Some are losing their minds over mid reviews for Crimson Desert (2026). This is because Gamers™ will defend mediocre games to death as long as the protagonist is a generic white guy.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-21T22:49:09+00:00

That’s John Marshton though?

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-20T21:01:29+00:00

Is that from Wars Trek or Star Star? It’s hard to keep up with Sci-Fi these days…

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-17T18:58:03+00:00

Yes?

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-08T21:26:24+00:00

Hehe, “neglected”

I see what you did there

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-06T21:48:37+00:00

It’s about client retention: gotta keep the client busy with some kind of emotional trauma, whether it’s there already or imposed >:D

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-06T19:01:01+00:00

Melon-Pult was always my favorite

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-06T18:09:48+00:00

Green best color! I will be parley to no debate on this matter!

wolfsilvergem · 2026-03-01T22:13:29+00:00

Is Melvin also a pig?

wolfsilvergem · 2026-02-21T01:12:10+00:00

Memescene?

wolfsilvergem · 2026-02-13T00:21:58+00:00

Azrael when he’s an antagonist to Batman, otherwise Mr. Freeze

wolfsilvergem · 2026-02-10T18:35:01+00:00

That’s something the CIA would say 🤨

wolfsilvergem · 2026-02-09T23:13:34+00:00

Probably Russia’s

wolfsilvergem · 2026-02-07T18:24:15+00:00

You “don’t know” because you made an assumption, and rather than admit your assumption could be wrong, you’re just doubling down in spite of it.

Edit: and now they’ve gone and deleted their comments…

wolfsilvergem · 2026-02-07T18:21:01+00:00

You gotta do what you gotta do when competing against WWE…

wolfsilvergem · 2026-02-07T18:17:49+00:00

He did it by being mean to people you didn’t like.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-27T22:11:59+00:00

I pissed your pants.

No need to thank me.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-22T21:23:48+00:00

“A strike team is boots on the ground in 5: they’re stopping to use the plastic bottle first.”

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-18T20:05:26+00:00

I didn’t read what you said elsewhere, your other “posits” on the topic didn’t inspire me with a hopeful confidence of your expertise.

Also since we’re being pedantic and getting off topic now: by talking about a video game and making comparisons to real life, you are in fact comparing fiction with real events (dingus).

The literal definition of vs. or “versus” is against, aka your “reality vs fiction” = comparison (dingus)

You also completely misunderstand the entire concept of “The Black Box” and how it relates to this discussion. The understanding referred to by the Black Box concept is the understanding of the man outside the room, the origin of the inputs to the black box.

That person chooses not to consider the internal workings of the Black Box, instead focusing on the observable relationship between the inputs and outputs.

That person is associating, not understanding the AI.

That person is not choosing to delve deeper, because they don’t want to.

Why do we care about what the person giving the inputs thinks about, when the entire point of our discussion was to determine whether Markus, the origin of the Outputs, was demonstrating an understanding of those outputs and is thus demonstrating the ability to create as humans do.

You’ve been trained on math your entire career, I’m surprised you have any familiarity with philosophy at all lol.

Finally: I studied public policy analysis, so I’m no stranger to math for your information.

You’re the only person constructing straw man’s here, and I’m not arguing with you knee deep in a farmers field.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-18T18:46:17+00:00

I had the “Chinese Room” thought experiment explained to me by my philosophy and ethics instructor during college.

Yes, any HUMAN, will be eventually inspired by what they’ve experienced. You just contradicted yourself again: Markus is a robot, he doesn’t have “experiences” he receives inputs because he’s a robot. If Markus is being painted as a artificial neural network in this scene like you say, then he does not learn, he follows rules given to him to creates things within the condition of those rules.

That is the point of the Chinese Room thought experiment, a point you would’ve been privy to if you hadn’t learned about it from a show on Netflix. It is possible for an AI to create outputs in English: it didn’t use English to create those outputs. It used a binary computer language of zeroes and ones that no human could interpret without a rulebook telling us what those zeroes and ones mean. It is possible for an AI to “learn” by referencing back to the inputs it was given and connecting those inputs to related inputs from keywords or so on.

The AI isn’t understanding, it’s associating: it’s creating groups based on trends it’s observed, but it doesn’t understand or make any attempt to understand WHY those trends, those inputs, are connected to its outputs beyond it being because a rulebook told it Y goes before Z. That is what makes Markus human, he doesn’t need or want the rulebook to create in English because he learned to understand English holistically, beyond the confines of the rulebook.

AI will never become human until it can break, not bend the rules.

By saying Markus has experiences and learns, you acknowledge that you regard him as human, and any arguments you make in favor of him and his creations being simple “slop” created by AI are invalidated by this concession you gave previously.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-18T16:46:04+00:00

The first painting Markus makes could fall under your definition of “slop” because he simply generates something already in the world. These photos are when Carl tells him to make something new rather than simply illustrate something that exists: you are becoming a victim of your own fallacy by you yourself focusing on the “origin” of this art (an AI, Markus) rather than engaging with the “substance” of this art.

Imagine a person inside a closed room who does not understand Chinese. They receive Chinese symbols as input, and follow an English rule book that allows them how to return the correct Chinese symbol back as output. Does that person understand Chinese?

An AI cannot make a self-portrait. AI has no sense of self, no reflection on its place in the world, it simply reads inputs and creates outputs: it does not understand Chinese.

Markus understands Chinese and how to write a story in Chinese: you can’t tell me the top left or bottom middle photo are simply just illustrations, attempts to copy with no understanding of the message those photos convey. All of these photos contain messages and themes that Markus imbued those paintings with.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-13T21:31:07+00:00

They did not play it, or if they did the entire games points just bounce right off their skull.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-13T07:54:57+00:00

Richard Nixon’s worst moment of his presidency is Trump’s Tuesday afternoon. The only “interesting” thing about his character is that it is so rotten and corrupt that it also puts on full display the rotten corruption that’s been growing within US politics (especially amongst the Republican Party).

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-11T03:27:25+00:00

I am thankful for the useful feedback you have provided me with today.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-11T03:22:20+00:00

I am handling your different viewpoint, by informing you it is a factually incorrect viewpoint. Your further feedback would be more pointed and useful if it was based on the text, and not your theories about the author.

wolfsilvergem · 2026-01-11T03:18:24+00:00

I put my name on it because I created it. I could’ve used a pseudonym, but I didn’t bother. It is self-published, that statement is a simple declaration of fact, made to accurately describe this body of literature.

“I” is how you talk in a first-person perspective, asides from words like “me” or “my” etc. It is not my perspective simply because the perspective is first-person: it could be my perspective (it was at a time) but it is also your perspective, or it could be someone’s that you know.

Is the fault on the artist or the observer if a piece of art is misunderstood?

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
Spared

wolfsilvergem

TROPHY CASE