It was a bad demo. I solved every “puzzle” near instantly except the robot, where I didn’t realize the arm had to be on a specific side. The demo was basically the story prologue and intro tutorial, but then it stops without ever giving you a proper puzzle. It didn’t do a good job of showing depth in its mechanics. Each puzzle has a single correct obvious solution. I wanted to optimise, but that single solution doesn’t give anything to work with. Forget single solution though, most levels are a single part. I get that they’re introducing new parts, but you’re allowed to what you’ve already taught even when introducing new mechanics. The lack of interaction between parts is a large part of what makes it seem so shallow. It makes me question if the dev even knows how they interact.

I didn’t mind the story at first, but it overstayed its welcome. Your “less is more” is an excellent way of putting it.

Hopefully the full game will be better, but I’m not counting on it.

You guys are the best. Thanks for the warm welcome back.

This post was actually how I learned slrpnk.net was back online.

Citogenesis in action

This is going to be harsh at first but bear with me. The reason you’re being treated like an NPC is because you’re acting like one. You copied that answer directly from ChatGPT, and from what I can tell didn’t put any original thought into it.

You didn’t make that post, ChatGPT did and you let it use your name. I want to hear from YOU, the person who poured their effort into a post explaining themself and sharing their life experiences with us. It makes me happy that there’s other people I can connect and relate to about the struggles in life. That’s what I want from Lemmy. If I wanted pure information, I’d get an RSS reader. I want to hear how people’s thoughts and insights relate to their experiences.

I don’t know what the role of AI should be. I recognize that AI often gets things right, but it also hallucinates with great confidence. I also have no way to prove if you or anybody else truly has a cousin that works in tungsten alloy. I do think there’s an inherent value in human anecdotes. They tell you about the person and can spark followup discussion. I could ask you about the tungsten alloy second hand market, and you might have an interesting story about how rich people love to flaunt giant blocks of tungsten, but then get bored and sell them. Those stories have value to me.

I also recognize that AI can be a ton of fun to spit ideas with, but it’s not good on its own. Your ideas are what drives it. If you asked it for a estimate for if it was made of a titanium alloy as well, now you’ve added a bit of your own ideas to the discussion. We can build on that and discuss the merits of tungsten vs titanium. The questions you choose to ask is at least one way to express your individuality.

The Lemmy community will gradually decide over time what the role of AI is. Right now, a lot of us fiercely attack any signs of AI in hopes of defending the human element. I’m sorry you were yelled at, and you don’t deserve to be treated like that. I respect your openness and the fact that you took time to write your reply.

I hope you’ve found some value in my response and it connects to you on some level. I hope you continue to practice theater and it brings you joy.

https://xkcd.com/978/ The problem is that a lazy answer builds credibility for a source or fact. You may try to disclaim that it’s unreliable, but the mere act of suggesting an answer implies your own support for it.

“I’ve heard there’s studies that suggest vaccines cause autism.” is a lazy answer to the question of vaccine safety that ignores the complicated nature of academic research. What it does do is build consensus. Over time, that lazy answer repeated gets you to state where a lot of people doubt the safety of vaccines.

I realize we all live busy lives and nobody has time to research things in great depth. Some people barely research major purchase decisions. What people are trying to communicate here is that an AI answer has very low credibility along the lines of “my uncle who works at Nintendo”.

We don’t need you to act as a human interface for ChatGPT. If you want to use ChatGPT, use it as a starting point for your own research. Ask it questions like “Where could I find information on this topic?” and go from there. Of course, that’s a lot of work; but you can always choose not to post.

If you have life experiences that give you insight into a topic, or you did research and found a good source; please comment and share your insights. They add value to the conversation and it’s why most of us are here.

I don’t know how you would go about banning parties. You would have to ban almost all forms of cooperation.

I agree with Madison that you can’t treat the causes of factionalism, you can only mitigate its effects. Madison argued a large government with many members makes it harder for one faction to seize a majority.

Unfortunately, the founding fathers fucked up bad when they chose first-past-the-post/plurality as the voting system. Social choice theory shows that plurality voting will naturally gravitate towards a two party system. No third party can get a single toe in the door because of the spoiler effect. Plurality’s only benefit is its simplicity, everything else about it is somewhere between bad and horrifying.

The lollipop really completes the bit.

We just got vertical align last month. There’s so many things they should be working on but are too busy trying to add more ads or monetization features.

I think the web is just too long in the tooth at this point but there’s nothing we can do.

Red sea urchin. Long life and limb regeneration.

I don’t want to turn back into a baby like those who chose the immortal jellyfish.