Latest 30 Comments

All I'm gonna say is two things:

Vibe coding is a joke for a reason, too many problems arise from it, ESPECIALLY when it comes to security (and you should care about the security of your machine!). Wasn't the whole AI code on Windows thing a hot topic just about now? You realize why?

Far as I know, there is absolutely no punishment for not disclosing AI specifically anyway, so whatever rules Valve puts up on this doesn't really make it enforcement and won't encourage honestly either way, which means we can never be sure.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Linux_RocksI really like that desktop background!

They always had sick wallpapers, you might want to check out their older wallpapers

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

A great game indeed. I hope they can get a big 1.0 launch soon, this game is special and I hope they succeed massively.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: EikeReally, you're getting the source code of the games?

Yeah, I know, we do get the binary code, which is translated by a compiler from the source code, ...

Correct, we receive what was generated by the AI in binary form. What's your point here? You wouldn't receive the assets as-is either, they get processed, too (e.g. exported into the correct format).

Quoting: EikeThis is not leading anywhere.

* Developers do use AI to code.
* You cannot find out if they did from the binaries.

It's not worth the discussion.

What's the difference? I doubt you could distinguish the AI source code anyway. If you don't have any arguments then simply don't join the discussion.

If the outputs get better then it's no longer possible to recognize AI assets either.

And thousands of developers have been fired in recent years. I'm sure some speak about their working experience. In fact, potential new employers will require that their AI experience is disclosed. So I really doubt it's possible to keep it secret.

But as was said: The whole thing is just a charade for the hypocrites.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: poiuz

Quoting: EikeThat example seems to be quite accurate to me:
The tools used to write the code are not an ingredient of the game. Unlike e.g. the assets. Which seems quite close to what Valve is asking for to be declared.

Obviously, the code the AI is generating is an ingredient of the game. Why should this be exempt from the disclosure?

Really, you're getting the source code of the games?

Yeah, I know, we do get the binary code, which is translated by a compiler from the source code, ...

This is not leading anywhere.

* Developers do use AI to code.
* You cannot find out if they did from the binaries.

It's not worth the discussion.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Let's go back to the topic: The disclosure is not about using AI tools. The disclosure is about generating content using AI tools.

Quoting: KROMOf course. It's a tool. Nobody stops you from taking the horse, but I'll be probably faster than you using my car.

There's absolutely no difference between generating code & generating assets. Both is created by a tool which serves to be more efficient. Both can & should be disclosed but Valve made this exempt because they know their customers will go crazy if basically every game becomes an AI game.

Quoting: EikeThat example seems to be quite accurate to me:
The tools used to write the code are not an ingredient of the game. Unlike e.g. the assets. Which seems quite close to what Valve is asking for to be declared.

Obviously, the code the AI is generating is an ingredient of the game. Why should this be exempt from the disclosure?

How about Photoshop? How much AI tooling is allowed?

Quoting: TheSHEEEPWell, yes.
You'd have to enforce open sourcing everything and even THEN you could almost never be certain.
Unenforceable rules are pointless.

Rules are there to be complied with. Usually there is a punishment if someone is violating a rule. I don't see why this wouldn't work here, too. If it's not directly evident then it'll require someone reporting the violation. Happens in law enforcement all the time.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I think this decision is being done as a matter of pragmatism. Nobody likes generative AI and game creators currently do lie about using it regularly. And it's not really possible to prove someone used it when coming up with ideas for their game because generic and uninspired games have existed long before chat bots.

The magic trick that neural networks were actually built to do is finding biases and patterns in large sets of data. They can link snakes to water, dwarves to fire, and help you build the next completely unoriginal fantasy rpg by including these links other people have made in your game. And though people might claim to not want this, people still pay good money for bethesda games.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

TLDR: The train has already left the station.It's now the same as a car or a smart phone, it has been integrated into our daily life.

Quoting: scaineMan, I can't believe we're still defending genAI. As I've pointed out in many other comments, the top reasons I hear for the "negative resentment" are, in no particular order:

1. Negative impact on environment, slap bang in the middle of a climate crisis.
5. Driving a nuclear age .....(Meta, Google and Microsoft have now all commissioned their own reactors)

True.

