Why just games? What about the Photoshop clone? Seems like making a derivative of anything should be blocked, but that’s all it can really do in the first place.
Seems like making a derivative of anything should be blocked
So we should get rid of anything in-the-likeness-of? Like Libre Office Writer being in the likeness of Microsoft Word.
Microsoft word was not the first.
I think their point is that it was trained on literally billions of repos and other software written, but because those developers don’t have hundreds of lawyers on retainer with an unlimited budget; their intellectual property rights don’t seem to be a concern to the slopmasters.
@GreenKnight23 @technology Copyright and Patents are only as good as your pockets are deep.
I think that the problem is that big companies have made “an offer they cannot refuse” regarding the problem of AI cloning commercial products.
just a different way of saying the same thing. the slopmasters have zero issue stealing IP when the IP holder can’t defend themselves.
This is sick!
They started with limiting cyber research capabilities, now gaming, within a month… what?
Useless piece of shit. That’s why I use Mistral.
Mistral, please do NOT go that way - I’d have to self-host my AI, and it ain’t cheap :))If that happens, there are many, many providers other than Mistral.
Why not?
God forbid we get our fucking hobbiest programming communities back.
Everyone always says shit like “its okay if games use ai for programming just not art, its not like its something the player interacts directly with anyway.”
Guess what? Programming is a fucking art form, and you literally interact with the code every keystroke.
Code is an art asset, using an LLM to generate it is artistically bankrupt.
That’s a stretch. I know code style can feel like an art form (and in a way, it is), but the results is that matters. No user ever on earth care what the code looks like. Not a single one. It only matters to other engineers, but that’s the same for other trades as well. When was the last time you gave a shit about how your plumbing is routed in your house or apartment? Other plumbers sure as shit do. But you or I? Don’t give two shits just want hot water and good pressure.
Abso-fucking-lutely-not it isn’t.
Art is anything made by a sentient being with the intent of making you feel or think something.
I can write software in a way that makes you feel or think, especially when it comes to interacting with games.
Just because you don’t respect the art form, doesn’t mean the rest of us don’t.
I once asked Claude to check the app it vibecoded for security flaws and it didn’t want to do it.
It literally told me to look up some basic security principles and do it myself.
I hook mine up to some classical static analysys tools like sonar or codacy. Just ask it to remove the security findings and haven’t had an issue. Then again, been on vacation while all this shit has happened, so don’t know what to expect when I return.
It literally told me to look up some basic security principles and do it myself.
I think that seems like excellent advice!
you want vibe coded apps with basic diy security principles?
Yeah their anti-hacking protections are over eager. Ask it to find bugs instead, or reasons we shouldnt deploy yet.
The legitimate developers I know aren’t hit by Claude restrictions, because they don’t fucking use it.
Gotta say… The Playstation debacle and resulting backlash has somewhat changed my mind on AI as a coding tool.
I still don’t like it, ethically and economically, but if “they” are going to use it to cut costs and punch down, then we can use it to invalidate them and punch up.
I doubt it will make the next great game or piece of software, but it can absolutely let us take a ps5 exclusive and run it on a PC.
Again, we still need actual developers who know what and why they do what they do, same with artists… but enabling a home-brew hobbyist to put mario kart in skyrim or whatever is pretty neat. Just wish it didn’t seem to require clear cutting a forest.
Linus Torvalds uses it. I’d consider him a legitimate developer.
“was legitimate”
Ftfy
C’mon Claude, don’t do us that way!
That’s the problem when you don’t own
You’re never going to own an industrial scale datacenter
True, because it will be ours,
Whether or not they belive it.
Hilarious
“Give us all your code for free who cares about copyright anyway”
“NOOOO YOU CANT USE OUR PRODUCT TO GET FRE CODE 😡😡😡”
It belongs in the trash. We’re going to look back on these large LLMs like we look at the milkman
Like they might actually be our real father?
No like they mix cum in their product
Back when you were nothing but a glint in the milkman’s eye.
