These are felony charges, are there no grand juries in AZ. The defense needs to absolutely unseal the grand jury testimony, there could have been nothing but lies told in that room. Not a single shred of evidence the defendant was ever in Arizona.
Fortunately, this stuff will never change because we're too busy fighting amongst ourselves how much foreign labor we should import to keep people too poor to fight these cases in the first place.
Because value in this case is particular to the engagement of a player.
Most playing a video game know nothing of programming let alone the specific architecture or development process, so I am not sure how you would expect them to express feelings about the code.
Narrarive or script is still in the same artistic consideration though, so say if the game was a sort of meta exploration of the code, this might expose the same sort of "value" over code.
It may not, by some philosophical definition, but most consumers (and I'd say most programmers too) place little importance on code as a human artistic expression. In the case of games the art assets are also a much more clear and direct signal that there was AI involved in the creation of the game. A game with handmade art but vibe coded game logic might not be as obvious.
I disagree. The core of gameplay is handled in the code. Art by itself doesn't make a game fun. Think about card games like Poker, Black Jack, Spades, you name it. Nobody plays those games because the cards are a particular art style, they play them because the rules and strategy are fun.
You can have AI create the rules for you, or you can have the AI create the code that implements the rules. It's not different for art. You can have the AI create concepts for your, or you can direct the AI towards a specific vision.
I argue that while it is possible to direct AI to implement your artistic gameplay idea faithfully, it is not possible to direct AI towards an artistic vision without losing a lot in the handling of the details.
There’s no right vs wrong, for art the details Are the fun part.
I’m enough of a sucker to think that there’s art in code as well (not just the game design but implementation too) but clearly less and it’s not nearly as visible.
There's nothing inherently offensive about AI generated art. You simply choose to dislike it. Are you offended by screws made by industrial machines instead of hand-carved?
Completely aside, but you maybe haven't even chosen to dislike cilantro. Some people have some gene configuration that make them taste cilantro like soap.
Yeah, I chose that example on purpose because of this.
“choice” rarely factors, since I technically could choose to continue consuming it despite disliking it- which is pretty much what the parent is suggesting.
And machine screws are a lot less art that art is, obviously, so I don’t think that comparison helps your case. Screws are the code equivalent in the analogy.
My point is that some object created by an automated process that serves its purpose should not be offensive. You can absolutely have a preference, but offended? On what grounds is something created by AI inherently offensive? And how can that be uniquely applied to art but not software?
I know a professional board-game designer who's using AI to make web prototypes now. He doesn't understand JS yet he still manages to model the gameplay he personally comes up with. I'm coming to terms with the fact that slop code can satisfy non-slop functional requirements, and the latter is what players will identify as non-slop.
But I don't think non-slop art is separable from the process to make it. I do however think gen-AI is blurring the qualities that distinguish non-slop by proxy, and we'll end up trying to find meaning in non-existent design/art decisions. I've already stopped trying to discover new digital artists for this reason. One day I might drop out of gaming beyond casual play with friends at this rate.
One pragmatic difference is that the art we directly interface with, the code we don't.
On the other hand, art is also strongly related to the human expression. Code can be artful as well, but usually it's more like utility, and to be frank, most art is utilitarian as well. So, art was was soulless enough before AI, and AI now ratcheted this up to a level never seen before.
I think the number of submissions is fine. It's easy to filter by the type of game you're looking for. If you just want to doom scroll, yeah you're going to have a bad time.
What are you talking about? 90% of litigation is convincing the judge that existing case law that clearly applies to your case does apply to your case.
I'm guessing what they're saying is that nothing goes to litigation if it's a clear pattern-match to existing cases, so actual litigation practice is only novel cases.
Isn't that just in the US/Commonwealth judicial system? I could be completely wrong on how others, like non-adversarial judicial systems, work and/or how pervasive the US system is or is not.
EDIT: specifically around the use of judicial precedent in case-law.
90% of legal work where there is a plaintiff and defendant is pressuring a settlement. My wife, an attorney, does not consider that to be "litigation".
As a former litigator, I would consider that to be litigation the moment a complaint is filed in court, regardless of whether the dispute is settled without trial.
But, for your sake, it's probably best that you accept your wife's definition.
And most of the leverage you have in negotiating a settlement is by referencing prior case law. If something is novel, there's too much variance to get a good settlement.
Money doesn't mean anything if you don't have a case to begin with. More money/time just makes the lawyers win because they end up siphoning most of the settlement. And more money with crappy lawyers will always lose to less money on smart lawyers who are able to use AI to find 100 examples of prior cases going your way. That's the whole point of AI disrupting the field.
This is why hosted agents (muse, dots, grok bot) will succeed. Organizations won't relax their PC security policies, so they'll need a platform where the agent actually has permissions to develop and install software.
On the hosted-agent point, Grok Bot specifically: Tried Grok Bot for customer support, auto-trading, and research. None of it holds. The machine resets without warning about every 1-2 weeks, packages and mid-run jobs gone. Unlike OpenAI's reusable env, you rebuild from scratch. Past ~50 minutes you get kicked. What's left is markdown and a box that dies mid-task. They still sell "persistent computer." Until that product choice changes, leaving is the honest protest; right now it's only fit for throwaway use.
Under the American theory of government, Cops tracking people without warrant is the same amount of lawful as people tracking cops without warrant, in fact, the former is more restricted.
The US multination corporations have benefited massively. The common American shares a lower portion of the wealth than ever before. Wealthy foreigners are taking an outsized portion of higher learning seats, and driving up prices. Then they take the white collar jobs. This clearly is keeping downward pressure on the average American economically, more so for the disenfranchised.
With 0 immigration, even sending most of the white collar immigrants back, the US would still be the greatest nation on the planet, except the common American would enjoy more of the spoils. If these immigrants were so valuable, other the countries would be competing hand over fist to bring in as many as possible as quickly as possible, but they're not.
Fortunately, this stuff will never change because we're too busy fighting amongst ourselves how much foreign labor we should import to keep people too poor to fight these cases in the first place.
reply