Regarding the whole Expedition 33 and GenAI assets debacle, one thing troubles me: where does one draw the line on how AI is used while developing a game (or any software, for that matter)?
Okay, no generated "front-end" assets, like text, music, voice or art, but how much further do we go? Does LLM-generated code count as "developed with AI"? Is it any amount of code, even if only one line, or substantial parts of the final product? Does that apply to the supporting documentation as well? If we want to be very technical, even auto-complete, a function that IDEs* have had for more than a decade, is "generative AI"; same thing with comments generated automatically by the software (the old ones, which only listed the variables used in a function and their type, not the new comments that "interpret" what's actually happening in the code).
Does this sound like what-aboutism? Probably. All I'm trying to say is, if people are going to use a binary classification of AI/Not-AI, like Steam started doing, there needs to be a very, very clear definition of what AI is in this context.
* for any readers who don't know, IDE stands for Integrated Development Environment and is a specialized software that, at its most basic, allows the writing and running of code. Most modern IDEs have many extra functionalities, including auto-complete and -correct, integration with cloud, and the dreaded LLM GenAI.
It’s a good question, and one with quite a long answer and I’m on holiday so have all the time in the world. Apologies in advance but also ‘Look what you made me do’.
Edit after I wrote all this: I’ve tried to answer your question in the first few paragraphs but naturally I’ve went off on one. Hopefully it provides a bit of context if you fancy a longer read. It looks more at the different critiques of GenAI.
To start I want to say I do separate the likes of AI/ML for medical research and broader scientific endeavours from the likes of commercial products like Midjourney and Sora.
I also believe we should differentiate between Machine Learning and Generative AI. An IDE like Visual Studio using the knowledge built over decades of programming to auto-complete the structure of the code is different from asking the myriad of hacky ‘website builder’ GenAI tools to build you a site similar to Netflix.
A lot of those website builders generate initially visually pleasing front-ends and not much else.
From the computer scientist sitting next to me - “There’s only so many ways to write code, you need to work within the bounds of the language so when programming it’s much easier to have something like autocomplete. But even then if you’re writing an if statement and you hit TAB to autocomplete it won’t insert your variable - it’s just giving you the scaffolding to do what you need to do. I wouldn’t say that’s an artificial intelligence.”
I’m hard-pressed to define auto-complete in something like Visual Studio as GenAI.
Another thing worth flagging early is that it doesn’t help that, given the amount of investment these products, GenAI has become the buzzword of the day. It’s the next ‘cloud/big data’.
Older products and tools have found any excuse to either implement some sort of AI function, or brand themselves as an AI tool, to maintain relevance. One such thing is Text-to-Speech which, as far as I’m aware, in some instances use generative AI for more ‘natural’ speech (more on that in a bit) but in other instances don’t.
That all being said one example often thrown up as the best case use of AI is when researches used it to catch breast cancer something like 4 years before it developed.
Something I think we can all agree is an excellent use of AI.
However there’s considerable ethical, environmental and to be honest commercial/quality concerns when it comes to generative AI and I’ll try and delve into them now. These aren’t necessarily separate concerns as there’s crossover between each of them.
BUT BEFORE THAT - A LITTLE BIT ABOUT STEAM
Steam does not display the various check boxes on the store page, but on the Steamworks backend during the content survey it asks you a few questions. First it asks you to confirm whether or not generative AI is used at all whether that’s in the game itself, the store page, and in any Steam community assets or marketing materials.
Checking Yes to this opens up another section which asks you to state whether the GenAI is pre-rendered or whether it’s live-generated during gameplay. It also gives you the Generative AI disclaimer to fill in about your use of AI in the game. There’s no guidelines or prompts for what can be written in there so whether in-game is specifically referring to art assets, text or voices, or whether it includes the underlying code isn’t specified.
Some clarity from Steam on this would be helpful, but I imagine they’d then have to define what they mean. Being in the industry, I feel like the they’re more likely to define it as any sort of visual/audio assets as opposed to code.
I would argue if GenAI was used at any point in the development pipeline for assets then studios should be checking that Yes box and detailing out what that means.
