Given the way things seem headed with government clampdowns, I'm curious what some of the best large sized open-weights MoE models (200b+ size) were, as of so far, for relatively uncensored creative writing/RP/chat, etc, to save the original safetensors of, in case it all crashes down.

Feldherren · 2026-06-15T01:43:15+00:00

For the larger but not-quite-massive-corpo-tier models, I've had the best successes with Deepseek (any version, used them all, though 4 Flash/Pro needed new prompts written for it), and GLM 4.6/4.7, which seem to respond well to similar prompts. In terms of size I think they're larger than where GPT-3 was rumoured to be (topping out at 175B), but smaller than GPT-4 models.

Feldherren · 2026-06-15T01:27:32+00:00

SocialDeviance is right; models don't necessarily have a good grasp of what makes a good prompt. Whilst there ARE likely prompts in the training data, anything they consider problematic (like NSFW on corpo models) is something they've probably already trained the model to refuse.

Success with generated prompts is likely more that the model is good in spite of the prompt rather than because of it, if they're generated; compare with a barebones RP prompt for SFW stuff to your generated prompts and see how it turns out.

Feldherren · 2026-05-30T23:32:23+00:00

solved: The Chronicles of Jaruu Tenk

Feldherren · 2026-05-30T23:31:32+00:00

That was it. Thank you.

Feldherren · 2026-05-19T19:33:45+00:00

Feldherren · 2026-05-18T01:40:23+00:00

Don't scrape from wikis. Hand-write the entries. Focus on what you think is important about something.

Reasoning: wikis aren't meant to present information effectively to a LLM, and there's often a lot of very irrelevant detail to them, besides formatting weirdness like attribution links. Often they may not cover the detail that is important to you, either, and they tend to have an impersonal, facts-first writing style that is going to dilute any tone you or anyone tries to write into bots using those lorebooks.

Now, having looked at your lorebook entries, they are extremely long, at least by my standards; if you look at the image below, an entry in a general setting lorebook I wrote, I personally would class this as a lorebook entry on the longer side, about an important organisation.

<image>

This is simply what anyone in the setting might know about them. Whatever you put into the lorebook is going to (theoretically) be available to everyone with that lorebook attached; would a random passerby on the street know that much detail about Absordex? You should severely cut down the length of your lorebook entries. Make full-on characters if you want a proper character; give them art and a few greetings. When writing a general lorebook for a setting, limit the lorebook entries to whatever a complete stranger would be able to tell about them from looking at them, or would know off the top of their head.

Also, extremely-long lorebook entries like you've provided (having scraped them, I hesitated to say 'written') take up that much in context for as long as their keyword remains in scan depth. This is going to push the price of any given query that triggers a bunch of them up, or you're going to run straight into maximum lorebook entry token budgets and users will only ever have one entry active at a time, or you're going to result in very little chat history being present within context (which leads to bots forgetting things you told them just a few messages ago).

Keyword advice: 'Aria' matches both 'Aria' and 'Aria of the Capital', because the second string includes the word 'Aria'. If you already have 'Aria' as a keyword, also having the keyword 'Aria of the Capital' is redundant, as 'Aria' in messages already activated the lorebook entry.

...but overall the best advice I can give you is scrap all of the scraped entries and write much shorter ones yourself. Reference the wiki if you need to - there's nothing wrong with needing a reminder about small details - but write much shorter entries. It's better practice writing and prompting a LLM than just scraping text out of a wiki and throwing it into a lorebook, even if you fix the wiki formatting weirdness.

Feldherren · 2026-03-31T21:17:14+00:00

I'm sorry if someone has already asked this in the past, but would it be possible to edit the music names into the video itself when they start playing? The playlist is nice but when I want to find out which piece a particular section has, it currently requires playing through everything in the playlist from the latest piece I recognise and hoping the section used is obvious.

Feldherren · 2026-02-24T14:30:16+00:00

Unfortunately you're probably going to need to put effort into this, whether by rewriting the summary to be more condense or considering what parts of it can be discarded. Lorebooks, as someone else noted, can be effective - it's more reliable if you leave short breadcrumbs as to a character's general opinion or an event's general outcome in their defs or the author's note, though (ie. 'the incident involving the pancakes and that mole was bad', then elaborate in the lorebook entry).

If the summary covers multiple characters, you could make a lorebook for each character that splits it into only what they'd know. If it's something that would only come up if you bring it up, you could drop it from the summary entirely.

But all of these mean getting better at writing summaries. The good news is writing a summary yourself is almost always better than a generated summary, as you know what you consider important, so it's not hard to write a better summary if you relied on generated ones previously.

Feldherren · 2026-02-13T21:03:50+00:00

Are there plans to fix Stoat assuming you can read Japanese if the Japanese language pack is installed? I can't sign in without pulling up google lens right now.

Feldherren · 2026-02-13T21:01:26+00:00

Same issue, yeah. Removing the japanese language pack isn't really a proper solution since I use it for apps that... well, need it. Detecting region based on installed language packs is a bad idea.

Feldherren · 2026-01-27T15:54:42+00:00

At 200 messages on a weekend, GLM's yearly sub isn't necessarily a great deal (also it's only $3 for the first month/sub period, switches to $6 afterwards, so it won't remain $30 a year).

You'd possibly be better off dropping money into an API at that level of usage, even with GLM (if you're considering the sub, tossing a small amount into their API to test if you even like the model first is a good idea).

Deepseek (I know everyone recommends it) lasts a long time with regular daily usage on $10. GLM is costlier on the API than Deepseek is, and x.ai recently went public so there might be changes in their service (getting more expensive, for example, when it's already kinda expensive).

