text:
Selecting NurbsPath as hair particle render object is not showing on the plane in viewport
I have already asked this question in Blender Stack and got solution of converting geometry to mesh but i don't want it to convert into mesh but as a path only and got suggestion to ask here in Blender Meta
I selected a plane, added a particle system, and selected Hair. Under Render I changed Path to Object and under Object I selected NurbsPath in the Instance option as shown in a YouTube video.
In the video, it appeared instantly on the plane but to me, it was not appearing.
So here is what happened to me in this query:
First I take a Nurbspath from Shift+A → Curve → Path
Then taken a BezierCircle, same as above.
Then changed the geometry of the NurbsPath in Object Data Properties to BezierCurve and modified the path as grass in Edit Mode.
Then added the plane to use as a ground for grass.
By selecting the plane added hair particles in Particle System.
Then in the Hair tab options went to the Render option and changed the instance as Object and in the newly appeared Object option below the render option I selected the NurbsPath (as shown in the image below).
Then instead of the plane having the NurbsPath in place of the hair, the plane appeared empty as appeared in the below image.
And I did this all by following a YouTube video in step by step process as shown in it. In that video, it appeared but for me, it didn't.
So, what was the mistake I have done here, and how to rectify it?

You can edit your original post by clicking on Edit below the post to add additional information.
It seems that there may be a misunderstanding how Stack Exchange works, any member of the community can post answers. Your question is still open and can receive answers by other users. Once you're happy with a particular answer you can accept it by clicking on the checkmark next to it.

But they said like there will be no solution as it was Bug so ask in Meta

@Ramos The comment by Emir did not state that it was a bug. They were just referring you to Meta, because your question was about how Stack Exchange works.

@Ramos Meta is for question about this site, moderation and how things work. If you believe you found a bug see Where to Report a Bug


text:
What to do with all the links to pasteall?
I'm not a user of this site. I just happened to be doing some cross-site meta research in relation to Please add a system to allow file uploads attached to questions and answers, and noticed that a large number of posts on Blender's main site link to pasteall.org (over 1.2k (all) (questions) (answers)), and there are several posts on meta here suggesting it as a file hosting site.
But when I go to that site, I get redirected to a different, very sketchy looking site.
Has this been discussed before?

What exactly happened? Did the service move to a different domain? Or is it just gone?
If the service moved, why not fix all the links and protect readers of blender.stackexchange.com from the sketchy redirect?
If the service is just gone, what should be done about all those links?

Wow I had not noticed this., it seems the site is down. Judging by the sketchy redirect I'd wager it is permanent and not some temporary outage. I've always pushed for using blend-exchange.com as our de-facto "permanent hosting" but not everyone honored the guideline. Not sure what to do about all the dead links, I suppose the information is lost at this point though it was never "permanent". Editing all the links by hand seems like an insurmountable task to undertake by hand. I'm not aware of any moderator accessible tool to batch find and replace.

"an insurmountable task to undertake by hand" you underestimate my willpower :P I'm a machine and have done much crazier (Ex. SO's script tag burnination... except I don't have edit privs on this site). and yeah, getting the company involved in doing something about this systematically would be good.

Yeah, it seems something easily scriptable through the site API for anyone skilled. The question is what to replace the links with now. Files in questions don't worry me too much, as the appeal to download those is generally lost shortly after answering the question. Files in answers are more troubling but those seem like a minority. If my search-fu serves me right we have a total of 460 posts with pasteall.org, out of which only 39 are answers. Where did you get the 1.2k?

True better query then mine indeed, the answers are still a manageable minority though sitting at 56. The sister site domain graphicall.org also seems to have found a new owner, so it seems to excludes the possibility of some ransomware or DDoS

i remember pasteall shutting down a few years ago. It started first as warning that they would stop uploading new files and keep the already uploaded ones for a while, and then warning they would delete all data. I don't remember why exactly, and I stopped using it very quickly, so I didn't even notice what happened to the domain. I guess the owner just stopped paying for it.

While we're at it, does someone have a backup of blend-exchange files? Let's say GiantCowFilms suddenly and mysteriously disappears - it would be nice to recover from such a blow.

@MarkusvonBroady no backups

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Do we want to enable an "AI-generated content" banner?
Given the recent announcement Sites can now request to enable a banner to warn about their policy on AI-generated content and given our stance in Should posts generated with the help of AI be marked as AI-generated content? and How to warn users about AI generated content?, it seems likely to me that we'd appreciate "a reduction in posts flagged for AI-generated content". (Happily, we haven't yet seen a large number of such posts).
I'll put two "voting" posts as Answers, one for each of the "yes" options:

**Reminder**: Answers generated by Artificial Intelligence tools are not allowed on [Site Name]. Learn more
**Reminder**: Answers generated by Artificial Intelligence tools must be cited on [Site Name]. Learn more

... but please add a separate Answer if you disagree with this idea for any reason!
The banner would then appear exactly at the point where it would be necessary to inform potential AI posters about how things (should) work here:

Thanks for taking the time to post this. I've voted for not allowing Artificial Intelligence generated answers in our site, my reasoning being that it hasn't served us very well so far and adds a lot of overhead for moderation. It is much easier to blanket ban them altogether, allowing us to just delete such posts, than what we currently have in place to keep track of them. Whoever wants AI generated answers can go directly to any AI model site.

Thanks also.. I'm assuming 'Not Allowed' does not exclude answers whose origin  may be  in AI, but which have subsequently been thoroughly tested and edited accordingly by a human. Those should be virtually impossible to detect in any case.

@RobinBetts I think if no one can really detect that an answer was written with the help of AI, there is no reason to intervene, because then a human has obviously written/edited a meaningful answer to the best of their knowledge and belief, which should also be correct in terms of content.

I've read an AI-generated answer on LinkedIn regarding UV splits at hard edges. Despite being the first hit on Google, it was literally useless. Nothing more than "perfect" paragraphs stuffed with utterly irrelevant fluff (it felt like reading a Facebook post by a crypto scammer). Then I read a human-written article on Polycount about the same topic. It was SOLID GOLD. No comparison. Needless to say, I gave LinkedIn and Google an earful regarding their folly in pushing AI.

@TitaniusAnglesmith I absolutely agree with you! The (most) AI translation mechanisms actually work very well. This is precisely why they are not a problem, because the translated content is actually flawless and understandable. What is problematic, as you rightly point out, is AI-generated content that is primarily the result of AI influence. In other words, content that simply generates seemingly plausible content in an obtuse manner, but which would never stand up to a practical test.

Answers generated by Artificial Intelligence tools are not allowed
I think we should have this banner added:

Reminder: Answers generated by Artificial Intelligence tools are not allowed on [Site Name]. Learn more

This banner has now been enabled on Blender SE!

Answers generated by Artificial Intelligence tools must be cited
I think we should have this banner added:

Reminder: Answers generated by Artificial Intelligence tools must be cited on [Site Name]. Learn more

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/