Quoting: scaine6a, 6b, 2, 3, 7. (social impact and allegations)

These things are not relevant or have overlaps with (game) development. Sure, they are valid in other contexts, bu not this. This is also the issue with these AI Witch Hunters who toss everything into one bowl and don't differentate.

Quoting: scaine4. Slows down development (even in cases where developers claimed it sped them up, evidence showed otherwise)
6c. Societal impact - genAI "slop" now devalues everything on the internet. When you see something cool, you think "meh, it's probably just AI shite". Or it actually IS shite, in which case, genAI is on a race to the bottom, since the next generation of genAI will be taught on today's internet - mistakes will be compounded, biases reinforced.

Not really, unless you do use LLMs only locally (unless you have enough hardware), using only free versions of public LLMs and LLMs which are known to have issues, once a project gains a certain size threshold.

If you are properly defining the project, the feature list and all its stuff surrounding it, you can do amazing things properly coded if you keep oversight, test, debug, review code, make appropriate changes and hold the assitant on a very short leash.

You still have to read the code, understand its workings, architecture and program flows, to make a well rounded project.

And yes, you pay for assistance enough, to achieve it, but you can really accelerate development tool-assisted. You also have to do your research and do decisions.

On the other side, if you just throw a LLM some rough paragraphs, that are not well defined, you will end wit slop (and projects that are at some point borked).

Quoting: scaine8. Hallucination (multiple cases of invented bullshit, including court filings, leading to lawyers being debarred).

regarding coding, this does not happen, and any bullshit code is quickly remedied once you have tested and reviewed it.

Aside that, for (game) development that is not relevant.

Quoting: scaine9. Obnoxious marketing (see MS especially).
10. Diverting investment away from targeted solution, and into a financial bubble (because #7).

Quoting: scaine11. All genAI engines are built on plagiarised work, for which the original authors/artists got no recognition, nor commission. Same with code - all code was scraped, regardless of license, and that code can be regurgitated in new, OR snippet form, by genAI, without recognition of that license.

Not really true, if that LLM has general programming and knowledge about standard algorithms. For example, if there is some undocumented RESTA API not documented anywhere on the web and you reverse that and give it a summary how the program flow is and works, at least the paid LLMs are able to integrate that in your application.

Free LLMs and locally run LLMs are way more prone to that and mostly try to throw dirt at the wall and try to be sneaky hard coding stuff or trying to implement shortcuts to just satisfy the requirement that "it works".

Quoting: scaine12. Impact on website scraping from multiple companies building genAI models. Wikipedia in particular has had to actively block enormous ranges to prevent the scraping from leading them into financial run. Again, can't be bothered to find the link, but there's a Wikimedia blog talking about it.

Most web sites already have taken active measures against that scraping and that is sadly a fact of life now.

Quoting: scaineAnyone offering the "it's just a tool" argument, is being deliberately obtuse. They're basically arguing that the ends absolutely justify the means, no matter the cost.

IT IS A TOOL, especially one that has to be used properly and given enough input data that is not wishy-washy.

Quoting: scaineAnd the cost is high. Big tech has absolutely no morals, and this is a race to the bottom, fueled by literally hundreds of billions of investment that could have have so much difference elsewhere.

Corporations always have been that, not just yet, but that is not a justification. Just be happy, that we aren't already in full Cyberpunk 2077 / Shadowrun / Neuromancer territory.

As above stated, the main problem with AI witch hunters is, that these want to turn back time unconditionally to a non-AI world, what would be about the 1970s if you call Weizenbaum's ELIZA an AI. Or what would be the point in time for you? Perhaps you should differentate between the various forms of AI and not toss everything into a barrel and blaze it aflame?

LLMs and AI are nowadays a fact of life, deal with it. It is the same with smart phones: if you are against smart phones (and maybe "dumb mobile phones"), you will have major disadvantages and inconveniences NOT using them. This is the same with LLMs, there are useful applications with them, but I myself only use them for project development and not for other things.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

It must be said that many Linux ports do not improve over time. They are just ports. Usually closed source. Closed source ports for a system that has a strong OSS philosophy. Instead of brutal backward compatibility, it is also common practice in Linux userland to update things in the code. This also happens with orphaned projects, because OSS was invented precisely for this purpose. You are not dependent on the original developer continuing to maintain a project until the end of time. But that is exactly the approach of Linux ports. And the reason why many no longer run properly after a few years and people switch to Proton, if they don't use it from the outset.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: pbWe have obligatory lists of ingredients on food products, cosmetics, detergents - not only because of allergens, but simply because we (the consumers) have the right to know what kinds of shit went in there, before we buy. I'm not necessarily saying it should be obligatory to disclose the full toolbox used to make a game, but it would certainly be well received and I hope it will become a good practice.

