If hating every single instance of CSAM regardless of victimhood makes me weird. Then I’m gladly weird.

Yes. They are both the worst of the worst. I place both in the very bottom of Dantes inferno.

Or do you still struggle to understand what that means?

Ok. You’re right. You saying it’s ok to depict CSAM if there isn’t a victim is not you arguing the opposite. It’s me lying.

You’re so smart. Good job.

That’s not what I said. How are you this stupid?

I said I think they are both, equally morally reprehensible. They both belong in the very bottom of Dante’s inferno.

What exactly have I lied about?

I’ve never once tried to even insinuate that what grok is doing ok. Nor that it should be. What I’ve said. Is that it doesn’t even matter if there are an actual real person being victimized or not. It’s still illegal. No matter how you look at it. It’s illegal. Fictional or not.

Your example of Bart in the Simpsons movie is so far out of place I hardly know where to begin.

It’s NOT because he’s fictional. Because fictional depictions of naked children in sexually compromised situations IS illegal.

Though I am glad you don’t have a dog. It would be real awkward for the dog to always be the smartest being in the house.

Talking about morals and morality is how you end up getting things like abortion banned. Because some people felt morally superior and wanted to enforce their superior morality on everyone else.

There’s no point in bringing it up. If you need to bring up morals to argue your point. You’ve already failed.

But please do enlighten me. Because personally. I don’t think there’s a moral difference between depicting “victimless” CSAM and CSAM containing a real person.

I think they’re both, morally, equally awful.

But you said there’s a major moral difference? For you maybe.

It doesn’t matter if there’s a victim or not. It’s the depiction of CSA that is illegal.

So no, talking about whatever or not there’s a victim is not the most important part.

It doesn’t matter if you draw it by hand with crayons. If it’s depicting CSA it’s illegal.

Yes, it certainly comes across as you arguing for the opposite since you above, reiterated

The real thing to talk about is the presence or absence of a victim.

Which has never been an issue. It has never mattered in CSAM if it’s fictional or not. It’s the depiction that is illegal.

The real thing to talk about is the presence or absence of a victim.

Dude, you’re just wrong. There seems to be a huge disconnect with you between what the law is. And what you want the law to be.

You are not allowed to take an image of someone, photoshop them naked, and distributed it. Period.

You are also not allowed to depict child sexual abuse. It doesn’t matter if it’s not real. It’s the depiction of CSA taking place that is illegal.

That is a lot of text for someone that couldn’t even be bothered to read the first paragraph of the article.

Grok has the ability to take photos of real people, including minors, and produce images of them undressed or in otherwise sexually compromising positions, flooding the site with such content.

There ARE victims, lots of them.

If you need to clarify that your characters are of legal age…

It’s pretty clear this was their marketing strategy from the start. Just play the “we’re a victim of evil valve” card and suck up some sympathy pre-order buys.

Reminder that there was about 5 devs + some outside contractors that made amnesia the dark decent. An excellent horror game. Made by a very small dev team.

These guys just suck. And then they want to cry about how it’s not their fault they suck.

And each dev is free to make their own font. But if they want to uses someone else’s, it stands to reason they might have to pay that someone else.

If you draw a really cool painting. That doesn’t mean I’m allowed to then just scan your artwork, print it on bottles and sell them.

The problem here is no one had the foresight to realise it’s a pretty big issue when you’re leasing the rights to a specific font for a specific period of time, what happens after the lease expires?

If they did, the contractual language would be different.

It’s not a problem in this sector alone. It’s a problem, in many sectors, but no one seems to learn from others mistakes.

I skimmed through this, and some other stories from the same “news author”. Either the author, Matt Wales, is actually bipolar and needs to seek treatment, or he just angles his articles about the given topic based on whichever third party threw him some chump change to buy a coffee.

I’ve never seen someone be so anti-steam, and pro-steam at the same time. One article is praising steam as the best thing that happened to humanity, the next one is talking about how terrible they are and how much they just want to censor games and kill studios they don’t like.

One article is praising Nintendo as the greatest gaming company ever, and the next is talking about how evil they are regarding the palworld lawsuit.

