#a hacker's tale

[robloxconfessions2]

okay I'll list it

Subspace (PHIGHTING)

Medkit (Phighting)

Rebel (Evade)

Defect Rebel (Evade)

Builderman (TRUD)

'Builderman' (Blocktales)

DedTech (from Admins vs Hackers animation on yt)

Cruel King (Blocktales)

John Doe (TRUD)

Guest 666 (TRUD)

1x1x1x1 (TRUD)

- ✦

for anyone who can’t count this is like. 11 characters

[explodingsparks]

Drew some silly hackers for blocktales and stuff idk tehee and some quotes that I made up or found!!

I like this thank you, Cruel King. Keeping MY kingdom all well-kept.

But I believe you time ruling my shit have expired for a long time by now.

I’11 T@K3 B@€K WH@7 1S M1N£.

I’m sorry, mister and misses.

O-Oh god, our boy…w-was this…?

…It was. It was to keep Robloxia safe and him safe from himself.

Oh no…n-no!! Where did we go wrong as parents…? What did we do so wrong that this was the only option…!!

Im not a violent dog, I don't know why I bite. But I grew up as less than human, somewhere between an object and a pet.

I was told to stay put, don't make any noise and don't fight back.

And I didn't. But now, I will bite anyone who tries to love me gently.

Because how could I be loved enough to rinse the filth from my soul?

I don't think it's possible.

Why do you hurt me like this? I’ve never done anything wrong.

I have only followed my brother, I never had anything great like him. But you said I had to go with him with punishment.

You took his arm.

You stretched my body.

It still hurts.

It still hurts, Builderman.

[linesonwhite]

You should play Soul Hackers 2, even if only because Saizo here is wonderful.

Also got this drawin' of him up on twitter.

[stagejakkal]

i was gonna say there should have been a TOME episode where they investigate an urban legend/myth about the game (forsaken has me thinking about that a lot, the game is based on popular roblox myths from the early days of the platform) and then i remembered that the forbidden power literally IS that. pretty much. anyways, do you think in universe anyones ever drawn alpha's avatar like he's a spooky .exe fictional character

[kapa-the-werdo]

Look it's John Doe because it's March 18 or something idk I'm not invested in Roblox lore

((happy John Doe day y'all!!! We've come so far))

[raurquiz]

#happybirthday #angelinajolie #actress #activist #thena #eternals #maleficent #MistressofEvil #girlinterrupted #changeling #salt #LaraCroft #TombRaider #TheCradleofLife #ThoseWhoWishMeDead #KungFuPanda #TheTourist #Beowulf #MrandMrsSmith #Alexander #SkyCaptain #SharkTale #Hackers

[hardcoregamer]

Perhaps you’re hungry for more though? Maybe you’re on a roll and are looking for another JRPG. Something that meets the same standards Metaphor has set with its engaging gameplay, fascinating new world, dazzling art style, and captivating characters. Thankfully, there’s no short supply of games that fit those descriptions, and this list will find the ones to scratch that role-playing itch.

[firstoccupier]

The Dark Web of Fate

October 22, 2025 — 23:00 It began with a thread. Not a conspiracy forum or cryptic tweet, but a hidden message inside a .onion address, buried deep within an anonymous chatboard. Gabe was the kind of hacker who thrived on riddles, especially the ones that came in hexadecimal whispers and barely-working servers in countries that didn’t technically exist. He wasn’t a bad guy—just gifted. Smart,…

[thefrogknight]

Why do so many recent jrpgs have home base/safe house with a skit function? I tried out Crymachina and literally right after the tutorial battle you get sent to a safe spot and have to sit through multiple skits to progress. I don't have anything against skits themselves but it feels kind of lazy to have plot and character development packed into home base skits

[thestuffedalligator]

It’s been said before but it bears repeating that Discworld is science fiction wearing the skin of fantasy.

Discworld tells science fiction plots and builds them from the material of fantasy. Feet of Clay is about robots and the ethics of artificial intelligence. Lords and Ladies is an alien invasion story. Moving Pictures and The Truth and Raising Steam are about the impact of new technologies on society.

Going Postal has hackers. They hack telegraphs, but they’re explicitly hackers.

Hex is made of magic and bees and ram skulls, but it is a super-computer. Discworld is built out of fairy tales and myths and swords and sorcery and a big hearty helping of Tolkien, but somewhere, deep down in its bones, it has a core of science fiction.

[sbcdh]

In order to foster adoption of commercial analogue phone technology in the 1960s, telecommunications companies were engaged in a PR race to be the first into every American home. Bell Systems found a novel approach in publishing their internal schematics as a monthly technology newsletter.

