abcde666777

The amount of things you're trying to simulate within the the performance contraints (games push computers to their absolute limits).

An example - a 3d humanoid character. You need code to manage the mesh, the animation (probably skeletal), the animations themselves, all the blending logic, probably specialised code and data for facial animations, and then you need to make sure all of that can mesh with both input driven locomotion and AI driven locomotion - and that's just one problem domain.

And I'm grossly oversimplifying what's involved even in that particular area.

This all sounds great until you've actually had your own small business and experienced things from the other side.

Employees are expensive, good employees are hard to find, and sometimes things need to be fixed outside 9-5 to avoid having an angry client on your hands.

Where did he say not to use LLMs? Oh that's right: he didn't.

Slight pushback - I think there's still a lot more consistency and coherence in a human's recollection of their motives than an LLM.

Sometimes I think we're too eager to compare ourselves to them.

My first reaction to these kinds of outcomes is always: what did you expect?

Because whatever it was it was disconnected from the reality.

Personally I haven't stopped doing things the old way. I haven't had any issues using LLMs as rubber ducks or brain storming assistants - they can be particularly useful for identifying algorithms which might solve a given problem you're unfamiliar with. Basically a variant on google searching.

But when it comes to the final act I find myself unwilling to let an LLM write the actual code - I still do it myself.

Perhaps because my main project at the moment is a game I've been working on for four years, so the codebase is sizable, non-trivial, and all written by me. My strong sense even since coding LLMs showed up has been that continuing to write the code is important for keeping it coherent and manageable as a whole, including my mental model of it.

And also: for keeping myself happy working on it. The enjoyment would be gone if I leaned that far into LLMs.

I'm also biased, but I think millenials turned out okay ;).

The same could have been said to someone who had yet to encounter generative AI. "Wait until you try it, you won't be underwhelmed for long".

But here we are.

Over time and usage the limitations of a thing become apparent.

Just to clarify, here's my actual position - it was only implied in the first comment so I'll spell it out:

1. We shouldn't kill or harass or destroy the property of someone like Altman. AKA, I'm not in disagreement with your take on abiding by the laws of the land.

2. But it's not surprising that such things happen to individuals like him, for reasons outlined. Put it this way - if I was in his position, I would be very wary of my public image, and I'd be very wary of my intentions - am I acting for the greater good, or only for my own good?

Of course it's possible he's actually acting with the best of intentions and is just terrible at presenting himself, which is one of the reasons I'd agree with due process and respecting his rights.

I consider rights a functional abstraction. That is to say, they're useful, we should abide them as a tenet of a civilized society, but we also made them up. And importantly we all recognize that they're conditional - if you cross certain lines of conduct you lose them - and there's actually a lot of debate to be had about where those lines are.

So I disagree with your axiom that you have to believe in them 100% or 0%.

I get the impression dating via games is becoming much more common in general.

Anecdotal example - I'm 39 and used to be an avid counterstrike player, and back in my days (2005-2014) it was 99.9% men. But every so often I play it now and I've been surprised by the number of women I've played with, and doubly surprised by the number of them who have made flirtatious advances. So much so that if I was single I'd almost consider it a reasonable avenue for meeting someone.

Being a somewhat lazy individual myself, I'm wary of this statement. It feels too... comforting. "It's okay that I wasn't productive today, because laziness has merits".

I consider my laziness a part of who I am, and I don't demonize it, but I also don't consider it my ally - to get the things I care about done I often have to actively push against it.

The author's making considered speculations about where things might go. You're just putting your hands up in the air and saying 'we don't know'.