Spiracle

Perhaps this ASRM-ish reading of java class exceptions might calm you down? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCCTCVBFt6E

Copied from miku-chan03?

Here’s a dramatic reading of some of miku’s posts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDqik-Y27Uc
The same text as from the OP is the first one in the video.

Finally. I haven’t seen a single positive use of these yet due to the poor performance. Only slightly more accurate than professors or lawyers asking ChatGPT whether something was written by ChatGPT.

Direct link to the (short) report this article refers to:

https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:vb515nd6874/20230724-fediverse-csam-report.pdf

https://purl.stanford.edu/vb515nd6874

After reading it, I’m still unsure what all they consider to be CSAM and how much of each category they found. Here are what they count as CSAM categories as far as I can tell. No idea how much the categories overlap, and therefore no idea how many beyond the 112 PhotoDNA images are of actual children.

1. 112 instances of known CSAM of actual children, (identified by PhotoDNA)
2. 713 times assumed CSAM, based on hashtags.
3. 1,217 text posts talking about stuff related to grooming/trading. Includes no actual CSAM or CSAM trading/selling on Mastodon, but some links to other sites?
4. Drawn and Computer-Generated images. (No quantity given, possibly not counted? Part of the 713 posts above?)
5. Self-Generated CSAM. (Example is someone literally selling pics of their dick for Robux.) (No quantity given here either.)

Personally, I’m not sure what the take-away is supposed to be from this. It’s impossible to moderate all the user-generated content quickly. This is not a Fediverse issue. The same is true for Mastodon, Twitter, Reddit and all the other big content-generating sites. It’s a hard problem to solve. Known CSAM being deleted within hours is already pretty good, imho.

Meta-discussion especially is hard to police. Based on the report, it seems that most CP-material by mass is traded using other services (chat rooms).

For me, there’s a huge difference between actual children being directly exploited and virtual depictions of fictional children. Personally, I consider it the same as any other fetish-images which would be illegal with actual humans (guro/vore/bestiality/rape etc etc).

Lol, I complete misread part of your first post.

The repulsive Picard picture on the Enterprise D,

Looking at the catalogue, the first is “Picard ready room painting”, and I somehow mixed the two together. Complete reading comprehension failure on my part. All the other erroneous points in my post followed from that. Sorry!

That said, the whole thing still seems to be an issue of “your mileage may vary”. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen the image of Picard on some other official Star Trek stuff at well. (DVD Box art?) I wouldn’t describe it as “repulsive”.

Comparing https://www.lego.com/en-de/product/millennium-falcon-75257 and https://www.bluebrixx.com/en/star-trek/104184/Star-Trek-USS-Enterprise-NCC-1701-D-BlueBrixx-Pro :

The Star Trek looks like the original. I don’t think a bridge would make sense given the scale. If you look at the video, every single dot is a room: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IwxDO2Lrnk

I’d say there are plenty of details, and ~1.5 as many parts to represent as many features as possible on the model. It doesn’t have any play features, as far as I can tell, but I don’t think that was the goal either. Unlike the LEGO set, it’s a straight-up display model, and it works quite well for that, by my estimate. Again, this is just personal opinion. Everyone should judge for themselves what they like.

Edit: I misunderstood the sets the above post was referring to.

Definitely need some stickers, at least, for this.
the miniscule size
Lego Millenium Falcon

I’m about 80% sure you are being sarcastic at this point. Just to be sure:

1. The BlueBrixx sets print unique design elements like names, numbers, coloured lines directly onto the bricks. LEGO is known for adding packs of cheap stickers for most of that.
2. The ready room picture is, afaik, one of the more iconic objects associated with Picard.
3. The painting is 1m x 0.5m with some depth.
4. The Lego Millennium Falcon has ~2.5 as many pieces for ~4.5 as high a price. (Using the regular price, which is €189.95, btw, ten less than you wrote.)
5. Intricate details I cannot judge from the pictures. I suppose that comparing a painting set to a ship that’s several times as expensive may also not be the easiest to compare, even in person.

The Star Trek ships should be bigger and cost more, or cheaper and cost less. Not the same amount for far, far less.

That’s, like, your opinion. Personally, I think €850 for a single set is a bit much. I’d rather have 5 smaller sets for that price. That said, Bluebrixx does plenty of ships that are “cheaper and cost less”, down to tiny sets for ~€10 each.

Okay?

If you want a more LEGO-like feel, you can probably replace the high quality printed blocks with some stickers.

In case someone doesn’t already know these 58 licensed Star Trek sets: https://www.bluebrixx.com/en/sets/star_trek?filter=parts&order=desc&limit=58

Not to dunk on you too hard, but this question is on the same level as “Do people actually use OnlyFans” and “Do people actually pay money on scummy gambling sites?”

Of course they do. The reasons vary from charity towards poor creatives to paying for access to exclusive content to simping for your favourite thirst trap to simply wanting to support a creator you like for a month or two.

I don’t fully understand what people get out of it in many cases like supporters of creators who get 50k+ every month but only release a bit of content once per year, but in general it makes a ton of sense.