I don't know if it's likely but what if a consequence of hyper-controlled distribution and DRM in contemporary big-studio video games was that the baseline "scholars has collectively put centuries of total time analyzing these works" canon are populated from this era by random-weird-breakout-indie-hits, while the big-cultural-mainstays are, like, "The Smiling Lieutenant" -type lost media.

Like ludophiles in 2138 going
"
Oh, DANG, did you hear about this? So, some voidmodder out of Nueva Vancouver, Cascadia is running an exhibition where it turns out -- you know "COD: Modern Fishing (2029)", the classic -- ey over the past year had tracked down both "Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 4" AND "Pokemon Waves" (I know, right! and ey kept eir find secret for a YEAR), which in the reviews of the time were discussed as its main aesthetic influences,
and eventually managed to fully crack and restore them, and has all three set up emulated adjacent, so you can explore the relationship between them.
"

They wrote up a design doc at the URL below. The gist of it is that they chose a fixed size and error correction level, then unrolled the whole encoding process into a finite circuit, and implemented RS encoding as a linear transformation over GF(2). In effect this is similar to what you'd do in digital circuit design, or mapping an algorithm to a secure multiparty computation implementation.

https://github.com/jimparis/qr-font/blob/master/design.md

This is awesome: Someone actually made a truetype font encoding QR codes, including reed-solomon encoding!

https://qr.jim.sh/

Wait, "well & dead" is a thing. like, is a phrase.

alive & well

alive & unwell
dead & unwell
dead & well

If AI as an industry doesn't collapse first, they'll claim to address safety issues by having an automated (+ Sama et.al. outsourced) reporting mechnanism that forwards "concerning interactions" to Relevant State Authorities,
and then at long last we will have created Friend Computer, from the classic sci-fi ttrpg Paranoia

Preemptively, for the history books:

Twitter users did not uniquely invent the term "mutual". It was equally developed on Tumblr. (And possibly elsewhere? also possibly it has earlier roots? I don't have a particular reason to think that but don't have experience in those spaces so can't say not-that.) Unless I'm mistaken about Twitter's UI elements, both communities developed it independently (well, there's definitely shared community, so prolly there wasn't NO exchange, but Twitter people learned it from Twitter and Tumblr people learned it from Tumblr) at the same time.

I don't know about Twitter, but Tumblr-the-company first used it user-facing, and tacitly acknowledged it as a word which everyone knew and used and required no introduction, when rolling out their real-time chat feature.

"""
At one stage [Cronenberg] was considered by George Lucas as a possible director for Return of the Jedi (1983) but turned down the offer.
"""
#WikiFinds

Look I don't object to Christians constantly schisming, it's clearly a long-held religious rite and I broadly support that (with the standard "are you behaving ethically generally" that applies to all traditions & hobbies & art),

but like could someone maintain, I dunno, a map/graph or family-tree-that-captures-relative-size or something?

It is just too confuisng trying to keep track of "Oh, this schism was like two thousand out of the 50 thousand Southern Baptist congregations splitting off so they could be less sexist" versus "GAFCOM contains like 50% of Anglicans and seem to be keeping their options open for if they somehow get Canterbury" versus "In like 1890, 30 years after being founded, the Salvation Army kept shooting off a bunch of branches" versus "this lady in Quebec declared herself Mary" versus "Moscow keeps splitting from Constantinople. This keeps happening."

Like. Please maintain documentation. I would appreciate it. Thank.

Also while I'm posting "sure like I don't disagree but that sure is some neck-craned angle to look from I guess" takes on the state of AI discourse, I'd like to just take a moment to thank everyone involved and thank god that I have yet to see anyone doing anti-AI meming, even the most "I enjoy foaming at the mouth for its own sake" people or the people really invested in making "clanker" happen,
use visuals from the Animatrix to express anti-AI sentiment.

(Statistically I'm sure that at-bare-minimum a single person probably has at least once, but using my personal experience as a very rough estimation of the reach that likely-hypothetical instance might have had, I'll definitely take that.)

Like, oh thank god.

(I haven't seen it used by anyone doing pro-AI response stuff, but there's less material related to their arguments there and also I wouldn't expect most of that chunk, by and large, to look to art to source arguments from.)

Oh, huh, I guess I think it's been a while since I've seen "slop" used by an anti-AI essayist to mean something other than AI slop.

( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6YvkbqAhAY&t=667 )
(I don't think it means anything negative about either the essayist, the term, or the state of the discourse. I just think, maybe it's a sign/artefact of focus shifting wider again?)
(Alternatively it's a sign of, I don't watch this particular person's essays much and plenty other people just kept using the term as normal and this is entirely about topic-selection on my part.)

(My harder sell is that this should be a much more common practice in academia, too.)

My quickest most desperate plea to everyone trying to "bring back the old web" and do webrings, more thorough hyperlinking, blogrolls, etc.,
is to THIS time around acknowledge and embrace the fragility and unreliability of a given site being still up or still relevant,

and when hyperlinking do double-step links where possible/relevant.

So e.g.

"Source: [cool nerd's datagathering/analysis] via [blog post you heard about it from]"
or
"For more info, check out this person's page [link] which has and overview and good resources such as [example further link] and others."
or
"My Cool Webring!
[<<prev-of-prev<<] [<prev] [info] [>next>] [>>next-of-next>>]"

... wiring a bunch of Eurons together into a Eural Network.

Eurosurgery.
Eurotransmitters.

Eurotoxin?

... Euroticism.

Eurotypical.
Eurodivergent.

(This parenthetical also means that I prolly disagree in details with many of the people who are agreeing with my comment it's parenthesizing off of. (In particular I think some would take a nazi-bar approach to AI advocacy. (tho that might be incorrect,,) I disagree with that strategy here.) Also good. Please use my words and phrasing and arguments to develop your own thoughts that partially-disagree with me, this is also a good thing.)

(Like yes putting bans and restrictions on LLM contributions in place does require projects to define "LLM contributions" and they're going to be inconsistent and negotiable around it. (e.g. the machine-translation/speech-to-text to next-word-suggestion to autocompletion spectrum.)
And different projects will likely land in different positions.

That's fine tho, it's good if people need to be aware of a community's specific policies when participating in that community.)

(To the extent there are accessibility concerns I'd also strongly push for explicit language around actively encouraging, making space for, and welcome-first-interpret/fit-vs-policy-later approaches to inclusion and unanticipated access needs. That'll result in pieces of hypocrisy and inconsistency flitting around before asymptotically settling but that also good actually.)

@slava "A blanket ban on LLM contributions in unenforcible, it's completely unverifiable in the general case and unmanageable without largely trusting people!--" Yeah we have those types of rules already they're called "community norms" and they work pretty well actually.