That example seems to be quite accurate to me:
The tools used to write the code are not an ingredient of the game. Unlike e.g. the assets. Which seems quite close to what Valve is asking for to be declared.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: pbSo what's stopping them from disclosure?

Nothing. And plenty do.

Quoting: pbAre thy ashamed of using "a tool"?

Shame has nothing to do with that.
But you can see from the absolutely braindead "outrage" over Swen Vincke's very reasonable stance on AI usage why a developer wouldn't even want to talk about it at all.

Anyway, this is about Steam enforcing disclosure when it comes to generating content that is "consumed" with the product.
And as said already, that only makes sense with parts where that can even be reasonably checked.
You can't check if someone uses Mistral in their IDE to help debugging, as a more efficient "Google" with more context, not at all, or writing half their code with it - the dev can tell you what exactly they do, or not.

Quoting: pbIt's also our right to know if the code was produced using genAI,

There is no such right.
You are hallucinating harder than ChatGPT on its worst day.

Quoting: pbWe have obligatory lists of ingredients on food products, cosmetics, detergents - not only because of allergens, but simply because we (the consumers) have the right to know what kinds of shit went in there, before we buy.

Apples and oranges.
You have a right to know what is in the product.
You have no right to know what brand of tool was used to harvest it, nor could that be reasonably checked.

Quoting: pbI'm not necessarily saying it should be obligatory to disclose the full toolbox used to make a game, but it would certainly be well received and I hope it will become a good practice.

I agree, disclosure would be nice and IMO beneficial to devs.
But there is no right to that, and some will do it while others won't.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: poiuz"Basically everyone is using AI."

Quoting: KROMOf course. It's a tool

So what's stopping them from disclosure? Are thy ashamed of using "a tool"? I don't see developers hiding the fact that they use unity, and some consumers will avoid unity for example because of some specific problems unity games tend to have on their computers. So what? It's our right. It's also our right to know if the code was produced using genAI, because for example some people have a stance against supporting such products because of the social or environmental costs etc. Devs are free to choose their tools, consumers are free to choose their purchases.

We have obligatory lists of ingredients on food products, cosmetics, detergents - not only because of allergens, but simply because we (the consumers) have the right to know what kinds of shit went in there, before we buy. I'm not necessarily saying it should be obligatory to disclose the full toolbox used to make a game, but it would certainly be well received and I hope it will become a good practice.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Just read that ChatGPT will start to show ads. They realized that they're not making money. :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I think both sides are rights, because both have valid arguments.

AI can be great, but THIS AI as it is used today is a smoking pile of bullshit.
I hope this will get corrected soon, so we all can benefit from this new technology without destroying the planet and human culture.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: MrBelles

Quoting: scaine12. Impact on website scraping from multiple companies building genAI models. Wikipedia in particular has had to actively block enormous ranges to prevent the scraping from leading them into financial run. Again, can't be bothered to find the link, but there's a Wikimedia blog talking about it.

Wikipedia recently signed API access deals for AI training, so I guess getting paid for the training data is preferable to it just getting scraped.

Of course.
If what you have is going to be taken anyway the best you can do is demand some compensation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

These rules make sense.

The hate against all AI usage without distinction between usage as a tool and usage to replace people is something I just mostly ignore nowadays. As do most people, thankfully.
It is mostly Reddit-level & social media brainrot and can be discarded. Eventually people on those platforms move on to the next thing to hate on, as they always do.

Quoting: KimyrielleIt's so funny how "code" is conveniently absent in that list (or is it "etc."?) I wonder if that is because you can't enforce what you can't prove is in the product, anyway?

Well, yes.
You'd have to enforce open sourcing everything and even THEN you could almost never be certain.
Unenforceable rules are pointless.

