People can tell their story for themselves with these tools, but making a story or a game that's compelling for other people is an entirely different skill, and one you don't get from AI. Like other UGC tools (Roblox, for example) you'll wind up with a few games that are interesting to other people and millions played only by their maker.

It's a good argument. Canned UI and pre designed user interactions are already done for. We can't sit around and think of what a user might want to do or how to present that. Those concepts have to be fluid and chosen by the user.

While agents that can book a hair appointment are interesting, that's more of a workaround than the kind of UI I think we're going for. The visual appearance of the software itself must change dynamically according not only to the task but to the user's preferences. This is something we haven't seen demonstrated yet.

Glad it resonated. You hit the nail on the head regarding agents being a 'workaround', that's exactly why I categorize them as the 'Transitional phase' rather than the destination. They are essentially bots trying to navigate a web that wasn't built for them.

Your point about the visual appearance changing dynamically is the 'Holy Grail' I touch on in the 'Generative UI' section. We are currently stuck designing static screens for dynamic problems.

I agree we haven't seen a true demonstration yet. Do you think that shift happens at the App level first (e.g., a dynamic Spotify), or does it require a whole new OS paradigm (a 'Generative OS') to work?

Good question! I'd say it happens at the app level first because the context of the OS is too big a surface to start with. But a RAG app for a specific vertical could have enough context to dynamically draw a custom UI for every user, given the constraints on what the app is generally about.

That makes a lot of sense, it is definitely the safer place to start.

It implies that design systems are about to change fundamentally. Instead of shipping a library of static components, we'll need to ship a set of constraints and rules that tell the RAG model how it's allowed to construct the UI on the fly.

While the definition of intelligence is speculative, the way that LLMs work is well known. They don't apply any thinking or reasoning at all. It's not even conceptualized or attempted. Instead, they predict the most likely response to the prompt given the training data. We can all agree that statistical predictions alone are not intelligence.

Consoles don't allow mods and trying to get your Switch 2 to run one would very likely be violation of TOS, for which they can and do brick devices.

I can see that, I was just actively watching a modding for TOTK early on youtube, and I guess theirs ways to have a mod running software, i think it was atmosphere or somthing like that, and I couldve only assumed it was not okay, but if so why make youtube videos about modding a switch 2 if its not legal with there terms? whats the point?

Hackers do quasi-legal stuff and publish it all the time. It's a part of the hacker ethos. But it's risky and if you want to do legit business under your brand or identity, not recommended.

Do you think Nintendo would respond to a email i send and give consent to just some normal game mods? or would it most likey be a hard no?

I don't think you'd get a reply. The TOS is clear and questions about it are legal questions. If you're so inclined, you could hire a lawyer to talk to their lawyer -- or even to answer your question about if it's a TOS violation.

But there's an easier way to tell. Every feature that is in every game in the Nintendo store is a feature that doesn't violate TOS. And no features that aren't already in the games in the store would be allowed by the TOS. So if you haven't seen it in-game already, it's not going to be allowed. Full stop.

This is true of Xbox, and PlayStation, too, and all other cloud-based services and stores like the App Store, etc. On PC, the difference is obvious, with game devs using an SDK (like mod.io) to include and promote mods in their games. They're making it official. Until you see some UGC inside an official game on the Nintendo store, I think it's safe to say it doesn't exist.

well that sucks, thanks anyways though for your help!

Two things being overlooked here. First, buying and scanning books for AI training was judged legal, not illegal, according to the article.

Second, destructive scanning is a cool and useful service. I've used it myself to turn old books into PDFs. And this isn't Alexandria; these are all books for which many copies exist.

The problem is likely not the SVG aspect. It's the fact that LLMs don't have any real cross-training between visual concepts and the syntax that produces them. We have this problem with CSS, too, which LLMs are notoriously bad at.

It's actually easier to do bitmaps which is why the visual models create those. You can describe any painting with a few words about content and style but that doesn't give you the SVG syntax needed to represent those things as shapes.