And here’s what I think are the different prongs of the GenAI discussion.
I’ll start with commercial - Does Generative AI help produce a better quality product cheaper and faster?
I’m not convinced it does. GenAI frequently hallucinates information in the creation of documentation and visual assets.
In games, I find it pretty easy to tell when a game has used AI for art assets. Some demos we played during next fest hadn’t declared anything on their steam page but had posters/newspapers in-game with the classic mess of letters. There’s a certain ‘uncanny valley’ when seeing AI assets in a game, it looks and feels cheap in a way that doesn’t benefit consumers.
Even popular games like ARC Raiders which uses GenAI for its voiceovers and voice acting has players noting that the generated voices sound stunted.
The retort to that is that the developers, Embark, paid voice actors to come in and train their AI and they also apparently receive royalties, but it begs the question - Why not pay them for the actual voice lines, get better quality takes, and pay them royalties on top of that?
Outside the games industry, Deloitte have been caught using GenAI to produce reports for the Australian government that contained inaccurate information. The AI hallucinated the sources - citing academic papers that didn’t exist, and fabricating a quote from a federal judge.
Arguably that’s a pretty big scandal, that paper could be used to inform government policy on fabricated information. Deloitte were paid over $250,000 to produce the report, and it appears they took what was produced by GenAI as gospel and had no quality control.
When it comes to programming, there’s equal concerns about quality. I’m not a programmer but have discussed this at length with programming friends (and I know @tgraywrites as fought his own battles with it) what tends to be happening in organisations is that CEOs or senior management want to be seen as having implemented AI, so they buy seats for Microsoft’s Co-Pilot and then push ‘AI training’ to teams on how to use it.
From working in tech before joining games, I know that it’s a bit of a red flag if a programmer has simply battered out code all day. It’s a creative process, and a lot of programming (and creativity in general) is being comfortable sitting with a problem and working it out.
Programmers gain experience by investigating what has went wrong with their code, or by finding ways around the blockers they have. The issue with AI produced code is that it’s three-fold:
It often produces incorrect code which takes longer to correct
It robs programmers, particularly junior developers, of the experience of sitting and working through the issue
It allows senior management to replace staff in a way that claims efficiency (most likely financial) while actually spreading more work to a smaller team
Applied to any industry, that’s not great. For games, the past few years saw massive investment during the pandemic lockdowns, over expansion, and then a drop in investment leading to mass layoffs.
It’s quite common to see advocates of AI compare it to the steam engine or to computer-aided design (CAD) software which resulted in jobs being lost. But with that, there was also a massive increase in efficiency. Something that isn’t being delivered by Generative AI.
Looking at the original quote from the CEO of Larian, the tech itself hasn’t led to big gains in efficiency.
The world seems to be full of organisations that are trying to make GenAI work in the hope they’ll ’crack the code’ and have a massive advantage over their competitors. I am not yet convinced those efficiencies exist.
Typing this on my phone so please rest here for a second, weary traveller
Next up - Is Generative AI ethical?
No.
Next up - Is Generative AI good for the environment?
Also no.
Half-joking with the bluntness of both of those answers. It’s widely known that publicly commercial generative AI products have been trained by scraping the creative work of hundreds of thousands of artist and authors without consent or even credit.
For me, this is probably my biggest issue with games using it for visual assets. Taking this example from a non-GenAI scandal where Bungie stole work from an artist for their upcoming game, Marathon. Generative AI is that on steroids, with enough plausible deniability to say that no one specific artist made it - it’s just an amalgamation of stolen work.
This is where the problem with GenAI earlier in the development process comes up. If GenAI isn’t in the final product, but is being used to generate references for concept artists, that’s still using GenAI in your development.
And maybe it’s just me, but I really don’t think GenAI for concept art references is pushing any sort of big efficiency gains.
Like here’s a few references I took while on a walk for a game I want to make in the future. Even with limited photography skills, I’ve captured the bits I need to capture, and it’s real! (although Callendar Square is no longer real, good riddance to that horrible building)
Nice segue into the environmental impact of AI which I feel often gets compartmentalised into ‘the eco-warrior argument’ but absolutely can’t be viewed in isolation from the another issue - Is the infrastructure to support GenAI benefiting the wider population?