The practice did well, attracting the attention of both home technology hobbyists and government officials alike. Bell Systems phone technology was marketed with a no-nonsense, wave-of-the-future attitude. Tomorrow was here, and it could be purchased at a convenient retail outlet.

An unintended side effect of the practice was the subculture now known as Phone Phreaking, some of histories first hackers.

The accessibility of blueprints and technical specifications, along with detailed descriptions of the analogue communication network allowed phreaks to do everything from eavesdrop on conversations, to evading charges for calls, to the creation of false identities.

Phreaking was, naturally, a rewarding pastime for those with sensitive hearing. Additionally, Phreaking something that could be done without the need of eyes. It is rarely stated in many historical accounts of Phreaking, but many phreaks were blind.

Phreaks have assumed a nigh-mythical place in niche cultural spaces, especially among hacking communities. Phreaks were the blueprint. The OG. Legendary exploits of phreaks were told by many an early computer scientist while hunched over pegboard in darkened university basements.

70s counterculture did little to downplay these legends. Experimental psychedelics we're added to the mix. Tales of blind anarchists speaking to machines was a popular trope in folk stories. The cocktail of psychoactives would always change depending on who told the story. Sometimes it was LSD, sometimes it was Psilocybin, sometimes a sinister or mysterious research chemical. Sometimes they didn't need drugs at all. Regardless, the archetype of the "bakelite oracle" has maintained a strange persistence.

Recently declassified court testimony has revealed these rumors to even have penetrated the echelons of the legal world. Perhaps emboldened by a red scare in full swing, prosecutors we're known to occasionally attribute the ability of wanted activists to vanish into thin air to Phreak collaboration. Preternatural elements are often implied, if rarely outright stated. It is unclear how seriously authorities at the time took such claims.

Study is ongoing.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Copyright takedowns are a cautionary tale that few are heeding

On July 14, I'm giving the closing keynote for the fifteenth HACKERS ON PLANET EARTH, in QUEENS, NY. Happy Bastille Day! On July 20, I'm appearing in CHICAGO at Exile in Bookville.

We're living through one of those moments when millions of people become suddenly and overwhelmingly interested in fair use, one of the subtlest and worst-understood aspects of copyright law. It's not a subject you can master by skimming a Wikipedia article!

I've been talking about fair use with laypeople for more than 20 years. I've met so many people who possess the unshakable, serene confidence of the truly wrong, like the people who think fair use means you can take x words from a book, or y seconds from a song and it will always be fair, while anything more will never be.

Or the people who think that if you violate any of the four factors, your use can't be fair – or the people who think that if you fail all of the four factors, you must be infringing (people, the Supreme Court is calling and they want to tell you about the Betamax!).

You might think that you can never quote a song lyric in a book without infringing copyright, or that you must clear every musical sample. You might be rock solid certain that scraping the web to train an AI is infringing. If you hold those beliefs, you do not understand the "fact intensive" nature of fair use.

But you can learn! It's actually a really cool and interesting and gnarly subject, and it's a favorite of copyright scholars, who have really fascinating disagreements and discussions about the subject. These discussions often key off of the controversies of the moment, but inevitably they implicate earlier fights about everything from the piano roll to 2 Live Crew to antiracist retellings of Gone With the Wind.

One of the most interesting discussions of fair use you can ask for took place in 2019, when the NYU Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy held a symposium called "Proving IP." One of the panels featured dueling musicologists debating the merits of the Blurred Lines case. That case marked a turning point in music copyright, with the Marvin Gaye estate successfully suing Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams for copying the "vibe" of Gaye's "Got to Give it Up."

Naturally, this discussion featured clips from both songs as the experts – joined by some of America's top copyright scholars – delved into the legal reasoning and future consequences of the case. It would be literally impossible to discuss this case without those clips.

And that's where the problems start: as soon as the symposium was uploaded to Youtube, it was flagged and removed by Content ID, Google's $100,000,000 copyright enforcement system. This initial takedown was fully automated, which is how Content ID works: rightsholders upload audio to claim it, and then Content ID removes other videos where that audio appears (rightsholders can also specify that videos with matching clips be demonetized, or that the ad revenue from those videos be diverted to the rightsholders).

But Content ID has a safety valve: an uploader whose video has been incorrectly flagged can challenge the takedown. The case is then punted to the rightsholder, who has to manually renew or drop their claim. In the case of this symposium, the rightsholder was Universal Music Group, the largest record company in the world. UMG's personnel reviewed the video and did not drop the claim.

99.99% of the time, that's where the story would end, for many reasons. First of all, most people don't understand fair use well enough to contest the judgment of a cosmically vast, unimaginably rich monopolist who wants to censor their video. Just as importantly, though, is that Content ID is a Byzantine system that is nearly as complex as fair use, but it's an entirely private affair, created and adjudicated by another galactic-scale monopolist (Google).

