Hell no. The very last thing I want is an unlicensed electrician causing a string of electrical fires years after the job's done because of faulty wiring or lax adherence to standards.

Licensing is not just to protect the individual hiring the contractor, it's also to protect the general public from the consequences of inadequate workmanship.

More power to you I simply don't share that sentiment.

Diablo would have a perfectly fine lifespan without live-service bullshit imo. It doesn't need a constant and regular update cycle if they just produced bulky and well developed content drops and sold them as DLCs as that would tide people over for a good bit with each. Besides, games don't need to have perpetual development for years on end, the quality inevitably drops pretty significantly as time goes on. But again that's only my opinion.

More importantly you highlighted something that I think a lot of my distaste comes from. Modern live-service design is contemptuous of the user's time and effort, is designed to be psychologically addictive, and gives the absolute bare minimum possible to keep people begrudgingly coming back. That's not something I think is healthy for the game or a net positive regardless of slow content drips that come with.

Honestly it wouldn't matter to me if it was just cosmetics. Part of the enjoyment of a game like Diablo is looking like a badass while you're going through the game destroying hordes of creatures. A battlepass that's cosmetic only just incentivizes lazy and unappealing cosmetic designs in the base game.

I'd rather that aspect of the game not be piecemealed out and used as incentive to pay for a battlepass or stay engaged. Just sell a complete game. Start working on DLC that will incentivize future purchases or an expansion of the game. Leave it at that.

Fairly confident their player base would be infinitely happier with that methodology. At a bare minimum I would.

That was all I needed to hear to have absolutely no interest.

Didn't know it was planned to come with a battlepass and I won't be engaging with it at all due to that. Live service design philosophy tends to work directly against enjoyable and complete baseline gameplay.

Well this is being applied to a traffic ticket so I would imagine its applicability would be to areas of law that are extremely rote and don't require diligent legal analysis or complexity of thought or approach.

But then again how many lawyers do you know that only do bankruptcy/divorce/admin law/etc.? Because those are the attorneys I'm referencing if I'm being honest. And there's a lot of them.

Edit: Admittedly family law is an exception there just because clients cause absolute fucking havoc in that domain no matter what, so probably shouldn't have included that.

It absolutely does but that's why this is such a big thing. Law is very formulaic and if the AI can properly interpret case-law and statutes, and apply those to present legal standards, it would be huge.

The biggest hurdle for the layperson in understanding legal proceedings is that a lot of it looks like ritual. Like there's specific terminology and behavioral patterns that magically cause weird shit to happen. In reality it's just professional foundational knowledge when those terms are brought up that brings about specific expected responses.

The law is a perfect test bed for AI because the procedures are pretty rigid, the end-point goal is something based on specific precedent and guidelines, and one of the biggest burdens to a successful case is clearly identifying connecting points to demonstrate your position is the most in line with established law.

Sorry to piggyback off your comment but it prompted this thought and I'm excited to see how this ends up. I know a few attorneys who are kind of sweating bullets atm due to this but I'm all for advancement in technology. Especially that which would make legal assistance more accessible and less costly.

Maybe the government, state and federal, should stop trying to outsource critical roles to the private sector. It usually doesn't work great and it's an abdication of the State's responsibility to its citizens.

Private enterprises are motivated by money. Once they get it they don't give a fuck about actually doing the work if they think they can keep it. The gov at least generally doesn't give that much of a shit about profitability and theoretically is motivated by the State's concern for the health and welfare of its citizens.

Keep it in house so the people motivated by something other than rampant greed will do their damn jobs correctly and ensure people who need a safety net can get help.