INCREDIBLY stupid take. a majority of code trained on is under permissive licensing and/or open source. We WANT you to use our code! There are limited numbers of solutions to a programming problem. There are an infinite number of ways to paint an apple. Dont gen an apple. Simple
People seriously have no idea how AI works, and it really is showing with this whole Big Walk controversy.
GenAI. Generative AI. It is trained on huge amounts of data to generate something new.
Whether it is code, music, art or video, it is ALL trained on something.
If you think AI Art is theft, then you must also accept that AI Coding is also theft, as it "stole" from all the code it was trained on.
You cannot allow one and not the other because it was all trained the same way.
This is the bed YOU made. We kept telling you not to make it, but you insisted.
So now lay in it.
If you're against one form of GenAI, you are against ALL GenAI. Even if that only adds 10 lines of code. By your own logic, those 10 lines of code were stolen off the backs of the programmers whose code was used to train the AI.
Code is meant to be optimal and efficient. Art isn't. You can draw a smily face a million different ways, but there'll always be one best way of writing a code script.
@WW92030 You CAN argue that over relying on AI does indeed impact your own skills in coding. However i still stand that GenAI, as a tool to be used to code, is perfectly fine.
Do want to point out that I am vehemently against GenAI for creative work, which includes art, video, music, and to an extent game design and direction. I want to consume human experiences. Not an amalgamation of optimized data
@Amhran_ The difference is that *you* did that. *you* spent the effort and time to study and create an apple that only *you* could make. If you trace over somebodies apple then its not your apple. If you kitbash 1000s of apples to make another apple its still not your apple!
@_GAi92 Now, if you hire/draw your own work, then train a model on it, and then create pieces? Sure. You do you. But you lose the human in a field where human experience and emotion are pivotal to making good art
@_GAi92 Disagree. GenAI for art has been trained on thousands of pieces that ARENT allowed to be used. Art style, composition and subject of the piece is inherently human and IMO only has value when made by a human, not AI.
@_GAi92 I mean, i also have gripes with vibecoding. "Claude make game no mistakes" is still slop. But if you use it as a tool to code things that youve designed and validated, then IMO its fine. Its like having your own junior dev lol
can my for you page fuck off from the ai code discourse
i dont wanna see an opinion from a 16 year old that has never installed an IDE before, nor do i want to see an opinion from a 25 year old that has their only IDE being Cursor
I'm very anti AI but I'm not gonna lie I'm royally pissed at how everyone is yelling at the devs of Big Walk over fixing 10 lines of code after searching for how to fix it. Yall are a bunch of performative assholes who throw nuance out the windows to make yourselves feel better
its crazy how ai discourse nowdays are either misinformed vegan purists who think text completion is AI slop or literally the worst person you know generating 15 pictures of you fucking somones dog