Google's copyright enforcement system is a cod-legal regime with all the downsides of the law, and a few wrinkles of its own (for example, it's a system without lawyers – just corporate experts doing battle with laypeople). And a single mis-step can result in your video being deleted or your account being permanently deleted, along with every video you've ever posted. For people who make their living on audiovisual content, losing your Youtube account is an extinction-level event:

https://www.eff.org/wp/unfiltered-how-youtubes-content-id-discourages-fair-use-and-dictates-what-we-see-online

So for the average Youtuber, Content ID is a kind of Kafka-as-a-Service system that is always avoided and never investigated. But the Engelbert Center isn't your average Youtuber: they boast some of the country's top copyright experts, specializing in exactly the questions Youtube's Content ID is supposed to be adjudicating.

So naturally, they challenged the takedown – only to have UMG double down. This is par for the course with UMG: they are infamous for refusing to consider fair use in takedown requests. Their stance is so unreasonable that a court actually found them guilty of violating the DMCA's provision against fraudulent takedowns:

https://www.eff.org/cases/lenz-v-universal

But the DMCA's takedown system is part of the real law, while Content ID is a fake law, created and overseen by a tech monopolist, not a court. So the fate of the Blurred Lines discussion turned on the Engelberg Center's ability to navigate both the law and the n-dimensional topology of Content ID's takedown flowchart.

It took more than a year, but eventually, Engelberg prevailed.

Until they didn't.

If Content ID was a person, it would be baby, specifically, a baby under 18 months old – that is, before the development of "object permanence." Until our 18th month (or so), we lack the ability to reason about things we can't see – this the period when small babies find peek-a-boo amazing. Object permanence is the ability to understand things that aren't in your immediate field of vision.

Content ID has no object permanence. Despite the fact that the Engelberg Blurred Lines panel was the most involved fair use question the system was ever called upon to parse, it managed to repeatedly forget that it had decided that the panel could stay up. Over and over since that initial determination, Content ID has taken down the video of the panel, forcing Engelberg to go through the whole process again.

But that's just for starters, because Youtube isn't the only place where a copyright enforcement bot is making billions of unsupervised, unaccountable decisions about what audiovisual material you're allowed to access.

Spotify is yet another monopolist, with a justifiable reputation for being extremely hostile to artists' interests, thanks in large part to the role that UMG and the other major record labels played in designing its business rules:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/09/12/streaming-doesnt-pay/#stunt-publishing

Spotify has spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to capture the podcasting market, in the hopes of converting one of the last truly open digital publishing systems into a product under its control:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/27/enshittification-resistance/#ummauerter-garten-nein

Thankfully, that campaign has failed – but millions of people have (unwisely) ditched their open podcatchers in favor of Spotify's pre-enshittified app, so everyone with a podcast now must target Spotify for distribution if they hope to reach those captive users.

Guess who has a podcast? The Engelberg Center.

Naturally, Engelberg's podcast includes the audio of that Blurred Lines panel, and that audio includes samples from both "Blurred Lines" and "Got To Give It Up."

So – naturally – UMG keeps taking down the podcast.

Spotify has its own answer to Content ID, and incredibly, it's even worse and harder to navigate than Google's pretend legal system. As Engelberg describes in its latest post, UMG and Spotify have colluded to ensure that this now-classic discussion of fair use will never be able to take advantage of fair use itself:

https://www.nyuengelberg.org/news/how-explaining-copyright-broke-the-spotify-copyright-system/

Remember, this is the best case scenario for arguing about fair use with a monopolist like UMG, Google, or Spotify. As Engelberg puts it:

The Engelberg Center had an extraordinarily high level of interest in pursuing this issue, and legal confidence in our position that would have cost an average podcaster tens of thousands of dollars to develop. That cannot be what is required to challenge the removal of a podcast episode.

Automated takedown systems are the tech industry's answer to the "notice-and-takedown" system that was invented to broker a peace between copyright law and the internet, starting with the US's 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The DMCA implements (and exceeds) a pair of 1996 UN treaties, the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the Performances and Phonograms Treaty, and most countries in the world have some version of notice-and-takedown.

Big corporate rightsholders claim that notice-and-takedown is a gift to the tech sector, one that allows tech companies to get away with copyright infringement. They want a "strict liability" regime, where any platform that allows a user to post something infringing is liable for that infringement, to the tune of $150,000 in statutory damages.

