Funny. Tech bros insisted that this wouldn’t happen.

WHAT THE FUCK

This is gonna get worse before it gets better.

Ruined. Fuck you.

“Why, yes. We can tell you are a criminal because of your skull shape”

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

That is literally a swastika.

Yeah, I was fine. Mostly. Probably. I just thought it would be a funny concept to have a character like that who’s dark and brooding exclusively when he’s on the job, and is friendly to just about everyone the rest of the time.

When I was a younger I made up a dark type gym leader OC who’s thing is he acts like an edgelord when he’s on the clock but is otherwise pretty chill when he punches out. I always thought it was a pretty funny concept that I’d love to see in a game. So that’s me.

We don’t “force” them to do it. This is repeatedly established to be something they enjoy doing. BW even has this as a plot point: N, a young man who is somehow able to understand Pokémon, is initially of the same point of view as you. To his astonishment, most Pokémon outright refuse to abandon their trainers. At first he chalks this up to some form of brainwashing, but over the course of the game he comes to realize that their desires to train and become stronger are in fact genuine. He ultimately decides it isn’t right for him to decide what they want for them, and spends the sequel targeting abusive trainers exclusively as opposed to tearing down the institution of Pokémon training in it’s entirety. >!There’s also some stuff about a bigger big bad grooming him to be the face of Team Plasma while he controls the group from the shadows, complete with strongly implied child abuse. Oh, and the reason the bigger bad wants to “liberate” Pokémon to begin with is so that no trainer can oppose his own team when he goes for world domination. You know, typical RPG stuff!<

“I’d rather be a pig than a fascist”

Transphobe who talks like a JRPG villain. Here’s a rationalwiki article about her.

deleted by creator

I understand that AI is a complex program and not just pressing buttons. That’s not the issue I have with it. My issue is, what happens when the technology improves significantly? It’s my understanding that LLMs keep improving themselves by continuing to train on (often unethically) acquired data. In its present form, sure, maybe we don’t have to worry. But give it 10 years or so, how much more competent will it be?

Let’s look at just the film industry for a second. We already have a huge problem with Hollywood churning out franchise films at the expense of everything else. But even these cash cows are made via the vision of someone whose name is attached to it. Somebody got paid to write Halloween 36: The Final Halloween for Real This Time. That person may or may not have gave a shit about writing a good story, or they may have just wanted a paycheck. Either way, that paycheck could be used to fund something they care about much more. Once AI reaches the point where it could spit out a passable script, what incentive does Mr. Bigshot the Hollywood producer have to involve a writer at all? And because no writer is receiving a paycheck, less risks are taken in general, because risks don’t guarantee profit

I might just be letting my anxieties get the better of me, and I really hope I am. I just can’t seem to move past the bad feeling I’m getting from this.

The whole generative AI thing bums me out as someone who dabbles in writing, but for more philosophical reasons than the ones you listed. Storytelling is supposed to be something humans do to connect with one another. Art and culture are windows into our psyches. This, to me, is why art makes life worth living. It’s why we go through the hassle of maintaining our dreary and tedious obligations, because when all that is done and over with we can sit captivated and spellbound by a good tale from a talented writer.

This? This makes little sense to me. You’re telling me they made a computer program that uses pattern recognition to write and draw for us? Okay, why? This goes against what I always assumed art was for. There’s more to storytelling than just pattern recognition. There’s themes, emotions, metaphor, allegory, messages, politics, and so much more. A computer program doesn’t understand any of that, it just follows it’s programming.

Tech bros insist that AI is not going to take our jobs, but as long as we live under capitalism I don’t buy it. A lot of the people who work in publishing or producing are just doing it for the money. They don’t give a shit about whether the stories are good, only that they are profitable. If you don’t think that they are going to jump at the chance to create product without paying anyone for it, then I have a bridge to sell you. Creators need to eat too. The phrase “starving artist” exists for a reason.

We were supposed to create robots that would handle manual labor so that we could all be free to pursue our passions. Now they have robots creating art while we continue to do manual labor. It’s not the future I wanted to live in.