It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
I hate AI art too, but I don't think it's so bad as that. It's terrible because it uses obscene energy and steals art. But that doesn't mean anyone actually likes AI art (except people who make it and wish other people would like it).
If you tell me your "art" is AI, then I instantly lose interest (with very rare exceptions that generally use older types of AI, like MGMT's "When You Die" music video"). Momentarily disregarding economic considerations, AI "art" is to real art as over-processed food is to whole-food, made-with-love meals. Will some people eat it, for whatever reason? Sure. But are Twinkies competing with fine dining? No. I'm interested in art for the relatable human element. If that's emulated, then you can only hold my interest until that fact is revealed. AI artists can only be disinteresting or deceitful, there's no third option.
The capital (the busy, sometimes-laggy place) is only one planet of the tens of thousands of planets found in Galactic Hub space. We select new capitals occasionally, but that's not why we're relocating the civilization.
Copied this from one of my announcements so excuse the highly-formal tone:
There are a number of strong rationales in favor of relocating. It's not a decision I take lightly, but after reviewing all points, it seems inarguable to me that the benefits of a move will outweigh its detriments.
- Most colonies have aged and are seeing minimal use, so leaving them behind will not be as catastrophic as it would've been at some points in Hub history. (I say "most" intentionally, I know it's not all of them!)
- Most old systems lack proper Hub tags because of upload / crossplay issues, and some new systems were improperly named.
- The search for a suitable capital will not likely produce many new results not already discovered in the previous search, because non-purple systems have not changed significantly.
- While end-game players can explore new purple systems, there is not nearly as much new content for players who have not yet completed the required quests. Relocating will put both old and new players on a greater level of parity, giving everyone new content to enjoy and explore.
- Somewhat related to the above point, some new players have communicated that the Hub is essentially so entrenched in its current space that they feel intimidated to even approach and engage with the community. Those same players have indicated that a full relocation would make them feel like they're 'getting in on the ground floor', and have a space in the community.
- In the past, I avoided expanding our space claim because, essentially, there wasn't enough content in the game to worry that we would miss out on any of it within our 11 regions. Now, the game is more and more complex. If someone wants to live on a purple fern-grass moon with flying snakes orbiting a gas giant, can I necessarily guarantee that we have that? I can't. Essentially, more game = more space required to capture all of that game within our boundaries.
It also seems that, for everyone except PS5 players (due to Sony blocking USB save backups), we will be able to provide a service to relocate bases to the new Galactic Hub space claim. PS5 may also be able to access this service once cross-save opens to all players. This will be an imperfect solution to the issue of base-loss, I know - bases which rely on terrain will need to have foundations constructed or some other method of adaptation to their new location, and bases which rely very heavily on terrain or natural features (ie treehouses) may not be feasible to relocate at all. But it beats a total loss of all bases!
Important Links
- Discord - Most of the Galactic Hub's community is based here!
- Galactic Hub Wiki - Learn everything about the Galactic Hub here!
- "How to Join" Guide
- YouTube
- Mastodon / PixelFed / Lemmy
I was thinking that Worlds 2 could potentially be creepy enough to be the Halloween update
but I'm happy with this too
WOOOO HALLOWEEN UPDATE!
I'll respond to this with what I said to one of the other AI-enthusiast-non-NMS-players commenting here:
I brought up this topic to gauge the general response from members of this community - I absolutely am not interested in discussing AI content as a concept with AI enthusiasts or other people who are not members of this community.
Also, the example you linked is completely unrelated to No Man's Sky. Unsurprisingly. So that doesn't apply here at all.
HALLOWEEN UPDATE
I BELIEVE IN SPACE HALLOWEEN!
I don't know if by "find" you mean "find on your own", but if not, here are some nice ones I found. The End of Certainty 11F-6 is my love... that glowing red diplo glyph, that circular "magazine" or whatever it is. Beautiful.
Voltaic staffs and Sentinel multi-tools have the best damage stats. Atlantid doesn't perform as well in terms of pure damage.
In practice though that doesn't mean much... if you do competitive PVP, you will probably use the Blaze Javelin anyway, and that'll kill an enemy in the same number of shots regardless of what type of multi-tool you use (as long as it's S-Class). It's like a 4? shot kill so, say you have a total of 4000 HP (I'm just making these numbers up to demonstrate the concept) - it doesn't really matter if each shot does 1,100 or 1,300 points of damage, you're still going to kill them in 4 shots. If you do PVE, you'll be able to easily shred any Sentinels with a fully upgraded multi-tool regardless of what type.
That's just my understanding though. I'm not a dataminer so I'm speaking more from experience than knowledge of the actual values or code.
I don't know the specific stats for the Atlas Sceptre but generally Expedition rewards are relatively middle-of-the-road for their category, so I'd expect Atlas Sceptre to perform like an average Voltaic Staff.
....Right, which is why the rest of that quote which you truncated for some reason was, "(except people who make it and wish other people would like it)"