this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
94 points (95.2% liked)

Fuck AI

2161 readers
122 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Procedural is still based off of seeds and can be recreated on any machine with the same seed.

I think the point would be to have truly random generated maps.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

AI still uses random seeds like other procedural algorithms.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

They could generate random seeds as it’s being generated making it truly random.

With AI the same input will not always return the same result, unless asking for a black and white answer that is.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Surely the random seed should be considered a necessary part of the input, no?

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

If you want repeatable results, the point would for it to not be repeatable, every thing would be unique.

What would be the point of making a game if someone could just repeat it with reverse engineering some seeds?

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

People love swapping Minecraft seeds because it allows them to share unique experiences. Like if something really cool generated, other people will want to see that thing happen!

To deny players this would be a huge error - seed hunting is a non-trivial community engagement factor.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Okay, and this is attempting to do something different, being truly random.

Both can exist, no?

Lots of games that use procedural generation don’t have public seeds or a way to input them sometimes, so there’s plenty of precedence that people want the opposite too.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

You don't want truly random, whatever that means to you. 99.9999'% of what randomness produces would be unplayable noise. Nowhere near anything a human would consider fun, engaging, or even interesting at all. The gaming marketing world went already through this discussion. Random generation without human intervention does not create fun games.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Random generation without human intervention does not create fun games.

Well arguably that’s the point of having the AI, it establishes what’s good and what’s not while still being random.

It’s the human element dude.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

AI is not human. And don't call me dude.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

And neither is procedural generation, so what’s your point then? They’re trying to make something truly random, no need to shit on it just because you’re biased against AI in general or don’t understand the point.

I bet you rely on spellcheck and auto correct don’t you…? That’s not humans either, yet it’s acceptable. Hypocrite.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Best genAI could do is a wave collapse algorithm where words could control some parameters, but is a dumb idea.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Good thing this isn’t generative Ai then.