I support AI in gaming too, without any limitations set in stone either - in theory. In practice, my main concern is how the training material for AI has been picked with little regard for ownership/copyrigh, and last I heard, that was still legally a grey area at best. As for quality, the end result will speak for itself (for better or worse). I suspect for many aspects, AI is perfectly adequate - like do I really care if some of the most widely used textures in a game, e.g. many ground textures, are created by humans? No, I don't think I do. I do think quality is still often an issue with AI, but in many (not all!) cases, it's also probably good enough that most of us will never pay attention to it unless going out of our way just to look for it.
As for jobs or art, I don't think AI is the issue. For all I care, AI can replace all the jobs, and it's up to the society to figure out how people are going to make a living and how they can be happy. If we think some kind of an AI tax is a good solution, I'm all for it. If it's something else, that's fine too. The same goes for art: the society should support the creation of art to the extend it's deemed valuable (and to be clear, I think it is valuable). If AI disrupts the society, the society should adapt. Regardless, if AI brings efficiency benefits (which is probably questionable in many fields), AI will come, or we will fall behind the likes of China, because the likes of China will adapt AI and they will find ways to keep the population happy enough. Adapt or survive is what we have to do, assuming AI doesn't turn out to be a bubble (which it still might).
| IcaroRibeiro said: AI usage is completely fine to things like coding and bug fixing |
This... doesn't match my experience at all. AI is definitely useful for programming but it's because of everything else it can do besides actual coding that it's useful for: figuring things out, explaining them, test automation... But for actual coding, it still does really stupid mistakes and tends to ignore existing coding conventions from the project. For things like games, stupid mistakes in particular might be something that are acceptable, but where I work, that's simply not acceptable. The code AI produces is also often overly verbose, which actually makes it harder to understand.
Also, as far as I know, AI has generally been trained with most code that's available, not just best, so it kind of tends to produce 'average' code. Of course that's still better than most developers seem to be capable of doing (at least based on my limited experience).
