Nerd02

I am no expert either, but I once trained and ran an AI chat bot of my own. With a decently powerful Nvidia GPU it could output a message every 20-ish seconds (which is still too slow if you want to keep the conversation at a decent pace). I also tried it without a GPU, just running on my CPU (on a PC that had an AMD GPU which is about the same as not having one for ML applications) and it was of course noticeably slower. About 3 minutes per message, give or take.

And bear in mind, this was with an old and comparatively tiny model, something like Pi would be much more demanding, the replies my model produced hardly made any sense most of the times.

Not familiar, but from what I just read online it looks pretty similar yeah. I believe the idea behind DCC was recreating exactly that simpler old school fantasy.

That's awesome. I'll rewrite all of my instance's bots to use that in the next months. I like how lightweight this appears to be.

Do you think it would be possible to host a bot on a servless platform, if the Lemmy instance uses Lemmy Webhook? It might be a bit slower due to cold starts, but I think it should be theoretically possible.

My dad used to play red box D&D (which I believe was the first edition ever released). Still has some manuals, which I got the chance to read.

Not only it was encouraged to play humans, it was assumed! You didn't get to pick a race, only a class. And while the classes of "elf" (think like 5e's ranger) and "dwarf" (5e's barbarian, sort of) were a thing, all of the other classes assumed for the player to be a human. You couldn't play an elf wizard: you either are an elf OR a wizard. Wild stuff, compared to some of the crazy stuff we get to do in modern D&D.

Correct, but that review process won't have any votes on it, meaning it also won't be possible for Hungary (or anyone else) to veto it. Doesn't seem like that great of an accomplishment on Hungary's side.

Possible. I'd love it if they actually went through with the article 7 threats, but until then using said threat to have Orban sit down is the next best thing.

News outlet are being extremely vague about Orban's motives, but it's clear that no funds have been unfrozen. By the looks of it, it seems Hungary received no grants at all and just changed its mind out of the goodness of her heart, which is weird.

From DW

"From what we are hearing from our sources, they made it very clear to Viktor Orban that he is standing all alone in the EU, blocking this essential aid for Ukraine," she said, adding that following the message it became clear Orban would finally say yes and so the EU leaders sat together to finalize the deal.

This makes me wonder if anything went on behind those closed doors. We know that yesterday Orban met with Meloni, who according to euronews

[Meloni] has fashioned herself as the most dexterous mediator between Budapest and Brussels. Meloni and Orbán held bilateral talks on Wednesday evening in anticipation of the high-stakes meeting.

All that's left to hope is that Meloni and other EU leaders succesfully managed to scare off Hungary and that no backroom deals went on.

I can agree with that. Something that looked particularly bad was von der Leyen openly supporting Israel, in contrast with what had been decided by the rest of the EU institutions. Basically she took initiative and used her position to support her own agenda rather than the one agreed upon by the institution she was representing. (source, albeit soft paywalled)

A more direct approach in foreign policy is sorely needed for our continent, but I think we are still going to have to wait a few years before we can see it.

Quickly? By EU standards, I suppose, but this is the furthest thing from "quick" in the real world. We are about a month late compared to the UK and the USA.

but they can’t do the minimum decent thing and say “we condemn Israel’s atrocities” in the UN

The EU is a permanent observer in the UN and as such doesn't have any voting rights. The common foreign policy is decided by the Council and requires unanimity so every member state has veto power. As such it's practically impossible to come to a conclusive decision on divisive matters such as the current Gaza conflict.

Exciting stuff! In particual I really like how neatly organized the project roadmap is, with a quick glance at the project GitHub page I can tell what you guys are working on and how development is proceding.

Also, props for using a widely established language like Java. I know Rust has lots of advantages and is all in all an awesome language, but having to learn a new language just to be able to contribute and submit PRs to your favourite open source project kinda kills the hype (and takes away a bunch of time).

Great idea, we really needed a more specific community. Usually any time I build something I post it to !fediverse@lemmy.world , but the scope of that community is so broad it sometimes feels out of place. Plus, as an instance admin I feel it will probably be convenient having a single community to consult for all the extensions and integrations we might want to opt our instances in.

Hey, pretty cool idea. So, if I understood your specifics correctly the bot's functionalities would essentially be twofold:

1. starting new megathreads
2. adding links to existing megathreads

About 1. I think you should seriously consider the idea of restricting the allowed megathread starters in a way. An easy solution would be only allowing community mods to start megathreads (and maybe instance admins? not really necessary, though, imo). So in your example only a moderator of !agriculture@lemmy.tld could start new megathreads. I think this would be preferable instead of an array of trusted users, because it would reduce the amount of configuration necessary.

2. would be comparatively easier on a permission side and unless any incidents happen it could probably be beneficial to allow everyone to partecipate in the megathread. However removing stuff from the megathread should definitely be restricted to mods and/or admins. Giving everyone the possibility to remove sources they disagree with in a public discussion sounds dangerous.

The biggest challenge would be designing a clear interface for users. What you have proposed:

@megathread@lemmy.tld add to Farm section Market

sounds a bit too long winded and possibly hard to remember.
Furthermore, you might want to assign some sort of unique identifier to your megathreads, as just giving them a title (like "Farm") will likely generate conflicts in the future. The "add link to megathread" action should somehow uniquely identify a megathread, both within a certain community as well as instance wide. Asking the user to provide a link to the megathread they wish to contribute to would be an easy and unambiguous solution, but it might be a bit too difficult on the UX side (bear in mind, users are LAZY).

All in all the idea sounds great, you (we?) should just discuss the specifics in detail before any code is written.