New Microsoft gaming chief has “no tolerance for bad AI”

But Asha Sharma faces scrutiny for lack of gaming experience.

See full article...

 

[rhavenn]

How will she understand the culture of gaming having never been a part of it? Market research and focus groups? It's not like it's a niche hobby these days either.

riiiiight. modern "gaming culture" very often looks like this:

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...r-old-girl-misogyny-social-media-online-abuse

"gaming culture" in modern parlance is a negative. 15 - 20+ years ago when it was still "niche" I would have worn the badge of a "gamer" as a merit badge. These days? It's commercialized to hell and back and so full of absolute chuds and incels who think they are owed something by women / the world at large it's just a cesspool.

Are there "nice" gamers under 20 out there? Yeah, probably, but you'll be hard pressed to find them since they get drowned in a sea of noise and vitriol. Back in the day you'd get some shit and get tea bagged or whatever, but it was all in good fun for the most part and you normally played with people at LAN parties vs. anonymously "online".

Throw in the social circle jerk that are modern social media circles and you end up with a problem.

That all being said; I game offline. I don't have the time or the patience to deal with online gaming outside occasionally an MMO when I want to scratch a gaming itch.

 

[rhavenn]

I'm one rung below you on that give a shit ladder.

Microsoft ceased being part of our family universe completely a couple of months ago when I finished upgrading my roommate's computer to Linux. Once that was done, there are literally no Microsoft products being used or accessed in our home.

I DO get that's not something everyone will do, and it's always a choice. But it IS a choice, and a viable one. We do the SAME GAMING we did before when Windows was the OS of use (if not choice). And no noticeable drop in performance or experience. In fact, my roommate says things load a LOT faster now than before.

So, for all we care, Microsoft can choke on whatever AI slop it decides to shovel to the masses. They have to figure out how to make some kind of profits from their FAFO with OpenAI as each tried to loot the other for their own gains. I feel for those who don't make the switch away from Microsoft, but understand that people will people and they do what they think is right for them.

It's just for those who want to take far more control of their lives (and digital privacy), there are viable options that can replace most of what they have now that don't cost a thing other than time, and, so far, at least, aren't falling into the AI rabbit hole.

I have a PS5 I rarely play (less than 10 hours in the last year) and I haven't had a XBox since the XBox 360 days.

"console" games just really don't appeal to me. 1) A lot of them are focused on "online" gaming and/or 2) are "action" orientated. 3) paying Sony or MS for the privilege of buying their games (yearly subscription fees) is just stupid. I play RTS, 4x / colony sims, and strategy games and for the most part the consoles have zero offerings that aren't more compelling on a PC. Been Linux / FreeBSD only for close to 10 years now for my main PCs / servers and have been mostly linux closer to 25 years and if / when DDR5 prices ever come down my next living room gaming rig will be a linux box running Fedora with Steam "big picture" enabled vs. just a gaming PC "in the office" with a monitor. The SO would kill me if I stuck my fugly ass EATX case next to the TV

The work Valve has done with Proton and the work the underlying WINE devs have done in general is just impressive.

 

[rhavenn]

Thanks to a story on Kotaku [kotaku.com], I've become slightly concerned about her apparently misinformed pronatalism stance. If you want to watch the video [youtube.com], the birthrate stuff starts at 43:10.

and WTH does that have to do with running a game company / division?

1) it's a fact birthrates are declining mostly because the cost of living is sky rocketing and GOPers / Republicans / boomers are doing their very best to pull the ladder up behind themselves after being some of the biggest benefactors of socialistic policies. Raising a family is expensive and getting more and more expensive while wages are more or less stagnant unless you're a C-suite exec and there are only so many of those jobs to go around.

2) talking about AI "helping" do medical research isn't alarming. In fact, an LLM can processes and correlate huge amounts of data way faster than a human can by orders of magnitude. It's one of the things LLMs are actually good at or for. She's not arguing for eugenics.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/population-growth-rate-with-and-without-migration

https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2020/

 

[rhavenn]

get your capes out folks, A rich person needs defending!

So, making up bullshit non sequiturs is totally cool cause they're rich?

 

[rhavenn]

No, that's not a fact at all.

Birthrates (measured as TFR - total fertility rate) have been declining for decades in the US and most other developed countries. US TFR peaked in the 1950s (~3.8) and has generally been below replacement (2.1) since 1971. Provisional 2024 data based on nearly complete records (99.9%) received by the National Center for Health Statistics show the US TFR at 1.6, which is actually a very very slight increase (less than 1%) over 2023.

Similar patterns exist in Europe and East Asia (countries such as South Korea and Japan have TFRs around 0.7-1.3), places you will note are not rife with "GOPers / Republicans / boomers."

There are many reasons for the general trend of declining birthrates, but ultimately, it's tied to modernization. The strongest driver is often thought to be increases in women's agency, education and participation in the labor force. These raise the opportunity costs of children, causing women to delay childbearing (resulting in fewer children) or deciding directly to have fewer children (education is correlated with family size). There's also more widespread access to contraception and family planning (generally speaking), urbanization, longer lives, more intensive parenting expectations, longer work hours/culture, etc.

Cost of living is definitely also a factor, as is broader societal pessimism, but this can't be blamed "mostly" on the groups you call out. The data itself contradict this; US fertility rates are generally higher in Red states than in Blue states. See also here.

Well, Korea and Japan have their own version of "live to work" mentality and serving the "company" / older generation. People don't have the time, energy or willingness to have kids or even meet a partner when you're expected to work yourself into the ground. Also, to be fair, countries like Norway and Sweden also have low birth rates and while there are certainly 2-income families they also have some of the best vacation and maternity / paternity leave policies you can find, so in many cases it can also be people just don't want to have kids because they don't feel they need them for whatever reason.

I appreciate the break down in numbers, but while I'm certain plenty of women want to work, etc...and I'm a million percent cool with them having the agency / choice to do so .I'm sure there are plenty of potential moms or dads who would appreciate the 1-income family and the white picket fence, but just can't due to wage stagnation and cost of living increases vastly outpacing wage increases. I'd say your phrasing is wall papering over the bigger issue of a single earner household is rarely affordable these days. "Modernization" should improve lives, but your use of it reads more like "corporatization and trickle up capitalism" is the way it has to be in a modern society.

I agree with you that "red states" certainly have higher birth rates due to lack of women's health care options or down right more prevalent beliefs it's a women's job to have babies, but that doesn't mean the Blue states aren't paying for them via taxes for food vouchers and child support payments, etc....It's not like the Red states have it better than the Blue states when it comes to income and cost of living. The Blue states subsidize them heavily.