You can know a hole is not straight. You can see it. Besides, if your house is built by someone that doesn’t know how a drill works, well, it’s going to crash down over you. Then why are we accepting works of people that can’t and doesn’t know how to properly use the tool?

Now, both of your examples have a person having to use the tool and know how to use it… IA is having the drill doing a hole by itself and just say “good enough”. The house will crash down.

My point stand against both your examples. Both requires a human doing the work and the human to know how to use it to be useful. If the difference between a surgeon and a butcher is precision and knowledge, why are we allowing the butchers in on everything?

“IA” at best is a tool and at worst is a substitute. A “tool” that doesn’t ask anything from you is not a tool.

I stand by it’s not a tool. It’s a substitute. But even by labeling as a tool, why should accept works from people that doesn’t know how to use it and when? By following your examples we can’t trust anyone claiming “I did this” with an “IA” until we or a professional inspect it, and since you can’t inspect the absurd volume of things “IA” spits, the only solution left is ignore it all. Either you trust blindly on the guy that says he knows how to use the drill and risk your house falling down, or only accept works of a professional, and if you only take the job of professionals then what’s the use for “IA” then?

My calculator can do math for me, but I need to know how to use the calculator, the operations, rules in math, and basically, well, know math. My calculator is a good tool.

“IA” can “craft” a magic result without you needing to known anything about what the tool is helping you to accomplish. In a perfect world IA can be used to automate the most tedious part of any job (scaffolding, auto generated code for APIs, color grading, laso tool, etc) but in this world people use it as an excuse to not learn what they are trying to do. “IA” is a bad tool. Is not helping you, is doing it for you.

Never in human kind has existed a “tool” that does things for you without the need of any input or knowledge of the tool itself. “Engineer” comes from “who operates the machine”, “IA” operates itself. I don’t think there exist a real comparison with that “IA” does, but it’s effects are clear, and are not good.

Both are not mutually exclusive.

It’s useful. It’s useful enough that justify the economy, climate, actual living places, etc 's cost?

I don’t think so honestly.

Have you heard about GoG? Just to be clear, not being able to access a game in any way after the publisher decides it’s not worth it is indeed the core of all of these.

No one is arguing they have to keep their servers and games running forever. It has never been a part of the conversation.

There’s much more than “you support it forever or don’t support it at all”. GoG allows you to download the game installer and do with it whatever you want. Buying a physical copy means you can play the 1.0.0 Cyberpunk in you PS3 even after the store closes. Even if your PS3 completely breaks, you can emulate it because you have access to the game no matter what happens in the future.

Reducing games access to one singular source that no one can have access is what is happening. There will be not offline installer, no game to emulate or preserve, no mods, no local play, nothing, and literally, the only thing they have to do is nothing.

What the hell are you talking about. John Nintendo himself didn’t had to pay anyone to make Mupen64. I assure you that Michael Sony didn’t had to pay to his engineer so Bloodborne could be played outside a PS4.

No one. Absolutely no one is asking that Sony or any other company release patches forever and that I could play Crash Bash in a PS5 or boicot. My PS4 broke years ago, I dumped my Bloodborne copy and play it again on my PC. Sony didn’t had to pay anyone a single cent for that to happen.

I’m really curious of who are you listening that made you think that the issue with killing physical media is “I want support forever”…

What do you mean with “engineers works for free in perpetuity”?

So… We should go backwards instead of forward?

For thousands of years back you could trade people for cows, owning your life is a massive historical misunderstanding.

You could own the Mona Lisa. You could own the original Dante’s inferno. For thousands of years there wasn’t the technology to have a copy of the Iliad, then there was and you could have a copy that wasn’t man-made, the press was born. You couldn’t have a copy of a painting without a massive spending on a replica, then in 1600 in Japan with wooden blocks they mass distributed art of Hokusai. You couldn’t own music until you could. You couldn’t own performances until you could.

Those were never moral or logical reasons not to, the technology just didn’t exists. Now the technology does exist and you say that because it didn’t before, then it’s a fluke?

For most of human history people died at early ages, we should go back to that and ditch all antibiotics I guess then, if “history” is the bar you’re measuring “moral”.

Also, guess what, the architect of the work was never in control of their art nor had the “moral authority” of how their work is consumed. Do you really thing that Homer personally went and trained everyone who wanted to interpret the Iliad? Your whole argument is based in something that didn’t even existed in the first place with tons of examples of the contrary that the only thing I can think is that you’re trolling or severely brainwashed.

They sold a product, not an “experience”. Without massive access and preservation of art in all forms civilization couldn’t even begin to grow as fast as it did in the last thousand years.

And before anything else, the mere concept of “owning” is the single most important part of capitalism, if they want to play the “owning” game then we should all be able to play the game. Also historically “owning” didn’t exist. We should course correct to the one true way of tribadism and nomads. I guess.

Funny. The consumer didn’t make physical media worse for the last 15 years.

Manual or at least something besides the disk: Gone Price: Same as digital despite they getting more profit from digital. Disc: half the game, other half downloads. (Not always, mind you) Game: Half baked without at least two patches.

They’ve been giving less and less with physical editions to push the more profitable digital store, and then they act shocked when no one buys physical.

Shockingly, if the only difference between physical and digital is that you need to go out of your way to pick the physical, most people will just get the digital.

Still I got my Switch games in physical so I can trade with friends.

If it was so cut and dry it wouldn’t be a “dilemma” don’t you think?

Have you seen Borderlands 4? They went full “use frame gen if you want 60fps”.

Devs might not want it, but CEOs sees they can cut corners and brag on using the new shiny toys and despite Dev’s warnings they will use it.

If one AI could clean other AI mistakes, shouldn’t the first said be able to not make such mistakes?

AI isn’t AI. It’s predictive text. They will all fall in the same pitfalls as any other. “AI” can write code and can be very helpful making short functions, but it can’t and will never be able to do or work in whole systems because, just by nature, those are made to fit human needs, illogical and sometimes very specific needs that can’t be just “predicted”.