yeah, this is weirdly sneerable for a 404 article, and I hope this isn’t an early sign they’ve enshittifying. let’s do what they should have and take a critical look at, ah, GameNGen, a name for their research they surely won’t regret

Diffusion Models Are Real-Time Game Engines

wow! it’s a shame that creating this model involved plagiarizing every bit of recorded doom footage that’s ever existed, exploited an uncounted number of laborers from the global south for RLHF, and burned an amount of rainforest in energy that also won’t be counted. but fuck it, sometimes I shop at Walmart so I can’t throw stones and this sounds cool, so let’s grab the source and see how it works!

just kidding, this thing’s hosted on github but there’s no source. it’s just a static marketing page, a selection of videos, and a link to their paper on arXiv, which comes in at a positively ultralight 10 LaTeX-formatted letter-sized pages when you ignore the many unhelpful screenshots and graphs they included

so we can’t play with it, but it’s a model implementing a game engine, right? so the evaluation strategy given in the paper has to involve the innovative input mechanism they’ve discovered that enables the model to simulate a gameplay loop (and therefore a game engine), right? surely that’s what convinced a pool of observers with more-than-random-chance certainty that the model was accurately simulating doom?

Human Evaluation. As another measurement of simulation quality, we provided 10 human raters with 130 random short clips (of lengths 1.6 seconds and 3.2 seconds) of our simulation side by side with the real game. The raters were tasked with recognizing the real game (see Figure 14 in Appendix A.6). The raters only choose the actual game over the simulation in 58% or 60% of the time (for the 1.6 seconds and 3.2 seconds clips, respectively).

of course not. nowhere in this paper is their supposed innovation in input actually evaluated — at no point is this work treated experimentally like a real-time game engine. also, and you pointed this out already — were the human raters drunk? (honestly, I couldn’t blame them — I wouldn’t give a shit either if my mturk was “which of these 1.6 second clips is doom”) the fucking thing doesn’t even simulate doom’s main gameplay loop right; dead possessed marines just turn to a blurry mess, health and armor don’t make sense in any but the loosest sense, it doesn’t seem to think imps exist at all but does randomly place their fireballs where they should be, and sometimes the geometry it’s simulating just casually turns into a visual paradox. chances are this experimental setup was tuned for the result they wanted — they managed to trick 40% of a group of people who absolutely don’t give a fuck that the incredibly short video clip they were looking at was probably a video game. amazing!

if we ever get our hands on the code for this thing, I’m gonna make a prediction: it barely listens to input, if at all. the video clips they’ve released on their site and YouTube are the most coherent this thing gets, and it instantly falls apart the instant you do anything that wasn’t in its training set (aka, the instant you use this real-time game engine to play a game and do something unremarkably weird, like try to ram yourself through a wall)

Oh it’s definitely comparable. See, I’ll compare:

The visual quality of GameNGen is worse than that of the original game.

If I had a dollar for every time it turned out some poller influencer went off on the deep end I would have two dollars, not much but etc. In the Netherlands we have a similar type of guy called Maurice de Hond, who also got famous for doing polls (which often slightly differed from other polls) but he has gone quite nutty nowadays, a man I knew who turned into an anti-vaxer was a big fan. (The Hond is also one of those ‘I talked about polarization and nobody listened to me!’ guys when he has been a regular person on the Dutch TV for ages, thankfully Nate doesn’t seem that bad).

Strange how generating a slightly different type of poll causes people to go off into contrarian/bad epistemology land.

E: Me : “doesn’t seem that bad” a few moments later A wild bsky skeet arrives (on why this sucks see this thread)

That is Alexander Grothendieck. He’s involved with some abstract algebra I’m way to sober to grok rn. My only knowledge of him is that his stuff basically established category theory as a thing, although apparently that was completely unintentional on his end.

He seems to have been an… interesting character in his later years

Local villagers helped sustain him with a more varied diet after he tried to live on a staple of dandelion soup.

That’s a weird place to have some opinions about jewish and trans people. I like to look at the sinfest subreddit every now and then and that sub really likes to sneer at people who have weird opinions on those topics (such as the author of the titular webcomic).

A perfect memory which is infinitely copyable and scaleable is possible. And it’s called, all the things in nature in sum.

A map is not the territory, but every territory is, in a sense, a map of itself.

I wanted to torture myself so I looked into that person’s posting history. They have made the exact same point that “Monty Python in fact used to mock the gays, how ironic huh?!?” three times in a row in different threads, really showing it to them wokes

Dang it, am I going to have to learn a new programming language after 24 years of getting things done in Python because the edgelords are indulging in a fit of pique?

So it’s entirely unclear from that HN thread, but where did this dumbassery start?

also, isn’t this congruent to how Iran works?

Ayatollah Jimmy has some zazz, admittedly

Yeah that they named it Q* and that they are very online (so they know about the implications) is quite worrying.

lisp programmers in shambles as I prompt inject another s-expression

I don’t want to have to make legal threats to an LLM in all data not intended for LLM consumption, especially since the LLM might just end up ignoring it anyway, since there is no defined behavior with them.

On a more considered note after actually reading the thread (poor choice on my part, I know), it’s hard not to connect this to the broader line-goes-up mentality that we see so often here. As evidenced by the long history of the “live free or die” ethos, whether enslaved people were/are actually better off than had they been killed is more of an open question than our friend’s argument would imply. This is especially true if you ignore all the ways that chattel slavery was deeply cruel and inhuman even in the history of unfree labor to the point where historians consider it an abberation, closer to being worked to death in Mauthausen than being a medieval serf. I’m not qualified to talk about the history of dehumanization, but even in ancient Greece and Rome there existed some legal protections for slaves, provided you could find someone with citizen standing who was willing to plead your case, and this was thousands of years before the liberal ideas of what being a full human being and a free individual meant, so we need to understand the position of unfree people in those periods differently. But even if you ignore all that context and treat slavery like a universal practice from the prehistoric “sea peoples conquered my tribe” days to the antebellum American South, the primary benefits that you get from slavery don’t go to the enslaved people, obviously. Rather it comes from the conquerors having a new source of labor to work their new fields, and the economic benefit they get from that. Rather than needing to allow population growth to expand your people’s farms into new lands, you have a ready-made labor force to start (or in some cases continue) working there. It makes the line go up faster, in other words. The argument relies on ignoring all the questions of justice and the impact that these practices have on people’s actual lives because it makes line go up, and in that sense it fits right in with all the other ways that ostensibly-libertarian ideologies end up supporting fascism.

‘Fun’ (not fun, horrible) detail about slavery vs genocide. During the holocaust, some capitalists saw all these people in concentration camps as nice business opportunity and convinced the nazis to sell them slaves to work in some factories. These people were basically beaten to death because they didn’t work fast enough. (because they were hungry). So the statement is a bit counterfactual here (also, another point for ‘capitalists would gladly work with genocidal fascists’ for the people keeping score (also for any Jordan Peterson fans this will come as a big shock (he, as self proclaimed expert on this subject, famously said that the nazis were more evil than people thought because they didn’t work the Jewish people to death)). For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monowitz_concentration_camp