This incredible; i will have a lot of fun with this
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
I mean, technically you didn't recreate anything. You had the LLM pattern recognize something that already existed and it copied it. I don't mean to sound harsh, but create something new.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Almost everything ever created is "like x but y", let people create what they want without trying to steal their joy
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Didn't used to be that trivial and effort-free to have a machine do it. Back in the day you at least had a lot of typing, or even the need to go out and do what you thought the other thing was doing, giving rise to useful variation, weird offshoots and failures that became things in their own right.
That's 'create'. LLM output doesn't at all have to be 'create' in that sense, and often isn't.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
I wonder if first photographers were saying "I painted this picture".
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Missing the music :)
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
turn up your volume! there should be music haha
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
So nostalgic. I had fun declining founders because of their various frauds/schemes.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
This feels icky considering the topic of the original.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Doom had demons, chex quest did not; derived works change subject matter all the time, I don't see why it's icky
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
The ick is from making light of other people's suffering. Paper's Please is about Soviet communism and people died. Term sheets for AI so some people can be billionaires? Hardly the same thing!
Emotions are weird.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
I wonder if part of the artistic intention here was to draw parallels.
I, for one, feel a lot of ick at the foundational functions of both systems. Icky stuff, it’s got to be done, it’s never pleasant or unambiguous, it brings out (and rewards) perverse behaviors, the decisions have high stakes for individual supplicants but the system itself is indifferent...
And so both seem to try and slather lipstick on their ick by way of ever-thicker layers of bureaucratic (and often self-contradictory) “tweaks,” in an attempt to correct for past icky outcomes…
I agree that an individual family’s fate at the hands of the government feels to me much more morally weighty than somebody’s, you know, get-rich-quick business enterprise. But I get how the whole “startup” system functions by making it feel totalizing and weighty to participants.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Yeah. The original was social commentary on the role of immigration enforcement as a tool of state oppression, with the brutality that sometimes occurs centered prominently and jarringly against video-game pixel art.
This is tech bros recycling the same exact structure but making it about getting billionaires to fund their latest "Uber but for AI-powered false advertising."
It's like if Flock wrote a version of 1984 where the heroic protagonist was trying to rise up against a regime of local activist groups who opposed installing Flock's mass surveillance products.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
It was also about how poverty enables cruelty, juxtaposing your struggle to pay for rent and food with the demands of the state. The incentives are very different from people like Paul Graham and Gary Tan who can flip through a hundred folios without being forced to pick anything. The procedural tragedy of the game is lost if you're Joe Capital with a $3M fund at your disposal.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Don't worry, the original is widely described as an 'empathy' game. Not something you'll need to consider here.
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
damn at least here i can be post economic
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Is post economic a term billionaires use to describe not having to care about the actual value of a dollar?
[3 hidden]5 mins ago
Yeah, it's what happens when you're agentic enough.
HN.zip
That's 'create'. LLM output doesn't at all have to be 'create' in that sense, and often isn't.
Emotions are weird.
I, for one, feel a lot of ick at the foundational functions of both systems. Icky stuff, it’s got to be done, it’s never pleasant or unambiguous, it brings out (and rewards) perverse behaviors, the decisions have high stakes for individual supplicants but the system itself is indifferent...
And so both seem to try and slather lipstick on their ick by way of ever-thicker layers of bureaucratic (and often self-contradictory) “tweaks,” in an attempt to correct for past icky outcomes…
I agree that an individual family’s fate at the hands of the government feels to me much more morally weighty than somebody’s, you know, get-rich-quick business enterprise. But I get how the whole “startup” system functions by making it feel totalizing and weighty to participants.
This is tech bros recycling the same exact structure but making it about getting billionaires to fund their latest "Uber but for AI-powered false advertising."
It's like if Flock wrote a version of 1984 where the heroic protagonist was trying to rise up against a regime of local activist groups who opposed installing Flock's mass surveillance products.