I thought LLMs had been good at this for a while? I vibed a language out and the LLM could write in it pretty well. I even got Qwen 3.8 to write it (though it was pretty slow, it managed to get it done)
In my brief test, it did OK but I'm not sure I set it up for success very well. I have a bunch of skills[1][2][3], and I don't think I set those up in OMP for deepseek to use first. Claude uses all 3 a lot so they're probably part of the reason it works.
Maybe it has to do with people losing their minds at the mention of it? Spend however long on a game, for some random to come out the woodwork and attempt to invalidate everything because you decided to disclose.
An AI filter is in the interest of both sides here because the people who would "lose their minds" over it can just avoid it with the press of a button. And if you want to sell to everyone, then make a product everyone wants.
It’s really to the interest of nobody, because obviously there’s an incentive to be dishonest.
It’s also not particularly helpful, right? Because if I use an LLM to debug a crash report, then that’s the same category as creating a slop game.
So what you would do, realistically, is use the AI to write code, debug, you know typical software development stuff and then just… lie. Your game is closed-source anyway, so nobody is reading the code.
There’s levels to this. AI generated slop assets is one thing. AI-assisted coding describes every software project everywhere in the world.
> Because if I use an LLM to debug a crash report, then that’s the same category as creating a slop game
Steam has clear guidelines on what requires an AI disclosure, and all that people are asking for is that they can filter based on this. It's a tiny change.
> AI-assisted coding describes every software project everywhere in the world
That is simply not true.
> and then just… lie
I'm not a lawyer, but lying about something that influences the customer's purchase decision sounds a bit like fraud and not something I would advise to "just" do. If using AI is so normal then why lie about it?
No, it is. You can ask any software developer working at any company right now if they use AI in their workflow somewhere in the company, either them or other developers. They will say "yes". The only people who think LLMs aren't typically used in software are not software developers. Which I get it, if you don't know then you don't know. So ask. It's not just one or two companies, it's also not 90%. It's 99.99%, I would say 100% but I can't say for sure.
> not something I would advise to "just" do.
Not something I would advise either, but people are going to do it. The difference is indistinguishable and you can't verify it anyway because you typically can't access the source code. So, of course people will lie.
Yeah why would people care about a technology they are already deeply skeptical about and have majority beliefs that said technology will harm humanity and not help it.
God forbid consumers exercise their rights in the matter.
Nothing is inevitable. If this was inevitable, it's only under our current anti-human from of capitalism (it was always that way, AI just took the mask off).
> Who want's to pay an extra bundle for a plumber to come in and destroy a bunch of walls to fix a clogged pipe? No job is safe.
If the clog is so bad they can't snake it out or something, I don't think a robot is going to do a better job. Plumbers have to destroy walls because plumbing is often installed in inaccessible places.
I think the worst part of it is that we are forced to value ourselves based on our jobs. Of course, there's no easy to answer to what everyone would do if no one had to work again.
I don't think people would choose to fix toilets to survive if they didn't have to
> I don't think people would choose to fix toilets to survive if they didn't have to
If I hadn't gone into tech, I might have been a plumber. Plumbing is a deeply interesting topic, and it involves a lot of physics and fluid dynamics. Acting like a plumber is a desperate idiot with a wrench is not an accurate take, and is really rude. Also, Master Plumbers who operate their own businesses generally make >$150k/yr.
I worked with plumbers on a daily basis for a number of years. The masters were generally never actually plumbing for the most part. I would say 95% of them did not treat plumbing as an intellectual exercise. Of course, this is just an anecdote. I heard the "your shit is my bread and butter" hundreds of times from different plumbers thinking it was comedies final joke.
I think it's definitely not accurate to say that these people have not made anything significant. It sounds like coping. How many programmers have made anything culturally significant? How many are just codemonkeys who fulfill someone else's requests, take their cheques, and go home?
In my opinion, the whole anti-LLM coding thing is purely ego preservation. And I get that, who the hell want's to believe their high paying job is going away? To say using LLMs cannot achieve results bigger than 'one-shotting a note taking app' is really just not true.
Comparing it to NFTs is absolutely wild also. NFTs literally were mass psychosis and had no value whatsoever. You're saying someone can't build software, even just for themselves, or otherwise, that doesn't have any value at all? How could that be true?
How many programmers have made anything culturally significant??
You are on an online forum geared towards programmers, using the world wide web created by a programmer. The concept of a video game did not exist before they were being programmed.
You think the world just appeared as it is and everyone only does things for money? Never because, unlike people who use every shortcut possible, they actually care about the details?
Did I say programmers haven't done anything culturally significant? No, clearly not. I'm saying the vast majority of all programmers have not done anything culturally significant
reply