Of course, there's no way for a platform to know a priori whether something a user posts infringes on someone's copyright. There is no registry of everything that is copyrighted, and of course, fair use means that there are lots of ways to legally reproduce someone's work without their permission (or even when they object). Even if every person who ever has trained or ever will train as a copyright lawyer worked 24/7 for just one online platform to evaluate every tweet, video, audio clip and image for copyright infringement, they wouldn't be able to touch even 1% of what gets posted to that platform.

The "compromise" that the entertainment industry wants is automated takedown – a system like Content ID, where rightsholders register their copyrights and platforms block anything that matches the registry. This "filternet" proposal became law in the EU in 2019 with Article 17 of the Digital Single Market Directive:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/09/today-europe-lost-internet-now-we-fight-back

This was the most controversial directive in EU history, and – as experts warned at the time – there is no way to implement it without violating the GDPR, Europe's privacy law, so now it's stuck in limbo:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/05/eus-copyright-directive-still-about-filters-eus-top-court-limits-its-use

As critics pointed out during the EU debate, there are so many problems with filternets. For one thing, these copyright filters are very expensive: remember that Google has spent $100m on Content ID alone, and that only does a fraction of what filternet advocates demand. Building the filternet would cost so much that only the biggest tech monopolists could afford it, which is to say, filternets are a legal requirement to keep the tech monopolists in business and prevent smaller, better platforms from ever coming into existence.

Filternets are also incapable of telling the difference between similar files. This is especially problematic for classical musicians, who routinely find their work blocked or demonetized by Sony Music, which claims performances of all the most important classical music compositions:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/08/copyfraud/#beethoven-just-wrote-music

Content ID can't tell the difference between your performance of "The Goldberg Variations" and Glenn Gould's. For classical musicians, the best case scenario is to have their online wages stolen by Sony, who fraudulently claim copyright to their recordings. The worst case scenario is that their video is blocked, their channel deleted, and their names blacklisted from ever opening another account on one of the monopoly platforms.

But when it comes to free expression, the role that notice-and-takedown and filternets play in the creative industries is really a sideshow. In creating a system of no-evidence-required takedowns, with no real consequences for fraudulent takedowns, these systems are huge gift to the world's worst criminals. For example, "reputation management" companies help convicted rapists, murderers, and even war criminals purge the internet of true accounts of their crimes by claiming copyright over them:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/23/reputation-laundry/#dark-ops

Remember how during the covid lockdowns, scumbags marketed junk devices by claiming that they'd protect you from the virus? Their products remained online, while the detailed scientific articles warning people about the fraud were speedily removed through false copyright claims:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/10/18/labor-shortage-discourse-time/#copyfraud

Copyfraud – making false copyright claims – is an extremely safe crime to commit, and it's not just quack covid remedy peddlers and war criminals who avail themselves of it. Tech giants like Adobe do not hesitate to abuse the takedown system, even when that means exposing millions of people to spyware:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/10/13/theres-an-app-for-that/#gnash

Dirty cops play loud, copyrighted music during confrontations with the public, in the hopes that this will trigger copyright filters on services like Youtube and Instagram and block videos of their misbehavior:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/02/10/duke-sucks/#bhpd

But even if you solved all these problems with filternets and takedown, this system would still choke on fair use and other copyright exceptions. These are "fact intensive" questions that the world's top experts struggle with (as anyone who watches the Blurred Lines panel can see). There's no way we can get software to accurately determine when a use is or isn't fair.

That's a question that the entertainment industry itself is increasingly conflicted about. The Blurred Lines judgment opened the floodgates to a new kind of copyright troll – grifters who sued the record labels and their biggest stars for taking the "vibe" of songs that no one ever heard of. Musicians like Ed Sheeran have been sued for millions of dollars over these alleged infringements. These suits caused the record industry to (ahem) change its tune on fair use, insisting that fair use should be broadly interpreted to protect people who made things that were similar to existing works. The labels understood that if "vibe rights" became accepted law, they'd end up in the kind of hell that the rest of us enter when we try to post things online – where anything they produce can trigger takedowns, long legal battles, and millions in liability:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/04/08/oh-why/#two-notes-and-running

But the music industry remains deeply conflicted over fair use. Take the curious case of Katy Perry's song "Dark Horse," which attracted a multimillion-dollar suit from an obscure Christian rapper who claimed that a brief phrase in "Dark Horse" was impermissibly similar to his song "A Joyful Noise."

Perry and her publisher, Warner Chappell, lost the suit and were ordered to pay $2.8m. While they subsequently won an appeal, this definitely put the cold grue up Warner Chappell's back. They could see a long future of similar suits launched by treasure hunters hoping for a quick settlement.

But here's where it gets unbelievably weird and darkly funny. A Youtuber named Adam Neely made a wildly successful viral video about the suit, taking Perry's side and defending her song. As part of that video, Neely included a few seconds' worth of "A Joyful Noise," the song that Perry was accused of copying.

