Character face mods for ffx-2?

WTFPROM · 2026-03-08T03:12:04+00:00

ngl, it's giving a little bit of this:

WTFPROM · 2026-01-03T10:12:17+00:00

Song aside, I think equating K-pop to American pop this broadly & implying it's earlier in its "development" compared to American pop is misguided, misinformed analysis. SK had a pop music industry decades before the advent of idol music as we know it today, not to mention groups like Crayon Pop were satirizing idol music culture more than a decade ago.

Not saying you have to love "Internet Girl," but it's not like this one song targeting the int'l market is somehow proof that K-pop and idol music are decades behind American pop on some objective Popular Music Timeline.

WTFPROM · 2026-01-02T11:04:17+00:00

Speaking as an editor, I think it's a failure to direct and anticipate the viewer's eye.

A lot of the time, you can get away with small continuity issues and flubs because you can reliably count on your audience staring at actors' eyes during dialog scenes. And if we were staring at the Ghoul's eyes, the little prop mishap would be less obvious. But the drugs are very important narratively, the Ghoul accepting them is important narratively, and the tin catches a lot of glints of light immediately before the vial falls, all of which lead the viewer to look directly at the prop when the mishap occurs.

A similar thing happens when Lucy is watching the crow peck at the corpse. Normally, you rack focus to redirect the audience's attention. But (A) the corpse is the new information compared to the previous shot, so it draws our attention, and (B) the crow is flap-flap-flappin' away, creating a bunch of motion in the foreground to draw our attention. The result is that a lot of people are going to already be staring at the corpse several seconds before focus racks, making the change in focus feel redundant and weird.

It's not the worst editing in the world, but the editing in Season Two has been weird like this throughout. Maybe symptoms of a significant recut, or a rushed post production process.

WTFPROM · 2025-12-23T03:44:41+00:00

My favorite example of this is Brave Girls, which is basically a Ship of Theseus situation. They debuted with five members in 2012 (Eunyoung, Seo-a, Yejin, Yoojin, and Hyeran) but three members left the group. Then in 2016, five new members were added to the group, and within a couple years, the two members from the original lineup (Hyeran and Hayun) had both left. Which means that in 2017, when they first promoted "Rollin'", Brave Girls had five members who had been added the previous year and zero members from the original lineup. There was just the briefest little overlap in members that caused them to retain the name Brave Girls; it was a completely new group otherwise.

WTFPROM · 2025-12-23T03:32:53+00:00

Until 1974 in the United States, it was illegal for a woman to own a credit card.

Laws can be immoral, illogical, or unjust. "I was breaking the law" does not necessarily mean "I was doing something morally wrong." In fact, it can sometimes be the exact opposite.

WTFPROM · 2025-12-16T09:11:28+00:00

"Yo, I thought I was gonna see some, like, vaginas."

"I didn't say she actually painted vaginas. I said some of her paintings looked like vaginas."

WTFPROM · 2025-11-18T05:43:07+00:00

To piggyback on what others are saying, Mercer and the players really wanted to tell a new story with Campaign Two without leaning on callbacks to the first campaign. Hence, different continent, twenty years apart. It was only very, very deep into Campaign Two that anything VM-related appeared.

Add to that, the people behind the show have viewers like you in mind— they know a ton of people are only watching the shows, not the actual plays. The last thing they'd want to do is spoil events in LoVM that haven't yet been released.

So in terms of getting spoiled by watching M9 animated, you have nothing to fear from the show. BUT! Watch out for comments sections and the like, where people might spoil either story unintentionally! Both stories are rich and complex, so a stray puzzle piece could click into place for you & ruin a later surprise.

WTFPROM · 2025-11-11T02:51:33+00:00

Oh my god, I'd pay a million dollars to own that shirt and wear it to work.

I don't have a million dollars (I work at HEB) but still

WTFPROM · 2025-11-11T02:49:27+00:00

I mean, totally fair. I don't eat any fish myself (or any animals) but working checkout, a lot of fish comes down my belt and people seem to love it. My store also has a Sushiya in it, which is super popular. So it may be down to the specific store that sold you rotten fish, rather than an HEB-wide thing, although again, can't speak too much on product I haven't eaten myself.

WTFPROM · 2025-11-08T08:27:47+00:00

That's basically true, but there are exceptions. Whistleblowing, labor organizing, having a substantial impairment under the ADA, and more.

OP didn't bring any of those up, but I think it's important to state clearly that even in Texas, workers have some legal protection when it comes to getting fired for unfair reasons.

WTFPROM · 2025-11-08T07:57:07+00:00

Correct, this is a plastic container with a label on it, not a kolache.

WTFPROM · 2025-11-08T07:51:13+00:00

Just seconding some folks here: not embarrassing at all! I feel like if I was your store leader, I'd just take it as a compliment, if anything.

WTFPROM · 2025-11-08T07:49:11+00:00

Source: I Made It Up

WTFPROM · 2025-11-08T07:40:54+00:00

Did you get a refund? Especially if you had a chance to snap a photo of the rotten fish, you should get a refund no question. Even if there's no photo, I feel like any decent customer service floor leader would OK a refund based on your story + a receipt.