Boycott Anthropic.
In Soviet America, Anthropic Boycott You!
AI exists to aid capital against you; not aid you against capital.
AI exists to devalue human labour.
I can only talk about software developers, but there it’s fucking pants on head to fire developers. It only makes sense if you don’t have any competitors.
More than 50% of software projects fail either because they run over time or over budgetl, but for obvious reason both. So you get this tool that increase your output, let’s say 10x. Does that mean that you can fire 9/10 developers? What does your competitors do? If they retain their developers they can smoke your company in months.
This assumes 10x the features at 2/3 the quality is a winning bet
The quality doesn’t matter. Look at a product like netsuite which dominates corporate accounting. It’s a total piece of shit. And overpriced one at that. But it has oracle in the name, so an executive can choose it with little thought and not take any blame because it was a “reasonable” choice that “everyone” uses. Much of corporate life is monkey see monkey do. Rarely does innovation happen because trying something different is a huge risk to some middle manager or execute that is just trying to make it to the next promotion or bonus.
Maybe your are right, software that checks all the boxes wins b2b deals even if it is a peice of shit
The reason a lot of these enterprises are looking to offload developers is because they see AI as accelerating their workforce. These businesses are doing the same thing as they were before, but with AI, which means they don’t have enough workload to justify having that many people on anymore (as long as they are using AI workloads). If one developer with AI can do the work of 3 to 10 developers without AI the logic is that they can have their developer headcount and still be ahead.
Not that I agree with what they’re doing, but this is the logic behind it.
I suspect we’ll see these features opened up for US-allied actors against their foreign competitors.
You can guarantee US auto companies are going to be free to reverse engineer software and manufacturing techniques of Chinese companies, for instance.
But you’re not going to be allowed to use Grok or Meta to hack your Tesla or BMW, pull out the OS, clone it as freeware, and offer a substitute unconstrained by subscription fees and gated upgrades.
Yet another absolutely fascinating comment section. Let me try to understand what is happening here.
Are some of you upset because Claude can no longer do this? Were you perfectly happy with AI being used to decompile games and circumvent Sony’s PlayStation ecosystem when it was being used to stick it to a major corporation? But now that Anthropic has decided to prohibit this particular use of its technology, suddenly AI is terrible again? Suddenly it devalues human labor, which, incidentally, isn’t really what is happening here. In many instances, it eliminates the need for that labor altogether.
Then there are those arguing that only AI companies should be allowed to do these things, rather than independent individuals. Which is, quite frankly, a ridiculous argument. Companies have every right to dictate how their products and services are used, particularly when we’re talking about a proprietary service like Claude. You don’t own Claude. You don’t purchase the underlying technology. It belongs to Anthropic, and Anthropic gets to establish the terms under which it is made available.
So which is it? Do you oppose AI on principle, or do you only oppose it when it doesn’t serve your particular interests? Is AI the enemy of human creativity and labor, except when it’s being used to accomplish something you personally want?
I’d appreciate a little consistency from this user base. Surely that’s not too much to ask.
The user base isn’t homogenous
I like that Claude can jailbreak consoles and decomp and port games quickly. These are projects that are cool, have utility, are obnoxiously difficult and or tedious, and exclusively unpaid. Is it better if some super coder does it all? Probably, but the unpaid bit means progress is painfully slow and limited to people doing passion projects. But is it also cool I can play a bunch of retro games natively on basically any platform and then jailbreak a ps5 to run Linux and steam? Yes
I will admit that it is possible I need to make my position a little clearer. The vast majority of comments on this platform are overwhelmingly critical of AI in other posts, yet many of those same people were praising it when it was being used to decompile video games and jailbreak the PS5.
I am simply, once again, pointing out the two-faced nature of this platform. My gripe, if you will, is consistency. If you hate AI, then hate it for everything it does, including the things that might actually be beneficial. It’s convenient to play both sides and act as a devil’s advocate when it suits your position, but ultimately, that’s a useless and self-defeating stance.