In court, Warner Chappell had argued that "A Joyful Noise" was not similar to Perry's "Dark Horse." But when Warner had Google remove Neely's video, they claimed that the sample from "Joyful Noise" was actually taken from "Dark Horse." Incredibly, they maintained this position through multiple appeals through the Content ID system:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/03/05/warner-chappell-copyfraud/#warnerchappell

In other words, they maintained that the song that they'd told the court was totally dissimilar to their own was so indistinguishable from their own song that they couldn't tell the difference!

Now, this question of vibes, similarity and fair use has only gotten more intense since the takedown of Neely's video. Just this week, the RIAA sued several AI companies, claiming that the songs the AI shits out are infringingly similar to tracks in their catalog:

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/record-labels-sue-music-generators-suno-and-udio-1235042056/

Even before "Blurred Lines," this was a difficult fair use question to answer, with lots of chewy nuances. Just ask George Harrison:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Sweet_Lord

But as the Engelberg panel's cohort of dueling musicologists and renowned copyright experts proved, this question only gets harder as time goes by. If you listen to that panel (if you can listen to that panel), you'll be hard pressed to come away with any certainty about the questions in this latest lawsuit.

The notice-and-takedown system is what's known as an "intermediary liability" rule. Platforms are "intermediaries" in that they connect end users with each other and with businesses. Ebay and Etsy and Amazon connect buyers and sellers; Facebook and Google and Tiktok connect performers, advertisers and publishers with audiences and so on.

For copyright, notice-and-takedown gives platforms a "safe harbor." A platform doesn't have to remove material after an allegation of infringement, but if they don't, they're jointly liable for any future judgment. In other words, Youtube isn't required to take down the Engelberg Blurred Lines panel, but if UMG sues Engelberg and wins a judgment, Google will also have to pay out.

During the adoption of the 1996 WIPO treaties and the 1998 US DMCA, this safe harbor rule was characterized as a balance between the rights of the public to publish online and the interest of rightsholders whose material might be infringed upon. The idea was that things that were likely to be infringing would be immediately removed once the platform received a notification, but that platforms would ignore spurious or obviously fraudulent takedowns.

That's not how it worked out. Whether it's Sony Music claiming to own your performance of "Fur Elise" or a war criminal claiming authorship over a newspaper story about his crimes, platforms nuke first and ask questions never. Why not? If they ignore a takedown and get it wrong, they suffer dire consequences ($150,000 per claim). But if they take action on a dodgy claim, there are no consequences. Of course they're just going to delete anything they're asked to delete.

This is how platforms always handle liability, and that's a lesson that we really should have internalized by now. After all, the DMCA is the second-most famous intermediary liability system for the internet – the most (in)famous is Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

This is a 27-word law that says that platforms are not liable for civil damages arising from their users' speech. Now, this is a US law, and in the US, there aren't many civil damages from speech to begin with. The First Amendment makes it very hard to get a libel judgment, and even when these judgments are secured, damages are typically limited to "actual damages" – generally a low sum. Most of the worst online speech is actually not illegal: hate speech, misinformation and disinformation are all covered by the First Amendment.

Notwithstanding the First Amendment, there are categories of speech that US law criminalizes: actual threats of violence, criminal harassment, and committing certain kinds of legal, medical, election or financial fraud. These are all exempted from Section 230, which only provides immunity for civil suits, not criminal acts.

What Section 230 really protects platforms from is being named to unwinnable nuisance suits by unscrupulous parties who are betting that the platforms would rather remove legal speech that they object to than go to court. A generation of copyfraudsters have proved that this is a very safe bet:

https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/

In other words, if you made a #MeToo accusation, or if you were a gig worker using an online forum to organize a union, or if you were blowing the whistle on your employer's toxic waste leaks, or if you were any other under-resourced person being bullied by a wealthy, powerful person or organization, that organization could shut you up by threatening to sue the platform that hosted your speech. The platform would immediately cave. But those same rich and powerful people would have access to the lawyers and back-channels that would prevent you from doing the same to them – that's why Sony can get your Brahms recital taken down, but you can't turn around and do the same to them.

This is true of every intermediary liability system, and it's been true since the earliest days of the internet, and it keeps getting proven to be true. Six years ago, Trump signed SESTA/FOSTA, a law that allowed platforms to be held civilly liable by survivors of sex trafficking. At the time, advocates claimed that this would only affect "sexual slavery" and would not impact consensual sex-work.

