Comment by i_cannot_hack

5 hours ago

So you completely agree with the factual description of the problem I supplied when asked to describe the problem, your only real complaint is that I used the phrase "more awful slop" instead of your preferred euphemism "more low-quality work". Having a frank discussion about the problems caused by new technology is not gatekeeping, and I don't think we should sugarcoat it out of fear of hurting people's feelings.

You initially said:

> It becomes a problem for everone when spaces meant for meaningful work become overrun with an awful stream of endless mediocre slop that someone quickly generated without giving it a second thought. The problem here is not that it is fast and easy. The cardinal sin is that it is fast, easy AND bad.

So..

"a problem for everyone" <- the fallacy of assuming your personal feelings and opinions are universal and apply to all of us (they're not and they don't).

"spaces meant for meaningful work" <- tells me that you don't seem to believe anything made with these new tools can be meaningful, implying they don't belong etc..

And again the hubris of believing that your personal opinion reflects the ideal state or voice of a broad and diverse community (a fucking textbook definition of gatekeeping btw)

And lastly, do you truly believe that AI tooling is the dividing line?

That all non-AI games made today are meaningful?

There's tons of quick and dirty stuff out there like asset flips and weekend projects that people throw up on Steam or Itch for sale, and there have been for years and years.

If your fear is that bad games are going to get out into the world you haven't been paying attention for the last (checks watch) 50+ years...

  • > "a problem for everyone" <- the fallacy of assuming your personal feelings and opinions are universal and apply to all of us (they're not and they don't).

    The phrase "a problem for everyone" doesn't mean everyone agrees, it just means the described situation would affect everyone broadly...

    And even you literally admitted you agree it will introduce problems just in the previous post: "I'm not pretending like that doesn't introduce new challenges", it's a little too late to try walk that back now.

    > "spaces meant for meaningful work" <- tells me that you don't seem to believe anything made with these new tools can be meaningful, implying they don't belong etc..

    No, just that the non-meaningful work they create risks overwhelming any meaningful work created with or without the tools, which is a real problem AI is already creating in online communities today. Knitting patterns on Etsy is a prime example. It is an accurate description of a problem that already exists today, and trying to avoid discussing it helps no-one.

    Again, even you admit the problem is real and don't really have any real complaints except that you keep complaining about my phrasing. It seems you would have been happy if I'd just used the more polite terms you introduce instead, like "new challenges" instead of "problems", "low-quality work" instead of "awful slop", and "not low-quality" instead of "meaningful"? Which is fine, but not really an interesting discussion.

    To avoid admitting you are simply annoyed with my phrasing you instead try to pin extreme opinions on me that are nothing close to anything I have ever said, like "you believe your personal opinion reflects the ideal voice of the community", "you believe your personal feelings and opinions are universal", "you believe nothing made with these new tools can be meaningful" and that I think "all non-AI games made today are meaningful", which is just silly.

    Since you agree that you see the same problem I see, and just want to discuss other opinions you invent for me that I don't actually share, I don't think we will reach any conclusion here and I probably won't engage further. Thank you for your time anyway.