A cautious position on AI.

This page exists because the subject comes up during studio and transaction work. It should not read as a claim that Dino Sloth is an AI consultancy.

Where it intersects with the work

• Performance and pipeline experiments. I can help define a measurable comparison: completed-task time, review cost and defects—not the speed of the first draft.
• Review data handling. Client source, captures and documentation stay within the agreed environment. Public consumer AI tools are not part of the review process.
• Technical diligence. I can establish what tools were used, what records exist and where a buyer may need legal, security or provenance advice.
• Operating judgement. I can challenge a productivity claim or help management decide whether a small trial has earned further investment.

Where separate expertise is required

Tool security, model deployment, copyright, data protection, contractual warranties and policy sign-off need the appropriate security or legal specialist. If one of those determines the decision, Dino Sloth will name the missing expertise rather than turn game-industry experience into an opinion outside its lane.

My working position

Start with internal work whose output can be checked against evidence and which does not place generated material in the shipped product. Approve specific tools and account types. Keep records proportionate to the material. Measure the complete workflow, including review and repair.

A deliberate no-use policy can also be sensible. What matters during a review is that the studio knows what it permits, what has actually happened and who owns the decision.

What I will not sell

• A promise that AI will make a team a stated percentage faster
• Legal clearance for generated content
• Security certification of a model or tool
• An AI transformation programme
• A policy presented as a substitute for counsel