The use of AI assets needs to be disclosed on the Steam page for the game

[Double G]

Perhaps everyone will wake up one day and realize there's nothing creative about AI whereas creativity is humanity's divine inheritance.

If I were God and my humans figured out how to replicate how they perform, I'd be so proud of them.

Unless there is some unforeseen, staggeringly stifling roadblock on the path of AI's advancement, it will surely get to the point where it will be able to create things that match human creativity and exceed it.
Many, if not all of the leading scientists in the field of AI have been saying (and only a few years ago) that they are shocked at what AI is capable of doing today. Some thought that where AI is now would never happen. And those are the legitimate experts.

I firmly believe that we will figure out what makes us tick and we'll be able to fully replicate it.

A great doctor once said: "To the rational mind nothing is inexplicable, only unexplained".

 

[EvilPolygons]

This kind of approach always makes me chuckle.

Quite the opposite... history is full of "proof" of human creativity that goes beyond "computation" (as you call it).
Until you can prove AI can do the same, the burden of proof is on you.

The fact you consider humanity's great achievements in every field merely as "computational" progress means you're not even thinking like a human. I CAN tell a Cylon when I see one.

*cough* Colonel Tigh *cough*

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

I'm not the one planning to change [human nature]

Neither am I or anyone I've cited as I think I've made abundantly clear. We're undergoing a natural process of maturation, as I see it, and no one -- not even the authors I've cited -- think (or thought) they have (or had) all the answers to life, the universe and everything; "plans" to "change human nature" or anyone or thing; or are/were absolutely certain about the future or how the process of transformation or maturation of human consciousness by-whatever-name-it-goes will turn out. Ergo, why Gebser warned it's a process that may be -- may be -- abortive. Who knows? We might destroy ourselves in the process. That's what I appreciate about bioregional, creative and regenerative systems thinking. "The world" is not a homogenous monolith. What works in one bioregion or culture may not work in another. The bioregions themselves are distinct. Yet, one way of seeing, one way of thinking, one way of knowing, one way of doing, one way of living -- one paradigm -- is being imposed upon everyone in the world...and the world, apparently, will have none of that if resistance to it is any indication.

 

[theFlu]

Yet, one way of seeing, one way of thinking, one way of knowing, one way of doing, one way of living -- one paradigm -- is being imposed upon everyone in the world

I kinda agree with the gist of that, while I disagree with the wording. Seeing, knowing, doing are well defined singular things, there is only one. "Way of living" is the only one that works to make the point.

But yeah, one paradigm imposed on the world isn't going to work - nor is it going to happen naturally. "Maturation" implies some type of improvement, but that's not in any way guaranteed by nature, partly because of way we renew. Every year there's a new set of "default humans" created, without knowledge of the thinkers you quote, nor your life experience. Even if you were correct about absolutely everything, you wouldn't be able to convince them that you are. Even if you get everything to be "fine for everyone" for a generation, the next one will figure out new ways to improve their individual lives at the cost of others. The only natural thing here is change; not maturation.

Thinkers have this habit of confusing people with thinkers. "I came to this obvious conclusion, it's only a matter of time everyone else does too." That works exactly until you get punched in the face by the guy who doesn't care for your ideals, just wants your wallet. That guy doesn't want to be part of the maturation, so he isn't. And if one respects freedom, there isn't much one can do to change it.

As a species, I think we're best off in somewhat isolated groups. Separate populations producing their own unique strengths - or at least avoiding the mistakes of others. The less single points of failure in the system, the better. The global powers that want either maximum profits from trade, or to save the planet from "those humans"; well, they'll have to employ force globally to reach their dubious goals. This is why I get queasy with ideological optimism; it won't work without force, and some of the adherents are going to be willing to try with it.