Quoting: KimyrielleIn any way, as a person whose code has very likely been used for AI training, I call hypocrisy on it. Apparently, the "poor artists" are entitled to protective measures, while coders aren't.

You are mixing different things here.
Almost nobody got any money for having their "thing" being used for AI training. At least coding-wise there were/are "AI trainers" - it is unclear to me how much of a share those have nowadays, but to my knowledge such a thing does not exist for artists or musicians.
So if anything, coders have it (a little bit) better here.

Quoting: scaineMan, I can't believe we're still defending genAI. As I've pointed out in many other comments, the top reasons I hear for the "negative resentment" are, in no particular order:

Practically all of these are examples of misuse and the current Wild West lawlessness state of the area.
Not arguments against AI use itself.

You are right about the bubble, of course, but that is just the normal hype cycle we've seen with all bigger technologies (just think of the internet & dotcom bubble).
What matters now really doesn't matter as much as what will happen after the bubble pops, which I assume will be a much more regulated and purpose-driven state (again, just like with the dotcom bubble).

Quoting: scaineAnyone offering the "it's just a tool" argument, is being deliberately obtuse.

I'd call it being level-headed and informed - as opposed to panic mongering apocalyptic nonsense and giving in to such.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: scaine12. Impact on website scraping from multiple companies building genAI models. Wikipedia in particular has had to actively block enormous ranges to prevent the scraping from leading them into financial run. Again, can't be bothered to find the link, but there's a Wikimedia blog talking about it.

Wikipedia recently signed API access deals for AI training, so I guess getting paid for the training data is preferable to it just getting scraped.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: scaineMan, I can't believe we're still defending genAI. As I've pointed out in many other comments, the top reasons I hear for the "negative resentment" are, in no particular order:

1. Negative impact on environment, slap bang in the middle of a climate crisis.
2. Driving job losses based on exaggerated claims of "efficiency".
3. Lowers IQ (I can't be bothered digging out the link yet again)
4. Slows down development (even in cases where developers claimed it sped them up, evidence showed otherwise)
5. Driving a nuclear age (Meta, Google and Microsoft have now all commissioned their own reactors)
6a. Societal impact - talking people into hurting others and/or themselves, sometimes leading to deaths)
6b. Societal impact - driving non-consensual nudity on Grok, including child pornography. When Musk learned of this, he paywalled the "feature". He paywalled it... not removed... paywalled it. FFS. Also see deepfakes of politians, or fraud using social engineering techniques.
6c. Societal impact - genAI "slop" now devalues everything on the internet. When you see something cool, you think "meh, it's probably just AI shite". Or it actually IS shite, in which case, genAI is on a race to the bottom, since the next generation of genAI will be taught on today's internet - mistakes will be compounded, biases reinforced.
7. Loss leading pricing - hoping to hook consumers/enterprisesthen putting prices up (see OpenAI adding adverts to ChatGPT)
8. Hallucination (multiple cases of invented bullshit, including court filings, leading to lawyers being debarred).
9. Obnoxious marketing (see MS especially).
10. Diverting investment away from targeted solution, and into a financial bubble (because #7).
11. All genAI engines are built on plagiarised work, for which the original authors/artists got no recognition, nor commission. Same with code - all code was scraped, regardless of license, and that code can be regurgitated in new, OR snippet form, by genAI, without recognition of that license.
12. Impact on website scraping from multiple companies building genAI models. Wikipedia in particular has had to actively block enormous ranges to prevent the scraping from leading them into financial run. Again, can't be bothered to find the link, but there's a Wikimedia blog talking about it.

Anyone offering the "it's just a tool" argument, is being deliberately obtuse. They're basically arguing that the ends absolutely justify the means, no matter the cost.

And the cost is high. Big tech has absolutely no morals, and this is a race to the bottom, fueled by literally hundreds of billions of investment that could have have so much difference elsewhere.

But hey, it's just a tool, right?

You forgot point 13.

The complete and total destruction of the consumer home PC market from inflated parts costs & the move towards subscription based 'ai' cloud gaming (and Ai windows cloudOS)

14. might end x86 Linux because of point 13.

ohh and probably if not regulated ..

15. Surveillance capitalism , Ai tracking stalking, minority report style dystopian society.

but it can put a funny cape on your dog !

that said Ai is here to stay, how it is regulated is what comes next

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Brokatt

Quoting: scaineI discovered this game by accident just before Christmas, a couple of days into the co-op beta, and me and my three mates played it for over 50 hours over the Christmas period.

