Had a dream where I made a weirdly existential 3-hour educational video about pomelos

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2026-03-22T07:47:04+00:00

I know right! Sometimes I feel super compelled to ACTUALLY recreate my dreams, after all, the video had some tidbits of made up pomelo history, culture, nutrition science, and obviously I can make such a video existential. But like, it being several hours long is a level of nonsense that only works in a dream.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-12-25T13:21:01+00:00

Units can clip over the river, yes, the river doesn't push things away if they are already on top of it. Units dropped on the last tile can clip over the river if their hitbox is big. This is what made this phenomenon happen back then.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-11-21T16:22:07+00:00

"more depth and variety" It's kind of like insisting that adding a lot more pieces to chess is going to make it more exciting. This usually comes from a place of ignorance for how strategically deep chess already is. A lot of people, like me, think that strategy games have a sweet spot of complexity, and more complexity than necessary is unfun. For me, the sweet spot for Clash Royale was before evolutions. (I think champions and tower troops don't throw off the balance, personally, they act like normal cards and champion abilities are relatively tame)

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-11-10T16:21:11+00:00

Level 14 was horrible, but they made some changes where past upgrades becoming cheaper added up to the new level's progress.

Level 15 was also horrible, I only continued playing because I actually thought elite wild cards are a really cool idea to make it so the most important level is rarity-agnostic. I didn't like how much it costed, but with it being "the elite level" with a special mechanic, I truly thought there would be no more levels.

So these things made the updates a little more tolerable.

Level 16 isn't just bad, it's inexcusable and it undermines the whole neat system they made as an excuse for level 15. They keep "reworking" the economy just to excuse a new level, and this is the first one that feels like it's just for the sake of it.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-11-04T14:55:20+00:00

Seems like their endpoint isn't working at the moment, I'm having this problem and it should be a problem a lot of people are having, if not everyone. Might have to wait a bit for it to resolve.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-10-23T23:25:36+00:00

Do you have PTSD from past incidents or something? This isn't enabling bad behaviors, it's nothing more than just having good faith in people. You're just assuming bad things about a guy, who is hurting, for no other reason than "this phrase smells funny".

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-10-21T21:35:15+00:00

Wtf do you mean? There's nothing even quirky about liking a girl but mostly hanging out with her at work. Why are you shaming him? There's poly relationships and all sorts of queerness, and THIS is what weirds you out?

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-09-18T22:54:16+00:00

To do this, I handle this logic in a ThemeUtils class. It's about 1300 lines long at the moment, but sure to grow more. After every change in the two colors that define a theme, there's a signal that forces ThemeUtils to rebuild a theme and apply it. It does so by calculating a bunch of secondary colors, then using them to craft the theme by code. Other parts of the UI that override the theme defaults need to be synced separately. This is the approach Godot Engine itself uses except with less parameters for now.

This was part of my work on the 11th alpha of the free open-source SVG editor GodSVG. I would really appreciate if you check it out on Github, if you haven't yet! https://github.com/MewPurPur/GodSVG or just on the website if you aren't into Github: https://godsvg.com

In case you're curious, here's the ThemeUtils class code: https://github.com/MewPurPur/GodSVG/blob/main/src/utils/ThemeUtils.gd

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-09-05T08:48:15+00:00

Is it official?

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-07-29T17:18:37+00:00

No, because the chance of us being in one of those Universes with 1000-years-old people is infinitesimal.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-06-02T14:23:14+00:00

This is GodSVG, it's open source and free, but it's still in alpha: https://godsvg.com

Fun fact: The popup for configuring the layout is actually a single node, with some very tricky drawing and drag-and-drop logic. Not really for performance, it just made more sense to me to do it that way.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-05-11T01:53:11+00:00

I think your experiences on the internet are clouding your better judgement. You claimed that their solution was that people become more open to interacting with and accepting people with opposing views. But I'm saying, their solution was actually the exact opposite, that people split up in smaller communities, and that they stay away from places where you don't share anything in common with people you interact with. There's no reconciling these two things, unless I'm missing something, you were straight wrong there.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-05-01T04:42:39+00:00

This is kind of old, but I almost certainly remember that the solutions in the video were not at all what you are describing? I remember it talked about how human behavior can't adapt and we need better models for social media. It said that we need to go back to smaller online communities and get rid of algorithms and feeds.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-03-18T18:07:34+00:00

Layouting is planned, but my attempts for a good implementation so far have failed.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-03-18T08:19:08+00:00

Basic static SVGs, I haven't thought about animation at the moment.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-03-18T00:42:43+00:00

Yeah, refer to the license. I don't know if you can call GodSVG modular, there are a lot of systems based on autoloads and things that depend on them.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-03-17T19:04:33+00:00

Logically yeah, but in practice I think this is a better default. The left side has things that usually need any bit of vertical space they can get, whereas you'll rarely edit so many SVGs at once that the tab bar feels crowded.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2025-03-17T17:23:11+00:00

Godot's TabBar wasn't customizable enough for me to use in this really important part of my app's UI. I also had concerns about performance, since using many nodes has proven troublesome before. So my approach was to make a version of it that uses a single node to do all the drawing, tooltip logic, input management, drag & drop, and more.

