Seriously. Everyone is so quick to cancel anyone or anything.

They made a mistake with AI art, once. They then compounded the mistake by not addressing it quickly. Eventually, they acknowledged both of those mistakes, and promised to do better.

So, what's the big deal? AI is a useful tool when used responsibly: to write simple scripts/code for one-off projects, structure code or a document as a starting point, to edit/refine texts, to identify bugs in human-written code, to transform point-form notes into text, to get a personal "tutor" to explain something, to rough-in art for mock-ups or prototypes, etc.

I've done literally every one of those with AI sometime this month, aside from the AI art one. (Not relevant to my job as a teacher.) It's an incredibly powerful tool in very narrow use cases. It can't create original text of any value. It can't be trusted with any facts or figures. Its ~~art~~ images are consistently full of janky artifacts.

I don't want GOG to throw out a useful tool. But I sure as hell hope this was a wake up call that AI should only be used for the things it's actually good at. Not customer facing text. And it most definitely shouldn't be writing any production code of significance.

Or are people not following this at all and think this is a leveraged private equity takeover trying to squeeze all the profitability out of GOG? This is the founder; this is most likely better for GOG, the industry, and gamers.