I get your point… But I feel like people in this thread doesn’t know how cake making works…
20 people will make a single cake faster. Not 20x faster, but faster. There are multiple part of the work that can be divided out to different people. Like you can have one person make batter while other makes icing. Fancy cakes actually do take multiple people to make simultaneously.
There are many different niches of ML. 99% of hobbyist would use consumer grade hardware. It’s quite frankly more than good enough.
Even in commercial usage, consumer GPUs provide better value unless you need to do something that very specifically require a huge vram pool. Like connecting multiple A100 GPUs to have hundreds or tens of thousands of gigabyte vram. Those use cases only come up if you’re making base models for general purpose.
If you’re using it for single person use case, something like 4090 is actually the best hardware. Enough ram to run almost anything and it’s higher clock speed than enterprise GPU means your results come back faster.
Even training doesn’t require that much vram. Chat models are generally more vram heavy but if you’re doing specific image training like stable diffusion for how to render your face, or some specific fetish porn, you only really need like 12GB of vram to do it. There are ways to even do it at lower like 8GB but 12 is sweet value spot where even 3060 or 4060ti can do. Consumer GPUs will get that trained in like 30min to 24hrs depending on settings and model.
I see current classic Bethesda as just a modders sandbox. Which I actually like. So starfield has been inline with my expectations.
Moon buggy mod may come out eventually. You can ride dragons and fly around in Skyrim.
They become semi-side quests once you reach a certain point in the main quest line. Technically, I think you only have to collect just one to three of them to finish the story. I’m not 100% sure though, I too have been too distracted by non-mainline quest thingies.
Easier to show than to explain.
Truly living the sandbox dream there.
You need to visit temples to get powers. They’re like words of power in skyrim.
I do not think end justifies the means. And companies should not be given a pass in the name of capitalism. Where are people coming up with this?
I said I’m for unions. Strangely people replying to me seems to be ignoring my very first line.
But there’s no evidence that unionized workers wouldn’t make shit games just as well.
I only played like 15hrs of vanilla Skyrim. But played like 1000+ hrs of modded Skyrim. I’ve now played about 30hrs of starfield. If the modding scene gets as big as Skyrim, I think it would have merit in longevity.
I’m all for unions. But I’m not sure how it translates to good for players. Unions exist for fair wages and working environment, not direction of how games should be made.
Edit: People sure seem to get the wrong impression with my question. As I said in the very first line, I am for unions. They’re great and we should strive for fair working wages and hours, especially in 2023 where wages are stagnating while having massive inflation. We should have happy employees and I prefer my games made by happy employees. Failure to keep the wages up is creating shit ton of societal problems.
Issue is the delusion people are presenting here. Unions are not magic. It doesn’t automatically improve unrelated things. What people are missing is that there is no evidence the union has ever advocated for a better product. If one exists, despite my desperate attempt to find one, then it’s clearly a fringe case. All the replies are making a huge logical leap of simply saying happy worker produces better product with no reasoning behind it. Unions never argue for better product. That’s just not what unions do. It argues for the betterment of workers.
Unionizing increases productivity for some sectors. But they’re usually rare and only seen in specific industries. They generally have no significant impact on productivity based on research. If it straight up increased productivity and made better products, every company would love it. The argument is counter-logical. Companies do what is efficient. Even if we assumed individual productivity is increased, there’s still no evidence that these individuals would have the capacity to change the direction in which the product is being made in the upper tier.
We need unions. But unions aren’t magic.
Almost every tech company functions in this manner today.
Modern tech cycle is basically keep operating at a loss to increase userbase. And then one of the 3 scenarios happen. 1. Most obvious, they run out of investor money and make drastic unpopular changes to make profit as seen here. 2. Sell company to an even bigger tech company, who will then most likely kill it too. 3. Become google/meta/etc. themselves, which is the least likely scenario.
Cost them more? I don’t think people realize Unity’s been working at a loss every year since the beginning, burning investor money. Just shutting down is quite frankly more profitable than continuing as is.
Sorry, this is wrong.
As a general statement: No, I am not. You’re making an over specific scenario to make it true. Sure, if I take 1 image and train a model just on that one image, it’ll make that exact same image. But that’s no different than me just pressing copy and paste on a single image file. The latter does the job whole lot better too. This entire counter argument is nothing more than being pedantic.
Furthermore, if I’m making such specific instructions to the AI, then I am the one who’s replicating the art. It doesn’t matter if I use a pencil to trace out the existing art, using photoshop, or creating a specific AI model. I am the one who’s doing that.
What gives a human right to learn off of another person without credit? There is no such inherent right.
Even if such a right existed, I as a person who can make AI training, would then have the right to create a tool to assist me in learning, because I’m a person with same rights as anyone else. If it’s just a tool, which it is, then it is not the AI which has the right to learn, I have the right to learn, which I used to make the tool.
