Jack Riddle[Any/All]

I think homestucks figured out how to prevent this ages ago

unfortunately, julia has been adding “agentic code” to their codebase for a while now.

1. microblog site ✅
2. funny image (meme) ✅

my checks are all green boss

yes.

from wikipedia:

Claire described non-consensual kissing and groping by Gaiman after meeting him at a book tour event, as well as a $60,000 payment from Gaiman to her in August 2022.[176] A woman identified as “K”, who also first met Gaiman at a book signing, said that during their relationship he subjected her to painful sex that she “neither wanted nor enjoyed”.[21][177]

Scarlett Pavlovich, a former nanny for Gaiman and Palmer’s child, alleges that Gaiman sexually assaulted her within hours of their first meeting in February 2022.[177] Pavlovich recalled that he said, “Amanda told me I couldn’t have you” after the assault; according to one of Palmer’s friends, Palmer had previously told Gaiman, “You could really hurt this person and break her; keep your hands off of her”. Pavlovich said that Gaiman had anal sex with her in the presence of his son.[21]

Caroline Wallner, a former tenant of Gaiman’s, alleges that he demanded sexual favours in exchange for being allowed to continue living on his property.[21][178] Wallner says that on one occasion, Gaiman grabbed her hand and placed it on his penis while his young son was asleep in the same bed.[21] In 2021, Wallner, her ex-husband, and Gaiman signed a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), and Gaiman paid Wallner $275,000. In early 2025, Gaiman and Wallner both requested arbitration, the dispute resolution method mandated by the NDA, each accusing the other of violating the agreement.[179]

The writer Julia Hobsbawm accused Gaiman of “an aggressive, unwanted pass” and described how Gaiman pushed her onto a sofa and French kissed her in 1986.[178][180]

and something that made it really fucking obvious, if it wasn’t already:

In a blog post responding to coverage of the allegations against him, Gaiman said there were “moments I half-recognise and moments I don’t”.

he doesn’t even fucking try to deny it

E: something else that pisses me off is this part:

Gaiman has denied engaging in non-consensual sex, and dismissed Hobsbawm’s allegations as misreading the situation.[178][180]

If she says he sexually assaulted her and he says she fucking misread the situation, then he sexually assaulted her. are you fucking kidding me. the most good-faith interpretation is that he misread the situation an assaulted her without intending to do so, but given the track-record and the fact that he says that she misread the situation instead of being horrified at himself, I am willing to extend absolutely no good faith. </rant>

unfortunately Neil Gaiman is still alive and benefits directly from things like purchases, so no. You cannot mikufy an author who benefits.

Ok so I checked and it looks to be AI slop but I am not against the idea. Trading in some convenience for a little whimsy can be a good trade to make.

I mean I don’t think most epstein listers are pedophiles in the sense that they are only attracted to children, my guess would be that it is mostly either a kink for the power dynamic or the taboo. There are prob some exceptions tho

as long as a paper manual exists…

(tar -xzvf <file> btw, the dash before xzvf is optional)

stop doing x(originally stop doing math)

As I understand it, this happens cryptographically. Send keys can be added to form a larger key, which gets used to sign the pool of transactions. Because the signature used your key as well, the recipient can verify that they have received your coins(from a pool you signed). The important part is that it is impossible to tell who signed what part of the pool, just that one of the people in the pool did. Because all money is pooled together and sent at the same time, it is not possible to read from the amounts sent which transaction belongs to who.

I believe the way they deal with this is by having the recipient create a one-time address for every sender, so it is not possible to recognize patterns between senders and recipients. Another thing is that every wallet has two associated keys. There is a “spend key”, which is a write-only key that can spend money from the wallet, and a “view key”, which can be used to view the contents of the wallet. You can publish the view key if you want that to be public information, but you don’t have to.

If a diy hrt seller doesn’t accept obfuscated cash they are 100% a fed, but point taken

You might be right, I have not followed xmr closely. You might also notice that this vulnerability is unlikely to deanonimise you, but the point was more that it is a mistake they shouldn’t have made. Their last audit looks fine, though it was made by a blockchain auditing company which I don’t know. I don’t think there is much harm in using xmr for this, groups who would be capable of exploiting vulnerabilities in this kind of project are unlikely to do so, unless an issue of national security becomes associated somehow

xmr is a cryptocurrency which aims to make reading transactions from the chain impossible. Iirc the main mechanism of this is that they bundle a lot of transactions together and send out coins from that pool only once it is large enough, without preserving each specific coin. This repeats for a few proxies. You could trace a coin from origin to endpoint, but this would be pretty much useless as you cannot know whether the endpoint was the intended one or not.

fyi monero hasn’t had the best trackrecord on the cryptography front[1]

I am not certain if they have improved or not but I believe zcash tends to do a lot better on that front

although this is usually correct, here it is important for the joke that setup and punchline are seperated by anticipation.

Both servo and firefox now report the text correctly. I haven’t checked the response code on those, but lynx correctly reports 418:

Servo says unknown application, which isn’t what I expected for a html error code

I looked it up and unfortunately the ruling is a lot weaker than I initially thought. An artwork generated solely by ai cannot be copyrighted, however, there can be copyright on ai-generated works with a human author(?)¹

¹https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/19/ai-art-cannot-be-copyrighted-appeals-court-rules.html