LogFAQs > #953919483

And basic economics seems to have gone over your head. What makes you think other farmers will sell cheaper. Or that people will be willing to buy from the others. Many places only source from the same places because they trust those places. Also, why would anyone else sell them cheaper. You do realize that farmers have to make a profit, as well, right? They still have to pay a lot of stuff. Like everything that bought for the animal (like feed), and pay for vet bills, and other things like the butchering of the animal. Just because robots are working the farm doesn't mean all those bills go away. It just means the farmer doesn't have to do all the work. They may not even have any farm hands. I know many farms in my area where it's a family thing. You seem to think having robots just means things are cheaper and free, but that's not how the world works. They will still have to buy the same amount of feed, and get the same shots. That doesn't change. And if the amount they spend to keep the raise the animals is the same, they'll have the same price to sell the animals when they're ready... That's why the farmer has no reason to lower his prices. So, that's why I asked why it would be cheaper for the people buying it from them? The answer is, it wouldn't be. Because having robots might not even lower their cost. It might just mean the farmer and their family won't have to work as hard. But the animals will still need food and shots... And if anything, they would have to sell it more to actually make more money to pay for the robot... Before telling someone else that basic economic is going over their head, make sure you understand it first... I live in a farming town, so this stuff is pretty common here... You can keep saying whatever you want about the robots doing the work, but you're still wrong. The robots are doing the work because the farmer owns them. Or is renting them. So, the food will still belong to the farmer, who sells them to be sold to us. They will always cost money. And if the farmer is renting the robots, they'll cost more money since it'll be like paying farm hands, since they'll have to pay whoever owns the robots. If the farmer owns them, then the food might stay the same price, unless he tries to make his money back faster to help pay for the robots... So you're the only one who's wrong here...

I don't remember what a string is. I wrote that after watching a short tutorial. But that was a while ago. But I don't know why I have to tell you what a string is. You obviously know I'm right and you're mad that I understood that you can have different playstyles in Go. And the reason "playing aggressively" matter in the context of an AI is because it's different than playing a different way. Like playing passively. They are two different play styles. Just like a human might play differently depending on how their opponent plays, the AI plays different depending on how their opponent plays. It's pretty basic knowledge. Like how is Chess, sometimes, a person has to play defensively when another person has got them on the run. Same thing in Go, but what's considered playing aggressively or passively is different.

And again, read the rest of the post, and you'll get context. Why do you take one sentence, ask for context, and then pass over the next couple of sentences that give context? Act like an adult, keep reading, and maybe context will be provided. You quote the past the said, "As for video games, I don't see them every trying to do that." Reading more would give you, "As for video games, I don't see them every trying to do that. Just taking other games and smooshing them together..." So, based on the context of the next sentence, and how I feel about AI (and what I said before), I context clues would most likely point to I don't think they'll be making a lot of new games. I feel they'll just take a bunch of games and smoosh them together... Even when other developers use ides from other games, they don't just smoosh games together to make a new one. It's usually inserted well, depending on the game and developers. Like taking an idea from a game and making it better. Or maybe they take two games, and insert them in a way that makes sense instead of just taking both games, cramming them together, and seeing what comes out... I feel that's one of the differences between human-made games, and AI-made games.

I don't think the ones letting the AI help with be "hobbyist. I think that will be their job. And it's fine if the AI helps. As long as it doesn't replace them. And I honestly don't think it will. Not for the gaming companies that make good games, at least... But I think the people letting the AI help would be actual game developers who get paid for their work... As for the simple statement of fact, you said, "Yes, it would try and make something new. That's a simple statement of fact." And I said, "Except it's not a simple statement of fact since all they use to do before (and probably still do) and take other ideas and use those to make stuff." Try to keep up... Also, in the sentence, I literally said, "all they use to do before (and probably still do) and take other ideas and use those to make stuff." So, I don't know why you any context trouble when the context was literally in the quote. The literal context was in the post. This is making me not want to quote more. Are you actually reading the post? Because I don't understand how you can literally quote the context of my sentence, and then ask for context... If you literally read what you posted, you would have had your context... And there's even more context since the sentences before and after are all talking about AI making video games. There's so much context, you should be drowning in it... Incase you're still confused, I was saying that about Ais making video games...

While I am looking at present day AI, that's because that's all we currently have. Who can actually say if they'll get better at making content? We can't say that for a fact. We can guess and assume, but something could stop it from ever being able to make games and stories better than smooshing other content together. But I am basing off of what we already have, because that's all I can base it off of... And you never know. Maybe they never will make a 100 terabyte that works for your computer. If they don't have one, we can't say for sure they'll make one... And even if they make the computer with one in it, who's to say you'll own it? And I'm not pretending it's about current tech AI. I'm literally talking about the current tech. You're the one that keeps lying about how that stuff is already out now. You keep saying stuff like that's already here. And keep asking why I'm using future tenses. I am talking about current tech. Because there is no future tech guaranteed. Plus, you were the one that keeps acting like this stuff will happen soon because of how fast technology moves. I've been saying that all this stuff is far away. And you keep saying sooner than I think, and that's it's not that far away. And my argument is AI aren't perfect but won't have to worry about mistakes, because the humans watching them to catch the ones the AI doesn't catch. The humans aren't perfect, nor do they have to be. The old saying of two heads are better than one applies here. The more people you have watching, the less mistakes they'll have, and the better chance they have of catching them before it gets to far. You can try to twist my words all you want, though... I'll still be right, and you'll still be wrong...
---

Official King of Kings
Switch FC: 7216-4417-4511 Add Me because I'll probably add you. I'm probably the LinkPizza you'll see around.