vinney...axkl on Nostr: so far, no. i'm playing the actual game and it's actually fun and shows true ...

so far, no. i'm playing the actual game and it's actually fun and shows true emergence/complexity.
the game itself uses no AI whatsoever. it's all just Rust code for complex simulations. so the "ai psychosis" risk would end at my talking to claude to generate the code. The static, AI-less code is what i'm interacting with when playtesting, and that's truly cool.
The one place where AI may be hypnotizing me is with promises of this game model being able to scale past early agrarian society. I've (and I mean **I**. not claude's idea) came up with an abstraction/folding system where the same rules that apply to simulating an individual and then apply to a household - which is a folding of many individuals together. and multiple househoulds form a band, many bands/neighborhoods can form cities, cities -> nations, etc. and all throughout, the "folded" entities still retain some emergent surprises - like there is a probability of a single individual "poking out" of a city if the probabilities align so that it makes sense for him to do so.

My rule with the game was that any level of organization, down to the person, should be able to emerge and meaningfully dissent/break away, if they have a good reason to do so and the means. So far this has served well at the levels of scale i've got: individuals get fed up with their band's location far from firewood, so they might choose to take their family and start a new band. or they may convince the rest of the band to move at once. and bands themselves sometimes merge when it is advantageous for them to do so.
Still yet to see if this will keep scaling up through the ages! But I have good reason to expect this approach to be arbitrarily scalable without losing too much of the detail that makes the lower levels dramatic and fun.

I'll post some recordings of feature demos today. i get claude to do these for me sometimes.