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

The real question is not what the algorithm pushes to you, but whether their moderation actually bans bigots and removes their posts. Any other instance would lose their “right” to federate with a queer-friendly instance if they didn’t do that, so why would Threads get an exception?

Isn’t “queer friendly” and “federates with Threads” an oxymoron?

ECS already makes it a hundred times easier for me to conceptualize game mechanics, modify and extend them. Giving AI the ability the ability to create data separate from systems that use them will make it much easier for it to build a game. I don’t believe for a second it will be able to write functioning object-oriented game code for example. It will likely be best if it avoided coding via a text-based language altogether, and use visual scripting or another system based on chaining logic blocks together. But that still counts as the “system” part of ECS.

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.

I don’t think that’s how it works and it would likely not be legal. By explicitly blocking Threads, you make a big statement about not wanting your instance’s posts to show up there. Also from a technical standpoint, I don’t think a “middle-man” instance will push posts from another instance to a third one. You’d have to explicitly scrape data that’s not available via the API. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Could you please provide some sources for that? I’d like to know more.

First of all though, there is no such thing as a “hostile fork”. Being able to fork a project, for any reason, is the entire point of open source. And to be fair, not wanting to continue working for a for-profit company for free is a very good reason.

And yeah, when you suddenly turn a FOSS project that’s been developed with the help of a bunch of contributors, into a for-profit company, without making a big fuss about it beforehand and allow the contributors and community to weigh in, then yeah, that’s a hostile takeover of sorts, at least in my opinion. Developers gotta make money, but they could’ve done that by creating a new brand instead of taking over that of a previously completely FOSS project. Forgejo is preventing that exact thing from happening by joining Codeberg (a non-profit).

There’s been a hostile takeover at Gitea and it’s now run / owned by a for-profit company. The developers forked the project under the name Forgejo and are continuing the work under a non-profit. See also: Their introduction post and a page comparing the two projects. Feel free to look up more, since I haven’t familiarized myself with the incident all that much myself. Either way though, maybe consider using Forgejo instead of Gitea.

I did decide to delete all my comments and posts on Reddit. Sure, maybe I’ve posted some helpful comments, but why support Reddit with their continued existence? Remove content, and people might move to other sites to get their information.

I also decided to keep my account. Turns out some content stayed around, because I could not see and therefore delete it in locked subreddits. So when they came back, the comments came back too, and I was able to delete them, still.

I’m unable to test this, but I was browsing around and found that in a FontVariation you add “Standard Ligatures” to “OpenType Features” and then disable it. Would that by chance help solve your issue? There’s also a similar field in the font import options in “Metadata Overrides”.

My only experience with Mind Traveler was them engaging with almost every single comment in one thread, seemingly stirring up stuff. I’m not sure about others, but to me that’s not how I want anyone to interact with a forum such as Lemmy. I don’t want half of the comments in a thread to be from a single user trying to argue every single other person, being as noisy as they can be.

Also, what is your stake in this? You aren’t a particularly active user, at least from what I can see from my Lemmy instance. There might be reason to believe you’re an alt account of Mind Traveler or a friend trying to push some narrative.

Besides, if anyone is not happy with the actions of our Lemmy admins, which are unlikely to change, why not just move to another instance? That’s the beauty of the fediverse, after all. Unless, of course, they aren’t welcome on other instances either.

Please, no more drama or attempting to discredit Blåhaj Lemmy admins.

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.

As a spectator with no stake in what happened, except of course wanting people to feel comfortable, I feel like two things were still left unaddressed:

• It looked like the owner of the affected community was driven out by something that almost resembled a witch hunt, with accusations that appeared to be unfounded or even maliciously pushed by people opposing the views or moderation style of the community.

• There was a particular user who stood out to me because they tried to respond to as many posts as possible, seemingly fueling the drama, or at least actively pushing their opinion on everyone. I feel like this is not the appropriate way to interact in such a forum, nor healthy for that individual.

What did the admins do or are planning to do in regards to these concerns?

I believe “copyright free” in this case doesn’t mean not protected by copyright, but rather that it was missing attribution, so they could not contact the original creator.