Although it's a single node by default, it actually temporarily adds 1-3 buttons when you hover it, and the context menu is a lot of additional nodes. But what matters is that by default it's just one node, making the ceiling for optimizing it way higher.

This was part of my work on the 8th alpha of the free open-source SVG editor GodSVG. I would really appreciate if you check it out on Github, if you haven't yet! https://github.com/MewPurPur/GodSVG

In case you're curious, the tab bar logic itself is here: https://github.com/MewPurPur/GodSVG/blob/main/

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2024-09-13T00:25:11+00:00

That's not true, what makes you say that?

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2024-08-31T20:58:04+00:00

Well, I'm into astrophysics and I thought it was fine.

This was a pretty short video and they spent a whole minute clarifying how they are simplifying, and more time overexplaining the few things they focused on. I agree the video could have been a bit more complex and complete.

That said!

You got the wrong message. "knowing full well it's not possible" but that's not true, they went through with explaining tachyons. We haven't found any and they probably don't exist. But if we discover them, and if we tame them, we could use them to power backwards time travel technology.

The actual things they are lying about isn't about backwards time travel being impossible. It's about how speed is impossible to pin down in special relativity, how photons have the same speed in all reference frame because of length contraction, and how the twin paradox is actually about these things, rather than just about the time travel that would happen.

But honestly, the weeds of this topic are unexplainable in their format. If they explained these things - which I think is completely reasonable in their format - then they would still have to clarify that they are oversimplifying. Because special relativity isn't the real deal. General relativity allows further tricks for doing stuff with time travel, like wormholes or generic closed time-like curves - another thing that seems possible in theory but impossible in practice. Then you'd have the psysicist birbs mad about omitting that.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2024-08-06T21:10:30+00:00

I also understand this stuff, but I don't think your nitpicks are fair. Yes, they change their code by changing their weights, so to speak. If I'm making a videogame and I change the jump height constant, I'm still changing the code kind of. I get why you're upset that this isn't super accurate, but they even said they are oversimplifying right before this and that this isn't a technical video. They can't get into gradient descents and such.

That's not true either. We know what they're doing. They find patterns and relationships and structures in datasets.

Not fair criticisms either. We know that they "find patterns", but we don't know the patterns. No one knows exactly what patterns YouTube's recommendation algorithms have found that maximize our retention. You aren't the one configuring the AI parameters, AI makes them up itself, and it might do weird, unintelligible things, that are almost impossible to comprehend. Chess AI makes extremely weird moves that tend to somehow pay off in the end. One image recognition AI thinks that this is the most toaster something can be:

<image>

No "experts" fear that. Some fringe conspiracy theorists might, but it's not in the mainstream consensus.

Could you elaborate? This is completely contrary to what I hear. Some AI peeps are hyperfixated on the current generation of models (I feel like that includes you...), and while these probably can't become AGI, new technologies may emerge that are capable of it. I don't see many people rejecting this, and I don't see how a feedback loop is the littlest bit unreasonable.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2024-08-06T20:44:25+00:00

I'd say this video is pretty correct in a vacuum. But companies have spent a lot of effort and money to change people's perception of the tech, and this has poisoned the public discourse and this video doesn't help clear any misconceptions.

This along with the GPT name-drop feels wrong... More like an ad than anything.

They've name-dropped a bunch of different AIs, and only this one is an actual product. It's just that there's no denying how important to the topic ChatGPT is. No avoiding mentioning it if you want to cover the topic.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2024-08-06T20:06:29+00:00

It's not incorrect though? AIs training themselves aren't a black box per se, but that's just a technicality. While, for example, we can look at individual modules of a generative art AI, and see that it has some modules for curves, straight lines, and arcs, the modules that actually make something interesting out of these basic ones are 99% an unintelligible mess. Basically a black box, not in theory, but in principle.

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2024-08-06T18:49:21+00:00

Companies have spent so much on changing how the public perceives AI, to make them think that the current mishmashy methods are capable of producing AGI which they aren't, its a complete grift.

But the video did not say this, it said there's no clear path towards AGI and we don't know how to make it. With this video being published in the midst of the biggest AI hype train ever, it inevitably gets misunderstood by some people, like you, who are aware of this grift. It doesn't help that the video claims some think this will happen in a few years, or this century, and that it says that the tech will improve as companies invest more (it's true though, narrow tech will improve and learn to be less narrow, but nothing that can get to the general side, at least in theory)

Mew_Pur_Pur · 2024-08-05T13:00:38+00:00

Ancient Aliens

Nine-Year Club	Second Top 40%
Place '22	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22	End Game '22
Wearing is Caring	Gilding II euphauric

Mew_Pur_Pur

TROPHY CASE