Perhaps, I personally believe the opposite, I think if 2 or 3nm is too expensive, we will go 3d, but I guess time will tell. But again, hopefully it won't matter too much if we can get higher fidelity graphics with the same cards

Ooh this is going to be fun...

1. In relation to your perspective of GPU prices, I think the opposite, I think crypto massively inflated GPU prices and since crypto is going through a bit of a winter right now, I think Nvidia and amd have radically overproduced. This massive increase in supply will keep prices down for a few years. There's other reasons also.

2. Conversational NPC's. ChatGPT has shown us what's possible. Use a LLM and give it specific information related to your game and you have a conversational interactive NPC.

3. Higher fidelity graphics. As you mentioned, unreal engine is taking the graphical capabilities of gaming to a different level, nanite is a game changer and will make it possible for real life quality rendering. This will be achieved by making animated objects such as characters out of point clouds, and using the point cloud data to create a animated mesh, this will allow infinitely complex character models through nanite, without an increase in computer hardware. Currently nanite only works for static meshes.

4. Brain computer interfaces. I think neuralink and invasive companies like it are 10-20 years away from a consumer ready product (although hope I'm wrong) however I see non invasive BCI's coming right down in price and having the fidelity to no longer need a controller.

5. Point 4 will allow VR to be more utilised. Currently VR is a bit of a workout, which is great if that's what you're looking for, but ultimately if you want to lose yourself in a good story, being able to forget you are in vr by having controls come through thought, will enable a much more immersive experience. Increased user adoption means increased investment. Better quality haptics, better quality screens, etc.

6. More indie games. Dalle 3d will be released soon, so I think within 12 months you will have high fidelity 3d meshes created by AI, hopefully a decent method of retopology will also be available, allowing people to create great assets in a fraction of the time. Developers will also be using AI assistants to come up with a lot of side quests and back story related to the main story, allowing more time to spend on more important things like combat mechanics ect. The AI assistants will also do the majority of the code. This massive productivity boost will allow individuals to create highly complex games that would usually require a triple A studio.

7. Sex. Yeah, it's obviously going to happen. Someone is going to create underwear with haptic feedback, increased fidelity graphics in vr, highly engaging NPC's that very closely mimic human appearance and interaction, and boom, you have a very believable dating sim.

8. Extrapolate this with improvements in each area of the technology and you have an experience that very closely mimics the holodeck from star wars. Ultimately culminating in whole brain emulation and full drive vr. Then after you have experienced everything worth experiencing, you go back in with a blank memory, set all the parameters to random, and turn on permadeath.....

..... Oh shit!!!!!

Give it as much info as you can based on the token limit, and ask it to summarise the info into bullet points, keep doing this until you have bullet points for the entire document that doesn't exceed 3k tokens, give it this summary and ask it for the info you need

Taken directly from gpt "you can also provide a summary of the information"

AGI? Depends on your definition of AGI. If AGI to you means human level cognitive abilities in every genre, emotions, consciousness, will and objectives of its own, ability to plan and reason, then no, it's not AGI. If your definition of AGI is broader, an agent that can learn something and then generalise that ability to a different or many different domains, then yes I think ChatGPT is AGI. However I caveat this by saying this is not what most people mean when they say AGI.

Unless there's scientific discoveries not immediately obvious that would facilitate a quicker development of AI.

You don't think AI will be used in areas that we use on a day to day basis? Food production, energy supply, housing production.

Seems like you're comment was kinda cynical, AI will benefit us more than it will hurt us.

But that isn't what we are talking about is it?

>there is an ineffable quality to human interaction which an AI will not replicate in my lifetime

Ah yes, I've heard this before. I also heard that computers will never be able to replace human coders, or write a sonnet, or paint a beautiful masterpiece, or pass the Turing test, or conquer the game of go, or beat the best chess players, and many more.

Sorry but if you're betting against AI at this point, you've not been paying attention

I agree with this

Signed. /Agree

I thought the exact same thing after I posted this.

We are currently in the top picture for 3d images, so next year we should have really good 3d models generated by a text prompt... It's a completely different world.

Pretty much, it assembles from the molecules, so as long as you have the raw material, your good to go

Oh no we will definitely survive it, and will prosper, it will just be very painful in the short term I think.

I think we are too dumb to make it work. It's going to be bad but luckily I don't think it will last long

Painfully most likely, but quickly.

I'm inclined to think slim chance, but until we know more about consciousness, it's a coin toss at this point

This comment completely invalidates the first paragraph of your post. Get help buddy.

sending love no matter how ugly you are.

This guy has it.🔨

Well this happened quicker than I expected

Asterisk ✳️ firm believer until evidence suggests the contrary

And if you can prove humans do not generalise from other work, or patterns found in nature or elsewhere, then you deserve a Nobel prize.

Ultimately our pattern recognition is the same in function as any AI (although may be programmed differently). We cannot extrapolate truly inspirational ideas, we are only able to merge key features of different patterns in a novel way. True inspiration is a fallacy.

But if an artist ever looks at a different artists work, he is being influenced by that work in much the same way an AI would be, the argument here is to say only art created by an artist blind from birth (who's also never heard, felt or taken in any data in anyway about someone else's art, or had any positive or negative feedback) could be considered original art

Yup, wouldn't surprise me if someone is already training a large language model on unreal engine so you can just ask it to do something and it creates it for you in the engine. This is definitely a near term reality and by near term I'm thinking less than 2 years for individuals to create indie quality games.

I see what you did there

Of course you are correct, but it still needs to be considered. Ultimately we are slowly fighting against everything that eventually kills us. we take a reduction in infant mortality as "matter of fact" but let me tell you, my second son was born 3 weeks ago and my wife and I did not get to the hospital in time and I had to deliver him myself on our bedroom floor. Miraculously everything went well and the ambulance arrived seconds later to take both him and my wife to the hospital, but it was such a dangerous situation. After that I will never take infant mortality for granted again.

With regards to your statement about people living almost as long as today, I disagree with. Yes 40 was never considered "old age" (as far as I am aware) but 50 and 60 definitely was. Living to 60, 300 years ago, would be like living to 100 today, very unusual and only perfect health, diet and environment would get you there. Now my dad is in his 60's working at a comfortable rate, and getting plenty of exercise and apart from type 1diabetes, has no major health concerns.

People are living longer, its just a fact, yes infant mortality skewes the data, but if you remove infant mortality from the data, I believe we have atleast doubled life expectancy from when modern humans first evolved.