But from the start, and ever since, SESTA/FOSTA has primarily targeted consensual sex-work, to the immediate, lasting, and profound detriment of sex workers:

https://hackinghustling.org/what-is-sesta-fosta/

SESTA/FOSTA killed the "bad date" forums where sex workers circulated the details of violent and unstable clients, killed the online booking sites that allowed sex workers to screen their clients, and killed the payment processors that let sex workers avoid holding unsafe amounts of cash:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/09/fight-overturn-fosta-unconstitutional-internet-censorship-law-continues

SESTA/FOSTA made voluntary sex work more dangerous – and also made life harder for law enforcement efforts to target sex trafficking:

https://hackinghustling.org/erased-the-impact-of-fosta-sesta-2020/

Despite half a decade of SESTA/FOSTA, despite 15 years of filternets, despite a quarter century of notice-and-takedown, people continue to insist that getting rid of safe harbors will punish Big Tech and make life better for everyday internet users.

As of now, it seems likely that Section 230 will be dead by then end of 2025, even if there is nothing in place to replace it:

https://energycommerce.house.gov/posts/bipartisan-energy-and-commerce-leaders-announce-legislative-hearing-on-sunsetting-section-230

This isn't the win that some people think it is. By making platforms responsible for screening the content their users post, we create a system that only the largest tech monopolies can survive, and only then by removing or blocking anything that threatens or displeases the wealthy and powerful.

Filternets are not precision-guided takedown machines; they're indiscriminate cluster-bombs that destroy anything in the vicinity of illegal speech – including (and especially) the best-informed, most informative discussions of how these systems go wrong, and how that blocks the complaints of the powerless, the marginalized, and the abused.

Support me this summer on the Clarion Write-A-Thon and help raise money for the Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers' Workshop!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/27/nuke-first/#ask-questions-never

Image: EFF https://www.eff.org/files/banner_library/yt-fu-1b.png

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

[coro-sg]

A LOT of Spell Tales hacker doodles because I thought it would be fun

[tknuniversum]

007n7 and C00lkid Block Tales AU!

Cross posted on Ao3 under the same name as my Tumblr account!!!

This is going to be a bit long. (Some things will change once Demo 4 comes out)

007n7

Backstory:

He's still a hacker, a really dangerous and powerful one. He mastered code manipulation and even Builderman had trouble with banning him. After a really close call with banhammer, 007n7 decided that he needs someone who will go to front lines for him, so he could still do the hacking without risking being banned. So he got to work and after some time he created C00lkid using android body he created and fragment of his own code (more specifically a part of code that includes memories from his youth where he started taking hacking seriously)

With C00lkid he made a lot hacking attacks, which resulted in him being feared across whole Robloxia. He got banned once, by Builderman and ended up in Banlands, but thanks C00lkid's help he ended up escaping. He decided to lay low for a while and ended up moving to small village [in the area where Demo 4 will take place].

More info:

- He's more emotionally distant than his Forsaken version, and doesn't regret anything he done in the past. He feels proud of his accomplishments.

- He doesn't view C00lkid as actual person, just a bunch of code in android body/ a tool that helps him hack. Despite this he still allows C00lkid to call him dad.

- He has a control panel for C00lkid, where he can also read the mood of his creation or any thought C00lkid sends him, is able to access his point of view and is able to control him (he rarely uses the last option)

- Believes that relationship are nothing more than a distraction and a obstacle.

- Is focused on his work, despite being in hiding from Builderman he hadn't stopped experimenting with the code. But he does it in unsuspicious amount.

- After Builderman went missing (time when game events take place) he became a bit more open with his hacking. Which resulted in getting Shedletsky's attention, who sent Player to investigate [this happens after events of Demo 4]

- 007n7 and Shedletsky came to understanding/ created an alliance. 007n7 can continue his experiments but the bigger ones need to be reported and must have someone trusted by Shed to supervise.

- At first 007n7 was reluctant but with time he realised that this alliance is beneficial for him. And now he legally does illegal things.

- Works as cashier in local market.

- With time people started trusting him more and now he sometimes helps around village, uses his hacking skills in different way than before.

- After spending some more time with Shedletsky and Player he slowly came to conclusion that C00lkid has, in fact, a human traits and he might've been too harsh to him. And he slowly started becoming a bit nicer to C00lkid, although he still has moments where he comes back to old ways.

C00lkid

Backstory:

He's an android created by 007n7 with his sole purpose being a extension of his C00lgui and someone to take blame for his hacking attacks. Because 007n7's code that gave him sentience was from his youth, C00lkid's mental age is around 12 years old. When 007n7 got banned in front of him. C00lkid escaped and since his Ai/code has the ability to analyse and adapt he was able to hack into the Banlands to save his father.

When they started over in the village [Demo 4 area] C00lkid started experiencing being a 'normal' child and tried to make friends, but because of his past everyone stayed away. His dad also weren't a good emotional support, but he just assumed it's normal.

