Luke

That’s a pretty vague question; what kind of NSFW “stuff” are you looking to post?

However, if you’re talking about art, then Slushe is a fairly nice NSFW art site (though it may be abandoned by it’s creators, last blog activity was over a year ago) that varied artists post plenty of stuff regularly.

Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be anything better than Calibre at the moment. (Though, I’m happy to be proven wrong!) Nothing against Calibre, it’s functionally amazing free software and it works very well; I said “unfortunately” because the interface is extremely dated and clunky and confusing to operate. Once you get it working, it’s very nice though. As long as you never have to go fiddling with it again, because every time you’ve gotta reacquaint with it’s weird UI. Still, it really is the best available at the moment, and it’s free so that’s awesome.

My favorite way to set it up is using the linuxserver image, which has a web-based VNC built into it, so you can remotely run the app on a headless server and then use your browser to interact with it.

I have Calibre configured to monitor a folder for new stuff I throw into it, where it’ll automatically fetch metadata and put it into the database. Calibre also has an OPDS server built in, to which I point a nicer frontend for reading comics. Currently that is Kavita which provides a decent web UI for both books and comics.

Anyhow, I believe you could enter data about your physical comics into the Calibre database, and then view the metadata with something like Kavita, though of course you’d be skipping the reading features.

Yes. (Or rather, gender neutral.)

I dunno, Mozilla developers have had 10 releases in the past 4 months alone, with many bug fixes in every release, and 3 of those releases being minor versions each containing multiple new features. I certainly consider bug fixes and new features to be improvements happening to the browser.

Yeah, not understanding that is a consequence of people not reading the source material, because Tolkien definitely explains exactly why the eagles couldn’t do that.

On the other hand, I think it’s a valid criticism of the movies that, for all the amazing things he did in that trilogy, Peter Jackson failed to explain something minor that turned out to be a lingering issue for some segment of the wider audience that would consume that adaptation.

Internet Archive to the rescue: https://web.archive.org/web/20240923091701/https://peabee.substack.com/p/whats-inside-the-qr-code-menu-at

Edit: oops, @ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org beat me to it!

I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your overall point here (I have no idea why people engage with shorts, maybe they do love that format) but I wanted to push back a little on the idea that a product must be popular simply because corporations continue to offer them. Especially with social media, where users are actively discouraged from making their own decisions as much as possible by The Algorithm.

I think there are plenty of examples of things that people continue to use (and often even pay for the “privilege”) despite major aspects of those things being generally reviled by everyone who uses them:

• ad infested apps and websites
• gaming microtransactions
• a new phone every year
• cable service
• insurance
• HOAs
• gasoline
• Amazon
• pants and dresses without pockets

Right! It’s definitely fulfilling the purpose OP stated here in this post, as long as that’s what you’re using it for. I’m just pointing out that it doesn’t do the other things it claims to do in the readme for the repo, so that’s something to be aware of.

This seems like a valuable utility for concealing writing style, though I feel like the provided example fails to illustrate the rest of the stated goal of the project, which is to “prevent biases, ensuring that the content is judged solely on its merits rather than on preconceived notions about the writer” and “enhance objectivity, allowing ideas to be received more universally”.

The example given is:

You: This is a demo of TextCloak!!!

Model: “Hey, I just wanted to share something cool with you guys. Check out this thing called TextCloak - it’s pretty neat!”

The model here is injecting bias that wasn’t present in the input (claims it is cool and neat) and adds pointlessly gendered words (you guys) and changes the tone drastically (from a more technical tone to a playful social-media style). These kinds of changes and additions are actually increasing the likelihood that a reader will form preconceived notions about the writer. (In this case, the writer ends up sounding socially frivolous and oblivious compared to the already neutral input text.)

This tool would be significantly more useful if it detected and preserved the tone and informational intent of input text.

Why is that impossible? Create the post in !reddeadredemption@lemmy.ml, or !gta6@lemmy.ml or !fortnite@lemmy.ml (those are the games OP keeps harping on) or whatever game they’re interested in.

I guess if there’s no existing community, that’s an issue. Create one, then. Post the hyper-specific question into that new community, and then go post an announcement of the community in the broader games communities and let people interested naturally filter in.

