The following I think qualifies as an off topic rant on the above, just to let off some steam in the cypher hehe.
So at some point this conversation will be so old hat and so ubiquitous that it ceases to be all that interesting anymore, but for now at least, I still think it's funny as all hell that Wikipedia, (the most comprehensive encyclopedia in the history of the world), is currently in the process of downgrading the reliability of sources that have knowingly published AI generated content alongside the regular stuff.
From the leap year article...
Futurism report highlights the reputational cost of publishing AI-generated content.
arstechnica.com
This is particularly amusing, since for years and years Wikipedia was scrutinized and denigrated esp. in media with claims questioning it's reliability, at least in the popular parlance, I mean right. Now it's Wikipedia going to bat for us on the credible information front haha. Currently CNET is all embroiled for their decision to give a byline to a computer and then pushing out plagiarized garbage with reckless abandon starting some time in 2020. Perhaps it was meant to be humorous, or just fad chasing, but now that game of chicken came home to roost. They went from a Green 'mostly reliable' designation, to a Red 'mostly unreliable' designation inside of 3 years. Their reputation as a credible secondary source is effectively destroyed. Not that CNET was ever all that great to begin with, but the AI branding doesn't just wash off from the later mea culpa. Their brand is already tarnished.
It's the same as an AI title sequence in a TV show ruining the whole show before you even watch the first 10 minutes of it. Or some jank AI image ruining everything else hanging in an art gallery, simply by being there. This whackness just permeates via osmosis or something. The backlash seems to be very very swift, to the point where I would be scarred shitless if I was a chief editor of anything, that somehow something like this makes it's way to the front page, or I don't know say a cartoon on the cover of TIME, that just ends the whole thing in farce?
As little things like this continue to happen - as AIs muddle and pancake everything down into the mire, and we become more saturated - I bet the reaction will become even more knee-jerk in response. This is possibly a new dividing line or wedge that's going to fuck up the discourse on basically all fronts at once. I don't mean terminator drones coming for the actors, or Lensa on her midjourney, but just the overall numbing whackness like a law of thermodynamics or something, the entropic effect of general AIs just floating around being lame - day to day. I mean do you all get that too?
I legit think the single worst thing a game developer or publisher could be doing right now is trying to save a buck in this way. It will mark the final product as trash, like the opposite cool, and peeps will be far less likely to pay for things that they know where made so cheaply and at such a hidden cost (trying to ditch all the humans involved.) The red line is super clear right now, like if they want to see where it leads just follow the trajectory straight off the graph paper down to the floor. My neuro-divergent quadrangle on this stuff is kinda laying it out for me over here, L7 to the point where the cards are pretty hard to misread at this point. Probably the same dumbasses who think that corporations should be people, or who want to extend personhood down to the cellular level in a freezer, would be the same sorts to unwittingly declare that now AI bots are also persons, just cause they bring a sufficient amount of cash to the table or whatever. Like to just say that and make it true, and put it on the books. Weirdly the same logic and cohort that probably says all the animals are for sure definitely not persons, or that the environment doesn't exist, or that nothing is real except for the one thing they happen to be on about at all times. It's at least as big as art or geopolitics right or MTV, and 24 is gonna be rough. The straits seem like they could potentially get that dire, if you know what I'm saying.
Then all these peeps getting laid off and sent packing during in the great bloodletting that has befallen workers in the games industry right now, it's all predicated on this idea that the broader public will acquiesce to AI generated content replacing them. Anecdotally, I see the exact opposite going down. In my brief time kicking around on planet earth, I don't think I've seen anything quite this extreme for a response.
The negative reaction towards a novel technology and the speed of its adoption, it just seems to be of a different order here. Like sure, people might have bemoaned cars or smart phones or socials or TV when they arrived, but learning to fucking hate AI takes a lot less time hehe. I've noticed that I no longer trust or have much confidence even when it comes to little things like random posts on general discussion boards. Especially if they are provocatively framed at the outset. There's no way to captcha on this one to tell whether it's a legit human or a bot anymore, or at least not for online communities at scale. Twitter is dead in the water already, youtube and meta, likely the same. The major publishers and studios seem to think they're pulling a fast one like 28 days later, but instead it's already spotlights way off in the distance. Zombie content is on the rapid rise, but also everyone can see em coming. Like good grief, what is this nonsense anyway. Affective polarization is off the charts everywhere already, and then the AI zombies arrive right on time, just cause of course they would lol. Bah. I will keep trying so hard to make sure that people know I'm human, or very cynical dog, and not just a fucking robot, even if it's hella long winded a bit more us/them in the framing than I'd usually countenance, but here why not I guess lol