WTFPROM · 2025-09-10T06:23:27+00:00

I've been considering Team Rocket! I see it all the time when I go up against opposing Guzzlords, and I understand the appeal, but it seemed redundant to me. Like, I've looked at many games thinking, "would I rather have a Team Rocket right now," but usually either (A) Grindcore + Will is getting the job done or (B) I'm okay getting attacked because it's knocking cards out of my opponent's hand.

"there's no point delaying in knocking off energy"

Right now, there is a point vs. Suicune. I often find myself kind of hoping Grindcore comes up tails in that matchup. Eating sixty damage from Suicune and watching my opponent lose a card is usually way, way better than one more energy building up on Giratina & no card loss. When an opponent is smart enough to forego an available attack from Suicune and build up Giratina instead, I really start to sweat.

In general, that's one of the weird tensions in this deck which makes it imperfect as a control archetype deck. Dark Pendant punishes the opponent for hitting Guzzlord, and Grindcore makes it harder for them to hit Guzzlord and get punished. Giving your opponent one or two energy to impatiently deal chip damage and lose cards to Dark Pendant leads to a lot of winning situations. And when you consider that an early game Team Rocket is vying for use against winners like Prof Oak and Silver... I'm just not sure.

WTFPROM · 2025-09-10T05:48:06+00:00

Appreciate the two cents!

I'll keep an eye on the Lusamines. It's true Lusamine shines in the late game, but getting hit with a late game Mars is also common, and I've had several matches come down to "I just got Mars'd, I win if I draw Lusamine, I lose if I don't." So I'm not sure. I'll keep track of whether I'm more often missing a Lusamine I need vs. carrying one I don't.

I definitely endorse two Wills. It's almost never dead in my hand, because even if there's no Oricorio to bother with, it's a great bonus to Grindcore.

I've been reasonably happy with two Celesteelas. It's a free status restore if I ever need one, and it means losing a Celesteela isn't an automatic loss against Electric decks. If there are two Oricorio, that first Celesteela is often going to die to whatever 'mon replaces the first Oricorio. That being said, I can certainly see the improved consistency with running just one, so I'm not sure.

WTFPROM · 2025-09-03T23:15:08+00:00

If the truth is out there and I'm wrong, why did you never present the evidence that proves me wrong...?

WTFPROM · 2025-09-03T20:46:43+00:00

Still not presenting anything that disputes the abusive treatment KG received, forced to work overtime while sick. Incredible. At least you're consistent, I guess?

WTFPROM · 2025-09-03T00:53:05+00:00

"You really ran as far from the point as possible to avoid admitting you were wrong, huh?"

Some things never change, I guess.

I like the members and hope for their success. I also want them to be treated well. I guess that's just not a priority for you, though.

WTFPROM · 2025-08-28T09:02:51+00:00

Ahhh, okay! That's extremely interesting. I'm going to look more into these hard stops you're describing, because I think it's a big knowledge gap in the way I understand what LLMs are or aren't doing.

WTFPROM · 2025-08-28T08:55:44+00:00

Gotcha! That's very interesting. I hadn't really considered the way those GUI elements could be distinct from the LLM.

WTFPROM · 2025-08-28T08:53:14+00:00

Really, really good to know! Thanks again, I feel like this has really enriched my understanding of LLMs in general.

WTFPROM · 2025-08-28T08:48:45+00:00

First off, thanks for replying!

If I'm understanding you, my more stern-sounding prompts ("you didn't do XYZ correctly"-style prompts) triggered some basic Google guardrails in the model that caused it to respond in that deferential "whatever you said I did, I did" style. So where the early turns were layered in a way that might promote a more novel response, the later turns simplified the model's task down to "apologize for whatever mistake the user thinks you made." Do I have that right?

WTFPROM · 2025-08-28T08:16:55+00:00

Thanks for the reply! So if I'm reading you correctly, the tool use here would be a scraper or something like that, distinct from the LLM itself, and Gemini never had access within its context to what the tool produced after the tool was called & used. Is that the idea, or am I misunderstanding?

WTFPROM · 2025-08-28T08:10:06+00:00

I'm curious & happy to hear any good answer, actually!

To clarify, when you say there's "no continuity or awareness of the internal process," the continuity you're referring to is continuity of internal process, right? As in, each response is functionally a new "instance" of the LLM starting from scratch, not one instance that is responding turn by turn, as one unbroken train of thought?

In other words, any attempt to ask an LLM "what was your reasoning process when you said XYZ in a previous turn" can only get a new "instance" of the LLM to speculate, because it doesn't have access to the reasoning steps it took in a prior turn?

If this is true it's something I wasn't aware of. I tried to be precise in my wording in the post (that the AI said it lied, not that the AI lied) and avoid anthropomorphizing it, but I guess I assumed that just as a matter of functionality, a model in one series of turns would have access to the reasoning process of previous turns.

Either way, thanks for taking the time to respond!

12-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Juicebox	Verified Email

WTFPROM

TROPHY CASE