I’m not a Lemmy expert by any means, I’m just suggesting ways to engage with people that seems to me like it’d be more constructive and likely to be appreciated. 🤷

I looked at the comments on a few of your posts, and people are telling you exactly why they are annoyed by them.

Your posts come off as low effort spam, almost like you’re treating Lemmy communities like a Discord chat room. Also, you post very similar kinds of things about the same couple of games on the daily, and people probably get tired of seeing samey stuff in their feed.

I’ve noticed that you’re making hyper specific posts (“what do you think about X mission in rdr”) in a general gaming community. Try posting those hyper specific questions in the communities for the actual game you’re asking about, where people who want to nerd out about some random mission are more likely to be.

It’s cool that you’re trying to engage people though, I think you just need to get some more practice at reading the crowd here. Lurk more, maybe. Lemmy isn’t the other site, we don’t necessarily resonate with all the same kinds of content here.

OnlyOffice can also be integrated with NextCloud or WordPress or a bunch of other stuff. I believe it can also be used standalone. Personally, I found it’s interface much more polished and usable than Collabora, though it’s been a couple years since I compared.

Next up: Discord!

German dubs are actually top notch

I find this ironic when compared to native language German porn, which frequently has audio that is distractingly out of sync to the point that it almost seems like it’s many minutes off. It’s not even just one studio either, it happens to a lot of them for some reason. I’m starting to wonder if there’s an industry joke that I’m not aware of which explains it, but I haven’t noticed the same issue with porn produced in other languages.

I think you underestimate how oblivious many users are when it comes to using software.

Yeah technically you aren’t supposed to ride on the sidewalks here (USA) but there’s barely any safe infrastructure to do otherwise, and I’m sure as hell not going to ride on the street with the death machines honking all over the place, so the sidewalk it is until city infrastructure is less car-brained.

Thank you for providing a non lethal alternative method. I’m uncomfortable with how much death humans gleefully visit upon the insect kingdom when they don’t have to.

That has ketchup in it though, I’m not sure it’s quite in the sprit of the question, though it’s definitely astoundingly popular specifically in Utah.

I haven’t seen anyone mention nutritional yeast yet, but that’s become my go-to seasoning for almost everything; popcorn, pizza, scrambled eggs, bread, ramen, soft pretzels, and of course on fries. So damn good!

(Yes, I realize the name “nutritional yeast” sounds vaguely unpleasant and unappetizing, but I promise it’s incredible if you like savory flavors, and it can also be used as a cheese powder substitute in vegan recipes.)

Your statement did leave some wiggle room to quibble over what exactly “very popular” means, though I don’t see how popularity is a useful metric when we’re talking about free software which doesn’t rely on user purchases for revenue. Ultimately it comes down to how funding the development of each software is accomplished, and whether that can be done effectively without selling out.

However, if we must compare funding strategies based on popularity, then we can. I’m not sure where you got your usage numbers from, but I’ll use your percentage to normalize for the number of employees paid through the funding strategies of both examples to compare the effectiveness of the approaches:

• Mozilla Corporation and Mozilla Foundation together have roughly 840 employees as of 2020 (the latest numbers available on Wikipedia). I’m not sure how they split up who does what for developing the software, but I seriously doubt the vast majority of those 840 employees are developers.
• Blender Foundation has a team of 31 people (as of 2022). Most of them are developers/engineers/designers directly involved with improving the software.

For purposes of discussion, I’ll assume that you are correct that Blender has 2% of the popularity of Firefox. Normalizing that for comparison, 2% of 840 Mozilla employees is 16.8 employees (round down because you can’t have 0.8 of a person).

In other words, if Firefox were only 2% as popular as it is now (thus making it equally as popular as you say Blender is), Mozilla would be paying 16 developers with it’s funding strategy.

Conversely, Blender is able to pay 31 developers using their funding strategy. This means that, even when accounting for popularity, Blender’s funding strategy is 2x more effective than Mozilla’s at paying developers to work on their software.

Again, I don’t agree that popularity is an important metric to compare here, but even when we do so, it’s clear that it is entirely possible to fund software without resorting to tired old capitalistic funding models that result in the increasingly objectionable violations of user privacy that Mozilla engages in lately. They could choose to do things differently, and we ought not to excuse them for their failure of imagination about how to fund their business more ethically. Especially when perfectly workable alternative funding models are right there in public view for anyone to emulate.