Data Centres are an ecological nightmare. Their electricity consumption is spiking prices for anyone living locally.
Data centres were billed as a boon to Virginia’s economy. Now, residents are concerned about their impact on real estate and electricity cos
The ‘jobs boom’ in the BBC article above is typical media both-sides-ing. is built around the construction of data centres, not the jobs when they are operational.
Now it is absolutely worth clarifying that data centres are not being built solely for Generative AI, that’s not how data centres work. But GenAI’s usage is increasing the demand for more data centres.
On top of the downsides for those living locally to data centres, the amount of water these buildings consume to stay cool is vast.
And despite water being one of our most valuable resources, it still feels like it’s being waved off as not a big issue. But when you put it in context of what is being achieved by mass consumption GenAI - there’s not any evidence of huge efficiencies being gained to deliver better quality and cheaper services for people.
If you got this far, thanks for reading to the end and hope I was able to answer the question.
This is only gonna be part 1 since there are a FUCK ton of languages.
All of them are apart of the C-family of programming languages.
Besides Lua of course (i didnt realize,only after i finished this and actually started to research so I can write this out)
The C-family is usualy characterizied by the use of curly bracekts and semi-colons ( {} and ; ),aswell as paramters delimited by parentheses ' () '
C is the parent (created 1972) and C++ being a direct descendant of C (1979).
The difference between scripting languages and programming languages is very simple.
Every scripting language is a programming language,but not all programming languages are scripting languages.
Scripting languages are only interperted at a certain runtime,whole P.L. are compiled ahead of time.
S.L. are alooooot slowr that their P.L. counterparts. S.L. are dependent on programs and enviroments to run at all,while P.L. can run independantly directly on the OS of the computer.
S.L. are veeery simple and light weight while P.L. are code-intensive with complex builds.
Errors are only found during the runtime of the vode being executed for S.L. while errors are caught during the compilation phase before the code can run.
Python and Javascript need an 'interpreter' to process line by line so it can be executed,while C++ or Rust need a 'compiler'. Interpreters read line by line in real-time as the program is running,while Compiler's read ALL of it all at once (also to catch errors before the code can run). Lua uses both actually,which surprised even me.The Compiler is actually used first and turns it into bytecode and then the Lua Virtual Machine or VM then reads the bytecode line by line using its internal interpreter.
Now,lets skip to my explanation of each of these languages in the universe of Robloxia.
Lua - even though its a simple lightweight scripting language,it still lives inside every Robloxian and what gives them Life. Lua powers imagination and is considered magical in a way. Though,the Roblox games are programmed using 'Luau' which is just a short term to refer to Roblox Lua (a faster version of Lua).All in-game scripts and gameplay mechanics are written in Luau. Veeery event-driven to (if a player touches a button,then this happens and etc.)
But guess what i also found out @cosmica-galaxy ?
THE DAMN ROBLOX ENGINE,THE VERY CORE OF IT,IS BUILT BY C++.
I stumbled upon this delightful information beacuse my curiosity was very hungry to search about the roblox game engine to understand it better and to write it here in more detail...You have no idea the dopamine hit i got,hehehe.
But that would also mean....(Possibly) That 2x2 knows how C++ works- or he cant understand it beacuse their human creators put some type of 'limiter' on them or Robloxia as a whole beacuse thats the damn CORE of their universe. They shouldnt mess with what's keeping their universe in check,whole and in balance.
