Bartimaeus

Key words being "used to be",

...Uh, actually, a billion is a thousand times a million, not a million times a million. That would be a trillion.

Nobody who has hasn't seen Brazil (but eventually plans to or was ever even thinking about it) should watch that video.

For some reason, I read it as "walking home from work", and so I expected a very different result when you said "I saw the Porsche coming up behind me going at least 120km/h", . Glad there wasn't too much damage.

The only kind of math that I hate in games is percentiles and ugly decimal points. I'm not sure what it is about them, but seeing my chance to hit expressed as "65.1%" just feels so incredibly and unsatisfyingly gamey to me. AD&D abstracted this away a little by using the THAC0, AC, ability bonus, and dice roll systems, which I always loved. The math is still there, and you can still rather easily figure it out if you so wish, but it's hidden away just a little bit in the game under a system which allows me to think of my average damage as being "1D6 + 1" (or 2-7) instead of an average of 4.5, or that I need to roll a 13 or better with my D20 roll combined with my other THAC0 modifiers to beat their AC instead of it being 65% chance or whatever to hit. I like just a little bit of fuzziness and abstraction for numbers, but not too much - the numbers should still be moderately transparent and tied to hard math that you can figure out. (e): So I guess I basically like rational numbers and fractions rather than irrational numbers. Gee, what a surprise: the guy with OCPD doesn't like irrational numbers - that's a shocker.

My HTPC/media streaming PC did the same thing recently. Cleaned it all out, took off my CPU's fan/heatsink as well as my GPU's and remounted them after reapplying thermal paste, and it was much better. I'll probably do the same for my main PC sometime this month...

Yeah, that's how they get you. The smaller ones are ridiculously overpriced for what you're getting, but if you try to tip the scales a little more in your favor, you'll just get sick drinking a larger one. That's why it's better to just have someone to share it with.

Math literacy is such a weird thing. There are so many people that I know that struggle understanding basic stuff like ratios. If you're getting a chocolate milkshake, which is more price efficient, $4 for 8oz, or $5.50 for 12oz? A lot of people either don't know how to figure that out besides just making a guess on "what they feel is right", or they don't want to expend the energy/thought to it...or don't think they'll be successful if they do try. So yeah, I can see that definitely being an education problem. (e): Holy awful writing, Batman - fixed this terrible post a little.

Well, friends, the draft is just about over. All sorts of "analysis" will be coming out about how well teams did, but remember: one of the best draft classes by a team in recent history, the Seahawks' 2012 class, was widely panned as being the league-worst at the time. None of this "analysis" means a whit - check back in three years to see how your team really did today.

Well... Some people do enjoy atmosphere and storytelling a lot more than the actual gameplay, popularity of walking sims is a testament of that. And Inside does hold a lot of appeal there, especially if you enjoy showing over telling. To be honest, I didn't get much out of the (unexplained and rather over the top, I felt) atmosphere or "story", either, but I guess different things work for different people.

Kind of mirroring my thoughts about it as well: gameplay-wise, it's just an okay and rather mediocre 2D platformer, and don't really get why people are so incredibly in love with it.

Too much death. Condolences/sympathies, Tale.

Yes, it seems the Packers, with the first pick of the 2nd round, wish to trade down a few spots already, and get another 5th or maybe even 4th depending on how desperate a team is and how many slots we go down...

I'm banking on that he DOESN'T become the next Aaron Rodgers, personally. On a side-note, if there was a "next Peyton Manning"-type prospect, it would have been much, much more expensive than what they paid to go up.

What the 49ers told the Bears was basically that if the Bears didn't trade up for our spot, somebody else will and they will also take your guy. I'm not sure if it was true, but either way, it clearly worked.

Or we don't try to make sense of it, and we talk about something else, possibly something just tangentially related!

No...but I'm not exactly the ideal person to be asking this, given that I'd describe my "preferences" as being anti-men while not feeling too strongly one way or another about women. That means women win by default, of course, but, you know, nevertheless, matters of physical attraction are really just not my forte here - however, the subject is still interesting to me, .

The Kinsey Reports (results and methodology) are likely more interesting than the scale itself, I think, since the scale (and all the others like it, as this wiki article itself mentions) are obviously totally arbitrary and meaningless in of themselves without data and good methodology to back it up. Thanks for the link. @Heijoushin: I understood that, and I still disagree. I don't think "most people" would say or even feel that they're even "slightly" or "2%" (or whatever) interested in people outside of their "first" preference, or that they have multiple, equal preferences. It's not clear how the Kinsey Reports feel about this, because while it says roughly 7-10% of people were 50/50 at some points in their life, I don't know how the Kinsey Report actually "judged" people to be 50/50, and I can't seem to find the percentage of people that fell anywhere from 1-5 (the 'tweeners) or again, how it was determined that they were a 'tweener to begin with. I'm not discounting the Kinsey Reports themselves, but it'd be nice to have additional/clearer information about the data and methodology.

Have to agree with Hurlshot here - the sliding scale/spectrum thing makes sense, but saying that "mostly everyone is somewhere in between" just doesn't seem to really figure for me. I don't think most people have a "small desire" (or greater than that) to "experiment" with those outside of their first preference on the basis of physical attraction...but they may do so anyways due to lack of better options and as a result of a desire for the other elements of a relationship. Additionally, I think this scale extends farther back than just from "no interest" to "absolute interest" - "no interest" people might eventually be pushed into a relationship outside their preference as a result of circumstance, but there are also people who feel more strongly (negatively) about it than just "no interest", and would never consider something outside of their preference no matter what - not now, not in a million years*. I'm not sure where on the scale the majority of people fall, but I think it'd be somewhat hard to believe that the majority of people have at least "some" physical interest in everyone - it certainly doesn't feel that way. Have there been any proper studies on the subject? *My bias may admittedly be showing in my feelings on the matter here, as I personally feel this way about those outside of my "preference".

You know, I've always wanted a savestate wrapper, that you could just attach to any game/program a la Cheat Engine, and where you could have hotkeys bound to saving and loading the RAM state (where it would obviously just pause the executable as you're saving and loading states similar to Cheat Engine's pause function). With the advent of SSDs, even games that take up a large amount of RAM (~4GB?), it would still only take a few seconds. This must be more complicated than I think it is, because nobody seems to have made it yet.

...I assume there's no pause function? Thank God for Cheat Engine, where you can just create a hotkey to pause and unpause the program.

Couldn't you just not let your AI co-driver drive? (No, I don't know anything about this game. )

Yeah, I watched this last time you posted this.

I tried to listen to them the last time you posted them (even though I don't really like metal), but it's just not for me, no matter how forward thinking or advanced they may have been for the time.