I think what the author is getting at is when loops are obviosuly "felt" and feel canned.

Strategy games typically have obvious, tight loops. Turn-based games are loop-driven by definition. And so on. This is fine.

But single player games, single player RPGs, etc, can suffer if the loop is really tight and obvious. Early on, you feel "oh, i get it. it's going to be 40 more hours of THIS". Novelty wears off if the loop doesn't really change or evolve. Whereas in turn-based games or strategy-based games, the loop itself IS the game because it progresses as the game state evolves. Nobody complains about the game-loop of chess because that's the game - if you don't like the loop, you don't like the game and the convo ends there, is what is is. But a single-player adventure game, for example, has to do a lot of other stuff right to keep a player incentivized to keep playing the "loop".

Best example would be BG3, where theres clearly a loop - but its massive. Theres a LOT of variation and events between leaving camp and returning later that night. So each "loop" rarely feels samey.

I think the issue is when gameplay loops become transparent and predictable rather than maintaining novelty. A LOT of games suffer for this - the type of game you agree is good, you enjoy it, but put it down after 12 hours for some reason. It's bc of this. The human brain seeks novelty.

I understand AI is trained on human output but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to distinguish between the two. I've seen blogs where this particular syntax "That's not x - it's actually y" is repeated 10+ times. That's not normal human writing. Admit I picked a bad example here, just read 5 AI articles in a row before this one.

the comments can't even be real. "I can’t- this is amazing… and the funniest thing that ever happened. Reality is literally breaking rn"

shit makes me want to go outside and fantasize about living in a primitive society

I think you know the answer to that.

That said, I haven't shown it to anyone... I'm not trying to make anyone mad. But what's the point of working on any music, AI or not, if nobody wants to hear it? This was a bit of a depressing realization for someone who was always fearful of letting anyone listen to my own actual music. It doesn't matter how much I piloted the prompt, or mixed down the stems, and how good the final result is, because at the end of the day, its just AI... I really don't know how to feel about the whole thing - there are legitimate arguments against AI for creative use, it's hard to not feel like a hypocrite or something for even using it..

My OCD would not let me ignore this typo. (Just kidding - I self-diagnosed OCD)

"You either have some quantity of illness or you don't."

I'm not sure what kind of argument you are making for (or against?) "binary" symptoms. The DSM-5 clearly lays out the spectrum. There is a conglomerate of effects caused by autism, and where you are on "the spectrum" is determined by how many of the symptoms you have, and their severity.

There is nothing wrong with someone claiming "I'm on the spectrum" if you don't know how or what they were diagnosed with. That language is consistent with the DSM. Unless they admitted to self-diagnosing, it seems wrong to assume someone is lying about their own experience.

"You can't just ascribe some quirky, possibly somewhat anti-social, behavior as being on the spectrum"

Quriky, somewhat anti-social behaviour (in your words) essentially is one of the dialogistic criteria. But nobody would be diagnosed with autism for that alone. Just like how autistic folks usually avoid eye contact. That doesn't mean they ALL avoid eye contact, and it also doesn't mean anyone who avoids eye contact is autistic. It's a wholistic diagnosis. One would need to be experiencing SEVERAL of the symptoms to receive an autism diagnosis. IME, the majority on the spectrum are indeed level 1, and high functioning, even to the point others might question if they are really autistic.

If you take issue with people self-diagnosing, I don't think anyone would disagree. But your combativeness in just discussing the topic kind of looks similar to people who refuse to accept that autism is really a thing ("there were no autisms back in my day" kind of thing).

That said, it completely destroyed my appetite. I picked up ciggies, too. It made me crave nicotine and caffeine. I started pulling all-nighters because I was so productive (or, so into whatever game I was playing.) I got cold sweats often and had some weird uh sexual health side effects. Develeoped a tolerance to 5-10mg very quickly, so went up to 15-20mg, which also felt weakened after a month or so.

So, wasn't lolng before I could tell this was not healthy. Felt like I was in overdrive mode - super mentally active, and productive, but running my body into the ground. I would never do it long-term.