Mr. Magniloquent

I choked on my drink of water reading that. That was ****ing hilarious. Thank you! "Foreign Policy" is a tax-feeding, statist, Neoconservative rag. They never met a region they didn't want to bathe in war--hence, their affection for Killery. Their comments are damning in exactly the opposite manner they intend.

He vowed to prosecute. You know, like what would happen if we mortals did anything single thing Hillary has done. Pick one. You'd be prosecute and thrown in jail-open and shut case. Is that "less American" than creating ISIS and providing material aid to Al Qaeda? Cutting a swath of blood across the middle east so that Qatar and UAE can build a natural gas pipeline? Mind you, I'm not a Trump fan, nor shall I vote for him. He's an intellectually average, silver-spooned, bloviating douche whose only credit is being born to enough wealth to have "yes men" prop him up for a life time. All things considered, that's still preferable to a totally corrupt and maniacal narcissistic sociopath that would sooner spell her name across the globe in corpses than surrender the slightest modicum of stature. That being said, I hope Killary wins by any means necessary. The US federal government is a malignant criminal organization. Her ascendance to the throne will be a significant push to de-legitimatizing it and moving the disillusioned to action. This election has exposed much of the outright evil that flaccid Yankees were contented to ignore or disbelieve for decades. When she wins, the next American revolution will be one step closer to "going live". Then the healing can begin.

I remember reading Dieonnarra's sensory stone in PS:T as a gripping bit of writing. The whole journey to get just to that point, then have part of the story revealed was an intense moment. It was like any sublime literature--I was totally engrossed. I've had many good experiences with games over the years, but that one came to mind first.

So far the development/lore of this game gives me a better impression than what PoE left me with. This video is encouraging in that it seems they are making an earnest attempt at a magic system that isn't totally awful. This looks far more promising than I expected.

No contest. Clearly GTA: San Andreas. RPGs are defined by player agency to develop a unique character and make meaningful choices. Both have only limited character development, but GTA allows relatively greater freedom. Diablo has next to no choices provided and no real ability to influence outcomes. The player either completes the game, or they do not. GTA: San Andreas gives much more latitude for player choice and the ability to meaningfully achieve varied results.

As an important note, this referendum is not binding in any way. Parliament still has to vote on what actually happens. I would hold your breath over this. Regardless, good for Britain. Hopefully this gives Scotland the stones to actually secede, even if only to change their preference of shackles. Anyone against Brexit hates liberty. That is not hyperbole. There is no reason why anyone from the UK cannot travel or trade with the EU. There is nothing holding any UK citizen from applying for EU citizenship, just like before. Any restrictions that may or may not be imposed on the UK by the EU are strictly at the fault and discretion of the Brussels and Brussels alone. All Brexit does is restrict the power of a unaccountable, supranational, unelected executive and bureaucracy. If you think that's a bad thing, then you hate liberty, and it's time to be honest with yourself and others about that.

[/Thread]

Strength isn't that important when you are fighting with those weapons, you need just enough to wield weapon (which is something that both men and women can quite easily achieve especially in time most of the house hold work was done with similar tools, especially farmers [and there was no farming house where women didn't partake in reaping, and other heavy duties, because they could not afford not to]) without problems, but then you need skill, speed, hand eye coordination and understanding how your opponent can move and most likely move. This is because sharp sword, spear or axe needs quite minimal force to wound and kill person. Strength also plays quite little in in armored combat, because additional force that you can put behind weapon isn't that much without risking losing control over it which is when you opponent most likely wins the duel, you are better of to find spot where there isn't armor. While I have no desire to discuss gender in gaming, I will make a point of interest. The above statement by Elerond is horrendously false. They have no idea what they're talking about. Strength is critical in wielding a melee weapon. It influences everything. Endrance. How easily you can maneuver it. The ability to break through a parry. The ability to effectively parry. How precisely you can place a strike, and yes, the severity of a blow. All of this is also true in instances with armor. Source: 6 years Aikido, 3 years of Fencing, 2 years Okinawan Kenpo, 1 year of Kendo.

