Greetings friends! I noticed Lemmy didn't have a New World community, so I made one.
Reddit is...what it is, and the official Discord is a flood of bug reports and unproductive complaints. The goal of this community is just the opposite: productive discussion, interesting content, and top-shelf memes. New World has had a tumultuous history full of anger and disappointment; another forum showcasing those unfiltered feelings would be redundant and unenjoyable.
Need to air a grievance about a frustrating game system? Want to vent about how bad your favorite weapon feels now? Do so, but do so productively. Posts or comments like "bow is trash" or "target lock is aimbot" can be found everywhere else. Let's make this place different.
Why does the weapon feel bad? What are your ideas on what devs could do to make a given system less frustrating? Center your comments on your perspective. As an example, on Aeternum launch day I kept seeing objectively-framed, vague statements like "the UI is garbage now," so imagine my surprise when I loved the changes they made.
Another goal is to avoid unhelpful dev-bashing. Blanket statements claiming "the devs don't know what they're doing" aren't productive. What could they be doing?
Lastly, a key goal is civility and maturity. "Can you not read?" might be a sick burn in the middle school lunchroom, but it's lame and juvenile to functioning adults. If you can't resist ad hominem attacks and insults that terminate meaningful discussion, go somewhere else.
With these goals in mind, I don't want the space to be over-policed or humorless. I just want to avoid creating yet another toxic echo chamber. This community is about quality over quantity. Let's work toward that.
Agreed. The problem is that so many (including in this thread) argue that training AI models is no different than training humans—that a human brain inspired by what it sees is functionally the same thing.
My response to why there is still an ethical difference revolves around two arguments: scale, and profession.
Scale: AI models’ sheer image output makes them a threat to artists where other human artists are not. One artist clearly profiting off another’s style can still be inspiration, and even part of the former’s path toward their own style; however, the functional equivalent of ten thousand artists doing the same is something else entirely. The art is produced at a scale that could drown out the original artist’s work, without which such image generation wouldn’t be possible in the first place.
Profession. Those profiting from AI art, which relies on unpaid scraping of artists’s work for data sets, are not themselves artists. They are programmers, engineers, and the CEOs and stakeholders who can even afford the ridiculous capital necessary in the first place to utilize this technology at scale. The idea that this is just a “continuation of the chain of inspiration from which all artists benefit” is nonsense.
As the popular adage goes nowadays, “AI models allow wealth to access skill while forbidding skill to access wealth.”