I see a lot of free games on here that are made with AI, and personally i’m not interested in AI generated content. If other people feel the same way, maybe we could start tagging posts accordingly?
I see a lot of free games on here that are made with AI, and personally i’m not interested in AI generated content. If other people feel the same way, maybe we could start tagging posts accordingly?
What about if it’s just for proofreading or a spellcheck? A lot of them are no different or fancier than what’s included in Word or other text programs. Those shouldn’t be clumped into the same group.
There needs to be a line between generative, and tools.
Whatever is disclosed on the store page should be copied into the post body. I don’t think that’s a monumental ask.
I don’t work for Epic, Steam, Google, etc so what to disclose is above my pay grade.
Almost all developers are using AI to some degree from what I can tell, I end up having to tag most posts on my emulation community as “AI Assisted” after wasting my own free time looking through repositories for open source software and I still miss things because I’m not a developer myself. Disclosure is hit and miss. Some devs even actively try to hide it. No doubt the few other contributors miss things as well. On top of that Lemmy still doesn’t support tags like Pylova/Piefed do. What a fucking mess.
It’s getting to the point where I’m considering removing that tag and replacing it with “Human Coded” or “AI Free” because that’s becoming the exception instead. Currently I think that makes more sense and promotes attention to the exceptional tag, instead of everyone getting complacent and beginning to just ignore the tags because almost everything will end up having Anti AI tagging. It’s just natural human behavior to start filtering out redundant noise. Have not committed yet, I can be discouraged or encouraged on this strategy here.
100% vibe slop (pure agentic programming) by non-programmers is remaining banned to be clear. That’s easy to spot at least. The reddit community allows it, it’s like wading through sewege looking for gold nuggets and then learning half of what you found is Fool’s Gold instead.
It’s also adding a lot of homework to a voluntary effort running the community I didn’t ask for or anticipate when I started it.
It’d be nice if I could share these thoughts without risking zealots on either side downvoting me but I also anticipate that which is rather unfair. I’m just trying to navigate a new reality, it’s not locked in yet. That’s… why I’m here 😆.
I think that if I were tagging it, i’d have an AI-Free tag and a “Contains AI-generated assets” for any sprites/dialogue/music/etc. made with generative AI
In that scenario they used ai to spell check. So it’s made with ai
The idea continues to hold water :]
But what is considered Ai? Those spellchecks are functionally identical, so anyone who has used words spellcheck would need to disclose Ai.
There’s tools in photoshop that use Ai or very similar systems. They would need to disclose as well.
It’s not a s simple as people are making out to be. A local model isn’t the same as LLM and generative content. They fall under being similar to spellcheck, and procedural generated content, or autofill tools.
Your idea is a sieve though, yeah it “holds” water, but there’s so many flaws and issues, it just doesn’t make sense.
Even translators were running what could be considered ai a decade ago. Where’s the line? We got to go back to not even using spellcheck? Yeah, no, let’s be realistic about this.
Yes, disclose those too!!
I have absolutely zero problem in letting me have a more informed choice. Disclose all the tools used and people will select what they tolerate themselves.
Doesn’t even need to be a detailed thing, “local self trained LLM used, photoshop used, this grammar check website used” is perfect cause I’d see ‘local self trained LLM’ and nope out anyway
So what, they pay someone who just goes and does the same thing and now they can avoid disclosing it?
You don’t know what parts of your tools you’re already using could have been ai, or the artist you paid touched something up in PS, but now you can say OC from a paid artist. Does that make a lick of sense to you?
You think if you pay a proof reader they’re not gonna go and put it into word to look for basic mistakes first?
If you did a search you definitely do know what parts of the tools are ai because that’s a hot topic right now. And commissioning an artist who you know uses ai should be disclosed all the same, both as a matter of crediting that artist and in the ai disclosure. “Assets made by Mr. Artist” minimum, who I can then also look up. “Assets made by Mr. Artist using photoshop” is preferable though. A dev should at least know what tool their artist is using, else that lack of care is just as reflective of the final product as ai
Lmfao, try asking the contractor working on your house for the list of tools they used. You’re delusional. Do you think that contractor knows what tools were used to make their hammer? Their tiles? Where does this end dude Jesus. It just doesn’t matter, that’s the point and problem, you’re paying someone else who is supposed to take the liability and issues with not doing it right. That doesn’t fall back upwards. That’s just asinine.
What the fuck yes a contractor should know what tools they used? You should know this before you even hire them! And it’s the same with artists, in my experience any artist I’ve talked to is more than happy to talk about what they use when getting a price quote, then I can just look up like “clip studio paint ai” and become informed
You might just have bad contractors or something :[
They know what tools, but they don’t matter to you, if you ask they’ll roll their eyes and just go on a client who is less of a problem and wouldn’t waste their time with frivolous requests and questions that don’t matter. Does it matter if it’s copper hammer or steel hammer? Does it matter if it’s smooth or waffle faced? If you think these questions matter…. You want their brand of chalk line and ingredient list for the chalk? These are the type of questions you’re saying you want to ask of an artist.
You also know that’s not what I said, don’t try to twist my words lol.
Nah, it’s even worse to have a plethora of existing pre-ai tools and still choosing to use AI for a task. Fuck those people extra hard.
Firefox runs a local LLM to do translation in the browser… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
With a local model, what’s the concern? It’s functionally identical to those tools, and could be expanded upon to include your lore and other literature. It can also look for syntax and other things as well. Which are things previous tools aren’t capable of.
There’s different “levels” of ai, even using photoshop has a lot of automated generative content. Those are indistinguishable from ai.
Procedural generated worlds would fall under this umbrella too.