In a sense the goal is to better simulate melee combat, yes. I only had a few clumsy experiences with Die by the Sword in PC shops as a kid, but yea. It takes it far beyond that though. Once understood, the controls are simple by powerful. The armor and hit system are extraordinarily meticulous. I've taken down knights that far outclassed me because my weapon luckily found a gap in their armor, and lost some for the same reason. Footwork, parrying, riposte, timing, it's all there. The interesting thing is that it's all physics based. Factors like weight and balance are of extreme important in weapons and armor. Once they start incorporating magic into this thing--it's going to be on a whole other level. Hence the name, Sui Generis (Latin: "A class of it's own".)

I was instantly reminded of the original Diablo as well. The dungeon is definitely grim and dark. Did I say it was dark? If you don't have a torch, good luck seeing much of anything in most of the areas. Combat has come a long was since the kickstarter. There are fore-swings, back-swings, thrusts, and overheard swings. You can target high various elevations on a person, like the legs or head and everything in between. There is even unarmed combat. I've had some hilariously brutal hits when doing a lunging uppercut from a crouched position like Ken from Street Fighter. This game is a blast. It is difficult, very difficult. The combat nuances are intricate. Stick with it if you try it, it's so worth it. Now I'm just very eagerly awaiting the input of magic. They're going to be implementing it the proper way--by providing you with an effect and letting you apply it as you see fit. In the presentation videos, they demonstrate using a phasing effect to not only avoid swings in melee, but blinking a guard off of a tower and steal his uniform.

I picked this early-access up on GoG the other day. It's the first time I've ever paid for early access, and I'm quite pleased. The melee combat mechanics of this game are awkward at first, but once you get the hang of it--serious fun! I was initial drawn by the appearance that it might be a proper gothic dungeon crawler, and I was correct. The music and ambient sound needs some help, but the dangerous dark is splendid. The combat is brutal, sophisticated, and gripping. I'm very excited to see where this game goes. Has anyone else out there given it a try?

You guys wont believe this but about 15 years ago I also could have worked in the USA but it was a military contract...I always wanted to join the CIA. I had this view of how it was the perfect place for me. I could work independently and bend laws and break them in the name of security of the USA.....I know this is fine as long as its for the safety of your citizens People dont need to know everything...but I didnt apply but I have always admired the CIA, its amazing how they get criticized by so many Americans. No offense to anyone but I would never do that...I see it as unpatriotic Stunning. I now understand your total blind Statism. Your curious mixture of white-guilt with your total subservience to anything called "Government" is just a flaccid manifestation of your latent sociopathy. So much has become clear to me now. To respond to your original post though: I would hang Obama from the same reasons that I would hang Bush (any of them). They destroy lives, liberty, and prosperity with their every edict and action. They are not merely traitors to The US Constitution or nation. They are traitors to humanity, coasting upon a sea of blood and ruin to prove it.

Got around to seeing Deadpool. Amusing but forgettable. Exactly what I expected. Would watch another.

@213374U I wouldn't sell yourself short. What they teach in the classroom at the undergraduate level is about cancer is at par with serious reading of materials you can find online these days. I honestly didn't spend a whole lot of time on cancer. My biochemistry undergraduate curriculum focused a lot more on analytical chemistry. IE: "Here is a chuck of organic material. Tell me what it's made of." I did my senior thesis on Alzheimer's disease, of which pursuing a treatment/cure for was my passion. That aside, if improper telomerase uptake in cancer is a problem, it wouldn't surprise me. One of the prevailing theories on cancer are there there is a dysfunction of the G2 phase of mitosis. Ordinarily, there is a negative feedback loop during this phase which prevents completion of cell synthesis. In cancer cells, it has been observed that certain enzymes which are responsible for catalyzing phosphate groups (highly important in DNA interaction) are out of "balance". Normally a cell will "suicide" (apoptosis), but in cancer cells this does not occur. Which quantities of what kinase are desirable is unknown, not understood, and appears to vary across different cells. That's one reason why cancer treatments are not universal. Personally, I feel that telomeres not falling off during cell division is more a symptom of cancer than anything else. To replicate, DNA requires an RNA primer which leads actual replication. Without disposable telomeres, you DNA would be damaged right at the end immediately before it was replicated--causing it to not fully synthesize. If telomeres are not falling of in cancer cells, it suggest that the kinase involved in the priming are not in order, and that the ultimate check sum of the DNA is failing. @Bruce, cloning is a common senior project for many undergraduate students. It's not terribly difficult to technically achieve, but is still poorly understood. It is not my area of expertise. Ask if you wish anyhow.

