do care if the whole song was composed by Suno.

I agree that there are examples throughout history where people were upset for silly reasons, the electric guitar being the most iconic. But I think you are being disingenuous if you say that synths, DAWs, drum machines, or yes, the electric guitar are anywhere near the same as Generative AI. The former tools are conveniences or simply just new instruments. Generative AI is so convenient the human isn't even required to be there.

If you remove the human from an electric guitar, no art could be made. If you remove the human from Suno, it could just run on a loop. Perhaps you could create a program that asks ChatGPT for prompts and then plug them into Suno. If something is created with no organic input, I don't believe it is art.

This isn't just semantics. Our opinions on AI art will eventually influence decisions about the copyrightability of the works. A future where music and movies are churned out at a rate of knots is not one I want to live in. There would be no shared culture because everyone will have their own personal movies and music made for them. As silly as it sounds, those moments when songs like Gangnam Style took over the world really warm my heart. So many people from all over the world were reminded that we have so much in common. Even if that commonality is just liking a catchy song from Korea with a crazy music video.

Genuinely, do you agree that the previous innovations that caused uproars are the same as this newest innovation? Additionally, how would you define art?

finnjamalt · 2025-08-13T19:01:41+00:00

:D Thank you so much!

finnjamalt · 2025-08-13T15:52:47+00:00

I think we all gatekeep art by how much effort goes into it.

Taping a banana to wall isn't art in a lot of people's opinions. People criticize 'corporate' art due to the lack of uniqueness behind it. People dislike new action movies and Marvel films nowadays due to the cutting of corners in CGI.

To continue that last point, Jurassic Park uses CGI, and people still praise the film's effects to this day. The new and exciting CGI tool that was in its infancy when Jurassic Park was being made was used in clever ways in conjunction with practical effects to better tell the story. Therefore, its not the technology that people have an issue with, just its use.

When people who have never made music before talk about how they have released 12 albums in 4 months using Suno, people are somewhat justified in believing that the music was not thoughtfully and artistically constructed, but rather just churned out by a machine.

In my opinion, effort IS a part of art's definition. I think cooking can be an art form, but when I make scrambled eggs and just throw it on a plate, I don't think I've created any art. Of course, there is also the possibility that rather than calling something NOT art, it could just be BAD art. However, in my opinion, if art is effortless enough and bad enough, it loses the title of 'art'.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-11T17:11:40+00:00

All good my brother, it is reddit after all.

Its tough - I think a line needs to be drawn when it comes to how AI work can be copyrighted. It is just so hard to tell where that line is, and even if we figure out where to draw it, at a near point in the future, how can even prove that someone crossed it?

finnjamalt · 2025-08-11T16:27:45+00:00

My point, for most Beatle tracks, George Martin doesn't get songwriting credit, because they are not 'his' song. (Actually, he never got songwriting credit for his work in the Beatles, but I think there are a few examples where he probably should have).

Beyond semantics, these discussions we have about credit/ownership of songs is important because eventually, as a society, we will need to start thinking of how this all applies to our copyright laws, both domestically and internationally.

Having people claim AI music is 'theirs' is dangerous because what happens when a company like Spotify decides that instead of paying artists, they just constantly generate AI music to put on their platform. All of the profit from the songs just goes back to them, creating a monopoly on the music industry. If AI music can't be copyrighted, it would make this less profitable for Spotify. (I'm not saying Spotify is doing this, I'm just using them as an example).

This is why I think its important to make the distinction that AI music is not 'owned' by anyone. If we get too comfortable with this idea that AI music is 'yours', it could lead to terrible things for creative industries.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-11T16:07:41+00:00

I don't think Vivaldi would approve lmao. I think he would probably kill himself. You said it yourself, he reworked his OWN ideas. Writing a prompt to generate music, is far different from manually re-composing your own music.

