A lot of contributors of FOSS projects make small changes that aren't copyrightable.

Isn't "queer friendly" and "federates with Threads" an oxymoron?

There is a possibility something like this will be possible in the future, but it's not going to be an achievement of AI, it's largely going to be the achievement of regular developers creating a general-purpose game engine that can be used to put together a game block by block, which can be utilized by both human game designers and AI. (Likely to better effect by the former.) I can imagine Entity Component Systems will play a big part of that.

One of the biggest blockers for AI making games is going to be testing it to select for better performance. With text it's relatively easy to see if some text an AI produced is plausible. Images are also plentiful, but that's a lot more subjective. With both of these it would also not take a massive amount of time to add a human element. It's quick to check if a paragraph or image looks like it is a good response to the input promt. A game, however? How long do you need to play it to see if it's fun? At best, perhaps, you can write an AI to control a bot character to see if it's technically playable.

I don't want to even think about the electricity that wlll be wasted training such models.

Both banned by your instance: https://lemmy.world/instances

Actually this is pretty easy. First of all you got to get a stack of exactly 1 TNT and place it down where you want it to explode. Be careful not to put anything else in the slot the TNT was in because that's now shadow-linked with the TNT you placed. You need to somehow get a redstone signal to activate in the same tick as you punch the TNT block. It'll take a bunch of tries. Be careful not to pick up the dropped TNT item, or it'll go into the shadowed slot. That part is pretty random. Next open up the chat and type "BOOOM!" or similar. It helps if you copied the text beforehand so you only have to paste it in. Log out of the server and never come back because you're a bad person.

Regarding what I called a "witch hunt", it seemed like some users quickly jumped on board accusing the previous owner of the libertyhub community of intentionally misgendering a user, when it appeared to be a singular slip up ("you" instead of "You"), that he quickly apologized for and fixed. Maybe there were valid concerns regarding the moderation of that community and it was indeed the right choice for the owner to step down – I am totally missing the context for this – but I felt like there was a large focus on the wrong issue that might've driven him away from Lemmy.

For the unfamiliar (like me), Xenia is chilling with Kiki the Cyber Squirel, the mascot of the FOSS painting program Krita.

I use uBlock Origin + vaft from TwitchAdSolutions, which is currently working pretty well for me. I've had some issues before, and every now and then the stream can freeze up when an ad is played. But it's so much better than having to endure even a second of those mind-rotting ads.

The reason I brought up emotion in my reply was because I've felt that the lemmynsfw admins have been able to explain their decision quite reasonably and seemed to be open to conversation, wheras Ada was set on one goal and upon finding disagreement, wasn't in the right mindset to continue a constructive conversation. Which, to be fair, due to the nature of the content, is understandable.

If the content that the Blahaj Lemmy admins are concerned about are limited to certain communities, and part of the issue is the concentration of content in said communities in the first place (at least, as I speculated in my original reply), then I don't quite understand why blocking these communities only isn't something that was considered, rather than defederating the entire instance. I do respect Blahaj Lemmy's decision not to want to host such content. Or is there some technical limitation that I'm not aware of?

I thought we already drew that line: 18 years of age, able to consent, and consenting. For context: I looked at this article where it is said Shauna Rae is 22 years old, however due to a condition her growth was stunted. I don't think we should tell her not to date or do explicit things with her partner, when she finds one. It's her body, and she is an adult. Similar to others with growth related conditions, such as dwarfism, or simply people who look petite even after they've come of age, who also get thrown under the bus regularly.

Let's actually go that extra step and pretend she did make sexually explicit content. Now what? It immediately feels very wrong. Put that aside. I'm guessing most people are going to be worried about those with certain urges getting their rocks off..? (Honestly, not sure what to call them here, I was already unfamiliar with the term "CSAM", so I'll just leave it at that.) Now there's content that's legal and hasn't harmed a child. That seems ... better than the alternative?

I don't think a person with unhealthy sexual urges gets to choose whether they have these urges or not. Demonizing them to the degree that we are, leads to most of them not being able to get the help they need. If it can't be done by other means such as therapy, or therapy is not available, an outlet might help. And whether that's "questionable" but legal porn, roleplaying, or other content or activities involving consenting adults that seems to tick the right boxes, ... that's up to them, not us. Again, miles better than the alternative, even if the immediate reaction is to be disgusted.

It's an incredibly delicate problem. I'd say the right approach would be to do more scientific studies, but I imagine not many have or will be done because of the societal taboo. It's also very iffy trying to search for existing research on this matter on the internet, and even if I could find some, I don't have the expertise to know how scientifically sound it is.

In fact, in writing this and continuously re-reading my comment, I keep feeling like the points I'm making are scarily close to those of an apologist, or worse, someone who wants to normalize the sexualization of minors. I want to make it clear that I'm 100% against this. But I'm also against shaming the bodies of adults, telling them what they can't and can't do, because it makes me feel uncomfortable. (And I want to note that this is not meant to be an argument relating to the thread as a whole, as it would not want to tell the admins to host content I hypothesized in this post.)

Trans girls: Both? Both.
Cis girls: Free money.
Trans boys: Not sure if worth.
Egg (female): Wouldn't it be funny if I pressed this button and turned into a girl instead of getting the money which is totally the reason I pressed the button? That'd be a total bummer. Haha, right? ... unless?

Not hating on people who like and enjoy PvP games, but to me it feels like it's a good way for a developer to make a game that doesn't actually have that much substance. Lacking content? Nothing to actually do in the game? NPCs are difficult to make interesting to fight? Just have players shoot each other. It's basically content that creates itself, not to mention (if you have good matchmaking) the difficulty ramps up naturally without you having to write better enemy AI.

I just want to fight stuff alongside other people, rather than potentially making another person's day just a little worse because I shot them before they shot me, you know? Is that too much to ask?