We can speak about this later-
C-Family
C is the proud father of 70 programming languages (DAMN BUSY AS HELL)
Though I mostly see them as elements and types of rock (C is malachite if you are wondering),given C++ is a fucking powerhouse compared to all of them,it is larger and much more like a liquid and gas (though,this is entering the territory of TFTOR and they way i interpret information,magic and code - still not written down),the reason why Lua and C++ are mostly like this in the picture is beacuse they are both used in Robloxia, Lua is the manipulatable kind (used by admins and hackers alike),while C++ is the 'Order' to Lua's 'Chaos',C++ gives the paramters,structures of the world of Robloxia...hmm,i can compare it to DNA and RNA, the DNA is C++ while the RNA is Lua. Given their function in cells,DNA is practically trapped in the nucleus ( the core of the universe of Robloxia) while RNA travels through the cell (universe) giving information and instructiona from the DNA (practically the manipulatable kind and information giver,the bridge to allow creation in Robloxia to even be possible)
C# and Objective-C. C# is used by Microsoft whole Objective C is used by Apple (for older models,while Swift,another member of the C-family has been used as a replacement since 2014). Though using these two should be treated with caution (like all languages of the c-family) .Objective-C has a lot of vulnerabilities beacuse itnhas loose null-safety lines (null safety is a programming feature designed to eliminate nullpointerexception,which means that it ensures variables to not hold null unles explcitiy allowed). Has bad pattern-matching and the value types are veeery complex. They inherited the pointer vulnerabilities from C which can lead to memory leaks or crashes. C# has a garbage collection that osnautomatic,which is convinient but it will allow a low frame per second rate , also application speeds plumet due to high level abstractions.
Thats why they arent used as much,they have an jnusual syntax but also their own vulnerabiltiies listed up ahead.Objective-C is practically forgotten by the masses,overshadowed by Swift.
But if used in Robloxia,these two would have only great use in battles (C#) and excellent in creating (Objective-C, though used with caution due to its many vulnerabilities and syntax)
Java, Javascript and Python
Java is programming language while the other two are scripting languages. They are VERY popular and they are moderate/high in terms of learning difficutly,slightly harder than C# and Objective-C. Java is very stable and versatile for backends and used mostly for Android applications.It is veryyy strict with its variables and data types.This language is very secure and scalable,but it takes a lot of code to make even the simplest program. Java is used for enterprise the most (and why its highly valued in today's market)
Javascript is the Master of the Web,modern web browers lean on this language,used for frontend web development and dynamic interfaced and can make hybrid mobile apps. The syntax is the same as in every memebr for the c-family. Though a non-neogtiable for web interfaces ,but due its flexibility is its downfall,its achilles heal, can lead to harder to fix bugs and the code is harder to maintain if the project is large.
Python is designed to be simple and readable to even the most junior programmer. Used in AI, data analysis and machine mearning due to this readability and simplicity.Code is very clean and minimalist, best language for begginers.... Though its aloooot slower in execution compared to any language in this list,mostly due to it being interperted to c++ theeen to machine readable code.
But in Robloxia,if the human ever uses one of these three would be a buffed version of Lua. Java is the best bet here,due to its stability and versatility,though i have a headcanon that it can hurt the user mostly beacuse due to how stable it is and its trying its best to 'correct' what it thinks is 'wrong' (if you know what i mean),its like a fire that clings to the arms and neck ,some parts of the chest,the most.Scalability allows more complex 'spells' and gadgets due to this. The best bet here for practically anything, given its easier to learn than c++ and a fast track to 'deityhood' compared to Lua
Javascript would be the best in terms of interaction . Better than Lua in terms of creation and alot more versatile compared to it. I think they would be the better alternative to objective-c of the reader wants to 'create' things,expiriences... Its a very powerful language to power servers too. It could be used as a powerful source of power in stability for the servers. Though its not the best in security.But its more a pink flame and only clings to the front of the chest(as in frontend,ha-)
Python is alot more powerful than Lua and veeery easy to learn.the fastest way to gain power.Best for security and taking down hackers. Python reminds me of Minos Prime from Ultrakill (que Order playing in the backround).its acts like electricity and the essence is usually around the elbow all the way down to the back hand.It acts like snakes and can speak (why?beacuse when writting in this language is very simple and has alot of english words understandable to its user,so its kind of like a headcannon that the 'essence'/snakes can speak,though very little)
And now the big guns, C++
The language I know best but also the core of the engine as a whole in Robloxia. It has maaaany libraries for data structures. Object-orienzed and compiles directly to machine code very fast. Allows manipulation of its code of storage adresses and hardware directly by the usage of pointers.Its extremely portable (with some adjustments) and canvbe used acroy many OS's. There is alot of documentation of this language,maaany compilers and VERY GOOD for games.