Stem cells. It's not as simple as "repairing telomeres = cancer". Read up on telomerase reverse transcriptase, apoptosis and cancer cells. The issue is really complex (as all cutting-edge science should be), and I'd probably make some fairly embarassing blunders trying to explain it. As a side note, this woman was trying to reverse a condition that involved abnormally short telomeres for her age (according to her own proprietary diagnostic tech). Short telomeres are linked to immune system problems. It's not the same as using gene therapy to secure eternal life, so her looking younger would be even more of a ridiculous PR stunt than the whole thing already is. paging Zoraptor... My undergraduate was in biochemistry & molecular biology. I never claimed that "repairing telomeres = cancer". Reread my statement. It's been a theory for quite some time that telomeres are linked with aging, but I never felt the link was more than anectodal. I feel the endocrine system is where to look for aging answers.

Exactly my thoughts. As a point of interest, the only cells known to not lose telomeres over time are cancer cells. I'll be more interested to see where she is at 6 months later, and in particular, 7 years later.

Scooped up Magicka 2 on a Steam sale for $5. Loved the first one, reviews of the second made me cautious. I picked "Hard" mode, but found it far more challenging than I expected. It turns out I had selected the "Bananas" condition in which enemies had 5x health and rapid regeneration. Changed those conditions and dominated. Some of the spells are nice, but I miss the old ones. The mobility and graphics are great, but I don't like the new controls. Still sating my fix for more Magicka though.

I finally got around to watching Ex-Machina. Vastly overrated. Very weak main character--more of a foil than anything else. Terminated the interview scenes just as they could have begun to introduce real substance to the film. Inexplicable ending. Glaring technical inconsistencies. Bleh.

Inventing crimes to justify the murder of half a dozen survivors aside, it's still a bizarre claim to make. Either a major blow against the theory of evolution, or a testament to the delusional nature of humans. Perhaps I repeat myself.

No, I don't. A dog has no demonstrable capacity to judge on a meaningful level, so its preferences are autonomic and hollow. This is both true for choice of food as it is for people. Have you seen a cuddly house cat viciously maim an smaller creature then leave it to slowly die once it bored of its novelty? Can the fidelity of a toy with no respectable judgement be compared to the cognizant loyalty of a human? You're projecting qualities that don't exist, then making arbitrary pardons for, or outright ignoring what does exist.

I'd probably be inclined to kill the other 6. The dog is one of my own, they're not This sort of statement causes me to reflect on what has gone awry with our species. A dog will never write a symphony, let alone appreciate one. They will never provide insight into the nature of reality. Its capacity to produce, appreciate, and relate are so comparatively inferior, yet somehow humans will frequently elevate them beyond their own kind. I don't understand this. Dogs have been selectively bred for social compatibility with humans for hundreds of years. Their affection has been cultivated the same way grapes have been selectively evolved by humans for enjoyment. Pinot Nior vs. Sauvengion Blanc. Doberman vs. Chihuahua. When people start valuing another species more than their own--let alone something as simplistic and inferior as a dog, I begin to suspect projection of a cognitively dissonant self-loathing. Somehow tossing human survivors overboard to their deaths is a sane statement, yet making an equivalent statement like, "I would murder half a dozen innocent sapient beings and feed them to my demonstrably inferior emotional toy should I deem it necessary" would be considered psychopathic. Bizarre.

I lean more towards Namutree's arguments. Value is subjective and both parties are interested. This is why juries are useful. Just because costs are sunk by a party does not unequivocally impart value. If some jerk destroys my asparagus patch that I spent three years cultivating--I am not going to be reasonably entitled to charge him or her my substantial professional rate for all of the hours I had sunk into growing those plants. While the abstract nature of a dog's value gives reason for the plaintiff to make their claims, it also is every bit as justified for the defendants and jury to provide their own contrasting determinations of value precisely because it is abstract. Laws are poor substitutes for human discretion. Whatever the ruling may be, it should not be taken as an applicable standard despite the popularity of doing that. Every case is unique, and we can only hope that in situations like this, human reason prevails. This is what juries are useful for.

