alpaca128

I'd it's more a convenient outcome of maximizing profits than premeditated. Not optimizing is cheaper for studios while Nvidia doesn't mind extra popularity for their DLSS feature.

Crysis 3 is over a decade old, still looks great and ran on hardware that wouldn't suffice for web browsing today. I haven't seen anything in games since then that justified a significant increase in system requirements.

You could ask your favorite LLM to come up with a nicer way of saying it.

> Because if I use an LLM to debug a crash report, then that’s the same category as creating a slop game

Steam has clear guidelines on what requires an AI disclosure, and all that people are asking for is that they can filter based on this. It's a tiny change.

> AI-assisted coding describes every software project everywhere in the world

That is simply not true.

> and then just… lie

I'm not a lawyer, but lying about something that influences the customer's purchase decision sounds a bit like fraud and not something I would advise to "just" do. If using AI is so normal then why lie about it?

An AI filter is in the interest of both sides here because the people who would "lose their minds" over it can just avoid it with the press of a button. And if you want to sell to everyone, then make a product everyone wants.

They don't ask for a ban but for a filter. So that everyone can choose for themselves.

I don't care if 90% of new games get tagged as AI, I am simply not interested in them. The developers don't care if they get tagged? Good, at least they'll be honest about it then. And on top I can filter out the 90% of suggestions I am least likely to care about? I don't see the downside.

> it carries no meaning about the quality of the games

It doesn't have to, Steam already has reviews.

No, that's Microsoft's approach.

Like when they made two generations of XBox consoles boot 5 seconds faster by making the unskippable boot animation 5 seconds shorter. Many years after the exact same issue bottlenecked Windows 7 boot times on SSDs.

Right, but that's a software problem. My first tablet cost $300 running Android 4.4 and ran pretty smoothly. I don't know what feature since then would justify the drop in efficiency.

To be fair to Apple here, the build quality is probably still pretty decent and worse specs don't necessarily mean lower price at a certain point. Still not much for that price imho.

They weren't a dick about it

I think it would be fair to call "Windows subsystem for Linux" a Linux feature, yes.

And Android is still the biggest mobile OS.

Firefox built from source is sufficiently sped up that I can notice it starting up at least 1-2 seconds faster. Not that I use the distro for speed, but I'm not complaining about a faster browser.

If you insist on acting like a normal person, no one stops you from using something normal.

It was possible to just donate money with no strings attached actually, and one of the two companies that helped did just that. And positive press was also involved.

I remember when the maintainer of an open source XML library contacted dozens of companies for support to fix a critical vulnerability, and most of them didn't even respond and aside from two the rest went basically "not our problem, get lost".

A handful of companies probably care a bit but most won't bother to pay even a penny.

What is not bloat about creating a hidden file for every file in every visited directory? It clutters up outputs, causes needless work for various tools, and deleting them is pointless as the system will just instantly recreate them.

Given the "endless options to change it" as you said, where is the option to turn that off?