So after being disqualified for using AI to generate a pixel-art image for a cut-scene, which was a totally fair decision and we should have read this page extensively before even thinking of doing it, I do have to say that I'm detecting some double standards in rule enforcing.
An excerpt of the rule for relevance:
17. No use of AI-generated content. Only licensed material is allowed in this jam.
Apparently the spirit of the rule is to "encourage the non-replacement of roles":
We don't encourage replacing roles or people with AI though so if it's clear it is AI replacing a role it's against the spirit of the rule.
This was in response to someone asking about web art (css, html and js) generated through code above, which was one of the examples of the grey area that is allowing copilot and AI code.
Again, I agree with not allowing AI assets, but if the spirit of the rule is to not replace a role, then what about replacing a developer? I'm pretty sure there are some models capable of producing the whole code for a decent game just tweaking it enough to adapt it to the theme. And let's not forget that license infringements by AI is done outside art and music too, code being public doesn't mean it can be trained with as it might infringe open source licenses, a long-standing debate by now. May be that license infringement is just another excuse for this rule, as AI fed with owned materials seem to not be allowed as well. Never mind the fact that CSS AI art being allowed in theory just because it is code-generated, which is quite the stretch when one can very easily translate a pixel-art image to CSS.
I hope this can be taken into consideration for future jams and don't allow such gray areas and fully enforce the non use of AI as a whole, I know is harder to detect in code and would mean taking code submissions alongside the distributables, but I think it's only fair. More so this being a trigger-happy disqualification rule, our game was almost immediately disqualified (meaning no user ratings at all,) whereas I have been reporting games for clearly going against rules 1 and 4 and not seeing much action taken. And again, I agree with the rule and I think the enforcement is fair, just a little disappointed that coding is not seen in the same light as art and there is clear bias in rule enforcement.
Thanks for reading and the best of luck with the rest of the jam.