Though it lacks a garbage collection which makes it prone to leaks and crashes if not used correctly. It has a steep learning curve. A fucking struggle to comprehend pointers and refrences. Strict and Cryptic syntax and it demands manual 'checkups' (if i can phrase it like that). And not to mention the error outputs are difficult to understand (WTF DO YOU MEAN EXPECTED '}' WHEN ITS ALREADY THERE??!!) (check that out yourself). Though it has a high risk of security bugs if not well written.
Though,its the best here in terms of use in all categories,but the code in c++ must be VERY precise,even the smallest mistake will throw the whole thing off (talking from expirience,im still technically a beginner,sitll learning this language and its many libraries)
But i imagine that C++ is similar like Lua in Robloxia.It produces alot more esccence and is alot more blue (a royal blue to be precise) and it acts like a gas,similar like Lua (all over the body and sparkly). C++ is less sparkly but it has 'shooting stars',the hair is the most effected here (floaty and looks like tendrils,no matter the gender,that hair WILL GROW IN FUCKING METERS - a headcannon beacuse C++ must be maintained time to time,more so than Lua),it also effects the eyes more than Lua,turning any eye color to the shades of blue and yellow,mostly yellow.It also heavily hangs out around the hands and feet,leaving trails (memory leaks con).
I headcannon that only Lua and C++ (which are what keep Robloxia in balance) can produce those crstalys.Technically still Lua crstals,but the c++ ones would be alot more harder to produce by the body but also i would call them 'Sea Crystals' (HA,SEE THE PUN???),mostly beacuse they lopk like the deep sea,a dark churning blue hue with more stardust compared to Lua Crsytals. (Still,they can be called C Crstalys,but i love my creativity :D)
____
I have been writting this for like 2 and a half hours.More spent on writting than drawing 😭
I allow the picture to be used by anyone for their own creative purposes (aswell as headcannons in this text) (just please mention me-)
Any questions?(Anyone can ask in the messges or in the ask,anything really)
Im really looking forward talking about Code,compiler,interpreter and Game engines, Cosmica Galaxy.
Your local programmer here on tumblr that is still learning :D
(why the forsaken,phighting and deadly delivery tags are here is mostly due to me wanting to reach a bigger audience beacuse in a way its connected to these 'worlds/dimensions')
[Notes: feral jester man, my favorite. I am finally getting back into the groove of writing after a break. We are also pretending that their room is not a goddamn mess like it is in the game. also not tsams, love the show, never would write for them tho. Enjoy.]
—————————————
The illuminated numbers at the bottom of the computer screen changed just as the lights in the daycare began to dim, shifting into the night hours where Moon would be allowed to roam after the daycare closed for the day. They could hear from the front desk, where they were seated, the sound of metal gears whirring and clicking in place as Sun shifted into night mode, the sound fading away after a few moments. Although they were more focused on the computer screen in front of their face more than the approaching jingles of bells, their eyes followed down the list of tomorrow’s reservations for the daycare.
They blink when a shadow was cast over them, their head tilting upwards to meet the red gaze of Moon as he was looming above them, his wide eyes staring down at them. They were going to question what exactly he was doing, even going to speak when he interrupted them.
“Sleep.” Moon’s voice was blunt while their brows scrunched in confusion, all while Moon continued to stare down at them, illuminating their face with a scarlet hue.
“What?” They blink rapidly at him, still confused on what his statement meant or why he said it. Was he trying to tell them that he needed to recharge? No, he would’ve just gone to his room without telling them. “Do you need to recharge or something?” It was worth asking, maybe their relationship was getting better.
“Sleep.” Moon huffed as if annoyed that they interpreted his singular word, bringing a metal hand up to poke their forehead, the bells on his wrist jingling as he spoke. “You need to rest, you haven’t taken a proper break since your lunch break and even then, you kept working…” The last word came out more as a growl, clearly, their behavior was irritating his programming.
