WotC Hasbro CEO optimistic about AI in D&D and MTG’s future

[Thomas Shey]

Still falls into the nice to have vs risks.

No. I've been a little too personally effected by advances in modern medicine largely dependent on computers to consider "nice to have" an adequate term for it, and I know too many other people who have been in the same. as far as I'm concerned the likely benefits vastly outweigh the risks. If you feel otherwise, that's on you, but I'll make it clear I'm on the other side of that as long as you insist on talking about eliminating AI as a whole.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Generative AI as touted by tech bros and people who write quarterly reports.

The kind that is 'AI' in the same way nuts are fruits: 'technically'.

Which is fine, though I still maintain even lumping the kind of processes used in AI art systems and the large language models used in text does the discussion no great favors, but at least its not throwing in every heuristic system in the world.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Which is fine, though I still maintain even lumping the kind of processes used in AI art systems and the large language models used in text does the discussion no great favors, but at least its not throwing in every heuristic system in the world.

People simply aren't hearing about actual AI with valuable use cases such as the ones that run biological and materials simulation. They're hearing about not even half-baked, unbaked tools designed with the intent to steal from and replace creators.

I don't think anyone here is talking about the former when they talk about AI as a blanket term because the tech bros have so thoroughly stolen, mutated and defamed that term while people were unaware of its deeper meaning and usage.

Like when people use 'verisimilitude' in relation to D&D to mean 'does not match my highly flawed and uninformed idea of how reality works in a set of very specific scenarios' instead of what that actually means.

 

[Thomas Shey]

People simply aren't hearing about actual AI with valuable use cases such as the ones that run biological and materials simulation. They're hearing about not even half-baked, unbaked tools designed with the intent to steal from and replace creators.

I'll just note someone upstream in this thread was clearly lumping those in together with the others, so I think I'll continue to be fussy about it.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Actual update on this topic from an artist who works for WotC.

 

[Faolyn]

Meanwhile even when they do things like clearly ban AI art or replace art "enhanced" by AI, they also get no credit.

Most AI art is made by effectively stealing from actual artists. I'm not sure people should get credit for not stealing. That should be, like, bare minimum.

If they were using AI art trained entirely on art that they actually own, that would be a different matter. It still wouldn't be as good as getting actual artists to do the work.

 

[ECMO3]

So... the power intensive process required to steal petabytes of content and hallucinate it into the world is going to reduce carbon emissions, eh? Pull the other one, it's on Etherium.

First off, to be precise I said carbon dioxide emissions, not carbon emissions. I know the media likes to talk about "carbon emissions", but elemental carbon is a solid and while "carbon emissions" can contribute to localized pollution they do not actually cause global climate change. Greenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide do.

That point aside, yes. Optimizing the supply chain to reduce shipping miles will (and have) reduced carbon dioxide emissions on a product-destination basis by reducing the amount of miles goods travel from production to consumption.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I trust WOTC with AI as much as I trust a munchkin with a high level 3.X wizard.

 

[Zardnaar]

I trust WOTC with AI as much as I trust a munchkin with a high level 3.X wizard.

CN Kender 3.x wizard.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

I trust WOTC with AI as much as I trust

a kender with a Wand of Wonder?