I know publications have their bias, but at least most of them are somewhat consistent in their bias…

I did find this comment under one of his articles regarding this game. (Yes, he’s made three articles about this game, one after the other), and I thought it summed up my short experience with eurogamer. (most other comments were very anti-steam, but that’s to be expected since everyone else that threw up in their mouths quickly clicked off the article)

Deejay#4435 1 day, 10 hours ago

15 years ago, Steam was a curated walled garden. Every game was manually approved for sale, and if they didn’t like your game and didn’t think it was good enough, then you didn’t get to sell on there. It was gutting when my game was sold on XBLIG, GOG, Green Man Gaming, and some other stores that I can’t remember, but Steam just gave us a flat-out “no”.

To be fair, the game was pretty crap (Eurogamer gave it an 8/10).

Extraction shooters “needs” PvE-only mode as much as Dark Souls “needs” an easy-mode.

It’s not a case of if they should offer exclusive modes. But you should get what you paid for. And you’re paying for PvPvE extraction shooter. If they add a PvE-only mode down the line, fantastic, but their main focus, should be to create the best PvPvE experience they can in accordance to their vision of what they want the game to be.

No matter how much you playtest your game, there’s gonna be “unexpected features”, balance has to be tweaked, exploits have to be removed. They’re gonna have their hands full for at least 1 year after launch before they can even think about adding additional modes.

Probably because a lot of nintendo games are speedrun on emulators. Since it can be difficult to attain region specific hardware and cartridges that are optimal for speedrunning, they resort to emulators so the barrier of entry isn’t unreasonable.

And we all know how Nintendo feels about emulators.

Not to say it explains how it benefits Nintendo. But it explains why they’re going this route.

Payment processors, such as PayPal. Are private companies and have a wide discretion to decide who they do, and don’t do business with. Just like you as a private person have a wide discretion to decide who you do, and don’t do business with.

A baker has every right to refuse a customer that wants a cake with a swastika on it. So the same rules have to apply to PayPal being allowed to refuse to do business with certain industries. They are not your bank.

If, it was some “religious organization” that got their hands in PayPal. Why would they only stop authorizing payments in certain regions? Wouldn’t it then be applied everywhere?

The fact that it was only in specific regions. Makes it far more likely that it’s due to the legislation in those regions regarding incest. Rather than a moral decision from corporate PayPal to stop authorizing payments to Steam.

Steam did not remove every porn game. They removed those belonging to a very specific category.

I’m not missing the point where payment processor aren’t police. But they still need to follow legislation in the region they operate.

First of, it’s not “Point in case”, it’s “Case in point”.

Second, I can honestly say. I have no idea how many payment processors does or does not authorize payments regarding legal porn for various websites. Feel free to link an article or source that investigates that particular topic.

If you look at the post. They claim “Possibly related to PayPal because people in certain regions have not been able to use it to pay on Steam.”

If this was PayPal taking a stand on a corporate level against porn games on steam. Why would only certain regions be affected instead of everyone?

The obvious answer, is that it’s only certain regions, because of their legislation. If PayPal wish to do business in their region. They have to follow their laws for those customers.

Sure. If that’s your opinion regarding art that’s ok. We don’t have to argue about that. It’s subjective and will change from person to person.

Regardless if something has utility or not. The point remains the same. You often want things you yourself is unable to create to an acceptable standard.

I’m not an AI fanatic. I do not believe AI makes everything better. But I do believe it can make certain things easier if used correctly. And I also think it’s a big difference between someone sloppily making an entire story arc with AI, rather than someone that uses AI to fill in some of blanks.

And again. This is all subjective. But just some food for thought.

Clothes have both utility and artistic expression. But do you really care if a person made your pants, as long as they look good, are comfortable and of high quality?

I’m not trying to change your mind. Just explaining my reasoning behind my opinion.

I want to include paintings as decoration on my walls where I live. But I don’t want to paint them.

I want a bed to sleep in, but I don’t want to build it.

I want food to eat. But I don’t want to grow it myself, nor would I like to raise, feed, care, and slaughter the animals I eat.

So… Maybe I want some trivia, an easter egg if you’d like, about something weird and funny. Despite not wanting to write it myself.