If you’re going to take a centrist position on AI, then do that. Praise it where it deserves praise and criticize it where it deserves criticism. But don’t turn around and say you hate everything about AI in one breath, only to make an exception when it happens to serve your interests.
So which is it?
Multiple things can be true at once, or change their status and realization as the world revolves. Very few facts get the honour of remaining as true axioms.
Is AI the enemy of human creativity and labor, except when it’s being used to accomplish something you personally want?
It’s the enemy of human creativity and labour, even when it’s being used to accomplish something I personally want. But if as you say, I don’t get to choose how the technology is used, then there is good moral reason to not be glad when its action happens to align with your intent. After all, we are glad for fair weather every once in a while.
May I remind you also that the worker class were quite certainly not the owners of the pitchforks and guillotines with which they rebelled against their oppressors.
Claude rests on a foundation of open source contributions hoovered up with license files sent to /dev/null. The unexpected positive we had for a little while was that maybe it could pry open the walled gardens of applications (conincidentally also built atop the same open source contributions). But it wasn’t to be, only big corporations get to use this benefit.
But they’re not. Big corporations aren’t decompiling games, modifying them, and then distributing them for free. They’re not even doing it for profit.
In a grand act of irony, they stopped potential copyright infringement involving the very games being decompiled and redistributed.
My complaint, and the point I’m calling out, is that people on this platform will praise technology when it’s convenient for them, only to throw it under the bus when it becomes convenient to do so. Even when, in this particular instance, the technology provider technically did the right thing by putting a stop to the activity. Although, no doubt, this was prompted by pressure from Sony, Rockstar, and other concerned parties.
The usual fallacy of treating the comment section as if it were a unified single opinion.
Also, false dichotomy. There’s plenty of other options, some of which make a lot more sense.
Your first comment, accusing me of treating the comment section as one unified opinion, is a straw man. It is significantly easier to defend an argument when you change it entirely, rather than address what I actually said. I was arguably addressing the comment section as a collective, not suggesting that every individual held the exact same opinion. Your response demonstrates that you either misunderstand or are misusing the term logical fallacy.
Your second statement is pure nonsense for the same reason. You clearly don’t understand what a false dichotomy is. I didn’t introduce a dichotomy or present two mutually exclusive positions. I simply asked a question: which is it?
Please stop throwing around logical fallacies when you don’t understand what they mean. It derails the conversation entirely. Instead of addressing the substance of my argument, you’ve changed the discussion into an argument about whether I understand logical fallacies. Worse, you’ve completely avoided addressing the actual point I was making. That’s precisely the kind of diversion that prevents any meaningful discussion.
o… it can still do this. if you pay for the super premium (hidden) tier
My take on it is that AI has been thrusted into everyone’s face without need or want and with no consideration to original content developers that the AI was trained on. There then became a use case where it allowed access to previously locked down corporate products. Within the span of weeks, this access has now been blocked /removed. This highlights that corporations will always protect corporations (AI didn’t give a shit about creative commons). When individuals push back the response is “suck it up, you should appreciate it” when it impacts a corporations bottom line or IP then there’s immediate changes. This forecasts that AI is not for value or benefit of people but of corporations.
This almost feels like some sort of oxymoron.
Big tech is supposed to reverse engineer individual devs and artists not the other way around, stahp!!
And just like that
G*mers are back to hating AI
We stopped hating AI?
Gaming subs were loving all the AI supported piracy the last couple days.
That and making up excuses defending Valve for selling AI slop.
YouTube algorithms are flush with AI boosters in gaming subs
I’m not sure making the tool you’re selling less useful is a smart idea. Hmm, yes liability is an issue. But other models are just gonna allow it anyway, so people will just stop using Claude for that usecase. Reverse engineering won’t stop. Claude will just not be used for it anymore
Don’t worry, it will also be more expensive too.
Can’t let the plebeian have too much fun
