Dark Helmet 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (7177) comment rss

  • On the post: No, Tim Sweeney, Valve Isn’t ‘Irresponsible’ For Having An AI Disclosure Tag On Games

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 02 Jul, 2026 @ 09:04am

    I didn't. The AI doomers love to lie about my position on the technology. It's a whole thing with them.

  • On the post: No, Tim Sweeney, Valve Isn’t ‘Irresponsible’ For Having An AI Disclosure Tag On Games

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 02 Jul, 2026 @ 09:01am

    "Ignorant, uniformed, from someone that refuses to speak with the people he’s declaring to know better than." Yawn. Yes, lord knows I never interact with our comments section....

  • On the post: No, Tim Sweeney, Valve Isn’t ‘Irresponsible’ For Having An AI Disclosure Tag On Games

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 02 Jul, 2026 @ 09:00am

    I can't tell if you're referring to me or Tim Sweeney in this comment. If it's me you're saying is "all in on AI" and that I stated it would be "the wave of the future", well, then you're just lying. So hopefully it's other-Tim in your comment....

  • On the post: Whoops! Military Reverses Course On Flu Vaccine Requirements After Soldiers Got Sick

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 28 Jun, 2026 @ 08:14pm

    The dissenters should bring Germans to Wrigley Field and feed them a Chicago style dog, dragged through the garden as it were, and see if they think they birthed this thing from their homeland....

  • On the post: Kotaku’s Pre-Judging AI In Gaming Coverage Is Getting Very Dumb

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 25 Jun, 2026 @ 12:13pm

    Then let me try to make the argument more directly than through sarcasm: inevitability is not a domain limited to sex crimes. Drawing that analogy is purposefully inflammatory and pointless.

  • On the post: Kotaku’s Pre-Judging AI In Gaming Coverage Is Getting Very Dumb

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 25 Jun, 2026 @ 10:08am

    My God please have mercy on all the buggy whip factory workers that were raped by an Henry Ford....I guess.

  • On the post: Kotaku’s Pre-Judging AI In Gaming Coverage Is Getting Very Dumb

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 25 Jun, 2026 @ 08:24am

    Ridiculous

    "“It’s going to happen whether you like it or not” is also something rapists say, and if that’s how AI advocates are going to talk about AI…well, you can see how that might poison the well just a bit, especially with AI-generated NCII and CSAM being a thing." If you want to attempt to analogize me as a "rapist", then you can take that story walking. It's an incredibly insulting and stupid thing to have said. The inevitable march of progress, particularly in technology, is a real thing. There are a zillion analogies that could be used here that aren't so inflammatory. The buggy whip makers crying foul over the automobile. The factory workers crying foul over machine automation. I realize we disagree on this particular topic, but I was operating under the impression that you were better than that kind of insult.

  • On the post: Kotaku’s Pre-Judging AI In Gaming Coverage Is Getting Very Dumb

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 24 Jun, 2026 @ 10:31am

    "But more to the point: Does Kotaku need to reiterate the already well-known criticisms of genAI in every article about it? Like, if they’ve gone a while without mentioning AI and need to catch people up or something, I could understand that. And if there’s some new criticism that isn’t widely known but absolutely pertinent to gaming, I could see the need to explain that angle. But when the criticisms are already well-known to the kind of people who would be reading Kotaku, do the writers really need to explain those criticisms every time they talk about AI?" If Kotaku would like to publish their manifesto on why all AI in gaming is bad all the time, they are free to do so and that would alleviate the need to actually make cogent points in their articles. They haven't. "I dunno, man, it just seems odd that I see articles about people proclaiming “AI is the future, AI is going to change the world for the better” and none of the evangelists have ever had to justify their hype beyond “trust us bro”" We criticize those idiots here ALL THE TIME. Jesus oblong Christ, the selective memory at work here is astounding....

  • On the post: Kotaku’s Pre-Judging AI In Gaming Coverage Is Getting Very Dumb

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 24 Jun, 2026 @ 09:23am

    You've got it nearly right....

    "But if a writer/outlet has a negative view of AI that is backed by reasonable concerns about the technology and its impact on society, and the writer/outlet isn’t about purely reporting the news, for what reason should that writer/outlet act like they don’t hold that negative view?" This post is, at it's most basic level, about how Kotaku specifically is missing your "backed by reasonable concerns" part in the articles I referenced. Yeesh, I didn't think this was this hard to understand. I opened this piece up by stating that dissenting opinions aren't bad and are necessary. I didn't realize I'd hate seeing a straw effigy of myself this badly....

  • On the post: Kotaku’s Pre-Judging AI In Gaming Coverage Is Getting Very Dumb

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 24 Jun, 2026 @ 06:41am

    Nope....

    "That is literally what you’re asking for. To the point where you don’t go an article without either calling people silly/dogmatic for not liking it, or gloating about how upset they’ll constantly be." I don't know how you could possibly get that from what I wrote. I'm asking for journalists to do more than shout "it's all bad" at the topic. Both of the Kotaku articles I references, and many more on the topic of AI, are essentially that. And it sucks.

  • On the post: Kotaku’s Pre-Judging AI In Gaming Coverage Is Getting Very Dumb

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 24 Jun, 2026 @ 06:39am

    So....

    The environmental argument, alongside the current spike in component prices and lack of availability, is perhaps the best argument against all AI use in gaming I've heard to date. It's not the most prevalent argument, but I think it's the best. But in that case, the goal should be to lower the environmental impacts of the use of AI, not to argue that it shouldn't be used entirely.

