John’s Wargame Page

There is a lot of talk and controversy about AI and its means of generating images. It almost certainly uses images on the Web but does it steal intellectual property or is it derivative in terms of fair use?

First off, here is how Google Gemini says it works, based on what it found on the Web.

“AI generates images by training on massive datasets of images and corresponding text, learning to associate visual patterns with descriptions. Using neural networks—commonly via diffusion models—the AI starts with random noise and gradually refines it into a detailed image that matches a user’s text prompt. These models understand, rather than copy, styles, shapes, and colors to create entirely new, unseen visuals. “

Further, it steps through how…

Core Concepts and Techniques

• Training Data: Models like Stable Diffusion, DALL-E, and Midjourney are fed millions of image-caption pairs to understand the relationship between text and pixel patterns.
• Diffusion Models: The dominant method where the AI learns to reverse a process of breaking down images into noise. It starts with, or introduces, random pixel noise and iteratively removes it to reveal an image based on the prompt.
• Latent Space: The AI maps concepts, styles, and objects into a high-dimensional mathematical space, allowing it to translate descriptive text into specific pixel arrangements.
• Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs): An older, though still relevant, approach where two neural networks compete—one generates an image, and the other evaluates it for authenticity.

In short, it’s a lot of mumbo-jumbo that you may or may not understand. I certainly don’t!

I put it to the test by asking it to generate a picture of Gary Gygax in the style of the Mona Lisa painting. It came up initially with Mona Lisa with a beard. I told it Gary had little hair so it kept her hair but he was now bald on top. Then I said, remove Mona Lisa’s hair. Now we had Gary in Drag. I said put him in masculine cloths. The final result is thus….

For the comparison, here is the original painting…

The style is definitely there. However, it does seem that the new “painting” is nothing more than a collection of images assembled seamlessly into one image without attribution to the original artists. That is required for fair use. The newly generated picture does not actually look like Mr. Gygax but does bear many features. Interesting painting and AI did kind of nail the vibe I was going for. I did not care about the background other than it being similar to the original Mona Lisa. The books, dragon, volcano and so forth were nice touches.

So, am I a convert? No. I think there needs to be a lot more thought put into image generation with respect to IP law. This does clearly violate fair use practices as there is no attribution to the original artists. It’s an interesting experiment.

AI generated content is starting to work its way into commercial gaming material. Before buying, you should consider whether or not the items in the documents/books have been properly attributed to their respective artists. For instance, if it is AI generated from my own works collected in my own library, that would be perfectly fine. However, this almost certainly is not the case with 99% of AI generated material out there. I suppose you could stick with free to use sources on the internet – those sources that are old and no longer bound by copyright law or those that the artist/author grants express permission. AI, however, is prone to make mistakes. So even those instances should be looked at with a dubious eye.

So, if/when I ever publish anything will I ever use AI for my artwork? No. I am not interested in walking down easy street. I prefer to take pride in everything I do and own the mistakes when things go wrong. It’s who I am.

You may have noticed the lack of posts. The house is being remodeled and all the spare spaces are filled with stuff from the rooms being worked on. I’ll be spending some time in my basement in search of my gaming and painting table that have been buried under stuff both old and new. Hopefully in a week or two I can get a game or two in to test all that OHW 3-hit nonsense. Until then, good gaming!

I came across a video on the Battle of Hastings. Most historians seem to cling to the old story that King Harold Godwinson dies by an arrow in the eye. The Bayeux Tapestry seems to support this though some claim that the arrow in Harold’s eye was added after the fact sometime in the later 1800s during a restoration. I think the arrow is immaterial. I have a different theory. That figure is not Harold at all.

“King Harold is dead”

The picture above is the frame depicting the final moments of King Harold. In position #1, we see a dragon standard and several men, presumably dressed in mail and carrying a shield and spear. The left most figure appears to have avoided a thrown spear. These men appear to be the kings personal Huscarls.

The figure at position #2 is who historians claim to be Harold. With a look we can see that he is clutching the arrow that presumably did him in. There are, however, two curious things. First, his socks don’t match. One is red and the other is brown. That does not seem like something a wealthy King would wear. The second thing is how he is armed. I can believe that he would carry a shield. However, heis also carrying a spear. That is a rather lowly weapon for a King in any era. I would have thought he would have had a sword or a mace or even a great ax. He is positioned under the word “Harold” so I suppose that’s something.

The figure in position #3 seems a little more like a noble to me. His socks and tunic sleeves are striped telling us he had the money to buy better close. He uses a great ax which is the weapon of a Huscarl. In total, he has a very different look than all the other living characters in the frame, either Norman or Saxon. He is also being struck down by a Norman Knight with a sword which is aligned with the two earliest accounts of his death as you will see below. Harold and the knight are rather well centered under the full title of the frame “King Harold is dead.”