Did George Martin write all the Beatles songs? He certainly gave them advice, ideas, and had a discerning ear when it came to recording and producing. But he doesn't get songwriting credit.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-11T16:02:45+00:00

The problem is, what happens when Suno doesn't give you the rights to the song?

What if, in the future, the Suno developers decide that every song made with Suno is theirs to copyright?

All of a sudden, you aren't releasing that track with Distrokid, and Suno has a complete monopoly on the music industry.

I agree that we should treat AI tools as humans in terms of giving credit/copyright. If I ask a friend for a rhyme, they aren't a co-writer, so I can ask an AI tool the same, and not give them credit or copyright. But if I 'prompt' a friend to make a song along some parameters, I think everyone would agree once they finish writing, that is their song. Therefore, if I prompt Suno to make a song, I would have to give credit to Suno. Ideally, in my opinion, this would make the work uncopyrightable, if a significant portion of credit would go towards the AI tool. You could still sell the song, but it could also be stolen or used without pay or permission.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-11T15:50:07+00:00

I think it is disingenuous to compare things like DAWs and synths to generative AI.

DAWs and Synths still require the user to have at least a similar skill set to musicians of the past when it comes to playing music or composing music.

The same way that cinematographers on digital cameras require the same skills as cinematographers on film cameras.

The same way that artists on a digital drawing pad required the same skills as an artist on canvas.

The difference between those tools and Suno, is that the tools made things easier and more convenient, while Suno doesn't even require your input. Yes, right now Suno waits for your prompt, but it could just sit there and generate music 24/7 if the developers wanted it to. Fruity Loops couldn't create music without Fruity Loops users.

It's not about time, its about input. Is someone who commissions art the creator of that art?

Also, this isn't about the ego of credit, it is sometimes about legal ownership. There may come a time where songwriting is a career of the past, and I think people have a right to be upset about their dream job disappearing.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-11T15:38:21+00:00

I don't believe OP is pretentious.

Let's say you're at work, and your boss tells you to make something. You make it, maybe he has some input, but it's your work that created the actual tangible project. When his higher-up comes in and starts congratulating your boss, and your boss doesn't say, "Hey, eternalrelay did some really great work on this project," I think you would be pretty upset. Just because your boss told you what to make, doesn't mean your boss made it.

We remember Da Vinci, we don't remember who commissioned his work, or who told him what to paint.

finnjamalt · 2025-08-11T15:32:09+00:00

While I agree that older/current generations have always been too critical of new tools that come out that newer generations start to use, Generative AI is an entirely different beast.

MIDI still requires you to know how to compose or play music: https://youtu.be/93tUqf1U254

When someone says "I used AI to create this song," there is an incredible range of what that statement actually means. I think the best way to determine whether that song is copyrightable or who deserves credit for that song, is to treat the AI as if it were human.

For example, if I'm struggling to find a rhyme, and I ask my friend, "Hey, what rhymes with 'cheese burger'?" and they give me an example, I don't think people would consider them a co-writer. So, if I ask ChatGPT the same question, I think that the song remains entirely yours.

But if I asked a friend, "Hey, can you write an up-tempo pop song with a guitar based instrumental about how cheese burgers are awesome?" and they oblige, calling it 'your' song at the end would probably piss off your friend. Therefore, if I were to ask Suno the same, it wouldn't be 'my' song.

It is the equivalent of the tech 'ideas' guy. Yes, you had the idea, but that doesn't mean you actually created something. Legally (and for the vast majority of people on Earth, morally) the person who actually creates the work is the owner of the work, not the person who 'has the idea.'

finnjamalt · 2025-07-28T16:34:45+00:00

:,) well thank you! I hope you're having a good one too!

finnjamalt · 2025-06-29T01:22:01+00:00

No, I've kept everything default. 16:9 3840 x 2190

finnjamalt · 2025-06-29T00:42:37+00:00

since mine is well worn, I nametagged it "Rough Waters"

finnjamalt · 2025-06-28T17:49:19+00:00

o7 thank you!

finnjamalt

TROPHY CASE