BCOVertigo

Yeah just start your own instance on a different planet with situations that only provoke your preferred amount of existential dread!

Barring that you're going to be stuck identifying the sources of this widespread misery and trying to help people overcome it. For most people that might be difficult but I don't know your budget so I won't assume. There's also the option of interacting with machines that pose as happier humans but your goal overall seems contrary to growing that 80% by adding yourself unless I misread your intent.

Trying to come up with original memes for the community that gave you brain damage

Hmm, I'm beginning to think this internet bullshit might not be the best way to get a crab.

✂️😡✂️

You gain Crabshell x1. You're still a little Hungry. You have become Lonely. You have saved $.65 on this order with your doordash subscription.

What about it specifically do you dislike? This type of setting definitely invites questioning by the audience and can break immersion, but I'm curious about your take on it.

In dungeons and dragons there is a type of hybrid character you can play called an Artificer who treats magic more like technology, and there are a ton of examples in popular media that others have mentioned. I do think you have to determine how and if you'll keep them distinct if that's important to your plot, but if they developed alongside eachother maybe the technology of that world relies on magic to work.

Or maybe your magic relies on elder gods that don't like the mortal hubris of critiquing the gods works so attempts to unravel magic gets you cursed or worse.

I think they can go together and the way you fit them can even become a plot point!

Yes, we do care that it's unintelligent because that's the reason it can't be trusted with anything important. This is not being pedantic. This technology is unreliable dogshit. We'll still be having this conversation in 2030 if it hasn't cooked us all or lost it's undeserved hype.

(Adding Stellarst0rm's example because I somehow forgot it https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/6gzfra/damn_wish/)

Do you notice how the original sketch version has very different facial expressions for the punch line (if simplistic sketch art) and the AI doesn't clearly convey anything by the younger's facial reaction because the model paints the same "angry/alarm" pattern on both characters? Why is the younger vaguely angry in the AI version? You can make something up like "that's just the style" but...

There is no answer because there is no style because nobody made this. It's just a copy missing a piece of the humor the source had that didn't make it through as statistically relevant even though it DOES contain data for the punchline to observers. Do you see how the next model training on this will actually lose something that's a concrete part of the joke? Let's ignore "soul" and say that it dropped the ball on nonverbal communication in a way that's meaningfully worse to the viewer.

It's true that people will have a hard time articulating why modeling art and language are worse than actually making them, but I don't think their concerns are unfounded. It's slop in my opinion because it loses to napkin art despite having vast resources applied to it. I understand how the difference may seem like a grumpy nitpick but the models can't train off their own output without a buildup of convolutional traces that poison their outputs eventually and break them according to current studies. It's clearly missing SOMETHING intangible and whatever people call it, it's real.

I should have read more carefully, thanks for catching! I'll edit and add something on topic.

"New York Life all said they’ve never hired prompt engineers, but instead found that—to the extent better prompting skills are needed—it was an expertise that all existing employees could be trained on."

Are you telling me that the jobs invented to support a bullshit technology that lies are themselves ALSO bullshit lies?

How could this happen??

Original comment:

I agree with all of this under the caveat that your DM interpretation of the "what constitutes interaction" in 5e can also have more influence on your success than clever or clumsy play. DMs I've played with have varied from very loose discussions about their concerns for balance to self crippling houserules that wind up with illusionist NPCs failing to do anything because of a broomstick and blanket being flailed at them by a fighter. Specifically speak with the DM running the game and come to a common understanding before you start. Find out how interactions and passive checks will work against your illusions ahead of time in that game!

Edit because I'm turning into a lich and forgetting which editions we're talking about:

Major Illusion, Hallucinatory Terrain, and Greater invisibility are amazing staples of illusion and you can look to Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration as patches for any missing features a wizard should have in your party. Other than that I think... take standard wizard spells and ban schools based on your party if you have the chance to plan with them. Also consider the synergy that lies (enchantment) can have with misdirection and see if you can fill that role or support your local lying bard/rogue/beguiler.

Illusion for gnomes in 3.5 invariably leads to talking about their shadow magic prestige class from Races of Stone and the ability to change what disbelief entails as well as cast evocation and conjurations as shadowy illusion that become more and more real as you progress. This is amazing for high powered campaigns but personally I recommend house ruling metamagic level out of the %realism formula. This prestige class is in no way necessary though as illusion rocks and gets license to make memorable scenes in ways other spell schools don't!