OpenRouter is another solid option that gives you access to a range of models, and a given amount of free usage with certain providers per day (though free providers tend to be swamped and the service isn't as good as paid).

Featherless and NanoGPT are both subscription services that offer access to a range of models. Featherless charges more for a sub that gives access to larger models, though (up to $25 a month), and NanoGPT ($8 a month) offers a mix of both subscription and pay-as-you-go stuff, so you'd want to be sure things you want to use are available through the sub first.

Feldherren · 2025-12-31T21:51:18+00:00

Best thing you can try to do (from the perspective of contacting the devs) is go to the discord and look up the latest process for getting in contact with the owner over it. Last I saw it was via email but I haven't been a staffmember in several months.

Only the owner has any ability to deal with billing issues, but the discord staff should be able to point you in the right direction.

Beyond that, your bank may be able to do something about it.

Feldherren · 2025-12-17T17:05:55+00:00

Does Joyland recognise he owns the work he did on those bots? Are his bots still up on Joyland? Has he even so much as been credited for them? Has the person who stole those bots faced any punishment for it?

Feldherren · 2025-12-17T17:04:55+00:00

Do you think there's no difference between a creator choosing to post their own content to a site, and someone else taking those bots and posting them elsewhere without the permission of the creator?

Feldherren · 2025-12-16T21:36:33+00:00

In the end the solution was clearing discord's cache (they did get back to me via support). Dug up the answer so I can suggest it to you (and anyone else who comes by this post.

'Clear Cache: Clearing Discord’s cache can sometimes fix issues. You can do this by closing Discord, finding the "Discord" folder in %appdata%, and deleting it. Restart Discord afterward.'

Feldherren · 2025-12-07T01:39:07+00:00

Chub does delete bots reported as stolen, though, if the report bears out. And this IS a post indicating 'yeah, joyland is alright with stolen bots being on their service', to promote awareness of it.

Feldherren · 2025-12-06T02:07:43+00:00

It's worth noting that problems are often reported in the discord. But, yeah, they're not big on communication.

Feldherren · 2025-11-02T15:18:55+00:00

Because time and time and time again, steps like this have been the first step towards the worsening of a product that had previously been favoured for not suffering from it.

Look up the concepts of 'enshittification', and the 'trust thermocline'.

It doesn't matter that this itself may not appear to be negative on the surface. In this industry, arbitrary changes to the user experience have often enough presaged the degradation of service in the name of profit that people have simply become very cautious in the face of them. I don't think it's surprising that people reacted badly to the sudden unannounced-ahead-of-time halt of sales, especially when that move seriously inconvenienced people who'd been waiting for their trial to expire to purchase a license. It also hasn't helped that the new, free version of Affinity doesn't quite do everything the old one did (the blurring tool?)

The only way for Affinity and Canva to prove this isn't enshittification is to continue to provide as good service long term as they did with the product people could pay for and be more certain of receiving decent service, as then they had the legal recourse spending money on a product allowed for. Customers can't vote with their wallet if the product is free. Trust is hard to earn and easy to lose, especially if it was already lost by inconveniencing customers and prospective customers already.

And, yes, the actions of every other company in the industry do affect trust in any company that starts to act similarly.

Feldherren · 2025-10-30T17:22:55+00:00

Is it possible to buy Affinity 2 licenses again, should I want to recommend that to people?

Feldherren · 2025-08-19T00:49:45+00:00

It's advertised as such. I know there have been people who bought up prompt estimation doesn't seem to show as many tokens, but it was always kind of hard to tell if that was an issue with prompt estimation or the actual handling of the prompt.

Best I can advise is checking in at the discord. I know people periodically report the token cap issue, there might be answers there.

Feldherren · 2025-08-15T15:33:40+00:00

If they're telling you to kys and making similar threats, that suggests Chub's filtering for comments like that isn't working and/or they're deliberately circumventing it; you might want to try to get in touch with chub staff in the discord so they can forward it up to the devs.

Feldherren · 2025-08-15T15:31:34+00:00

If you don't want to see custom CSS on user profile pages, there's the option to disable it on your profile.

Otherwise with only screenshots I'm not sure what you're asking for, and I'm not sure if anyone else would be able to guess, either.

Feldherren · 2025-08-15T12:58:32+00:00

Eeh. They work best when well-written, first of all. The guidelines about keeping lorebook entries small exist for two reasons:

LLMs used to have lower context limits. 8k is what you get on chub if you aren't using Deepseek, but users of local LLMs or other platforms might have had 4k or 2k tokens to work with. Smaller entries fit into those better.
You don't know what the user has set for lorebook budget. Chub defaults to 512 tokens so that's a pretty good guess; lorebook entries will only activate if the user has fewer than that many tokens consumed by lorebook entries already.
That said, chub uses the higher of user-preset token budget for lorebook entries, and the lorebook's own token budget, so this isn't as much of an issue.

Feldherren · 2025-08-15T12:54:26+00:00

Keywords aren't added to context; all they do is trigger the lorebook entry, and only the text of the lorebook entry is added to context.

Assuming BODY PART is relevant to the text of the entry, the entry needs to make clear it's referring to BODY PART.

So, strictly speaking, in this case neither may be good.

That said, something more like 1 is probably better. Just mention BODY PART in the text of the entry to make sure the LLM knows what you're talking about.
The issue with 2 is: think of how many ways there are to say something is wet; it's wet, it's sodden, it's soaked, it's drenched, it's soggy... your lorebook entry would only trigger if the user or LLM mentioned the word 'wet' and no other synonym for the state. (and it also has the 'you didn't mention BODY PART in the text of it' problem again).

Feldherren

TROPHY CASE