I understand Steam not wanting to moderate the absolute flood of user-created content of its thousands of games (on their own), but then, it probably shouldn’t force community forums on every single one of its games when the developers can’t or don’t want to moderate them.

(Also, the ADL doesn’t recognize the ongoing genocide of Palestinians so maybe we should just ignore what they think.)

Then you should also override Equals(object), GetHashCode, and implement IEquatable<T>.

Thankfully a lot of the usual boilerplate code can be avoided using a record class or struct:

public record Person(string Name, uint Age);

I was editing my comment as you were responding. Check the issue on GitHub I linked in the edit, and maybe thumbs it up for visibility. One of the commenters mentions using a third-party tool but I’m not sure the one they linked to can grab posts. In theory another one might exist to dump your post data.

Which service? Mastodon has a built-in export functionality in preferences.

I can’t find such an option on Lemmy, but you should be able to do a GDPR request for your information as a last resort.

edit: Non-post data / user settings can be exported (and imported!) but posts are a separate issue. See this open issue.

Is this not what the “active” sorting does?

The idea is that “roguelike” = a game like Rogue, which according to some people, requires checking most if not all of the boxes including ASCII, proc-gen, perma-death, turn-based, … while the term “rougelite” is less strict. But I think we’re past the point of that distinction being adopted into mainstream.

https://github.com/godotengine/godot-docs

This is the source for Godot’s documentation. You could clone the repo (in reST format) or download one of the releases (in HTML format) offline, so you wouldn’t even need to query anything online.

The lenses don’t have to both be at the same distance to be fair.

Taming animals so you can ride them, or let them pull carriages? Building roads for vehicles? Train tracks with functional trains? Cool airships? All made obsolete with this one-kills-all glider feature! Don’t let good game design get in the way of convenience! /s

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.

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

Indeed, it’s a neat way to visualize gravity, but that’s it. It lacks any sort of explanation of why masses appear to be pulled towards one another. (I will point to the other person in this thread saying it “explains gravity with gravity”.) This is why I think the metaphor you mentioned detracts from the original video.

I think that explains the “how” more than the “why”.

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.

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.

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).