I would have preferred that they kept the lead Japanese. I don't much care for it when studious divert from the source. If the ethnicity/gender/whatever is not supposed to matter, then why depart from it? Are we supposed to believe that there was not a single ethnically Japanese female actress that could capture Kusanagi? Why change the formula that was a success? It was like when the DragonBall Z film announced the actor for Goku. As soon as I found out it was a white boy, I knew the rest was going to be garbage. That Scarlett Johannes doesn't encourage me, as I find her to be so much mediocrity in nice packaging. As a related tangent, that a creepy bald eunuch playing either Wong or The Ancient One is a mark of confidence lost in Dr. Strange, which is a film I am greatly anticipating.

Yes, I did. No matter what currency you have at some point machines will be able to do any labor more effectively and at a lower cost than any human could ever compete with, regardless of the finance system. You may have a point that the current system is speeding up the development of such machines, but such machines would be in development regardless. Machine labor potential > Human labor potential This is the be all end all of whether or not human labor will at some point be phased out. If you could have a machine do the labor of a human at 1/1,000 the cost of a human and 1,000 times faster than a human ever could why would anyone consider using human labor? Why wouldn't such a machine be created? There is nothing wrong with that so long as the fundamentals for it are real. Nobody wept for the jobs lost because mules could carry greater burdens. Nobody weeps for the near total absence of travel agents today. If money keeps equilibrium, then any transition to a robotic workforce must pass a total or proportionate amount of gains in efficiency onto the customer. You cannot sell to someone who has no money. Robotized production requires massive capital investments, narrow scope, and mass production to yield the necessary profit margin. Even with continually decreasing automation costs, a stable monetary system would require a nearly reciprocal drop in price for efficiencies gained. No customers means no profit, no matter how efficiently you produce.

It wasn't really a rant. It was an attempt at explaining a problem fundamental to what the video is getting at, yet doesn't mention because the makers of it don't see/understand it. In fact, most people don't (even though it's not even remotely rocket science), which is the #1 reason why it's even a problem to begin with. What the video is getting at is that machine labor is getting more efficient than human labor. This has nothing to do with fiat currency. This is about technology. His post does NOT address the issues of the video in any way. Are you suggesting that if we didn't have fiat currency technological development would grind to a halt and human labor wouldn't be getting replaced my machines? Yes, I did. The video even glosses right over the point at 2:23 when talking about the economics of robotic vs human labor. The incentive to develop these automated systems is because human labor has been out-priced by market distortions. They continue to be pursued because of this. You're not just paying an arbitrated wage (minimum wage), you're paying a large variety of taxes on those wages. You have to provide VERY costly benefits. You have to comply with various regulatory requirements. These are very real burdens. They are the burdens which cause companies to make sure that they never have to hire you. These distortions exist because money has been ruined. They could never exist in a system where money was backed. Never. They couldn't, because the companies nor the taxpayers could sustain it. The author also has a vast overestimation of what actually constitutes "thought". Binary computing is not sufficient. Binary computing languages can't even scratch the surface of thought. Quantum computing provides some potential, but is still far off--let alone developing a quantum language capable of utilizing the hardware. The most painful example is when he talks about robotic stock trading. Stock trading doesn't happen through pattern analysis, it happens through exploiting latency in networks to front-run everyone else. Extraordinary difference. The medical doctor referencing is also absurd, because it totally ignores how tightly and incredibly restricted the medical profession is. The medical profession is artificial constrained in the strictest terms imaginable. These constraints are pricing doctors out of reach by market participants. The video is filled with such fallacies. It makes gross overestimation while ignoring the actual circumstances which drive and develop the situation it seeks to opine about. The OP of this thread doesn't understand why universal income will fail because they don't understand money. The author of the video doesn't understand why robotics are underpricing humans because they don't understand money. You didn't understand my post, because you don't understand money. You can't have a discussion on economics and ignore the basic unit of trade and store of value--let alone all of the ramifications around it.