cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/49263187
Tim Sweeney claims it’s a “Scarlet Letter” which makes players “try to kill the game”
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney has criticised rival Valve for forcing studios to disclose when they use AI in game development.
Epic recently showed how it was integrating AI into Unreal Engine 6.
Time Sweeney said:
“If you want to launch a game, and get it as widely publicized as possible, you’ve got to put it on Steam so people can wish list it, and if you want to play it on Steam, then you have to get this Scarlet Letter of AI attached to your product, and now there is a hater community trying to kill the game.
“I think it’s really irresponsible of Valve. They shouldn’t do it, because it makes it much, much, much harder for a game developer to have a chance of success. You have to choose from either not using tools that can make you way more productive, and probably failing due to competition that does.”
Which is totally ignoring the factor that the user should know about the purchase it makes and be able to decide for themselves. Transparency for the player is not a bad thing.
Copying isn’t stealing, and learning or training on public information certainly isn’t. Your argument based on a vast expansion of what is “intellectual property” is disgusting and moronic and dangerous.
If generative AI can generate useful work, who gets to profit from it? That is the only question since AI is inevitable. But you’re arguing that only capitalists and large companies that can afford to “license” this new form of intellectual property may profit. I’m saying AI should be open source, and the ability to make use of this cheaper generative work should be able to be used by all for free.
Or, these shitty ai companies could pay creators a small amount to use their content for training. What is the problem with that?
There is no incentive for anyone to create original content anymore if AI will just steal it. Id argue that is dangerous
Good luck with your Nvidia shares …
Don’t even bring open source into this. Open source isn’t about stealing work mate. It’s about sharing it. And very few people consent to ai using their data. I know it copied a huge amount of data from our own website, despite the copyrights on it.
The people who generally want this are generally people who don’t contribute much of value that AI will steal
It’s logistically impossible, and economically non viable. The AI companies are a bubble that will soon burst. And then consolidate and monopolize.
But you want to ban all open source / weight AI models that ever possibly trained or learned from public information. You want to monopolize and give the AI companies ultimate power and control over AI, by creating the legal framework to make models never free.
Copyright covers reproduction, not learning. Books, articles, comments are all public information.