It's absolutely stunning. My Steam review goes into detail, but basically, even in early access, this game has launched itself into my (ever-changing) Top Ten Games of All Time.

I'm a sucker for fantasy RPGs, but the way they mix meaty combat, progression, and puzzles is sublime. The graphics and animations are simply five-star too. Incredible game.

I was so inspired by your post that I bought it and convinced my friend to buy it. Turns out the co-op beta has ended 😆 We just have to wait until release on 22/1 😀

Oof, haha! I mean, it's literally the first line of this article, but I can see how you overlooked it!! I wasn't aware it was a time-limited beta either, and my mate was like "the co-op is gone!" in early January! At least it's only a week away now! Still a great game single-player, but definitely lends itself to a multi-player playthrough, it's so much more fun, especially when you're building out your townhouse (whichever one you end up buying) in Sacrament!

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Man, I can't believe we're still defending genAI. As I've pointed out in many other comments, the top reasons I hear for the "negative resentment" are, in no particular order:

1. Negative impact on environment, slap bang in the middle of a climate crisis.
2. Driving job losses based on exaggerated claims of "efficiency".
3. Lowers IQ (I can't be bothered digging out the link yet again)
4. Slows down development (even in cases where developers claimed it sped them up, evidence showed otherwise)
5. Driving a nuclear age (Meta, Google and Microsoft have now all commissioned their own reactors)
6a. Societal impact - talking people into hurting others and/or themselves, sometimes leading to deaths)
6b. Societal impact - driving non-consensual nudity on Grok, including child pornography. When Musk learned of this, he paywalled the "feature". He paywalled it... not removed... paywalled it. FFS. Also see deepfakes of politians, or fraud using social engineering techniques.
6c. Societal impact - genAI "slop" now devalues everything on the internet. When you see something cool, you think "meh, it's probably just AI shite". Or it actually IS shite, in which case, genAI is on a race to the bottom, since the next generation of genAI will be taught on today's internet - mistakes will be compounded, biases reinforced.
7. Loss leading pricing - hoping to hook consumers/enterprisesthen putting prices up (see OpenAI adding adverts to ChatGPT)
8. Hallucination (multiple cases of invented bullshit, including court filings, leading to lawyers being debarred).
9. Obnoxious marketing (see MS especially).
10. Diverting investment away from targeted solution, and into a financial bubble (because #7).
11. All genAI engines are built on plagiarised work, for which the original authors/artists got no recognition, nor commission. Same with code - all code was scraped, regardless of license, and that code can be regurgitated in new, OR snippet form, by genAI, without recognition of that license.
12. Impact on website scraping from multiple companies building genAI models. Wikipedia in particular has had to actively block enormous ranges to prevent the scraping from leading them into financial run. Again, can't be bothered to find the link, but there's a Wikimedia blog talking about it.

Anyone offering the "it's just a tool" argument, is being deliberately obtuse. They're basically arguing that the ends absolutely justify the means, no matter the cost.

And the cost is high. Big tech has absolutely no morals, and this is a race to the bottom, fueled by literally hundreds of billions of investment that could have have so much difference elsewhere.

But hey, it's just a tool, right?

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: poiuzLet's translate Valve's message:

Efficiency gains through the use of these tools is not the focus of this section.

"Basically everyone is using AI."

Of course. It's a tool. Nobody stops you from taking the horse, but I'll be probably faster than you using my car.

Quoting: poiuz

Instead, it is concerned with the use of AI in creating content that ships with your game, and is consume by player. This includes content such as artwork, sound, narrative, localization, etc.

"Let's stop being transparent & declare only stuff we obviously can't deny."

But reading the article it seems to work - ignorance is bliss.

I really don't get the negative resentment from a lot of people with AI. It's a tool. It can't replace people, although many seem to think so. Right now, it simply can't. I mean, you probably could for some smaller things, but quality wise it's not the best idea.
What it does is to aid you, to let you iterate faster. Do the annoying things... *shrugs*

Related to the code, I couldn't care less if someone uses AI to aid in coding, as long as the result is proper, clean code. And as a gamer, a stable game that doesn't crash or has weird bugs. How that is achieved, I really don't care, so why tick boxes for that?