  • On the post: Steam Sends Boilerplate Message To Gamemaker For Angering Russian Anti-LGBTQ+ Bigots

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 03 Jun, 2026 @ 05:36am

    An answer so obvious, it's a wonder that the question was even asked....

  • On the post: Feds Begin Targeting ‘Anti-Technology Extremists’ Which Is Going To Make Everything So Much Worse

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 03 Jun, 2026 @ 05:29am

    I think your point about making an actual falsifiable prediction is a good one, though not really the main thrust of the post I wrote. I, however, can very easily play this game too: "There will be a major AI crash and global economic recession within the next 5 years. There will be no constitutional amendments ratified within the next 10 years, concerning AI or any other subject." On the first, you're now playing the same game, apparently. That is not a falsifiable statement because you haven't stated your terms. Define "crash", for instance. And are you saying that the former will be causal of the latter, or does that not make a difference. On the second, I think I agree with you, here. But perhaps not by as much as you might think. I said "on a long enough timeline" for a reason. Elongate that timeline out to 25 years and you might have someone in me to take you up on that bet. The last Constitutional amendment occurred in 1992. That's 34 years ago. It's a tough thing to get done, but not as tough as some people think, in my view.

  • On the post: Feds Begin Targeting ‘Anti-Technology Extremists’ Which Is Going To Make Everything So Much Worse

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 02 Jun, 2026 @ 09:38am

    If you say so, I guess. I will stick with that prediction.

  • On the post: We Need A More Serious Discussion About Suicide And AI Chatbots

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 19 May, 2026 @ 08:28am

    This is so completely, utterly wrong that it's hard to even know where to begin responding to it.

  • On the post: Canadian ‘Pickle Fest’ Rebranded Under Bullshit Trademark Threat

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 13 May, 2026 @ 11:13am

    LOL

    Oh, you sweet person, no I don't. I pickle: cucumbers, onions, garlic, tomatoes, asparagus, radishes, zucchini, and, my new personal obsession, kielbasa sausage. Pickled sausage is A THING and its glorious....

  • On the post: Canadian ‘Pickle Fest’ Rebranded Under Bullshit Trademark Threat

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 13 May, 2026 @ 05:37am

    Now I need to buy a label maker, because that is gold....

  • On the post: Steven Soderbergh On AI In Films: If There’s a Filmmaking Tool, I’m Going To Explore It

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 08 May, 2026 @ 06:51am

    "If an artist has to resort to using genAI, they’re not an artist⁠—they’re a hack fraud." I'm sorry, but this is just silly. We're having this conversation in the comments of a post in which a storied director is talking about incorporating its use into his overall art. The suggest that that somehow un-artists him makes zero sense.

  • On the post: Steven Soderbergh On AI In Films: If There’s a Filmmaking Tool, I’m Going To Explore It

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 08 May, 2026 @ 05:54am

    Two things I'll say here.

    1. The picture you painted in this last comment was very eloquently stated, but doesn't really seem to address what I wrote, and what you quoted me as having written.
    2. Where you end your comment is flatly different then where you started it. You start off with a passionate defense of human artists and the need to defend their place and their work against the use of AI in any way. That's a valid argument, though one that I think is shortsighted in some ways. But you end your comment suggesting this is about the quality of what AI can produce, rather than a defense of human workers. That is also a valid argument, but one in which you assume that the art AI is capable of helping produce will not get better and better in quality, which I think is a poor assumption.
    But it's ultimately entirely besides the point. You seem to be getting hung up on this all being binary in nature. Either a human will create the art, or AI will create the art. There's something very much in the middle of all of that: humans using AI as part of a process to create art. It can be just another tool in an artists toolbelt in order to get his/her vision into reality. I think that's the most likely outcome of all of this AI in art discussion and, as I've been saying for a fucking while now, THAT'S the conversation we need to be having. How will AI be used in these different art forms? Where is the line where its use sucks the humanity out of a work? How do we make it a quality positive use? But if you start with "AI must never be used in any way, ever and forever, amen!", then you're out of that conversation. And you might as well go shake your fist at the clouds. I'm sure I'm losing something when it comes to furry culture. I'm intentionally avoiding commenting on that not out of disrespect or because I don't think it's valid, but because I am completely devoid of knowledge on the topic and anything I said about it would be said out of ignorance.

  • On the post: Steven Soderbergh On AI In Films: If There’s a Filmmaking Tool, I’m Going To Explore It

    Dark Helmet ( profile ), 07 May, 2026 @ 06:48pm

    You're missing my point. I'm not calling your position weak as some ad hom attack. I'm pointing out that if your position is unfalsifiable, or in this case unalterable, it's a weak position to take as a matter of rationality and logic. You've made up your mind. By your own claim, there is no evidence that will move you from your position. You're not open to altering your position, not even a little bit. Therefore, the conversation I believe needs to be had right now MUST exclude you. And that's too bad, because I want as many people having this conversation as possible. Now, my position is not unfalsifiable, nor untestable. I can easily be swayed from my current position by new facts on the ground. For instance, if AI begins to be used heavily in movies, and movie theaters close by the hundreds, Hollywood dries up and largely goes out of business, and we are largely left without quality films to enjoy....then my current position is wrong and will need to be changed. It's really that simple. I believe you are assuming facts not in evidence, because you're predicting the future. My position is completely different. I want to talk about how we're going to CREATE the future.

Next >>