Tim Sweeney’s interviews on the uses of GenAI for game development have been some of the best takes I’ve heard. He’s mentioned how GenAI is great at filling in the gaps or treating assets, but no world simulation means no deep persistence or authoring for a whole new unique game world.
What is the conversation like within Epic now? Is this still the view? What is the future for simulations like this?
I made a hard switch from all digital to all physical (when available) after I tried to introduce old games to my kids. I found many of them were no longer downloadable.
What are the odds that PlayStation, Nintendo, Xbox servers will be around in 2040? 2050? It’s certainly not 100%. Those companies may not even exist. If there’s any dependency, there is a chance that one day you won’t have access any more.
Incredible. I may be the only one in the dark, but until this moment I had no idea 3D printing at this high a fidelity was possible. It looks like a real bee.
Last I knew, the best 3D prints still looked like hardened play dough
Maybe a dumb question but since 2B2T (as I understand it) is a single instance of everyone modifying it to their heart's content, why does the download look like the standard biomes of a fresh minecraft map?
If you don't like this, physical books are wonderful.
Unpopular here but: This won't bother non-techies who aren't religiously against DRM. They love their kindles, old ones should be thrown away and they will buy a new one (with cool new features like blue light blocking mode).
I used to work in the games industry and this is a large split between older games and newer games. Traditional games like Super Mario don't "reach out" through notifications for you to play them more like Roblox. You are in control of the on/off switch
what is the solution then to age gating apps that the public feels should be age gated? (TikTok, Instagram, etc). it seems like every app implementing its own guessing system would have even more holes, right?
this is one where I am sympathetic. the moment when someone, with their parent, is setting up a device seems like the best point to check age. right?
"Scientists may have...that ability could...early experiments suggest...if verified, it could..."
I have become jaded with publications that hedge like this. In my experience most of these discoveries never pan out, they just disappear. And not being in the field myself, I don't know how to judge.
Does anyone in quantum computing have a read on how big a deal this is (or isn't)?
The key thing here is not whether it's AI. The key thing is quality and signal. No one wants to read to a low quality human comment either.
If the AI output was actually better than talking to a real human, more useful, more concise, serving the job to be done, then no one would have a problem with it. In fact they would appreciate it. That future is not here in many areas.
The problem is people are wielding AI right now and either [a] the models they are using are not good enough, [b] they aren't being given enough context, or [c] they are deployed in a way that makes it sloppy
(Insert joke about whether this comment is AI. It's not, but joke away)
As an American who has lived in Japan and traveled around Asia, Europe, and South America, Japan's attention to detail is almost superhuman. From how bathroom lines are managed, packages are wrapped, garden moss is curated, dishes are plated, everything is almost perfect. It's like the level of service in Michelin restaurants, applied down to the lowliest of jobs.
There's nitpicks people will find with a statement like this but I've never found anything like it.
It seems unbelievable that this is the first time the child ever picked up a paintbrush and applied paint to a surface.
It's probably more like: this is the first "published" final painting he ever did, after doing hundreds of other practice paintings/sketches that don't "count"
My anxiety about falling behind with AI plummeted after I realized many of these tweets are overblown in this way. I use AI every day, how is everyone getting more spectacular results than me? Turns out: they exaggerate.
Here are several real stories I dug into:
"My brick-and-mortar business wouldn't even exist without AI" --> meant they used Claude to help them search for lawyers in their local area and summarize permits they needed
"I'm now doing the work of 10 product managers" --> actually meant they create draft PRD's. Did not mention firing 10 PMs
"I launched an entire product line this weekend" --> meant they created a website with a sign up, and it shows them a single javascript page, no customers
"I wrote a novel while I made coffee this morning" --> used a ChatGPT agent to make a messy mediocre PDF
I would encourage people to test this out for themselves, I think you will find a different result. People today are starved for in-person connection, but are afraid to initiate the conversation.
This doesn't come naturally to me, but after working on it over a few years, 95% of the time strangers are excited to chat and say hi and make a friend.
Speaking as someone who worked for the SF bay area's largest homeless shelter nonprofit:
People who end up homeless long-term usually have negative social behaviors that push others away. When you help them, they don't tell an interesting story, they act angry or yell at you. When you give them money, they don't make you feel you happy, they make you feel afraid or annoyed.
This is unfortunately often due to mental health issues or drug problems. It's very sad, and ends up completely isolating them from all friends, family, and strangers who could help them.
Edit: This article actually puts this into clear terms, long term homeless people are poor "kindees"
The complex answer is probably social: the contributor to wikidata might not think of these ancient structures as "castles"