erin

You and my girlfriend both!

I don’t know what specific issue the image is referring to, but there are often vehement disagreements over relatively small differences in design. Look up the history of spinosaurid research if you want some grade-A science beef.

Oh, delightful! I’m not exactly sure how 2026 is gonna give me sloppy head but I’m looking forward to finding out.

It’s part of an overall system that protects the Haves from the Have-Nots. I consider it evil.

I am an artist who is VERY anti-IP law. The system as it exists is evil and does far more harm than good. IP is not some holy grail that deserves protection when it can be so easily abused. I would rather have no IP law than the current system, but I’ll settle for reforms.

We’re the same flavor of queer! I do the exact same thing. Easier than needing to clarify several different identities to the curious but well-intentioned cis-straight person I’m talking to.

I personally am really sick of frame generation and scaling being the only way modern games are playable. The graphical improvements are minor, but the performance cost is enormous. Your average person shouldn’t need to buy a GPU worth as much as a used car just to squeeze out average performance. Scaling and frame generation are never seamless, and it can’t create information where none exists. Especially in PvP games, I’ve noticed how much worse the graphical fidelity is with distant targets or people peaking around corners. I’d genuinely rather play the game at a lower framerate or resolution than be losing vital information in my computers attempt to make sense of the handful of pixels representing the gun of my opponent peeking the corner, and turning it into a blurry section of wall instead.

In singleplayer games it’s not as bad, but I have found that a game that isn’t chasing perfect true-to-life graphics but has a gorgeous art direction looks far better to me personally. I’m just sick of AAA and tired of having my super computer from 4 years ago struggle with the latest releases in native resolution. Slightly more realistic lighting and realistic hair and cloth simulation are not nearly as important to me as good performance and visual style.

The studio was very upfront and honest with their usage, and never tried to pass it off as anything else. We shouldn’t let reactionarism overtake logic. Ethical applications of AI should be our friends, because when they succeed, it shows all the bad actors that their way isn’t going to win. Lashing out at anything “AI” just for existing helps no one.

TL;DR: This application of AI is arguably novel and ethical, and reactionary takes dunking on some of the only ethical usage in the AI world hurt our cause in the long run.

Correct me if I’m wrong, the game only uses TTS trained on the voice actors for the characters, who gave their consent and were paid for their labor, right? I feel like of all the applications of generative AI, that is not really the hill I want to die on. The game certainly is not unartistic, and this is one of the few cases where AI was used in a novel way where the voice actors are still paid and credited, and now the characters can respond to things in world far more dynamically. Otherwise callouts would have to be pretty generic, as there are just too many locations and combinations of phrases to record.

I feel like we, as those members of the public that oppose generative AI’s wasteful use of power and water and the general watering down of human creativity, get really caught up over the use of “AI” in a very reactionary sense. We’ve used TTS, and TTS in games for decades. This is just the newest form of that, and done far more ethically than I suspect a larger studio might have. The voice actors gave them tons of lines and locations, and the TTS mashes those lines together to create very specific callouts. They were paid, and consented. AI is not inherently evil, it’s a technology, and it’s how we use those technologies that determines the ethics of the situation. Using the voices of paid voice actors that consented to that specific use is ethical in my opinion.

I’m very much opposed to the AI bubble and the invasion of AI into my life in so many ways that are unhelpful and dystopian, but it really bothers me to see reactionary behavior from other members of the anti-AI community. We should be opposed to AI wasting power and water and being used to dilute art and media, or deceive us. This just isn’t that. There is an argument to be made that this is a slippery slope towards less ethical applications, but the slippery slope is a well known fallacy for a reason. AI, just like the internet after the .com bubble, will find legitimate and useful applications. We’re in a very speculative phase of way too many (very invasive) applications of AI being shoved down our throats, and I totally understand resentment, but keep it rational. We shouldn’t be dunking on one of the few applications in the space that is choosing a novel and ethical route. It’s overall just going to hurt us in the long run.

There are a lot of 40k fans, me included, who are very antifascist. The game has a large queer audience and many fans who enjoy the grimdark aspects of the setting as a cautionary tale. Anyone that knows anything about 40k knows that there are no “good” guys, and that everything sucks for everyone but a few in power. That’s the appeal. It’s a universe where everything is awful all the time and trillions of lives are wasted, and yet stories of compassion and hope can still arise in the middle of it (even though they’re ultimately fruitless). I personally refuse to monetarily support GW but enjoy the setting in other ways. There will always be those that don’t get it and glorify the evil unironically. We just make fun of them and move on.

Intelligence is an inherited trait?

Some may. Others make art. Generalizing artists as a monolith is irresponsible.

What a weird technicality to get caught up on. Disintegrate destroys wall of force. RAI over RAW any day. It makes absolutely no sense that you can’t shoot a disintegrate wherever you want. If you’re so worried about the wall being invisible, then target something behind the wall. It’s a ray, and it hits the wall, and both spells explicitly say the wall is destroyed. Disintegrate also explicitly can target walls of force, even though it has the “target you can see” caveat. If a player tries to use the explicit counter to wall of force against it and you catch them on a technicality, you’re harming the collaborative story.

Don’t exploit poor wording when the intent of both spells is clear. No one wants a DM rules lawyer.

Oh god please don’t eat horse chestnuts. Eat regular, non-poisonous chestnuts.

Thanks for the clarification! That all makes sense to me.

I’m not exactly well-read on particle physics, but to my understanding neutrons and neutrinos are neutrally charged and electrons are negatively charged. Why does a proton break down into net-negatively charged particles? I assume some weird quark shenanigans.

Oh right, straight sex. Duh. I suppose there are reversible surgical options to prevent conception, but I imagine most people don’t do that. Completely slipped my mind that sex can result in children because of how that has never affected me, despite my wife and I joking about trying to get each other pregnant all the time.

Getting tested is easy and usually free. I get tested just for the hell of it every time I see my endocrinologist. Seems like most people I meet for hookups also get tested relatively frequently. It’s just way easier when you can show a potential partner a recent health report.

If you’re exclusive and both have no STDs, why not?

No, it’s a tort. A crime is a criminal offense. A tort is a civil offense. Both are illegal, meaning against the law, but whether that is civil or criminal law is the distinction.