They were taken aback by his words, had he been watching them? Were they both watching them!? They had to shake their head to refocus on the situation, “Moon, I’m fine. I still have paperwork to complete here, I will go to sleep when I get home. Besides, I have a few more hours left here to work, I can’t really leave during my shift.” Somehow, they knew their words would not get through to the daycare animatronic and the grumble that followed told them just that.
Moon had begun to move away from the front desk and they had assumed that was that, Moon had given up and went off somewhere to recharge or just wander around. Finally, they can just get their work done without interruption! At least, that’s what they were hoping for, as that hope was swiped away as soon as hands came under their arms to grab them, hauling them up and out of their seat as a yelp escaped them before they were pressed against the metal chest of Moon. They should’ve known better, Moon was not going to give up that easily.
Moon was still huffy as the aerial wire came down, attaching to his back before he began to lift into the air, making them cling onto his far colder frame as the floor shrunk beneath them while he moved over the colorful arrangement of play structures. “What the hell are you—“ They went to question him, wanting to know what exactly had gotten into him when he had shushed them.
“If you won’t sleep willingly, then I will make you sleep.” The bells attached to Moon rang gently as his feet hit the landing outside his and Sun’s room, moving forward to push back the red curtains to enter the area.
They were still in a state of shock when Moon sat down on a colorful couch up against one of the walls, snapping them out of their shock as he moved to lay down with their body resting on top of him, even going so far as to pull a blanket that had been tossed over the back of the couch over them both. His arms were all but clamped down around them so they couldn’t escape his impromptu nap time, and turning their head upwards, cheek squished against his metal chest, they once again met the gaze of Moon as he was staring down at them with a slight glare.
“I’m not even tired!” Their voice was muffled slightly by their face being squished but their grumble did nothing to ease Moon’s grip on them.
“Yes, you are. I am built to detect when a person is tired, you’re just too stubborn to admit it.” Moon clearly was not going to drop the subject of their rest, and they had to begrudgingly accept that he was right, even if they did not want to.
They sigh in defeat as the realization finally settled in, he was not going to let them up no matter how much they disagree and struggle to escape, he will just hold them here until they fall asleep. Moon seemed to settle when they gave in, his frame relaxing underneath them as a soft lullaby began to emit from his chassis, lulling their eyes to close slowly as if still trying to fight off the wave of sleep that rolled over their mind.
Their eyes had finally closed just as a soft spoken word left Moon, “Goodnight…” It was an oddly comforting word, knowing that he or Sun will likely be here when they wake, and as they were drifting off into the realm of sleep, they felt a light kiss pressed upon their forehead, bringing a small smile to their face as they finally drifted off, leaving the two in the dark room, a lullaby filling the void of sound. They can deal with work when they wake up.
Trading Signals: The Real Difference Between Profits and Guesswork
If you’ve ever glanced at crypto trading charts and thought, “This might as well be ancient hieroglyphics,” you’re definitely not alone. The crypto market moves fast — often too fast to keep up with — and the sheer volume of information can feel overwhelming. Enter trading signals, the practical antidote to crypto confusion. But wait, are they really all they’re cracked up to be, or just another shiny distraction?
Let’s unpack what crypto trading signals are, how they actually work, and why they can make the difference between consistent profits and random guesswork.
What Exactly Are Crypto Trading Signals?
Think of trading signals as cheat codes provided by expert analysts or sophisticated algorithms. They give you clear instructions on:
When to Enter a Trade: A specific time or market condition to buy.
Direction (Long/Short): Whether the market is trending upwards or downwards.
When to Exit the Trade: An explicit signal indicating when to cash out.
The best signals go beyond basic price points. Reliable providers include clear timeframes, risk levels, and projected outcomes, taking the guesswork out of your trading decisions.
Human Analysts vs. AI Algorithms: Which is Better?
Trading signals typically come from two sources:
Human Analysts: Experienced traders who interpret market trends, news, and technical analysis to provide precise recommendations. They’re skilled but can be slower due to manual processing.
AI Algorithms: Advanced computer programs that rapidly analyze hundreds of market indicators, historical data, and real-time trends. They offer speed, precision, and adaptability, often identifying trades faster than humans can.