After events of Demo 4, Player is the first one who treats C00lkid like actual child and not deadly hacker or line of code. Which resulted with other village kids and adults to become more open.

More info:

- C00lkid believes everything that his dad says and thinks that there's nothing wrong with the way he treats him.

- He knows he's artificial life and he is okay with this. He uses it to his advantage.

- Because his code is able to self learn, he's incredibly smart. And uses this to prank people. (He's a mischievous little guy). He especially enjoys changing people's clothes into Team C00lkid all red 'uniform'.

- Loves helping out around village, with his unnatural strength and hacking skills people learned to appreciate him. (He's more liked than 007n7)

- His power is mostly locked away now, so he incidentally won't cause a disaster.

- C00lkid begged Player to teach him how to sword fight, after being approved by Shedletsky they started meeting up and train with wooden swords.

- He meet Red and Blue Noobs, when Player was babysitting them and they became friends (especially him and Red). Let's just say that Player had a eventful day.

- C00lkid is on Hatred's hit list. Not even Player knows why.

- Cherishes every bit of attention/care he gets from his dad. And was overjoyed when he started to give him more attention.

- Has trust issues when it comes to anything related to Builderman and Banhammer (because of his dad getting banned and what he heard from Players rant about Hatred disguising as Builderman)

- Enjoys copying/mimicing people.

- Want's to become champion of Swords Fights On The Heights

[forsaken-headcanons]

SO SORRY IF I SENT IT TWICE, TUMBLR LAGGED AND I HAD NO IDEA IF IT WAS SENT OF NOT. (I had to colour it att again on mobile. IT WAS PAIN)

Since Mod Nooby wanted to see more of my Forsaken characters changed to fit Blocks Tales here's a part two about BT!007n7 and BT! C00lkidd!!!

After getting freed from Banlands, 007n7 took C00lkidd and decided to lay low in a small village in the Demo 4 area. (A desert/oasis village)

There are some gangs/groups lead by people that lost their family members during the Team C00lkidd hacking attacks. They hold a grudge and want revenge. If they someone ended up bumping into hacker duo, a nasty fight would happen

007n7:

He has a control panel for C00lkid, where he can also read the mood of his creation or any thought C00lkid sends him, is able to access his point of view and is able to control him (he rarely uses the last option)

007n7 and Shedletsky came to understanding/ created an alliance. 007n7 can continue his experiments but the bigger ones need to be reported and must have someone trusted by Shed to supervise.

At first 007n7 was reluctant about working with Shed, but with time he realised that this alliance is beneficial for him. And now he legally does illegal things.

Hates traveling on a ship. Why? Because he always gets seasick. It (obviously) makes him sick, but also makes him have a sour mood.

With time village people started trusting him more and now he sometimes helps around village, uses his hacking skills in different way than before, although he makes them know he's not happy about helping them. (He's always grumpy in front of people. It's his way of keeping them away)

Lost count how many times he got a lecture about the way he's mistreating his son. Was lectured by Shedletsky, Player, People in the village. EVERYONE!!! Does he care? It makes seem like no, but slowly it gets inside his head and slowly, really slowly starts to see their point of view. But since he hates when he isn't in the right, he's hesitant to make changes.

Once he and C00lkidd fought another hacker, it caused C00lkidd's code to get completely messed up and drop 'dead'. 007n7 knew he could fix him, but since it was the code that got damaged it meant that C00lkidd might never be the same. This were one of the most stressful weeks in 007n7's life. Eventually C00lkidd turned out to be okay, only with minor memory loses. That was the first time 007n7 started the hug.

Often falls asleep during work, which results in sleeping in odd positions, although he always wakes up in be

C00lkidd:

When he has trouble understanding emotions, he sends a signal to 007n7's c00lgui to inform him in hopes of help understanding them.

Doesn't go against his father's orders no matter what. Any task given by n7 will be completed, no matter the cost.

Has trust issues when it comes to anything related to Builderman and Banhammer (because of his dad getting banned and what he heard from Player's rant about 'Builderman')

At first everyone in the village was afraid of him. He wanted to make friends, but everyone ran away at the sight of him. He understood why, but it didn't mean it hurt less. And when he brought up this issue to his dad... Well, he didn't care.

Player is the first one who treats C00lkid like actual child and not deadly hacker or line of code. Which resulted with other village kids and adults to become more open and now they unofficially adopted him in. They are his emotional support and helped him understand emotions better.

Loves helping out around village, with his unnatural strength and hacking skills people learned to appreciate him. (He's a lot more liked than 007n7)

His abilities are mostly locked away now, so he accidentally won't cause a disaster. Despite this he's still overpowered.

Is on Hatred's hit list. Not even Player knows why.

