@VictiniVStar@plasma_node If you think it took the guy who had his AI create a 1:1 copy of minecraft on roblox overnight by giving it one single simple "make me a minecraft copy" prompt required the skill to tell the AI how to do those things, you are delusional. And that is just with current day AI
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node My entire point was the act of "conceiving" is not as skill-based as you claim it to be. All it takes is telling the AI "make me that", you don't need to "conceive" the specific instructions or subtasks or whatever. You can tell the AI "copy this thing I saw" and it will do that.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node And you don't have the intellectual capability to understand that an AI that is smarter than a human, is smarter than a human.Anything you can conceive of doing, an AI will do it better than you, sooner or later. It's not a fun future to think about, but that's where we're headed
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node So I guess you just wanted to defend the usefulness of the human in the loop (aka YOU ๐ซต) ๐๐ sorry bud, I'm pretty sure the AI that solves millennium math problems is going to make your fancy directions obsolete too... You can keep coping though!
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node It would be foolish to assume that we have hit the peak of AI capability and that it will never get any better than what it is right now. AI is already problematic enough to seriously damage the fabric of society, imagine what terrifying things it will be capable of tomorrow.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node For the record, I absolutely detest AI. I am only pointing out what is obvious if you have spent any time watching the progression of what AIs are capable of. Every few months, the claims of "AI can never do this" get disproved, and the goal posts get moved.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node You would need to hope that you can capture your target audience faster than an experienced copy-cat company with AI armed and ready to spit out a copy, with the marketing and distribution resources to beat you to the punch.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node Two problems: 1. A week is enough time for a game to blow up and have an incumbent advantage. A few hours is not. 2. Pre-AI, a rushed copy of an original idea would always be worse than the original that had been in the oven for months or years. Post-AI, that isn't guaranteed.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node Okay, so your argument is again resting on the idea that AI is imperfect and unable to do what a talented human can do. There is no point in discussing this further if that is your underlying assumption. AI isn't there just yet, but it will sooner or later
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node if your version of whatever fantastic idea was released 3 days before the next best AI-generated copycat that hits on all the same notes.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node Okay, but the moment you release whatever it is you created, the time between your release and the release of an equally good copy is only a matter of hours. Pre-AI, it would have taken months, if not years of dedicated programmers and artists. I don't think the end user cares
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node Again, you're assuming that the AI cannot delegate those tasks and do them by itself. We can already tell AI "go make me a 1:1 copy of Minecraft", and the AI spins up a bunch of subagents that research the game mechanics, download the necessary texture assets, etc.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node Okay, but what's stopping me from asking the AI "hey, can you copy this top tier UI artist's design"? You are working with the implicit assumption that AI will stay imperfect, when we know that will not be the case.
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node no real difference in perceived quality from the consumer POV. Which I think is still a possibility, many consumers already protest against copycat games and AI slop...
@VictiniVStar@plasma_node their AIs to make a carbon copy of your new creation. Soon, whatever it is you have invented, is just another source for the AI blob to absorb, digest, and mass produce. At that point you are relying on the consumer to care how something was created, because objectively, there is