Anything you create is automatically protected by copyright, whether you put a “© copygirl” or something to that effect on it or not. To use someone else’s work, you either need to get permission from the author directly, or the work has to be available under a license that says you’re allowed to (typically comes with some requirements or restrictions). One can also release a work under public domain, but that isn’t legally possible in some countries. There’s also some exceptions like fair use but that’s another thing.

Something else to consider in place of or in addition to a build number could also be using the git commit hash of what you’re building. Though I would only use that for non-stable releases.

For example, stable versions of Zig look like 0.12.1 and then there’s in-development releases like 0.13.0-dev.351+64ef45eb0. It uses semantic versioning where the “pre-release” is dev.351, which includes an incrementing build number, and the “build metadata” is 64ef45eb0, the commit hash it was built from. The latter allows a user to quickly look up the exact commit easily and thus know exactly what they’re using.

Version 5 of a software, device, vehicle or such isn’t necessarily better than version 4, and no official definition of the word “version” require this, either. If I may make another anology: You may pick one of 5 different versions of an outfit to wear, and even though they were labeled in the order they were made, from 1 to 5, none are inherently, objectively better than any other. In the case of UUIDs there are versions that are meant to supercede others, but also simply alternatives for different use-cases. Anyone with access to some up-to-date information can learn what each version’s purpose is.

1. There is the --download-sections option. Looking at it, you might want to use --download-sections "*0:00-1:00".
2. I briefly checked with --list-thumbnails and it doesn’t look like YouTube offers any square ones, so I would look into using ImageMagick to edit the image with a command. I doubt yt-dlp allows you to do any sort of image manipulation out of the box.

But whether it’s technically legal is exactly what does or doesn’t make it CSAM. “Looking like” is going to be highly subjective, and I don’t understand how the admins of the other instance are supposed to handle reports, other than to verify whether or not it actually is the case or not.

Are petite looking people not supposed to make explicit content while dressing up cute? Should a trans man not share explicit pictures of himself, because he might look like an underage boy? Do we stop at porn that gives the appearance of someone being young? What about incest or ageplay? Like, what if you or someone else was made sufficiently uncomfortable by some other kind of porn? How do you decide what is and isn’t okay? How do you avoid bias? What would you be telling a model when they ask why you removed their content?

Apologies for going on with this when I’m sure you’re already sick of dealing with this. I had just felt like some of the points I brought up (like in my original reply) were entirely overlooked. Putting effort into an (attempted) thought-out reply doesn’t mean I get to receive a response I was hoping for, but I was at least hoping for something you hadn’t already said elsewhere.

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 think both instance admins have a valid stance on the matter. lemmynsfw appears to take reports very seriously and if necessary does age verification of questionable posts, something that likely takes a lot of time and effort. Blahaj Lemmy doesn’t like the idea of a community that’s dedicated to “adults that look or dress child-like”. While I understand the immediate (and perhaps somewhat reactionary) concern that might raise, is this concern based in fact, or in emotion?

Personally I’m in the camp of “let consenting adults do adult things”, whether that involves fetishes that are typically thought of as gross, dressing up in clothes or doing activities typically associated with younger ages, or simply having a body that appears underage to the average viewer. As the lemmynsfw admin mentioned, such persons have the right to lust and be lusted after, too. That’s why, as a society, we decided to draw the line at 18 years old, right?

I believe the concern is not that such content is not supposed to exist or be shared, but rather that it’s collected within a community. And I think the assumption here is that it makes it easy for “certain people” to find this content. But if it is in fact legal, and well moderated, then is there a problem? I don’t believe there is evidence that seeing such content could change your sexual preferences. On the other hand, saying such communities should not exist could send the wrong message, along the lines of “this is weird and should not exist”, which might be what was meant with “body shaming”.

I’m trying to make sense of the situation here and possibly try to deescalate things, as I do believe lemmynsfw approach to moderation otherwise appears to be very much compatible with Blahaj Lemmy. Is there a potential future where this decision is reconsidered? Would there be some sort of middle-ground that admins from both instances could meet and come to an understanding?