On 6/20/24 09:35, Kyonshi wrote:
> On 6/20/2024 1:00 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:08:18 +0200, Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/19/2024 1:37 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 08:07:29 +0200, Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/19/2024 1:32 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 16:35:42 -0000 (UTC),
>>>>>> <smaug@ereborbbs.duckdns.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rin Stowleigh <rstowleigh@x-nospam-x.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 09:21:33 +0200, Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 6/17/2024 4:39 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 15:08:33 +0200, Kyonshi
>>>>>>>>>> <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/16/2024 4:39 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2024 15:21:52 +0200, Kyonshi
>>>>>>>>>>>> <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/16/2024 2:11 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2024 00:38:54 +0200, Kyonshi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/16/2024 12:00 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2024 19:25:00 -0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <smaug@ereborbbs.duckdns.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rin Stowleigh <rstowleigh@x-nospam-x.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2024 11:09:38 -0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <smaug@ereborbbs.duckdns.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rin Stowleigh <rstowleigh@x-nospam-x.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:42:32 +0200, Kyonshi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/2024 7:02 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 15:08:09 +0200, Kyonshi
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/2024 7:21 PM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Real AI (not what most gamers have historically
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> called AI) integrated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into dialog / behavior / relationships with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other civilizations is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where the franchise should go next.  It's a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mistake if that's not done
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Civ 7.  And if it's not done, it's only a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matter of time before a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> competitor gets there first.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so far there is no real AI. Just stuff they hype
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up as AI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Look up YT vids for a game called BodyCam.  It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> introduces a level of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> immersive visual realism to the tactical shooter
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> genre that to my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge hasn't been done before, and it supposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> came to market via
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a couple of kids (well a 17 year old and a 20 year
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> old).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Someone will do something equally as disruptive to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the strategy genre
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> utilizing real AI soon, and if the Civ series is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> caught sleeping, it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will become irrelevant overnight.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There still is no real AI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Years ago, I realized the juice simply was not worth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the squeeze
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whenever I allowed myself to get baited into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pendantic black holes of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion-presented-as-fact-discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But occasionally, it's probably good for the soul to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> treat myself to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an occasional token episode of frivolous time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasting activity?  ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I'm curious what aspect of the current state of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> colloquially referred to as AI fails to meet your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> personal definition
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of "real"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when it actually manages to fit the definition of an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AI, and not one
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written by the people that are just trying to sell
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you their next
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hypecycle.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be clear, I'm completely uninterested in strawman
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arguments, so I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> am asking.... specifically.... what aspects of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current state of AI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do not qualify as "real"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is it intelligence?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is it actually intelligence, or is it someone hyping up
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an advanced
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> algorithm into something it isn't?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the problem is of course that intelligence itself is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not that well
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defined, and that this helps the usual scammers to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claim that something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is artificial "intelligence" when it's merely an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> advanced mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand why you're separating the word
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intelligence from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artificial.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Artificial means fake.  Fake Intelligence.  So you're
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> asking for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something that's Real and Fake at the same time if I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Real intelligence is playing a multiplayer game against
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a human.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Computers are not capable of real intelligence, only the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artificial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> variety.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Real Fakel Intelligence" is an oxymoron; thus the quest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for it is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> self-defeating situation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no, artificial means "made by humans"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a building not a structure because it's artificial?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where did you find a building not made by humans?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> caves exist, are a structure, and have been used by humans.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Answers to questions I never asked is a prime example of why
>>>>>>>>>>>> I stopped
>>>>>>>>>>>> wasting time on discussions like this, given the current
>>>>>>>>>>>> state of
>>>>>>>>>>>> Usenet.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I dunno, you throw out stuff like "artificial means fake" and
>>>>>>>>>>> expect me
>>>>>>>>>>> to accept that drivel without saying anything?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> as I said higher up "But occasionally, it's probably good for
>>>>>>>>>> the soul
>>>>>>>>>> to treat myself to an occasional token episode of frivolous time
>>>>>>>>>> wasting activity?"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So believe me when I say I expected absolutely nothing from
>>>>>>>>>> you, and
>>>>>>>>>> was not disappointed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ah, so I just fell for a troll?
>>>>>>>>> true, noone would have earnestly advocated for AI in that way.
>>>>>>>>> Should
>>>>>>>>> have known.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You disqualified yourself from the level of discussion I was
>>>>>>>> initially
>>>>>>>> offering the moment you revealed that you believed the word
>>>>>>>> 'artificial' could not be synonymous with 'fake'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/artificial
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Synonyms
>>>>>>>> --------------
>>>>>>>> affected
>>>>>>>> assumed
>>>>>>>> bogus
>>>>>>>> contrived
>>>>>>>> factitious
>>>>>>>> fake
>>>>>>>> false
>>>>>>>> feigned
>>>>>>>> forced
>>>>>>>> mechanical
>>>>>>>> mock
>>>>>>>> phony
>>>>>>>> phoney
>>>>>>>> plastic
>>>>>>>> pretended
>>>>>>>> pseudo
>>>>>>>> put-on
>>>>>>>> sham
>>>>>>>> simulated
>>>>>>>> spurious
>>>>>>>> strained
>>>>>>>> unnatural
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> did I say that?
>>>>>>> maybe reread my comment. But then you are ignoring your own
>>>>>>> source here
>>>>>>> as well, because it also can mean unnatural, simulated, or
>>>>>>> mechanical.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But well, I know you are just pretending to argue right now. So
>>>>>>> we can
>>>>>>> just agree that you got me good and you don't have to pretend to
>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>> these stupid claims anymore.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So we both agree that no actual artificial intelligence exists,
>>>>>>> and we
>>>>>>> are only talking about advanced algorithms, yes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then we basically can stop talking here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your basic premise is that your own personal definition of AI, which
>>>>>> is different than that of the rest of the world, is correct.  And as
>>>>>> long as you continue searching for someone that agrees with your
>>>>>> definition instead of the mainstream one, I suppose you can turn
>>>>>> grasping onto hope into a hobby if you like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But it won't change reality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Luckily I found you already, so there's that. We already established
>>>>> that you do agree with me about the general definition of AI.
>>>>
>>>> If that's true, then congratulations on adjusting your perceptions and
>>>> glad I could help.
>>>
>>> Yes, we both agree that no actual AI exists
>>
>> Oh, disregard...   I see that you're actually a delusional cunt.
>> Conversation over.
>
> I mean, you admitted to being a troll. So do you think you insulting me
> would hurt my feelings? It just means I riled you up enough.
>

Time passes by.

I was surprised that they announced VII, since it felt like they just
released VI.

Civilization VI is actually my favorite game in the series. I tend to
like that type of art style, and the districts are great.

However, a new game is a new game, and hopefully it will exceed my
expectations.