So, who wins? Ideally, you want a platform that blends the intuitive insights of human analysts with the speed and consistency of AI-driven signals. Platforms like SignalCLI combine powerful AI analytics with human oversight, providing traders the best of both worlds.
Scheduled Trading Windows: Precision Over Luck
Timing is everything in crypto trading. High-quality signal providers don’t just throw random alerts your way — they offer clearly scheduled trading windows indicating when market conditions are optimal for profitable trades. This means no more sitting glued to your screen 24/7.
Instead, you trade smarter, not harder. With scheduled trading periods, you receive signals during defined hours with the highest statistical likelihood of market success. Think of it as your trading calendar — clear, structured, and remarkably effective.
The Reality Check: Not All Signals Are Created Equal
Beware the traps. The internet is full of signal providers promising miraculous profits and unrealistic accuracy rates. Here’s how to separate the reliable from the rubbish:
Transparency: Providers should clearly communicate how signals are generated.
Track Record: Check historical performance data. No past performance? Big red flag.
Support and Community: Reliable providers offer direct support and engage with their user community.
Trading Signals Aren’t Magic (But They Can Feel That Way)
Let’s be clear — trading signals aren’t magical guarantees of profit. However, they’re incredibly effective tools for minimizing guesswork and maximizing informed decision-making. Instead of blindly throwing darts and hoping for the best, you’re leveraging expert analyses and advanced AI algorithms to make educated, data-backed trades.
How to Start Using Signals Effectively
Getting started is simple:
Choose a reputable provider: Verify their credibility, accuracy, and transparency.
Start small: Test the waters with minor trades to gauge signal reliability.
Combine signals with your own analysis: Match provider insights with your market understanding to make smarter, well-rounded decisions.
Stick to the plan: Follow scheduled trading windows and structured signals consistently for the best results.
Bottom Line: Signals Are the Difference Between Profits and Guesswork
Whether you’re a seasoned crypto trader or someone dipping their toes for the first time, high-quality trading signals can significantly improve your results. By providing clarity, precision, and actionable guidance, they transform trading from a gamble into a strategic, profitable pursuit.
In the fast-paced world of crypto, reliable signals aren’t just helpful — they’re essential. After all, why guess when you can trade smartly and confidently?
Enjoying the content?
Awesome!
Please support this project by sending USDT (BSC / BEP20 network) to:
0x7241275b9D37CcF0621480fD408CFf401762c485
Your contribution of $5–$10 helps keep these articles free and accessible to everyone.
Thank you for your support!
I'm double majoring in computer science and ancient Mediterranean studies and the reaction I get a lot of times is "lol, how do those two even relate?"
Which, first of all, they don't have to. I can be getting my ancient Mediterranean studies major purely because i think it's interesting and it not have anything to do with my plans for a career in computer science, but also, they are far more intertwined then people realize.
A lot of the computer science logic can be applied to ancient Mediterranean studies. I can easily identify formulas and structures in myths and use those to further analyze the text. Translating ancient Greek is shockingly similar to trying to understand code because ancient Greek is a very logical language in how it's written. Also, analyzing philosophy through a very mathematical and logical lens can help you understand the arguments in very precise terms, which can be a useful tool for understanding the points being made.
On the other hand, computer science isn't just about the programming part, but also about being able to interpret a request and figuring out how to translate that into a program. You have to account for what humans will try to do, and how to make your program easily usable. I'm consistently studying how to interpret and analyze texts, and what different cultures and time periods did to try and overcome challenges. These skill sets are absolutely applicable to computer science, even if it's not clear at first how.
On the question of transgenderism as a mental disorder or a neurological issue, I'm sort of confused about your refusal to call it a mental disorder. ADHD is a mental disorder caused by neurological issues. I see no reason why we couldn't say the same about Gender Dysphoria/transgenderism. How does acknowledging gender dysphoria as a mental disorder disregard its ability to be "real"?
