Well, you know it when you find them attractive. The only blank spots are when you’re not attracted to them and why bother with those people (/s).

Or it’s the order of commands, looking at how the fingers point, in which case it’s the reverse of what you imply he’s trying to say.

That’s a great idea, melt everything together and we’ve got a giant landmass. Let’s add even more garbage there, presto!

In no land are babies free

Wow, I’ve never heard anybody say that; is that a regional thing? Just like “Je niest” and that’s the response?

We say the same in the Netherlands, and sometimes we also say the equivalent for “cheers”, not sure why though.

That’s a fair point. And I believe AI should be able to combine legal material to create illegal material. Although this still feels wrong, if it excludes suffering in base material and reduces future (child) suffering, I’d say we should do research on it at least. Even if it’s controversial, we need to look at the rationale behind it.

Of course we don’t want both, but it comes across as if you’re dismissing a possible direction to a solution to the one that is definitely worse (real life suffering) by a purely emotional knee jerk.

Mental health support is available and real CSAM is still being generated. I’d suggest we look into both options; advancing ways therapists can help and perhaps at least have an open discussion about these sensitive solutions that might feel counter-intuitive at first.

I believe from Instance A, you can only subscribe to a community on instance B if both A and B allow it. Otherwise you need to create a different account in instance B.

This way an instance can have some kind of governance over its users and the content they see.

I wonder if an SSO solution exists and is supported by many instances, so as a user you won’t notice much of the different accounts you could have.