Sometimes, AI isn't able to keep straight lines continuous. In this case it seemed really bad. Relying on my own ability to make out these things is something I'd like to keep doing. I also think it's important to call out. Even if I'll get things wrong occasionally. (But that's why I'd never encourage witch hunts or stuff like that.)
When you optimize for the top men vs top women, you'll often see men come out on top. (Though there likely also is an element of men being encouraged to go into sports, rather than women, so they are disadvantaged not only because of biological differences.) The part of the OP you skipped is "inherently weaker". There's a problematic viewpoint, while not taken literally most of the time, of all women being weaker than all men. Or that they should always be weaker, whether physically, or just in the "being subservient" way.
With your response having missed the point, it basically shows you're falling for that propaganda. I invite you to rethink.
I mean... if they are going through with making the movie and are okay with the creative commons licensing, I might just go out of my way to financially support the heck out of it, and encourage anyone else to do the same. Big companies embracing CC-SA (and similar) and being commercially viable doing so would be pretty amazing. Hope something comes of this.
The point is not that pulling any project from the asset store is insecure. It is for any code you download onto your computer that can execute arbitrary code. (In fact, yeah, the asset store itself could be dangerous, as it encourages people to download a package without first being able to inspect it. Again, I personally prefer pulling from a repo, which I can check out beforehand.)
The point is that a bad actor might be able to put themselves between your repository and the exact package version you're attempting to download, and give you something you did not expect. The checksum helps ensure that what you're getting was not tampered with, whether it by a man-in-the-middle, a hacker of the asset store, a hacker of the asset owner's account, or a malicious asset owner.
OP accepted the feedback, but they appeared to be.. let's say "more emotional" than others in this thread.
But hey, I appreciate you looking out for OP. They don't deserve to be piled on. I'm just trying to explain why I said what I said.
In my second reply I pointed out why even the asset store is not a source you can blindly trust. In my third reply I meant to point out that deflecting with the project being free software is largely irrelevant, not to mention that OP asked for feedback. The "doesn't matter" part was pulled out of thin air, I'll admit, but it was based on the dismissive reply to pikl ("It’s free software mate lol").
You can do whatever you want, but another person can use their free will to point out incorrect claims. In fact, in the age of disinformation, it's pretty important to look into claims (say, about safety and performance) made by people and projects, because they're not always to be trusted.
If you really want to get into it, since you are already trusting the author of the project you're pulling code from, you don't gain any security from pulling part of the code from another source. The benefit of your package manager is having to include less code in your git repository, potentially making it smaller, and (presumably) the ease of updating to a newer version.
And I don't know how you went from reading my comment to "screw yourself". Perhaps you should reconsider the way you handle entirely neutral and well-meant feedback.
Like pikl said, you made claims, so you can't just go "oh those don't matter because I'm not being paid". I wasn't demanding anything, I was just wondering if the claims held up. I'm just as much a hobby dev as you (by choice, in my case). We won't be able to do everything, satisfy everyone, finish every project, whatever it might be... but we can accept feedback all the same. And I'm glad you're considering mine.
I don't know how the official asset store works, but some software repositories allow re-uploading binaries under the same version, often for a legitimate reason. Relatedly, for example, Vintage Story released the same version twice for Linux, because the first time it had a broken install script. Everything else stayed the same. It broke the AUR package though and required a pkgrel bump.
A bug in the asset store could be exploited or it could be hacked, a popular asset silently replaced, and then you won't know if something changed. You mentioned decentralization, but if you wanna support other unofficial sources, then again you need to either trust them (and their security), or you could have a verification check like I mentioned.
I'm disabled, so your comment kind of stings.
So much for "peace and love".
Sometimes, AI isn't able to keep straight lines continuous. In this case it seemed really bad. Relying on my own ability to make out these things is something I'd like to keep doing. I also think it's important to call out. Even if I'll get things wrong occasionally. (But that's why I'd never encourage witch hunts or stuff like that.)
Wow, what an unfortunate crop. Apologies.
Is the path just crooked like that?
Because if I didn't know any better I'd guess this is AI generated.