The first quote comes from the book called The Carmen writen by Guy of Amiens

“William called to himself Eustace, Hugh of Ponthieu [and] Giffard … for the destruction of the king…

The first, cleaving [Harold’s] breast through the shield with his sword, drenched the earth with a gushing torrent of blood; the second cut off his head below the protection of the helmet; the third pierced the inwards of his belly with his lance; and the fourth hewed off his thigh.“
–Guy of Amiens

There is no mention here of an arrow in the eye. It does appear that Harold suffered many wounds before he died. Whether it was a heroic death or the knights just hacked at him, we will never know.

The second quote is written by the Norman chronicler, William of Jumieges.

“Harold himself, fighting amid the front rank of his army, fell, covered with deadly wounds.“
–William of Jumieges

In much less detail, this account seems to corroborate with the first account. Both accounts were written within 4 years of the battle.

The alast account is from an English Writer, William of Malmsbury.

“fell, from having his brain pierced with an arrow … and yielded to death. One of the soldiers with a sword gashed his thigh, as he lay prostrate; for which shameful and cowardly action he was condemned by William, and expelled from the army.“
–William of Malmesbury

This is the first time an arrow is mentioned, some 59 years after the battle. The arrow pierces Harold’s brain. Whether it went through the eye or not in this account is anyone’s guess. An arrow through the brain would, never the less, be lethal.

So, we could take the popular theory that Harold was hit in the eye with an arrow but the reasoning to me is flawed. The figure is standing under the name “Harold” but the name is not a tag but rather is part of the title of the frame. He is also wearing similar attire as all the other figures in the frame, save one, the man on the ground. That figure has similar armor but has striped stockings, no shield and is the only one with an ax. The demise of this figure also closely matches with the earliest accounts of his death.

There is a theory that both figures are Harold at different stages of the battle. This does not work either. Logically that would mean, Harold was wounded in the eye, changed his stockings, dropped his shield, picked up an ax and then was then slain by a Norman knight. No. The frame is a moment in time. The knights burst through Harold’s personal guard and killed him. The figure in position #3 is Harold and King Harold is dead.

The information comes from primary sources mentioned above and was compiled John D Clare’s teaching site here.

The full scene…

It’s been a while. Probably since the end of the pandemic. Isolation really plays with one’s motivation to do anything but just get by. I’ve finally got the bug to start gaming in earnest again. I hope to blog about the more interesting gaming experiences I have in the coming months and years.

My conundrum is that most of my friends are role players. I generally don’t like the more “modern” versions of Dungeons and Dragons, starting with first edition. The original edition is the one I will always have fond memories of.

That said, gone are the days of 4+ hour of game sessions. Life is too short and I just don’t have that kind of time to sit and play a game, especially one I just don’t enjoy. I am mostly interested simple rules with simple game mechanics all the way through. Rules molded in the Featherstone/Bath style are really what I enjoy.

I’ve got plenty of subjects I’d like to pontificate on or review. 4 years is a long time. Be on the lookout for some new posts. Until then…

Got back from Cold Wars yesterday in the early afternoon.  Early you say?  That bad?  Well no.  It was an interesting event with some odd changes.

1. The Host.  You know you are dying to hear about it.   Construction is going at a good pace.  There was a lot of stone work done on the exterior of the building.  There are doors where their once were no doors.  There are windows where their once were no windows.  The tennis barn, for instance, has a huge pane of windows on the front letting in much natural light.  The side effect is that the barn is now quite warm!  Some of the space has been walled off.  The space outside the HAWKs room, for instance, has been walled off to make another room.  The finished rooms are quite nice.  They are as nice as some of the nicer hotels.  Ours, however, did not have a phone and at one point some workers had to come in to fix a problem with the cable.
2. Food: The general food situation is about the same as before.  You could get tacos and burritos throughout the day from the upstairs station.  Downstairs was still serving the usual fair of cold sandwiches and hot dogs as well as coffee, soft drinks and even beer!  The kitchen food was a large disappointment.  The breakfast was merely OK.  It has been better in the past.  The dinner at the bar was a complete disaster though.  I ordered a burger cooked medium.  It came out well.  I would have sent it back had I not been pressed for time.  My friend got the prime rib sandwich, which in the past, is quite tasty.  His came out as a thick, tough slice of meat well overcooked.  I heard others complain the same about the food in the kitchen.  That was the only non-breakfast meal I ordered from the bar.
3. There were plenty of games going on.  Lots of interesting and beautiful games.  The HAWKs room remained very busy on Friday and Saturday.  Even on Saturday night, Distilfink room (the huge ball room) seemed to have every gaming table full.  I’d not seen that in several years.  Sunday was another matter and perhaps the big reason I left early.  There was not a single game going on when I walked around at 9:30am Sunday morning.  I did see one gentleman in the big room with some Star Wars stuff including an AT-AT but it looked more like he was just inventorying or repairing than setting up a game.  HAWKs room also seemed to have just one game setup.

It was a good time and I enjoyed seeing my friends who came from as far as Indiana.  I understand that 2017 will be the last year of conventions at the Host.  It seems HMGS-East and the new owners of the Host could not come to an agreement for future conventions.  From what I’ve heard, all HMGS conventions will be held at a Marriott (I think) in downtown Lancaster.  The last HMGS convention in the Host will be Fall-In 2018.