Agreed it was bad timing but yeah other companies have been charging more for games for years, calling it a "complete edition" or whatever, and locking people out of content of they don't pay the full price. But eh it is what it is.
You are being willfully ignorant if you think Sony has got the same negativity Nintendo has been getting recently. I have seen comments calling Nintendo a cancer on the gaming industry, calling for them to go bankrupt, etc. You can't pretend Nintendo doesn't get an undue amount of heat when they misstep. My headcanon is that the discrepancy is mostly due to 13 year olds in their edgy phase but it's still real.
This is not an argument against fair use, but against abuses of the fair use system. Everyone should be for reforming the system in such a way that it is not abused in this way, but that does not mean that we cannot implement a similar system for AI abuses.
I would assume those would fall under fair use of some kind, but you're right that those fair use laws would need some scrutiny before implementing this. I'm still cautiously optimistic about it, but yeah if I was a lawmaker I'd be thinking hard about the potential misuses of it for sure.
Because sycophants keep saying it's going to take these jobs, eventually real scientists/researchers have to come in and show why the sycophants are wrong.
Gamergate people always say this but I've never seen their actual complaints about games journalism. I did see them getting pissy about people like Anita Sarkeesian discussing feminism in games, though.
Again, you're being reductive. My argument is not that we will stop practising critical thinking altogether, but that we will not need to practise it as often. Less practise always makes you worse at something. I do not need evidence for that as it is obvious.
I don't see a point to continuing this conversation if you keep reducing my argument to "nobody will think anymore".
I am glad you use AI for reasons that don't make you stupid, but I have seen how today's students are using it instead of using their brains. It's not good. We teach critical thinking in schools for a reason, because it's something that does not always come naturally, and these students are getting AI to do the work for them instead of learning how to think.
The people who were used to the oral tradition were right. Memorising things is good for your memory. No, I don't think people will stop thinking altogether (please don't be reductive like this lmao), just as people didn't stop remembering things. But people did get worse at remembering things. Just as people might get worse at applying critical thinking if they continually offload those processes to AI. We know that using tools makes us worse at whatever the tool automates, because without practice you become worse at things. This just hasn't really been a problem before as the tools generally make those things obselete.
You don't think it's possible that offloading thought to AI could make you worse at thinking? Has been the case with technology in the past, such as calculators making us worse at math (in our heads or on paper), but this time the thing you're losing practice in is... thought. This technology is different because it's aiming to automate thought itself.
My first laptop was an Ubuntu machine with no battery when I was 4. I had no idea what Linux was, I just played the games my uncle had pre-loaded onto it.
It does, it's completely anonymised tho, and they pull in results from Yahoo and other sources (even Yandex). So while they do use the Bing API their results can be pretty vastly different from Bing's.
Agreed it was bad timing but yeah other companies have been charging more for games for years, calling it a "complete edition" or whatever, and locking people out of content of they don't pay the full price. But eh it is what it is.