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

The System Administration tool looks really cool!

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: scaineI discovered this game by accident just before Christmas, a couple of days into the co-op beta, and me and my three mates played it for over 50 hours over the Christmas period.

It's absolutely stunning. My Steam review goes into detail, but basically, even in early access, this game has launched itself into my (ever-changing) Top Ten Games of All Time.

I'm a sucker for fantasy RPGs, but the way they mix meaty combat, progression, and puzzles is sublime. The graphics and animations are simply five-star too. Incredible game.

I was so inspired by your post that I bought it and convinced my friend to buy it. Turns out the co-op beta has ended 😆 We just have to wait until release on 22/1 😀

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Molyneux is a fair bit infamous nowadays after some past events.

Even that is an understatement IMO, Molyneux is one of the least reliable and reputable "auteur" types out there. A few good games in the 90s with Bullfrog, then nothing but trash (I played Black & White on launch, what a shitshow). I'm convinced that the other people at Bullfrog were responsible for the success of their games, he's just good at bullshitting.

My favorite so far: "Curiosity: What's Inside the Cube?", a mobile "game" where you tap cubes to make them disappear. He promised a "life-changingly amazing" prize for whoever clicked on the last cube. The prize was... 1% of the revenue from Godus (so nothing) and some input on that game's design.

And THEN he goes on to claim that they never took money from people with Curiosity, something that is straight-up not true because of course there were microtransactions. Just not the macrotransactions he originally wanted - you know, pay $10000 to remove an entire layer of the cube.

It's like a multi-layered trolling attempt, except he's not trying to be funny. He's just a giant douche who's obsessed with lording over the little people for some reason.

Don't see a single word about Linux support on the Steam page either.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: RandomizedKirbyTree47

Display I imagine is the only one that would actually be relaxed, since we're talking about all sorts of resolutions since the Steam Machine is just a mini PC with SteamOS Linux on it. Input, Seamlessness and System Support cannot be relaxed in any way or the whole system would be a bit pointless.

Why?

The Steam Machine is a desktop computer. Why does it need full controller support? Why does it require an on-screen keyboard? Why do launchers need to be navigable with a controller?

Those make sense for Steam Deck because it's a handheld console with a built-in controller, and is not expected to be used with a mouse or keyboard. But for an ordinary desktop computer, which the Steam Machine is, all those conditions can be dropped.

Putting it plainly, you can plug a PC to a TV since forever, and all PC games are playable on a typical PC setup (monitor+kbd+mouse on a desk)... but a TV usually means a couch or bed instead of a desk and kbd+mouse doesn't really work on a couch or bed.

If the Steam Machine is meant to compete with consoles, then it's essential that Valve pressures for controller support in its games catalog to improve.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

hopefully this can gr8ly improve the horrible Senua's Sacrifice traversal stutter

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Let's translate Valve's message:

Efficiency gains through the use of these tools is not the focus of this section.

"Basically everyone is using AI."

Instead, it is concerned with the use of AI in creating content that ships with your game, and is consume by player. This includes content such as artwork, sound, narrative, localization, etc.

"Let's stop being transparent & declare only stuff we obviously can't deny."

But reading the article it seems to work - ignorance is bliss.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Wow. Proton/WINE changes for a launcher. What did they do to make a launcher that complicated?

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

"This includes content such as artwork, sound, narrative, localization, etc."

It's so funny how "code" is conveniently absent in that list (or is it "etc."?) I wonder if that is because you can't enforce what you can't prove is in the product, anyway? Or because they realized that the vast majority of programmers is using at least some AI-generated content these days? Or simply because consumers don't "consume" code, because they can't see what it does? Or because vibe-coding is a legitimate efficiency tool in their view, while efficiency gains by generating AI art assets are not?

In any way, as a person whose code has very likely been used for AI training, I call hypocrisy on it. Apparently, the "poor artists" are entitled to protective measures, while coders aren't. Which reflects the vibe I am getting from the anti-AI crowd, really. One should think that people hating AI should hate all of it equally, at least.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

It's worth noting that Endeavour was first released during the period where Arch didn't have an install script (archinstall), so it made more sense back then than it does now.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment