It seemed to me like they're hedging until they know which side is more profitable to support. We don't know yet if slop will be widely embraced by consumers. Valve will be happy to profit from AI if it takes over from real developers.
Valve has ignored the quality problem of submissions for years. Lazy asset flips of demo levels have been common for years. It's less of a hedge and more of a restatement of what their position has been since they opened the floodgates. AI just made the bad stuff look better than it used to, so people have to relearn how to filter.
As far as I can tell, "slop" doesn't have a clear definition. It seems to just mean "AI used poorly or obviously". Nobody cares if a developer of a game uses AI as long as it's done well. They might not even know.
The idea that there is a future where game devs don't use AI, while the rest of the industry does, is absurd. We do know that AI will be widely embraced in gaming, because the alternative is, what? The honor system?
You can openly be a white supremacist on Twitter now. The reason some people still aren't happy is because what they really want is to be able to have terrible opinions and not be disliked and shunned, which isn't possible. Social repercussions and censorship are different things.
You're allowed to think something is bad. We do not and cannot live without rules, we need to stop acting like every issue that nudges back and forth the line of where those rules start and end is the difference between absolute anarchy and tyrrany.
Apparently you need a 10 K+ karma account to say the following (which another account, a new one and not mine btw, posted). Some I'm just reusing the other dude's words:
In contrast, thought-terminating clichés like "facebook boomer" show critical thinking on your part.
I fully agree with that: calling someone a "facebook boomer" is just plain pathetic.
(btw the boomers are my parents' generation: don't go thinking I take it personally. I'm a GenX'er and GenX'er are badass, which is why I don't give a flying fuck saying what I think).
Something something about the pot and calling some kettle black etc.
Please don’t sign up with burner accounts for one snarky reply: take responsibility for your words. You could also respond with something nice that inspires the author and other readers.
Provide food for critical thinking instead of accusing people of not being critical thinkers.
For example, tell us what new media from the US is actually great today. What do the arts offer that is next level and worth watching? Is there a rise in arts in other counties that we are missing? What could Facebook boomers need that leads to more and higher quality arts and movies?
> David Merritt, a Blue Cross Blue Shield vice president focused on federal policy, said patients, too, tend to have few options to avoid the fees. “There certainly is no federal protection or even state protection as far as I know,” Merritt said.
Insurance companies are often portrayed as evil, and maybe that's accurate, but we often overlook that sometimes their interests are simply aligned with ours. This practice hurts them, too. Another example is the Covid vaccine, my insurance still covers it. They don't have the luxury of engaging in culture war nonsense. It costs them money if I get hospitalized with Covid symptoms. For their own bottom line, they're not incentivized to use RFK as cover for denying vaccines.
No, they’re not aligned with patients at all. The root cause of all of this is the lack of problem of price transparency; and both hospitals and insurances fight to keep prices for service opaque.
For someone who's been on Twitter for a long time, these alternatives function as a good off-ramp that's easier than quitting entirely and abruptly. I deleted my account a few years ago knowing I'd still be able to see some of the content without viewing their ads or contributing my own content.
reply