Quoting: AlveKattI have a feeling this isn't an LLM but an actual specialized AI system. The companies keep conflating different machine learning cases to drive their AGI narrative.

It's LLM, and might be nothing special, just marketing as usual: https://www.flyingpenguin.com/the-boy-that-cried-mythos-verification-is-collapsing-trust-in-anthropic/ [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: SzkodnixToday I won't believe anyone 😁

If it's a joke from the RPi Foundation, it's a really bad one.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Really loving this 🤣:

Lots of cosmetic improvements (so the game plays as you remember it, not as it actually played).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: doragasuI hope SquareEnix continues the trend and removes Denuvo from the latest "Paranormasight" soon. I really enjoyed the first one and was surprised when I found out this has Denuvo (first one hadn't).

Quoting myself, guess what, SE has removed Denuvo from the latest Paranormasight! Time to buy!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

If this continues this trend, it will be like that camera app that didn't use the camera, just grabbed the GPS location and used generative AI to get an image of the place you were pointing at.

If I was a Capcom artist that had worked in the game and saw that image, I would be coughing blood.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

We can **trust** in the rare occasion you mess something, you will do whatever it takes to correct it. I prefer one gazillion times all the messes you could make than a perfectly sounding pile of slop I will never **trust**, done with a tool made to exploit the people with less resources and accelerate this planet doom.

Thanks for GoL!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

There are several critiques that can be made from different angles.

* From the "I just want to get things done" perspective, using these tools might or might not make sense. All rigorous studies I have seen state the productivity increase for experienced devs is negligible when not negative, and it comes at a high cost (loss of codebase understanding, cognitive decline...). But well, there's lots of people telling it helps them a lot, that people doesn't know how to use it, that Claude 4.6 is really the thing and earlier models were shit, etc. So I will give it the benefit of the doubt even if I'm not convinced at all.
* From the code license/copyright perspective, using these tools is a legal minefield. There's already a USA judicial sentence saying generative AI outputs cannot be copyrighted. And on top of that, there are several studies demonstrating how all LLM "frontier models" can output entire copyrighted books almost verbatim. How can you guarantee Claude is not outputting code from other software project with a non compatible license?
* From the ethical perspective, is when using these tools is without a doubt very very wrong, I have said it several times and will repeat it again: **there is no ethical use case for generative AI**. For these tools to be somehow effective at what they do, they need to suck tons of resources (energy, chips, raw materials) and data, most of it copyrighted/licensed. The generative AI craze is causing a massive resource hoarding by a handful companies (that want you to own nothing and rent everything from them), is feeding a gargantuan bubble that is leading to an economic collapse, is accelerating climate collapse (with so many countries backing off their environmental compromises because of the AI craze), is actively being used to kill people (yes, Anthropic tools are also used actively for this, Amodei has always said he is OK with using Claude for war, he only backed of two very specific points: completely autonomous weapons and mass surveillance, but he is completely OK with everything else, including using Claude to select targets to bomb).

You might want to get things done, risk the legal issues and don't mind the ethical aspects and then use these Generative AI tools. But don't try reasoning Generative AI tools are ethical, they are not. And don't forget Lutris is a tool for GNU/Linux users. Maybe most Windows/macos users don't mind that much, but many of us in the GNU/Linux community are here because we care about ethics. So it should not be that difficult understanding you will get pushback when writing GNU/Linux applications using unethical tools and procedures.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: eggroleIf the AI generated code can't be found without labelling it, what is the problem?

If the code was crap or buggy and you could reasonably sniff it out that would make sense. But if the only way for you to tell if it is AI generated is the person behind it announces it, then the AI code is literally indistinguishable from the human generated code.

If he never labeled the stuff in the first place, no one would have ever noticed or cared.

Quality of code is only one of the concerns. It being generated using the "Torment Nexus" is other in itself, even if the code was immaculate.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Using Generative AI tools to "fix Linux gaming" does not make sense, because Generative AI tools is killing gaming (in Linux and everywhere else) along with many other things, like many tech startups that will have to close because the magnificent 7 are hoarding all resources. And Anthropic is among the culprits here.

He also states the problem is capitalism, but it's difficult imagining this tech would work in a non capitalist heavy scenario, because for models to be effective they have to suck tons and tons of energy and data. Does he want to use AI but not "bad, capitalist AI"? OK, he can buy an RTX6000 Blackwell GPU and train his own model on non copyrighted/licensed code. But good luck getting the GPU at a decent price and getting that model to get the same level of performance as Claude.

He could just said something in the lines "I don't mind ethics, I just want to get things done", and although not OK, that would have been a better response. But his justification does not stand. **There is no ethical use case for Generative AI tech**, because it can only work if you waste enormous amounts of resources and train on tons of copyrighted and licensed work, without giving a shit for that copyright/licenses.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dibzNot all that uncommon of a practice. At least some publishers tend to use things like Denuvo for release date protection, and past that for the initial few weeks of sales (which for most games is the majority of sales/the most important). Then they remove it because it's no longer actually needed in a business sense.

Then you have UbiSoft that does not remove it even for 10+ year old indie games like Scott Pilgrim.

I hope SquareEnix continues the trend and removes Denuvo from the latest "Paranormasight" soon. I really enjoyed the first one and was surprised when I found out this has Denuvo (first one hadn't).

View this comment - View article - View full comments