The discussion surrounding Perlin noise and its implementation in procedural generation of landscapes raises important considerations about the underlying assumptions made in such methods. Critics, including geologists, argue that procedural generation should account for geological forces that shape actual landscapes, rather than relying solely on randomness. This calls for a refined approach in code that is more representative of real-world geological processes. Additionally, there are concerns over the use of AI-generated images that do not authentically reflect the procedural generation techniques being discussed. Readers desire a more accurate visual representation of procedural landscapes, as misleading images may diminish trust in the content presented. Key Points: - The need to incorporate geological factors in procedural generation. - Potential issues with randomness in current methods. - A call for authentic representations in accompanying visual content.