If Dark Souls had easier difficulties, they wouldn't have the reputation they do. People would turn down the difficulty instead of learning the bosses and how to beat them.
The games aren't as hard as people make them out to be. They just force you to adjust and learn to play in control. There's a reason people can play them with all kinds of goofy input options, though. If you pay attention to what enemies do and don't blindly spam attack every second, they're all beatable
I'm curious. What are the chances of mods existing to bring other D&D storylines to life? In theory, a lot of people have written a lot of content, and while they take some liberties from the rules, I don't think there's anything that can't be worked with.
Can anyone comment about how realistic it would be to bring other stories to leverage this engine?
The second.
I'm not sure how that's relevant here, though. There is nothing at all being copied but an aesthetic.
The AI is not intelligent. That doesn't matter.
Nothing anyone owns is being copied or redistributed. The creator isn't the tool; it's the person using the tool.
AI needs two things to work, an algorithm and data. If training is allowed to anyone, anyone can create their own algorithms and use the AI as a tool to create innovative new messages with some ideas borrowed from other work.
If data is proprietary, they cannot. But Disney still can. They'll just as successfully flood out all the artists who can't use AI because they don't have a data set, but now they and the two other companies in the world who own IP are basically a monopoly (or tri- or whatever) and everyone else is screwed.
And yet the artist's name is used to push the weights towards pictures in their style.
That's not even vaguely new in the world of art.
Imitating style is the core of what art is. It's absolutely unconditionally protected by copyright law. It's not even a .01 out of 10 on the scale of unethical. It's what's supposed to happen.
The law might not cover this yet, but any law that restricts the fundamental right to build off of the ideas of others that are the core of the entirety of human civilization is unadulterated evil. There is no part of that that could possibly be acceptable to own.
Google's version of RCS involves sending everything through their own servers. Apple even considering that would be a massive violation of their user's expectation of privacy.
Demon Haunted World is really good, too. I don't think he narrates any of it himself, though.
It is unconditionally impossible to own an artistic style. "Stealing a style" cannot be done.
Audible just had a 2 for 1 sale and I found 4 that look intriguing to me and pulled the trigger on:
Projections by Karl Deisseroth
Being You by Anil Seth
The Anatomy of Anxiety by Ellen Vora
The Dragons of Eden by Carl Sagan
I haven't started any yet. I'll probably start with Sagan because he's a great blend of rational scientist and story teller. The other three look like moderately researched books on different aspects of the brain and I read as much as I can find on the brain and intelligence. I have a fairly lengthy list of ones I've read and consider interesting here.
Irrelevant. Nobody is arguing that they can't legally do it.
Just that it's impossible to do without being a shitbag.
Obviously edited some.
Apple doing their own wouldn't result in any of the benefits people want. The open spec doesn't support shit.
It's not a good standard. It's not a mediocre standard. It's complete fucking horseshit that only works with Google's proprietary implementation.
Apple supporting RCS would be a massive betrayal of their customers. It's not remotely redeemable.