People who claim “guys” is gender neutral would most often only count men when asked the question “How many guys did you sleep with in your life?”

Until I find a single person who immediately thinks of people of any gender at that question, I will not fall for the internalized misogyny of “‘guys’ is gender neutral” meme. (Same with “dudes” and all the other ones I’ve seen over the years. I’ve even seen someone say “bro” is gender neutral.)

For sure, that’s why my main accusation is them directing traffic to their bad article (could even be an attempt at getting search engines to associate their article with “android games 2024”) and not the AI stuff. I just started with the AI accusation because it was funny to me when OP and you already talked about AI (in games).

AI or not, the post is poorly written and has little to no informative content.

I do agree with you though, some people through around AI accusations way too quickly. Especially when they spot mistakes. LLMs are very good at NOT making grammatical or syntactical mistakes in English. If anything, those mistakes are often a sign of authenticity.

What games use AI to enrich the user experience? Highly doubting that one.

Even more so, I highly suspect OP is written with anything but AI. Even if we give them the benefit of the doubt that they wrote it by hand, it’s very suspicious that their article on mobile games in 2024 has a url that states they’re about 2021 and mentions mostly games from back then. Using the Wayback Machine (I would never give them a click) reveals that it’s (mostly) the same article over all those years with the year in the title updated and some layout changes to fit the layout of the website.

While I cannot say with near certainty that OP is written by AI, I do feel confident saying that this post exists solely to direct traffic to that shitty article.

Co-op for sure. I’ve seen all sorts of toxicity in, for example, Vermintide or Helldivers.

It’s not copyright, it’s patents…

(I do also hope that they lose because ingame mechanics being patented is bullshit)

I’m not sure how fucked up their prompt is (or how unlucky they were). I just did 3 tries and every time it used modulo.

I’m assuming they asked it specifically to either not use modulo or to do a suboptimal way to make this joke.

💀

It’s only from spells and only the player itself is immune from them. I don’t think this would even see play in YGO.

From what I remember and what a quick search on the internet confirmed, B didn’t actually deny her anything. He actually went out of his way to do as much good for her as he could. He claims to have replied “Language.” because he knew other people at NASA with more say on her job would find her, which would get her into trouble (and they did find her even before his first Tweet).

I hate to defend Nintendo, but they used their own Emulators in the NES and SNES Mini (Kachikachi and Canoe respectively). I would be surprised if they just yoinked one from the internet here.

I’m guessing they just take the correct prefix (the first 3 letters of the correct month) and append “tember”, no matter the month.

Tangentially reminds me of Richard Feynman’s Cataclysm Sentence.

If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence was passed on to the next generation of creatures, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words?

Sure. You have to solve it from inside out:

• not()…See comment below for this one, I was tricked is a base function that negates what’s inside (turning True to False and vice versa) giving it no parameter returns “True” (because no parameter counts as False)
• str(x) turns x into a string, in this case it turns the boolean True into the text string ‘True’
• min(x) returns the minimal element of an iterable. In this case the character ‘T’ because capital letters come before non-capital letters, otherwise it would return ‘e’ (I’m not entirely sure if it uses unicode, ascii or something else to compare characters, but usually capitals have a lower value than non-capitals and otherwise in alphabetical order ascending)
• ord(x) returns the unicode number of x, in this case turning ‘T’ into the integer 84
• range(x) creates an iterable from 0 to x (non-inclusive), in this case you can think of it as the list [0, 1, 2, …82, 83] (it’s technically an object of type range but details…)
• sum(x) sums up all elements of a list, summing all numbers between 0 and 84 (non-inclusive) is 3486
• chr(x) is the inverse of ord(x) and returns the character at position x, which, you guessed it, is ‘ඞ’ at position 3486.

The huge coincidental part is that ඞ lies at a position that can be reached by a cumulative sum of integers between 0 and a given integer. From there on it’s only a question of finding a way to feed that integer into chr(sum(range(x)))

If you wanna see a language model (almost) exclusively trained on 4chan, here you go.

Presumably. Wouldn’t take much to fake that though.

Despite all that, there was the Warlock who Ninja’d the Sword dropping in Naxx on the final day. Fun times. Now that we’re slowly approaching Classic MoP we’ll finally see if the masterplan worked out too.

When were talking about teaching kids the alphabet we need to train both individual and applied letters

This is only slightly related but I once met a young (USAmerican) adult who thought the stripy horse animal’s name was pronounced zed-bra in British English and it was really hard to convince her otherwise. In her mind zebra was strongly connected to Z-bra, so of course if someone was to pronounce the letter “zed” it would turn into “zed-bra” and not just into “zeh-bra”.

That data is also publicly available (of course), so a model could be trained on it. I’d love to say I’d doubt Google/YouTube would ever do that, but at this point nothing would surprise me.

I trained the generative models all from scratch. Pretrained models are not that helpful when it’s important to accurately capture very domain specific features.

One of the classifiers I tried was based on zoobot with a custom head. Assuming the publications around zoobot are truthful, it was trained exclusively on similar data from a multitude of different sky surveys.

Does it? I worked on training a classifier and a generative model on freely available galaxy images taken by Hubble and labelled in a citizen science approach. Where’s the theft?