km3r

Deuterium (close enough to an element)? Einsteinium?

Here in America, it's the left wing that's more interested in ai regulations and bans. Cares about green tech.

Except you don't actually ban it, you just move it to texas.

That content is coming either way.

And if you require them to over offset their load to the grid, it's literally fossil fuels burned over all.

This is why people in left wing areas need to oppose datacenters bans. Regulate them. Require green energy investments that more than offset their load. Use some of that flowing AI money for the betterment of society.

If you don't want to play any of the great games of 2025+, that's on you, but it's just childish to pretend there is not great games coming out now that just happened to have some help from AI.

They aren't all slop. An actual programmer using AI to help code can create non slop. E33 is one of the best reviewed games of the decade and it certainly used AI. AI is a tool, tools can be used create slop and they can be used to create good games.

80-90% of devs, which will make for 99%+ of games with 5+ developers working on it.

Sure, some solo projects might not use AI, but those are the exact people who i think should be using AI for game dev. Games are often best when a single person can execute their vision, and the productivity gains from AI enable a solo dev to actually execute on a larger vision.

Most programmers admit to it if you ask them, its everyone else making assumptions.

You don't miss out on hidden gems, you miss out on ~95% of games. Most programmers are using AI now, and when you get into any game with a significant amount of devs, at least a few of them are using it.

Slop vs non slop isn't what is getting marked though, AI is. Almost all developers are using AI code tooling now, so its a pretty meaningless marker. We need actual way to mark slop, which requires something a little more complicated than "did they use AI"

It's also one of the major way labs can understand these models. Without the models are significantly harder to understand and align.

Yeah I think this is the clear position. In a few months, the open weights models will be just as powerful as the models behind the rouge agents were when they hacked hugging face. Anyone with a little too much money to burn can set up a similar experiment, make similar mistakes, and cause massive damage. A bad faith actor can even direct a swarm to cause havoc.

We need to be beef up our security systems now. These attacks will happen, regardless of Anthropic's or OpenAI's security practices.

> The root of this challenge comes from more text aka more code ~= more tokens, so these firms have little incentive to optimize for that mindset.

I'm not sure if this is true. The code is such a small part of the total output. Thinking harder, like what would be needed for architecturing better code, would use more token.

But a little bit of directing of the architecture can easily bring in design patterns.

Ideally, you design patterns that enable quick replacing of parts that get to messy. The code is cheap, just start from scratch with the defined functionality pre defined instead of bolted on with jank.

My friends and I used this for a camping party's solar panel's placement (for charging a battery). A large campsite with intermixed trees makes it hard to find the optimal spot on our own, but this map helped us keep the party going late into the night before we needed to turn on the generator.