The reason is money, not creativity. If the money spent on tokens doesn’t yield a profit, nobody would be releasing 5 games a week.

Edit: didn’t realize that it had already been mentioned. I’ll change to something else to avoid parroting;

You should give it a try and see find out yourself. The issue is not that people vibecode their own games, who cares. Let them enjoy themselves. I believe that the fun part is watching your game come alive and tweaking it to your preference. The issue is rather that a lot of people choose to publish them, which I suspect is because of the potential profit it may have. My question is why aren’t there a website where people can share, or even sell their vibecoded games for those interested? That would benefit all since sharing assets, prompts, MCP, and what not, would lower cost of spent tokens.

Edit 2: A quick search answered my question. Apparently there are multiple websites dedicated to serve this purpose already.

This has no relation to technology whatsoever. Neither Meta or zuck are relevant to anything besides spreading misinformation and interfering with elections around the world. As for the other clown, he’s famously quoted by “it’s all computers!”, and single handedly decided to change name of AI for some recently developed unknown namechanging kink.

You are weird and make no sense what so ever. But since you seem to enjoy adding random images that has no context or relation to anything, I’d like to do that too. Here, on the house.

Is your previous point then that this is a private company, rather than FOSS?

Maybe I’m confused here but if you’re seriously questioning whether you’d benefit from a smaller, Swedish based service over an American tech giant (unsure if this term applies to Discord in all honesty) - for starters you have the Swedish laws/consumer rights, GDPR. This company’s whole idea also seems to resolve around being ‘basically like Discord’ - but without all the aggressive data collection, fingerprinting users, storing messages, and profiting from users data. I also took a quick look at the ToS and PP and it seems pretty solid what their ideals seems to be, or what they want to advertise themselves as. But hey, I bet using a US tech giant company with its entire business model focused on making a profit from user data in the year 2026 is just as good for data privacy respecting laws and regulations as any other!

Maybe this was crooked Hillary’s plot.

Hey, me too! I ditched W10 for Linux Mint in Sept last year, so much to learn but it’s been a blast. I’ve never experienced having such a smooth working PC.

Factorio is still one of the games where I have the most hours put into Steam, and after the crack-like obsession finally wore off I haven’t really looked at it since. I suppose the DLC could be fun, but I already went to space thanks to mods. Will always be a favorite for me!

That was the point I was trying to make in my original comment. I don’t think there is, and I don’t think OpenAI even care at this point given their track record of bad PR. They are already in bed with the government, they can’t really be touched until that changes first.

That could work. But who will define where the company should step in, at which times, and still maintain respect for the right to digital privacy? And in this case, since it was OpenAI specifically which is generally known as a corrupt company, would one trust the company to not use this as some kind of loophole for other stuff?

If your reason to be on an online forum is to discuss, disprove, or change the beliefs of an stranger online, a good idea is to actually try.

If you’re hunting precious updoots with snarky one-line comments that are parroting the ideas of internet culture, then this is not the place for it.

Such a thoughtful, elaborated response. And a emoji included as well, to really capture the feeling of being written by an adult.

Why should OpenAI be held responsible for this particular incident? Because their LLM recommended the user to contact a suicide hotline when he expressed his suicidal thoughts? Because it correctly answered his questions and confirmed that the safety of his shotgun was off? Don’t get me wrong, I like having companies held accountable as much as the next guy, but why don’t you ask the gun production companies to be held responsible as well? Hell, we might as well be asking for his parents to be held accountable for their offspring’s actions.

Yes, LLM’s can, with or without external manipulation, provide information about sensitive subjects, which can then be consumed by vulnerable individuals who may act in a harmful way. That individual would have acted and reached the same outcome not matter if the LLM would have existed or not, because there are multiple options to using an LMM to gather information.

What are the realistic expectations of OpenAI to implement to prevent these things, that doesn’t automatically mean stricter restrictions to the user data privacy and further strengthen the control of citizens (thanks to the flourishing relationship between OpenAI and the American government)?