When you optimize for the top men vs top women, you'll often see men come out on top. (Though there likely also is an element of men being encouraged to go into sports, rather than women, so they are disadvantaged not only because of biological differences.) The part of the OP you skipped is "inherently weaker". There's a problematic viewpoint, while not taken literally most of the time, of all women being weaker than all men. Or that they should always be weaker, whether physically, or just in the "being subservient" way.
With your response having missed the point, it basically shows you're falling for that propaganda. I invite you to rethink.
Might be obvious that this is fake, but it's presented as fact, so I'll just link this here:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/coyote-using-crosswalk-button/
No love for YYYY-MM-DD?
If you see a date in that format, it's pretty unambiguous.
wait, you shower daily?
I mean... if they are going through with making the movie and are okay with the creative commons licensing, I might just go out of my way to financially support the heck out of it, and encourage anyone else to do the same. Big companies embracing CC-SA (and similar) and being commercially viable doing so would be pretty amazing. Hope something comes of this.
"This story has words in it, how unoriginal." /j
But enumerators (aka. iterators) typically have nothing to do with enums, no?
Anyone else get GenAI vibes from this? Could just be artist errors..
Additionally, should I be suspicious in general about pictures that have a blurry background like this? How often is it used by real artists?
Not to mention the Nazis, too, tried to get rid of trans people. And all the "undesirables".
Doesn't the Bible also say that there's nothing you can do to bring the end times around faster?
So why not do objectively good things until then, instead?
Maybe it's one of gods tests, and he wants to see if you're a good person even in the face of inevitability.
I can't with these religious people.
The point is not that pulling any project from the asset store is insecure. It is for any code you download onto your computer that can execute arbitrary code. (In fact, yeah, the asset store itself could be dangerous, as it encourages people to download a package without first being able to inspect it. Again, I personally prefer pulling from a repo, which I can check out beforehand.)
The point is that a bad actor might be able to put themselves between your repository and the exact package version you're attempting to download, and give you something you did not expect. The checksum helps ensure that what you're getting was not tampered with, whether it by a man-in-the-middle, a hacker of the asset store, a hacker of the asset owner's account, or a malicious asset owner.
OP accepted the feedback, but they appeared to be.. let's say "more emotional" than others in this thread.
But hey, I appreciate you looking out for OP. They don't deserve to be piled on. I'm just trying to explain why I said what I said.
Scrolled down a bit further and came across some threads pointing to this issue:
https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/AuroraStore/-/work_items/1566
In my second reply I pointed out why even the asset store is not a source you can blindly trust. In my third reply I meant to point out that deflecting with the project being free software is largely irrelevant, not to mention that OP asked for feedback. The "doesn't matter" part was pulled out of thin air, I'll admit, but it was based on the dismissive reply to pikl ("It’s free software mate lol").
You can do whatever you want, but another person can use their free will to point out incorrect claims. In fact, in the age of disinformation, it's pretty important to look into claims (say, about safety and performance) made by people and projects, because they're not always to be trusted.
If you really want to get into it, since you are already trusting the author of the project you're pulling code from, you don't gain any security from pulling part of the code from another source. The benefit of your package manager is having to include less code in your git repository, potentially making it smaller, and (presumably) the ease of updating to a newer version.
And I don't know how you went from reading my comment to "screw yourself". Perhaps you should reconsider the way you handle entirely neutral and well-meant feedback.
Like pikl said, you made claims, so you can't just go "oh those don't matter because I'm not being paid". I wasn't demanding anything, I was just wondering if the claims held up. I'm just as much a hobby dev as you (by choice, in my case). We won't be able to do everything, satisfy everyone, finish every project, whatever it might be... but we can accept feedback all the same. And I'm glad you're considering mine.
I don't know how the official asset store works, but some software repositories allow re-uploading binaries under the same version, often for a legitimate reason. Relatedly, for example, Vintage Story released the same version twice for Linux, because the first time it had a broken install script. Everything else stayed the same. It broke the AUR package though and required a
pkgrelbump.A bug in the asset store could be exploited or it could be hacked, a popular asset silently replaced, and then you won't know if something changed. You mentioned decentralization, but if you wanna support other unofficial sources, then again you need to either trust them (and their security), or you could have a verification check like I mentioned.