
★
Mike Driver

@theartofmadeline
Fai_Ryy
official daine visual archive

Discoholic 🪩
sheepfilms

PR's Tumblrdome
d e v o n
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

izzy's playlists!

⁂
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Xuebing Du

Origami Around

titsay
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
No title available
tumblr dot com

seen from Germany
seen from France

seen from Germany

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Maldives

seen from Italy

seen from Iraq
seen from Belgium

seen from India
seen from Argentina
seen from Russia
seen from Senegal
seen from Tunisia
seen from Thailand
seen from Brazil

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Malaysia

seen from Uzbekistan
@escapingdaydreamsinthewilderness
kissing my sick wife (ao3) on the forehead with tears in my eyes. tucking her into bed with shaking hands. praying for her health. bless the doctor (otw volunteers i think) that gave us medicine (working on unexpected maintenance). she needs to sweat the fever out
fat little girls deserve the world tbh society is so traumatizing to them
fat little girls can do whatever they want forever actually. btw. it’s law now.
onion not even doing satire at this point
"is my anger learned or was it in my code? passed down from your father's father, prophesied and predisposed. a generational curse, that'll only get worse, rotting out our family tree. It didn't start with you, but it'll end with me"
this sims 2 ad has like such deep gay energy to it. Like this feels like queer history to me
The funny thing is that it wasn't even an intentional stance taking. They just forgot to code a check to make sure characters genders "matched", resulting in that characters could get into relationships regardless of gender.
What the hell are you talking about? They didn't forget anything. A programmer for the sims 1 was a gay man who programmed gay relationships into the game and they kept adding it back, intentionally, in each game.
Actually, you’re both correct. It was an accident and a deliberate decision by one gay developer:
“During The Sims’s protracted development, the team had debated whether to permit same-sex relationships in the game. If this digital petri dish was to accurately model all aspects of human life, from work to play and love, it was natural that it would facilitate gay relationships. But there was also fear about how such a feature might adversely affect the game. “No other game had facilitated same-sex relationships before—at least, to this extent—and some people figured that maybe we weren’t the ideal ones to be first, as this was a game that E.A. really didn’t want to begin with,” Barret told me. “It felt to me like a fear thing.” After going back and forth for several months, the team finally decided to leave same-sex relationships out of the game code.
When Barrett joined the company, in October, 1998, he was unaware of the decision. A fortnight into his new job, he found himself with nothing to do when his supervisor, the game’s lead programmer, Jamie Doornbos, took a short vacation. Jim Mackraz, Barrett’s boss, needed a task to occupy his new employee, and he handed Barrett a document that outlined how social interactions in the game would work; the underlying rules for the game’s A.I. that would dictate how the characters would dynamically interact with one another. “He didn’t think I could handle it with Jamie off on vacation, but he figured that at least I’d be out of his hair,” Barrett told me. “Neither he nor I realized that he’d given me an old design document to work from.”
That design document predated the decision to exclude gay relationships in the game. Its pages described a web of social interactions, in which every kind of romantic relationship was permitted. That week, Barrett confounded the expectations of his disbelieving boss. He successfully wrote the basic code for social interactions, including same-sex relationships. “In hindsight, I probably should have questioned the design,” Barrett, who is gay, said. “But the design felt right, so I just implemented it. Later, Will Wright stopped by my desk,” Barrett said. “He told me that liked the social interactions, and that he was glad to see that same-sex support was back in the game.” Nobody on the team questioned Barrett’s work. “They just pretty much ignored it,” he said. “After a while, everyone was just used to the design being there. It was widely expected that E.A. would just kill it, anyway.”
In early 1999, before E.A. had a chance to kill the design, Barrett was asked to create a demo of the game to be shown at E3. The demo would consist of three scenes from the game. These were to be so-called on-rails scenes—not a true, live simulation but one that was preplanned, and which would shake out the same way each time it was played, in order to show the game in its best light. One of the scenes was a wedding between two Sims characters. “I had run out of time before E3, and there were so many Sims attending the wedding that I didn’t have time to put them all on rails,” Barrett said.
On the first day of the show, the game’s producers, Kana Ryan and Chris Trottier, watched in disbelief as two of the female Sims attending the virtual wedding leaned in and began to passionately kiss. They had, during the live simulation, fallen in love. Moreover, they had chosen this moment to express their affection, in front of a live audience of assorted press.”
- from The Kiss That Changed Video Games by Simon Parker
by tucker
being anti ai is making me feel like in going insane. "you asked for thoughts about your characters backstory and i put it into chat gpt for ideas". studies have proven its making people dumber. "i asked ai to generate this meal plan". its causing water shortages where its data centers are built. "ill generate some pictures for the dnd campaign". its spreading misinformation. "meta, generate an image of this guy doing something stupid". its trained off stolen images, writing, video, audio. "i was talking with my snapchat ai-" theres no way to verify what its doing with the information it collects. "youtube is impletmenting ai based age verification". my work has an entire graphics media department and has still put ai generated motivational posters up everywhere. ai playlists. ai facial verification. google ai microsoft ai meta ai snapchat ai. everyone treats it as a novelty. every treats it as a mandatory part of life. am i the only one who sees it? am i paranoid? am i going insane? jesus fucking christ. if i have to hear one more "well at least-" "but it does-" "but you can-" im about to lose it. i shouldnt have to jump through hoops to avoid the evil machine. have you no principles? no goddamn spine? am i the weird one here?
what? oh sweetheart no, you're not weirding me out at all. you're weirding me in. keep talking, freak
A serious (and seemingly obvious) problem with the implementation of the Online Safety Act is that it requires malicious actors to not exist.
Since the UK govenment in any form hates paying for things, especially things required for their goals, the current situation is that websites have to work out to do age verification themselves. There is no government-approved or provided service for this - it's a free-for-all of third-party verification providers.
Now, some people are pointing out that depending on how these companies handle the data given to them to perform verification, it's possible this data could be stolen or leaked. This is a worrying possibility. This danger is primarily one of passive incompetence, although if your driver's licence gets leaked, you won't be happy either way.
But passive incompetence probably isn't going to hurt anyone before active malice does.
Normalising showing your face or identity documents to random websites is an incredibly stupid thing to do. You know who benefits from this? Actual criminals! Phishing attacks continue to be successful because people will put their banking details into websites that are very much not their banks. And while random websites asking for your banking details is suspicious, the OSA makes it so that random websites asking for your driver's license or passport or other such things will now be expected.
Meaning an enterprising criminal can set up a website, stick a fake age verification pop-up on it, and harvest a whole bunch of things that come in useful for committing identity theft. Or blackmail perhaps.
The overall point here is that in this respect, the Online Safety Act is going to make the internet more dangerous, in a way that should be obvious if you actually think about the potential negative consequences.
weird as fuck living in a culture where it's considered more impolite to speak up and defend yourself against someone treating you unfairly than it is for someone to be rude to you in the first place
older family members, coworkers, customers, and strangers in general can say the most batshit insane things to your face and somehow you're considered to be the "rude" one if you say "hey that wasn't cool of you to say"
ideal living situation is what i call the 'sitcom special' : having all your closest friends live in the same apartment building or neighborhood where you each have your own space but can wander in and out of eachothers homes at will, seemingly always welcome and never at bad times. and also all of you only have jobs when its important to the plot.
new hayley lyrics that make me feel like clawing my own eyes out
cooking with trauma