Been watching this space for a while and I think most of the discussion is stuck on the wrong question, everyone argues about whether the output is good enough yet, which is a moving target and a boring argument, and almost nobody talks about what happens to a creative field when execution stops being the filter. Historically being able to build a game was itself the qualification, if you could ship one you were by definition somewhat skilled, and that filtered out a huge number of people including plenty with genuinely good instincts who simply never learned to code. When execution gets cheap the filter doesnt disappear, it relocates, and it relocates to knowing what is worth making, which is a much less teachable skill and much harder to fake, and you can already see it in the output, the volume is enormous and the median is bad and the top of the distribution is made by people who arrived with a specific point of view rather than better technical ability. This happened with video and with music production and with publishing and each time the same argument played out, and each time the outcome was more total noise plus a handful of things that could not have existed before because the person who made them would never have been allowed near the equipment. So the question I find interesting is not whether the ai is good enough, its what the next generation of taste driven creators looks like when nobody has to serve an apprenticeship in the tooling first. submitted by /u/Elsa_Contudix69
Originally posted by u/Elsa_Contudix69 on r/ArtificialInteligence