We were promised flying cars in 2020. It's 2026, and we just got a car that can leap over traffic. Progress, I guess! Tesla's new Roadster does look cool, ngl. $TSLA
Unbiased opinion: @Oortbound could very well be game of the year and it won't even be close. Just needs eyes on it. Wishlist below if you'd like to play. 👇 (Releasing very soon) #ScreenshotSaturday #indiegame #solodev #goty
One way I think this whole AI vs artist "war" could eventually cool down is if AI companies found a way to properly acknowledge and compensate artists. For example, whenever an AI model generates something that clearly builds upon a particular artist's work or distinctive style, a small fee or royalty could go back to that artist. I'm pretty sure the majority of established artists already have some form of payment method attached to their online presence. I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine companies like @OpenAI or @AnthropicAI eventually building a system that identifies participating artists and distributes a portion of subscription revenue based on how their work influences generations. This could actually be particularly interesting for @ElonMusk and @Grok. If X Money becomes deeply integrated into X, you already have artists, their work, AI generation, and potentially payments existing within the same ecosystem. Perhaps X Money could eventually be used to automatically compensate artists when their work meaningfully contributes to an AI generation. Obviously, figuring out attribution, ownership, percentages, and what actually counts as someone's "style" would be complicated. I'm not pretending I have the technical or legal answer to all of that. But the general idea makes sense to me. If AI companies are going to build increasingly powerful creative tools, finding a way for the original human creators to participate economically in that ecosystem could remove a lot of the hostility surrounding generative AI. I genuinely think whichever AI company figures out a fair and practical system for this first could gain a massive amount of goodwill from artists and potentially set the standard for the rest of the industry. Instead of artists feeling like AI is being built at their expense, they'd actually have a reason to participate in its growth. Curious what artists think about this. If a system like this genuinely compensated you whenever AI meaningfully used your work or style, would it change how you feel about generative AI?
As someone who enjoys AI as much as the next guy, here's my take on AI, art, and the never-ending war between AI bros and artists. TL;DR: Artists have an immense creative talent that should be respected and valued. Purposefully teasing them, devaluing their craft, or plagiarising their work is distasteful. At the same time, people shouldn't be attacked for using AI if they can't afford to hire artists or spend years learning an entirely new skill. I'm not creative at all, and watching the stuff that artists come up with is genuinely mind-blowing to me. I sometimes watch artists like Jazza simply because their work is so impressive. The ability to start with a blank canvas and turn an idea in your head into something that didn't exist before is an incredible skill. We should be supporting artists as a society, not pushing them away or treating their craft as obsolete because a machine can generate something in a few seconds. AI, imo, is best suited for left-brained activities: logical, complex processes that help advance society technologically. Analysing information, solving problems, automating tedious work, coding, research, and essentially building upon existing frameworks or blueprints. That's where I think AI has enormous potential. Tbh, even generating images could fall somewhere within this category because AI doesn't exactly "create" in the same way a human does. It processes what already exists and produces something based on patterns it has learned. Right-brained activities are much more tied to the human experience: art, music, storytelling, culture, expression, etc. No matter how much generative AI improves, I don't think it can truly replicate the creative capabilities of human beings. It can imitate the output incredibly well, but the human experiences, emotions, intentions, influences, and imagination behind that output are something else entirely. At the same time, I understand that not everyone has the resources to hire artists, buy commissioned art, or learn the craft themselves. It's not a black-and-white world out there. These skills can take years to master, and for many people, they simply aren't their passion or talent. People can use AI to generate images, gaming assets, concepts, memes, placeholders, or whatever else they need, and they shouldn't automatically be shamed for doing so. The point is that using AI doesn't require putting actual artists down in the process. You don't need to mock artists because AI can generate an image faster. You don't need to intentionally copy someone's work to prove a point. And you definitely don't need to celebrate the idea of artists losing their livelihoods because you happen to like AI. So appreciate your fellow artists, even if you disagree with some of their views on AI. Their creativity contributes far more to civilisation, culture, entertainment, and the way we experience the world than I think people sometimes realise. And that respect should go both ways. Artists shouldn't be hunting down and attacking every person who uses AI either. A lot of people don't have the funds to regularly hire artists, nor the time or passion required to spend years mastering an artistic skill. Using an accessible tool doesn't automatically mean someone hates artists or wants to replace them. AI isn't going anywhere. Neither is human creativity. So maybe the healthiest path forward is learning how to live with both. Use AI where it makes sense, support human creativity where you can, respect the work that goes into art, and stop treating every person on the other side of the debate like an enemy. Technology can make creating things easier. Human beings are still the reason those things have meaning. Thank you for coming to Mango's TED Talk.
I truly hope people will enjoy my game as much as I do. This is my biggest, and most passionate project yet, and after months of building, I will be launching the first version next month (if all things go well). That won't be it tho, I have a couple more "gamemodes" planned for afterwards. That will depend on the success of the Roguelite mode however, as building solo with 0 funding is not easy at all. I do believe this has what it takes to be a success, so good luck me! 🙏
Apple just announced the first ever foldable phone in the world. True pioneers, best to ever do it. Watch everyone now come out with foldable phones like the iPhone Duo.
You don't see many black holes in games, let alone ones you can fly around and dive into. This is a beautiful (scary to some) experience you can only find in Oortbound. I'll be launching Oortbound very soon, who's ready? #indiegame #spacegame #solodev
The most anticipated, and probably the biggest, @ValhallaP2E patch is coming this week. This will be the first of a series of patches that will target the economy, and essentially Valhalla, rework. Web3 gaming is about to change forever with $FLOKI and Valhalla leading the way! https://t.co/PkmlGw4LHl
So beautiful! 🥹