Didn’t EA go to court with Sega over exactly this? I believe the court said using a trademark as a device to prevent access to a device was not applicable.
It works…ish. GPT4 is pretty good at detecting what it wrote but I was able to get a false positive with the United States constitution. Or maybe we can go deeper and say maybe it was AI generated?
So if you submitted the US Constitution word for word for your assignment you wouldn't expect the cheating detector to flag it? How isn't this flagrant plagiarism?
An AI detector is basically a plagiarism detector trained on AI datasets. Fundamentally it's about discovering writing that is too similar to existing writing, which is why I'm concerned about false positives.
Yeah, which is why "AI detection" is crap. It's basically the plagiarism detector with the false-positive dampening turned off. (I know, I know, it may not be exactly that under the hood, but I think that's what it amounts to in practice).
I think you and I agree. I'm just saying that the "AI wrote this" flag on something that's notoriously not AI-written should be enough to reject outright the use of these detectors.
Like a mechanic who warns me that my Tesla doesn't have a muffler. They're technically correct, but I wouldn't trust them to diagnose anything in the future.
I would invert that question and ask what, to you, would qualify as being sufficiently new that it doesn’t have? To me, there are tons of things. The death / checkpoint system, weapon durability, the massive non-linear open world, the recipe system, the puzzle dungeons, the fact that, if you want to, you can essentially go challenge the final boss immediately. If these things aren’t new enough, I have to wonder what is.
Most of those things have been fairly common elements of games for decades? For example "puzzle dungeons" is just a staple of Zelda as a franchise, there's a whole genre of games designed around being able to rush the final boss as quickly as possible even though there's plenty of other content to explore (Metroidvanias), and I can't even think of anything particularly remarkable about BotW's death/checkpoint system other than that it's fairly generous with the autosaves.
My point is these are new for a Zelda game, and they've put them together in a complete package in a way that's not been done before. If the bar is "something no game has ever done before," it's rare that anything in life is ever going to reach that bar.
Even if you take a completely different profession, like music, revolutionary artists still have their influences and build on instruments and techniques that are 99.9% the same. It's not like they are suddenly playing flutes made out of loaves of bread. And even if they were, most of the time those sorts of things just come across as gimmicks to me.
I'm surprised to see "Metroidvania" described as a genre where you can rush the boss quickly. Neither of the two defining games that name the genre, (Super) Metroid or Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, allow you to reach the final boss without having explored a substantial amount of the world map and collected the majority of available upgrades. Both games do have low% and any% speedruns that skip a lot of stuff, but those require the use of glitches. Do you have an example of a game you're thinking of?
Neither low% nor any% speedruns of Super Metroid or Castlevania: SotN require the use of glitches. From personal experience, Super Metroid is beatable with less than 20% completion without using any glitches at all. Sequence breaking is not a glitch (which is an actual bug).
But also Hollow Knight, Salt and Sanctuary and Axiom Verge are some pre-BotW games that I've personally played where you can rush the credits without experiencing a significant portion of the game once you've gotten out of the early game.
shout out to Chrono Trigger and Super Mario World which, while not metroidvanias, have the same "rush the final objective once you can with minimum exploration" vibe that many of them have.
I see what you mean, but in order to win Super Metroid you still have to beat all the bosses to open Tourian, and the same with the five bosses you need to beat to get to Dracula in SOTN. In BOTW, once you're off the Plateau, you can literally walk directly to Ganon. And, like you mention, being able to skip a substantial chunk of the game to get to the final boss is as present (if not more so) in other genres; it's been in Mario since the NES!
The days of tuning software have changed. In the past, these systems were indecipherable and had no good profiling or debugging tools, so they came with a lot of hardware connected which allowed you to profile and tune and debug.
If you wanted to profile PS2 code, for example, the way you did that was with a gigantic logic analyzer connected to various traces at Sony's labs. We used their Redwood City lab. You'd give Sony instrumented code, and they'd do some kind of secret magic on it and run it on this instrumented PS3, and a few days later, you get a profile! Downside, this thing is incredibly complex, but on the upside, you had little performance penalty for profiling. Later, these kinds of tools came built into dev kits.
For the PS3, programming the Cell was quite difficult and so you had to do lots of tuning. The single PPC core (called the PPU) was really slow, so you had to offload what you could to the SPE's, which were incredibly fast on floating point math, but it was on you to interleave DMA and computation in a way to get good utilization of them. The Dev kits had tools to give you visibility into this.
Programming on a laptop only requires the laptop, as you've got all the tools you need in the OS. Only apple does debugging at the board level.
Because Apple don’t release low-level dev tools externally? I’m sure there are some wonderful frankensteins in their labs, but they have less of a need to release them externally.
I believe the question has always been causation or correlation. Do people with schizophrenia use marijuana to self medicate or does marijuana cause schizophrenia. Apparently from this study it’s the later.
ive been playing with it locally in the hopes of a model that allows for commercial use. at my job if i had a model I could run in the cloud and just wrap a REST service around I could think of a ton of ways to use it both internally and externally.
Thanks! If ChatGPT can be used commercially and it successfully passed SOC3 cert, wouldn't you still want to use those non - chatgpt models?
Also, you hint at those many ideas, could you elaborate on that a bit? I'll be playing with LLMs in near future, might as well do something useful with them
my concern with using chatgpt is PII. If I host the LLM and set it up that it doesn't record any of the interactions besides some weird meta data and sign that in a contract i bet a bunch of my clients would like to use my LLM. especially if I can train it on internal documentation that they can't/won't send to a big third party like chatgpt. im one throat to choke and i already have their PII so i think its a good fit.
without getting into too much detail my job supports business to people interactions. my use case is training the LLM to assist the business agents. if it can give real time information that's helpful to the agent while causally listening to the conversation thats a pretty big game changer. also i want to use it for staffing decisions since it can view historic data and make recommendations for the future.
