GrimReaper

Sorry for the late reply, I did put it to like 5000ms and this helps reduce the resetting hair but it still is somewhat annoying. I don't know if it's an entire reset, if I do use the smp reset function from FSMP it usually distorts the entire character for a split second. In this case it just affects the hair. I suppose I could disable the dll entirely unless it's strictly necessary for the mod to function, I wouldn't mind doing the reset manually during certain animations.

I do use FSMP, not Flex. Everything else behaves as expected but after installing your SMP head, I do get this issue. Whenever the mouth moves, to be precise. I do have mods that enable player expressions, so maybe that's the issue? I suppose the reset is necessary as explained in the mod page here since SMP has trouble with face morphs or something along those lines, so in a way it seems to be working as intended. The head morph changes, SMP resets which probably causes the fair to flicker? This just happens as soon as the mouth gets morphed via expressions. If the mouth doesn't change due to some emotion being displayed the hair stays normal. Edit: Looking at the FaceMorphWatcher.ini, it seems to update every 50 milliseconds. Which would probably explain the flickering when the mouth slowly changes due to an emotion or face 'animation' (like yawning) being played.

Sorry if this has been asked before, but is it normal that the SMP hair kinda resets itself whenever the facial expression changes? I know one needs to rest smp because of the morphing during BJ scenes but I'd rather not have that every time happen when the face makes some sublte changes.

AI can be an incredible tool but you need to already have the ability to work without AI. If you're an Artist a model trained with your art can do the labor intense work for you, like background art or animation. But you'd need to be an artist in the first place so you can spot and rectify the mistakes an AI will make. It's probably the same with coding or any other field, if you have no idea what you're doing chances are the AI will produce garbage and you'll have neither the knowledge nor the skills to recognize when the AI has a stroke.

I just deleted the recipes.txt and disabled the male model. Zombies in general are not supported in the B42 version but bandits are. Obviously your male characters won't have any dicks so there will be a lot of barbie and ken doll action. If you decide to use the male model and not use guns it'll probably not crash but bandits with guns will behave in a weird way because the animations won't work. At least it was like that for me. B42 is such a mess, honestly. If you want adult content to be an integral part of your playthrough it's probably better to go with B41 for now.

Speaking about the dev b42 version of Zombowin: - Male model crashes the game when aiming a gun. I think that was a common issue back when b42 was first released, character meshes need to be updated with the new skeleton b42 uses or something like that. - There's a recipes.txt which causes UI errors like the vehicle dashboard not showing, this is due to internal changes in the last b42 update - Defeat got integrated into the main mod but doesn't work for zombies, only for bandits. At least they'll strip clothing, dunno if they go further than that.

While I do agree that the team sports can be annoying it's way more important that people voice their disagreement with the establishment. I don't think you need to be 100% accurate 100% of the time and arguing over details is what kills momentum and splinters what should be common ground for pretty much everyone into smaller movements that disperse much more easily without getting things done. I personally haven't seen what you describe - rather than making it into a left/right issue people are usually pointing out that this is might be the beginning of a sanitized, controlled internet.

Yes, that's why I said it's not only about porn. 'Harm' can have incredibly broad and vague definitions, i.e. stories about protests, crime, corruption, political unrest and such could be considered potentially damaging to the psyche of the readers, especially if said readers are children. It's all about incentives - age restricted videos are available on youtube for instance but creators know the potential reach and thus money of any age restricted content is severely limited and thus is best avoided entirely. You don't need hard censorship to steer the public perception. Again, like I already said, this doesn't seem to be a single issue for a single country. Payment processors got uppity, steam and itch.io folded immediately. UK passes new age verification law, EU and US are working on the same thing. This is not a left/right or party issue. Tories may have drafted the law, but Labour implemented it. Tories were in charge when Rotherham surfaced but Labour didn't exert any pressure on the Tory government back then and only launched an investigation after being pressured themselves. I mentioned Diddy and Epstein not because of the UK but because laws like these are probably coming next for the EU and US as well. If it would be really about protecting children I'd assume you'd want to deal with that first. No, I think the main reason is sanitizing the internet. Manufacturing consent is easier that way. Edit: If you take a look at the related article about the Rotherham situation on wikipedia, it's listed as a Labour Party scandal because it was a Labour stronghold at the time. Should tell you something that the Tories didn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole despite it being easy ammunition to use against the other party. Like I said, not a party issue it seems.

I don't think that porn is necessarily the issue here, at least it isn't the primary one for me. It seems to me that there's a somewhat coordinated effort to sanitize and sequester the internet. First the payment processors, now the UK. EU und US are likely to follow in the near feature. This is just my guess but porn is just a low hanging fruit to grab, especially under the pretense of protecting children. After all, nobody in their right mind would be against that, right? Anyway, once you get a foot in the door the rest is much easier. The real world can go to hell in a handbasket but the main interest seems to be what people should or shouldn't say on the internet. If it's about protecting children / minors / women I personally would first think about actual exploitation happening to real people. It seems insane to me that with all the shit that's come to light recently (Rotherham, Epstein, Diddy) the focus is instead protecting children from virtual boobs and upsetting social media posts instead of IRL predators. Seems par the course, though - sometimes I have the impression the people in charge are more interested about policing speech instead of dealing with actual crime.

If you read the post I originally responded to, you'll see that it was a point about numbers. I.e. that one would need a lot more people to voice their discontent with the new law in order to pressure the government to reconsider. The 3.5% rule regards toppling governments through non-violent protest which is obviously a much, much more extreme outcome. If that's the case, it's safe to infer that one would need a lot less than 3.5% to make it very clear that something the government did is not wanted. Under these circumstances, 400k+ people essentially saying that they don't want this law is quite a lot, especially since the UK has had a few additional periods of political unrest in the last year or so. As the ruling class you can obviously ignore these circumstances that would ideally tell you to change course. Up until a certain point, anyway.

Okay but my point was that you don't need a whole lot of people to enact change so even a relatively small minority can still have a big impact. It's up to the ruling class to recognize these signs, though. You can only act so long against the interest of the people before things get ugly.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903 I'm not entirely sure what your point is. The 3.5% rule simply states that roughly 3.5% of any given population are needed to non-violently overthrow a government. The now 420k signatures obviously aren't 3.5% of the UK's population but a large enough chunk that it should be cause for concern, especially with all the other political unrest going on in the UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3.5%_rule Generally you need less people than one might think to enact change. The 3.5% rule is about extreme change like removing power from the government. The UK has a population of roundabout 68-69 (56 in England alone) million people so 400k voices is nothing to sneeze at, really. It has not reached a tipping point yet but it should be reason for concern inside the government, especially since that new law is not the only cause of political unrest there.

This adds a gene for the twisted penis from cumquer. Needs RJW Genes to work. I'm on 1.6 so that's what the patch was made for, dunno if it'll work on 1.5 or not. Cumquer-Gene.7z

Updated UAP some more Less red errors on startup RMB options are now available again Masturbation animations enabled again but you need the most recent dll for the animation framework from discord for them to work UAPv2.zip