You almost had a good argument until you started trying to tell us that it’s not just a parrot. It absolutely is a parrot. In order to have creativity, it needs to have knowledge. Not sapience, not consciousness, not even “intelligence” as we know it— just knowledge. But it doesn’t know anything. If it did, it wouldn’t put 7 fingers on a damn character. It doesn’t know that it’s looking at and creating fingers, they’re just fucking pixels to it. It saw pixel patterns, it created pixel patterns. It doesn’t know context to know when the patterns don’t add up. You have to understand this.

So in the end, it turns out that if you draw something unique and purposeful, with unique context and meaning— and that is preeeetty easy— then you’ll still have a drawing job. If you’re drawing the same thing everyone else already did a million times, AI may be able to do that. If it can figure out how to not add 7 fingers and three feet.

If you haven’t noticed, the people we’re arguing with— including the pope and James Cameron— are people who think this generative pseudo-AI and a Terminator are the same thing. But they’re not even remotely similar, or remotely-similarly capable. That’s the problem. If you want to call them both “AI”, that’s technically semantics. But as far as pragmatics goes, generative AI is not intelligent in any capacity; and calling it “AI” is one of the most confusion-causing things we’ve done in the last few decades, and it can eff off.

Yeah, well, “AGI” is not the end result of this generative crap. You’re gonna have to start over with something different one way or another. This simply is not the way.

I mean, you make good points.

Trump President for life? So like… six months?

But Democrat-aligned groups saw something else in the Republicans’ about-face: disingenuousness.

Haha, keep dreaming. If a system made by OpenAI is used for robots, it’s not going to work anything like— on a fundamental level— current “AI”. It’s not a matter of opinion or speculation, but a matter of knowing how the fuck current “AI” even works. It just. Can’t. Understand things. And you simply can’t fit inside it an instruction for every scenario to make up for that. I don’t know how else to put it!

You want “AI” to exist in the way people think about it? One that can direct robots autonomously? You have to program a way for it to know something and to be able to react appropriately to new scenarios based on context clues. There simply is no substitute for this ability to “learn” in some capacity. It’s not an advanced, optional feature— it’s a necessary one to function.

“But AI will get better!” is not the fucking answer. What we currently have? Is not made to understand things, to recognize fingers, to say “five fingers only”, to say “that’s true, that’s false”, to have knowledge. You need a completely new, different system.

People are so fucking dense about all of this, simply because idiots named what we currently have “AI”. Just like people are dense about “black holes” just because of their stupid name.

Wikipedia is written by humans, a.k.a. non-objective people, which is why they call it “duodecimal counting” instead of “dozenal counting” and used to have Talk wars on that page about it. The irrational side won.

If a game has classes like I said before, then it’s a class-playing game, a.k.a. RPG. Something can be a roguelike but not an RPG. Also “roguelike” is a pretty dumb name for a genre and itself causes a lot of problems, but I digress.

“Limited” is relative to what context you’re talking about. God I’m sick of this thread.

I added Dark Souls into the list before I saw this comment; because usually when I talk about this subject, I list it. I try to use variety in my examples, but I just forgot for a moment about listing Dark Souls ^^

Except for all intents and purposes that people keep talking about it, it’s simply not. It’s not about technicalities, it’s about how most people are freaking confused. If most people are freaking confused, then by god do we need to re-categorize and come up with some new words.

That sounds and looks like the best pizza ever. -grabby hands-

No? There’s a whole lot more to being human than being able to separate one object from another and identify it, recognize that object, and say “my database says that there should only be two of these in this context”. Current “AI” can’t even do that much-- especially not with art.

Do you know what “sapience” means, by the way?

I wasn’t knocking its usefulness. It’s certainly not AI though, and has a pretty limited usefulness.

Edit: When the fuck did I say “limited usefulness = not useful for anything”? God the fucking goalpost-moving. I’m fucking out.

I’m not sure if I want to go into the full thing because people tend to get defensive about their preconceived notions and make a big, heated argument about it. But I will say this: game genres are defined by gameplay— not by content, by visuals, by storytelling style, or by similarities with other games people assume to be in that genre.

As simply as I can put it— and hopefully not opening up a huge can of worms— I define a role-playing game as a game in which your character(s) play one of several roles, meaning “classes”— each with their own stats and abilities that play differently and support the character(s) differently. You can have a single-character game where the character can choose one or more classes, or you can have multiple characters that each have their own classes, or you can have multiple characters that can choose between their classes. That makes D&D, Pokémon, Kingdom Hearts, Dark Souls, Final Fantasy XIII, and honestly a bunch of multiplayer shooters, etc., RPGs. That does not make Zelda or the first Dragon Quest/Dragon Warrior RPGs.

So the biggest problem with humans and categorizations is that humans are highly assumptive, seeing surface-level features and defining items by those, and defining items by outward similarities with other items that they already assume to be of that category. Because of this, what a lot of people do is confuse the adventure genre— games that use exploration, puzzle-solving, and key items in order to progress— and role-playing games, which almost always are adventure games as well. D&D? Both RPG and adventure. Final Fantasy XIII? RPG but not adventure. Zelda? Adventure but not RPG. But in most cases, RPGs are also adventures; so a lot of people through association mistakenly think games with common adventure elements are simply RPGs.

I know a lot of what I’m saying is going to fly over many peoples’ heads, and they’ll go crazy in the comments. Let’s see how long I can ignore them for the sake of my own sanity…

I mean yeah. Most people define genres or categories using association, and they can become a gooey mess at worst. I’ve been arguing for structured definitions for years, but it’s a lost cause. I still believe I am the only person who has a completely sane definition for “role-playing game”. But I digress, fam. ^^

Current “AI” doesn’t solve problems. It doesn’t understand context. It can’t see fingers and say “those are fingers, make sure there’s only five”. It can’t tell the difference between a truth and a lie. It can’t say “well that can’t be right!” It just regurgitates an amalgamation of things humans have showed it or said, with zero understanding. “Consciousness” and certainly “sapience” aren’t really relevant factors here.

Manga are a kind of comic, they’re just pretty specific about their format and choices. Anime is a kind of animated cartoon, it’s just specific about its choices. Even “coming from Japan” isn’t a requirement as long as it follows those traditionally(-ish) Japanese choices.

Ninjas are illegal!

Good. It’s not even AI. That word is just used because ignorant people eat it up.