I can use photoshop to replicate art a lot more easily than with AI. None of us are going around saying Photoshop is wrong. (Though we did say that before) The AI won’t know any specific art unless it’s an extremely repeated pattern like “mona lisa”. It literally do not have the capacity to contain other people’s art, and therefore it cannot replicate others art. I have already proven that mathematically.
That’s not how AI art works. You can’t tell it to find art and plug it in. It doesn’t have the capability to store or copy existing artworks. It only contains the matrix of vectors which contain concepts. Concepts cannot be copyrighted.
If AI art is stolen data, then every artists on earth are thieves too.
Do you think artists just spontaneously conjure up art? No. Through their entire life of looking at other people’s works, they learned how to do stuff, they emulate and they improve. That’s how human artists come to be. Do you think artists go around asking permission from millions of past artists if they can learn from their art? Do artists track down whoever made the fediverse logo if I want to make a similar shaped art with it? Hell no. Consent in general is impossible too because whole lot of them are likely too dead to give consent be honest. Its the exact same way AI is made.
Your argument holds no consistent logic.
Furthermore, you likely have a misunderstanding of how AI is trained and works. AI models do not store nor copy art that it’s trained on. It studies shapes, concepts, styles, etc. It puts these concepts into matrix of vectors. Billions of images and words are turned into mere 2 gigabytes in something like SD fp16. 2GB is virtually nothing. There’s no compression capable of anywhere near that. So unless you actually took very few images and made a 2GB model, it has no capability to store or copy another person’s art. It has no knowledge of any existing copyrighted work anymore. It only knows the concepts and these concepts like a circle, square, etc. are not copyrightable.
If you think I’m just being pro-AI for the sake of it. Well, it doesn’t matter. Because copyright offices all over the world have started releasing their views on AI art. And it’s unanimously in agreement that it’s not stolen. Furthermore, resulting AI artworks can be copyrighted (lot more complexity there, but that’s for another day).
I agree with all your points. I didn’t intend to imply that dating apps are the only at fault, merely the one that came to my head after reading OPs post.
Slightly in tangent. But I think problem of finding a partner these days is that most of it now happens online, though dating apps. And they are a breeding ground of the most shallow and judgemental viewpoints in human history.
I forget the exact statistics, but according to some dating app, men swipe “yes” to like 60-something percent of the women. Women on the other hand swipe yes to like 4%. At a glance, while that does have a large disparity, you just think… Oh, women are more selective. And I think that’s fine and they should be. But problem is that all other women are selecting the same guys. So the top tier men, whether in looks, height and/or wealth are banging 100s of women. While the bottom majority of men are never getting any matches. From the woman’s perspective, every man they date is a cheater. That’s obvious, these guys have girls lined up as far as the eye can see. They have zero reason to settle with you. From majority of the men’s perspective, they never get any matches or get constantly ghosted and get angry. Majority of men don’t cheat, frankly they don’t even have the opportunity to cheat.
Men get angry at incredibly high standard of women which keep rising since women doesn’t have problem sleeping with men higher in social ladder, albeit briefly. And women get angry at incredibly high number of guys who are just there for sex and have no interest in you as a person.
In real life, you see people first, build an understanding about them and start consider dating. If you know that guy is a cheater, a woman wouldn’t pick them. A guy could go up and get to know them instead in dating app world where seemingly every woman ghosts you.
I think dating apps are ruining the “finding a partner” problem.
I’m sorry to hear that you’ve faced hardship. But if you don’t learn to feel empathy towards others, you’re going to continue to live in hate. Your continued hate towards men and men’s issues are not going to make you a better person and you will die alone. And you might be fine with that. Your pedophile father is not a men’s health issue. He’s just a shithead. Your CEO sexually assaulting you is not a men’s health issue. He’s just a shithead. Everyone dislikes them. Men and women.
Also, people are learning. The result of that learning is people learned to stop interacting with the other gender more. Men just don’t talk to women anymore on workplaces for fear of backlash. And if there are very small number of women is said workspace, they feel isolated because men don’t want to deal with potential behavior like yours. More and more people are just choosing to be single from both genders.
The fact that there is asymmetry in genders will always exist. And frankly, I don’t think there can be complete equality, I think that’s neither attainable or desirable. Are we going to start demanding 50% of construction workers need to be women too? Are we going to try to have 50% quota of people in prison be a woman? That’s insane, right? The best we can do is to empathize as much as possible with all other humans and understand both men’s issues and women’s issues. Validating a men’s issue doesn’t devalue a women’s. You are being an unempathatic whataboutist because you feel your issues are more important to you. We are not saying your problems didn’t exist nor should we not try to do our best to solve future issues of that nature. All problems should be fixed the best we can.
If you can’t empathize with men’s problems. The men who face these issues will refuse to empathize with women’s problems. That’s how relationships between any sets work. It’s a two way street. You’re working to create a segregated sets instead of trying to find the middle ground. You’re actually directly working against your own goals by being like this.
At that point, it probably starts costing steam more money in support agents.