Also, you say that gender dysphoria/transgenderism is caused by a disconnect between the brain and body having a different gender. And you say this is made possible by a distinction between a male and female brain, but I'm not sure what the physical evidence of that is. As far as we can tell, there is no physiological difference between the brain of a female and that of a male. And any observable things we could say that make a "difference" can be entirely chalked up to socialization. While I find your general argument persuasive, I take issue with this idea that there is a distinction between a male and female brain when we have no literal evidence on the subject.
For the record, I've been finding your arguments on this topic fairly persuasive and I'm just generally interested in your thoughts on it. Thank you.
It's not a mental disorder because it is purely a hardware issue, not a software issue. There is a sense in which all computer problems are hardware issues because the software exists on a physical storage medium, but it isn't a useful sense. The problem is not how you are "programmed" to think, the problem is this gizmo right here. Our treatment of the problem depends on how said gizmo works.
I can't find it anywhere since it's been lost to the Internet of Ghosts, but there actually was research done on this, in the 80s or 90s when the demands of ideological capture went the other way. There is a specific gyrus they found different in men and women, and transgender people had the gyrus of their stated mental gender and not their physical sex something like... I wanna say 70% of the time? The problem was that there's basically no way to look at it without an autopsy, and it's small so there's inevitably some level of observer interpretation. Obviously you could never do that research today because the results might be unflattering, and nobody who would interpret the results could be trusted to do so.
But it's also, like, proprioception. Proprioception is your brain's sense of your own body, a table of where all your limbs are and what they are doing. People who lose a limb usually have phantom limb syndrome, where it still feels like it's there (and hurts) because your sense of proprioception is independent of your body, and changing the latter doesn't change the former, at least right away.
So we know for a fact that the brain has a structural map of what the body is supposed to be, and a person can experience that independent of their physical body. That's what we can learn from phantom limb.
And we know for a fact that human DNA contains a (nearly) complete blueprint for everyone as a man and as a woman, and only the presence or absence of testosterone is what causes male or female development. We can learn that from observing complete androgen insensitivity syndrome, where someone with XY chromosomes develops as a female because the Y chromosome signal doesn't activate the necessary markers.
And we know for a fact that the nervous system of a fetus develops at a specific time, and this time is not the same time as other sex characteristics. That's not from a disorder, that's just from looking. We know that expression of sexual characteristics can get fucked up due to intersex disorders.
So it is plausible that the sense of proprioception, or something similar, would include "what gender is my body." And if so, it would be possible to mismatch it to the body. And an event likely to make that occur would be if the testosterone level was juuuuuust below the line at the "body develops sexual chatacteristics" phase and juuuuuust above the line at the "nervous system develops" phase.
We can't exactly test that, but it's the best we got. It's internally consistent with other stuff we know. And the ideology of the time was to claim that there are no gendered differences in the brain, so John Money tried to prove it by abusing David Reimer, and produced results incompatible with that theory. Reimer knew his birth sex without anyone ever telling him because he possessed an innate knowledge of his body that didn't match his body. And that matched exactly what observations of transgenderism were at the time. Like have you read the DSM-III entry on it, before it was taken out for political reasons? Their observations of transgenderism at that time don't make sense as a mental illness because it consistently requires information children don't have access to -- I remember reading it (again before it became the battleground of Culture War) and the descriptions were remarkable in that they were about young kids saying things that shouldn't make sense to them. Trans women, born as boys, were not just insisting they dress up as girls and be called girls but insisted that their penis wasn't real or was going to fall off, at an age when kids don't know the other sex has different genitals. And then we saw that behavior in the one case of a person who we knew for a fact was born as the opposite sex. (Though that itself is muddled by Money's intensely fucked up idea of "treatment".)
Now, is it a slam dunk objectively proven case, no. Hell, even that study didn't find 1:1 correlation between mental gender and tiny brain thingy. But I think it's the best one we got, that fits the observable world the best and is the most internally consistent and isn't contingent on believing a specific ideology's demands. If there's a better theory, it's gotta interface with the facts better than this one.
Cod3: Essential Programming Concepts [Part 01] So.. before I am moving into learning the C language and some courses on Algorithms and Data Structures..
