allo

joined 1 year ago
1
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by allo@sh.itjust.works to c/imageai@sh.itjust.works
 

It now uses custom Flux and is still free and adless if u make an account. I'm making a new gen since it just dropped today and many previous gens of ppl have to be updated SO ITS CHAOS. Here's my old gen link if u want to check Perchance's new ai out. use a custom button to not have it manipulate the prompt. Anyway, again Im theoretically advertising (how bad of me) since BP is my gen, but idc I dont need views and im making the next generation of it rather than touch it. thats basically a link so u can check out the update if you want. Feel free to check out others on Perchance; i havent since the update. To me the new perchance image genning feels lacking in a few ways, tho it does now feel modern, creative, and the dev says the model is still training so it will improve. It also feels great for 'free'. It also still does nudity and pron. Anyway, enjoy!

also if u know any javascript have fun making your very own ai art gen on perchance

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I love your wisdom. Thank you. I agree all life is sacred.

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

It is also interesting to me how many people consider it a troll question. It is most acceptable to kill only men and no one beside me sees anything sexist about that? How is discussing that troll? I have trolled trillions of times, but this one is an actual facet of our world to discuss. I would actually say those who cannot view this as anything but a troll question would also 100% kill the men and leave the women unquestioningly as 'the one true way'. Doesn't mean me highlighting your sexism makes my question troll. We are in a world now where both sexism is bad and women are not inferior. Duh the ideal is to kill no one. This question isn't about that. Reminds me of modlogs where mods ban ppl with different ideologies than their own with the reason being 'trolling'. Consider my question trolling and I consider everything you ever do trolling. :)

 

I thought this silly. Banned for violating rule 1 (sexism, descrimination, etc). Literally laughing irl right now since my post was specifically antidiscrimination.

no idea lol

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 months ago

weird. sounds opposite lemmy.world

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

there's that quokk again. seems like a good instance. i only see good things connected to it tho i kno basically nothing. its australian? are the ppl of quokk called quokksuckers?

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 months ago

In soviet america cocks suck you

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works -4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

edit: Oh god i hadnt seen somehow a community on lemmy.world was in my feed again. enjoy your cesspool

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

As a main communitymember on a site with chats used by a huge amount of kids, I have seen how the internet makes it very easy, compared to oldentimes, for pedos to be in areas high in children. One of the kids there often complains about pedos and asked me to help remove them. So, with kids being a defenseless flock of animals, there ARE kids who then take a Defender role and they become the ouster of pedos. Also noteworthy is, right before I emailed an official pedocatching organization, the kid I was helping got in a confrontation and spilled the antipedo plans; which alerted the pedos and spoiled the plan. So the issue with kids doing high stakes things is they are mentally still children.

overall, pedos in kid areas, thanks to the internet, feels, to me, also on the rise. And those areas SHOULD have the pedos removed in an organized acceptable fashion; and that that doesn't happen causes some Defender kids to think they need to do it themselves.

imo get better real official pedo prevention measures up in kid spaces to reduce vigilantiism.

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works 22 points 2 months ago (9 children)

ok so thats cool and all but how do we join? washington oregon california want in

 

Just looked it up and the entire first page of searches is about how 'guys' is masculine and insensitive to women. I disagree. I think the masculinization of the term is like an unneeded extra filter placed over 'guy' but the term itself is innocent. Guy Fawkes was a real person. He did something that caused him to be a symbol of the common person. There is nothing gendered about that. It's the patriarchal culture that then assumed 'common person' refers to males. When I think of Guy Fawkes, it is his actions, not what's in his pants, that is important. So, while there are many needlessly sexist and sexual phrases in English, I do not view ''Guy" as one of them and, instead, view it as a victim of the patriarchy just like you and me. It isn't an inappropriate phrase to change or remove, it's one to reclaim for all people; which is exactly in the spirit of the symbol of who Guy Fawkes is.

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

Conclusion: Yes they have done maybe as many as 3 somewhat minor things that were not atrocious.

 

Just curious. As far back as I remember I only hear about them destabilizing countries that aren't fully in the pocket of American powerplayers. Sometimes they assassinate people, sometimes instigate coups, subvert media... and the #1 way to encounter them seems to be to try and take back control locally of one's country's oil and other valuable resources.

So my question is, have they ever done anything good?

[–] allo@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

just want to say having just read that article that it sounds like someone snatched the photo off the girl's social media. possibly not her trying to blackmail him.

1
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by allo@sh.itjust.works to c/musicproduction@sh.itjust.works
 

Just made an epic music video for the song I submitted to Routenote a month ago. I have never made a music video for a song and when I search to find advice it's not about what I'm curious about. So here are some questions and I would also love any advice from anyone with experience distributing songs with music videos.

  • As my song is not yet processed, I can still cancel and switch distributor. Are there any Distributors that are extragood with having music videos for songs? Any to avoid? Why?

  • I do not like google and would prefer to not touch youtube. What is the ideal way that does not feed in to google's empire to have the music video available online? Or should I make a youtube account and play their game?

  • other tips?

Thank you.

 

Was looking at my profile and thought it would be fun to see how many upvotes I've received compared to downvotes. Can this be done?

0
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by allo@sh.itjust.works to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
 

Came across a list of pseudosciences and was fun seeing where im woo woo.

Lunar effect – the belief that the full Moon influences human and animal behavior.

Ley Lines

Accupressure/puncture

Ayurveda

Body Memory

Faith healing

Anyway, list too long to read. I guess Im quite the nonscientific woowoomancer. How about you? What pseudoscience do you believe? Also I believe nearly every stone i find was an ancient indian stone. Also manifesting and or prayer to manipulate via subconscious aligning the future. oh and the ability to subconsciously deeply understand animals, know the future, etc

 

In Kotlin, I can set a bitmap to be 500x500 and use ScaledBitmap to load an image in to it at that size without wasted memory junk as far as I know.

Now I am trying to do this in javascript so I can have my website display it's images to scaled sizes of my choosing without having to load the full size of every image first or manually making and uploading multiple sizes.

Everything I'm seeing says there is no way in JS. My ELI5 here is WHY? What makes Kotlin have this but not JS?

sloplike screenshots for reference

 

especially 3.

 

When I see "the FDA has stated..." I automatically think it is probably a corrupt conclusion bought by some powerplayer to maximize their own profit instead of having to do with whether the statement is true or not. I've always viewed FDA as basically a council of a bunch of power players on boards of Big Capitalism companies like Pepsi that make decisions based on control and market share rather than health.

but I see posts now about how trump attacking FDA equals bad. So is my view of FDA wrong? Are they noncorrupt? Are they a necessary evil? Should they be thrown in a volcano and remade?

 

If you learn you are the heir to a distant, secluded empire and the local trusted family advisor says, "don't worry we'll make a cult of personality for you." Do you accept or decline? Why or why not?

view more: next ›