Cherishes every bit of attention/care he gets from his dad. And was overjoyed when he started to give him more attention.

Enjoys copying/mimicking people.

Really, REALLY likes doing origami. He learned it from Azure (I also made Azure and Two Time in BT. I'll talk about them next time)

Uses his skills to prank people. (He's a mischievous little guy). He especially enjoys changing people's clothes into Team C00lkid all red uniform. (Main target: Player)

1x1x1x1, calls him him a "Spawn from hell". It's not with malicious intent. Just annoyance.

For C00lkidd, hacking is a second nature. So Shed had to make a special anti-hacking bracelet so he won't accidentally use the c00lgui in public. After all, Team C00lkidd is known as one of the most dangerous hacker groups in the world.

Once some bandit wanted to attack C00lkidd. The bandit ended up having to buy himself a new sword, after all what do you expect after attacking a metal robot with a simple sword.

He doesn't have to eat, but does it anyway. He really likes ice cream

Has a special folder in his memory bank. It's labelled "C00lkid's favourite memories folder".

He created a song in a pirated app, where he put random sounds that sounded nice [Insert Forsaken C00lkid chase music]

If he sees his dad sleeping in uncomfortable position, he will teleport him to his bed.

Normally is left to do what he wants, but sometimes assists his dad.

~ Purple anon (I apologise for bombarding the inbox!!! I think I'm done for now... The fixation hit me HARD)

HI!!! HELLO!!! we say as we cock the shotgun behind our back /silly

GODSSS just. these are so adorable. no words. holding them all so close.,/, hgrajkhwlkahwddhjghasd

[cursedfallingmoon]

OC MASTERLIST!

(ALL THE LINKS ARE FIXED!!)

🏢.Modern day OCs!

💖. Jesse || Cute boy best friend: PT. 1 | PT. 2

🦴. Bone || Delinquent: PT. 1

🧸. Lylah || Friend's little sister: WIP

💵. Malakai || Toxic rich boy: PT. 1

🌊. Ranee || Confused Merman: PT. 1 ⇒ Asks: Where's my Human?

🔪.Takehiko || Yakuza sugar daddy: PT. 1

⭐. Ryland || Scummy celebrity: PT. 1

Hacker

Scumbag

Surfer

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

👾. Cyberpunk OCs!

Netrunner

Mercenary

Corpo

Diner owner

Ripperdoc

City Grown

Badlands Grown

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

👑. Switched Disney OCs!

!!Moved here!!

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

💍. Husbands through the decades!

Modern Day-☕. Julian || Too perfect Husband: : PT. 1

2010 Husband

2000 Husband

1990 Husband

1980 Husband

1970 Husband

1960 Husband

1950 Husband

1940 Husband

1930 Husband

1920 Husband

1910 Husband

1900 Husband

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

💻.Futuristic OCs!

Alien

Robot Society

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

💪. Hero Society OCs!

WIP

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

🪄.Mythical OCs!

🪶.Helys || Shy Harpy Hare: PT. 1

Tiny Fairy

Fairy Hive

Vampire

Emperor

King

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

🪶.Hybrid Bird OCs!

Harpy Hybrid

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

🦋.Hybrid Bug OCs!

Butterfly Hybrid

Moth Hybrid

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

🐾. Hybrid Forest OCs

Buck Hybrid

Deerling Hybrid

Moose Hybrid

Wolf Hybrid

Hare Hybrid

Bunny Hybrid

Fox Hybrid

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

🧺. Fairy Tale Picnic

WIP

꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦꒷꒦

📖.Cealieor Realm!

The Gods

God of Life

God of Death

God of Seas

Goddess of Earth

God of the Skies

God of Sun

God of the Moon

Goddess of the stars

God of Love

God of War

Goddess of Knowledge

Goddess of Dragons

Goddess of Elves

Goddess of Fairies

Goddess of Humanity

God of Winter

Goddess of Fall

God of Summer

Goddess of Spring

The 7 Princes

Prince of the North

Prince of the South

Prince of the West

Prince of the East

Prince of the Central

Prince of the Sea

Prince of the Sky

Dragon Realm:

🔥. Solaris || Yan Fire Dragon: PT. 1

💨. Yandere Wind Dragon: WIP

Earth Dragon

Rock Dragon

Lava Dragon

Water Dragon

Ice Dragon

Thunder Dragon

Fairy Realm:

Ice Fairy

Water Fairy

Fire Fairy

Nature Fairy

Dark Fairy

Light Fairy

Wind Fairy

Earth Fairy

Elf Realm

Normal Elf

Ice Elf

Water Elf

Fire Elf

Nature Elf

Earth Elf

Dragon Elf

MORE TO COME!!