213374U

How do you like the game? I've been watching some videos and am kinda drawn to the aesthetics and the premise. But combat looks unbelievably clunky and obviously there's no way to judge the storytelling from a bunch of YT clips. I'm finding it harder and harder to drag myself to try new games so I'd rather not waste the effort if it's not very good...

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them? How can space and time be the same thing if space allows me to go backward, or forward, but not time? No, what is not allowed is >1 copies of yourself existing simultaneously. How can you know that you haven't travelled to the "past" if your memory only registers events from... the past?

Agreed. But if you have to make that decision, why not choose to be good at everything? (or as close to as is within the realm of possibility) I'm familiar with the principle of specifity, but making it the basis for an either/or viewpoint is sadly limiting. Clearly the gymnast in the vid isn't going to be able to bench 600 lbs. But outside of world-class athletic feats, which is not what most people train for, a better general conditioning is possible... without necessarily compromising other fitness aspects. The point I was making is that to a bodybuilder, size (and definition, etc) is the #1 priority, raw strength being simply a means to achieve that, and everything else an afterthought... why then are they still so prominent in general fitness culture? Traditional, bodybuilding-influenced strength training regimes are great for building strength and size... and little else. This is what most people have access to owing to the fact that "normal" gyms, and the equipment and instructors therein have evolved from the bodybuilding culture of the 60's and 70's. Check this dude out, for contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzUcQM58kDY He has some beast DL and BP vids, too. He's no weakling. How many pro BB'ers can do half that stuff?

Tell me what you think. Both ideas are referred to as "time", so both warrant consideration. Is there a relationship between them?

Electromagnetic radiation (of which visible light is a small subset) considered as a single photon is postulated to have a "rest mass" of zero, because of how rest mass is defined—you can find a "rest frame" for some particles but not for photons as a result of special relativity. Attempts to give a single photon a non-zero mass have some interesting implications such as light no longer actually traveling at the speed of light, etc. It's not possible to prove as far as I know that it is strictly zero because no experimental measure of a zero-magnitude can be taken, but results put the higher limit for its mass at an exceedingly small value. This is compounded by the fact that rest mass is not additive. Individual photons have zero rest mass, but this is not necessarily true for a pair of photons taken together. Also, EM radiation does exhibit a quality that in the macroscopic world is proportional to "mass": momentum. Radiation pressure preventing the gravitational collapse of a star (or blowing it away in a runaway reaction) is a manifestation of this momentum. However the case of a photon, (rest) mass has no bearing on momentum, being a function of wavelength instead. I'm not a physicist so I'm sure somebody around here can provide a more rigorous/complete/easy to understand answer (which I'd appreciate). Now, what is time?

Had not heard of this word. Synonym for spatial awareness, I guess. I may just borrow the first half for a PoE paladin character name ... Proprio the Defiler!! Close. It's a fancy term to refer to the feedback mechanism that provides your nervous system with information about joint state and the muscular activity with regards to that state. Improved proprioception results in more efficient motor patterns and decreased risk of injury. "Proprio" is actually latin for self, so "self-awareness" is a pretty good summary.

I had some buddies from a different game that had a squadron going. Tried to drag me into IL2. They were adamant on playing on "full realism" only. I could barely get off the ground and was basically of no use airborne—and this was in coop missions (which were otherwise fckn awesome), vs the AI. From what I understand, the game is a sim's sim, the flight model being especially accurate, with different types of aircraft handling closely to historical reports. So good luck to you sir...

Serious point? Was I making that? Oh **** I must be getting old... In Japan's case it's a done deed though. They already have the industrial/logistical train to manufacture nuclear arms so the point is moot. Best we can hope is that stuff in the Sea of China doesn't escalate. And let's not get into the who-sends-volunteers-where game. That's never pretty.

Yep, that's Japan's situation IIRC. Nobody seems to care that they could just start pumping out bombs tomorrow. And hey, turns out their rhetoric (good ol' Abe's mostly) has been getting more aggressive of late. Also, Israel. Ho-hum. Regardless, I find it difficult to believe that Iran is really pursuing 100% peaceful nuclear power applications, without any intention whatsoever of securing a strategic deterrence element as well. Oh, and since apparently nobody mentioned it and the idea that civilian nuclear power entails nuclear arms is taken as gospel by most people, I'm going to be a hipster and point out that Thorium power is an alternative to that. Or rather, it could be if somebody bothered to invest in and develop it to make it competitive. No nukes out of it though, and that makes both petty autocrats and grand western democracies go all sadface and less inclined to throw buckets of cash its way.

Oh, man. Deep down, you really are a romantic! I knew it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jhWOSoWhs8 Props to the man for stepping outside of his comfort zone and into a setting where all the effort and sacrifice he's put in through the years is seemingly rendered pointless. That takes some balls in general, but it's even more impressive when dealing with something so ego-sensitive as one's physique. Still, goes to show how show-oriented a sport bodybuilding is. The guy is seriously lagging behind in motor control and proprioception, auxiliaries development and resistance, with respect to his apparent fitness level.

I have to admit, I LOL'd.

Poor, poor crabs. (don't even ask how I came across that...)

Yeah, CM crystals are hideous. I only use the mint green one. Problem is that regular "classic" crystals require level 50 and a bunch of Corusca Gems... so I just grab one off the collections tab to slap on the offhand as soon as I hit 10 with an alt. I guess 61 gear can be useful for companions, but I mostly don't bother—the pieces themselves are fugly and ripping the mods off is just not worth it when the difference with 58 stuff is barely noticeable. I respect your completionist urge, though. And yeah, the crafting/comms system is all over the place. The weekly comm cap is especially jarring: "nope, that's enough progress for this week, go play outside!".

Magnificent, splendid. Check it out. You can tell she's hard as steel where she needs to be, but also soft and inviting around the parts you'd grab her by. This one clearly requires a real man with a firm touch. I never fail to be mesmerized by the sight of a... Browning M2.

If you can stomach it (I personally can't) go to Makeb. Learn the dailies there and find the most efficient way to do a few of them that are in the same mesa. Some GSI dailies are really quick once you know it and they net good XP and cash. Since you'll be fighting tons of trash mobs (especially Rep side), you'll hit the cap in no time. In addition, Makeb rewards basic comms, and finishing the planetary arc rewards a few elite comms too. Other than the fancy +41 crystals and the Gormak thingamajig schematics, there is literally zero reason to bother with classic comms at this point. Spend your planetary comms as per Spider's advice, and hit CZ-198 as soon as you feel confident to get the necessary reputation with Czerka to buy a 69 mainhand from there, provided you can't craft the hilt/barrel yourself. You could also try heading over to Oricon directly as completion of the quests there rewards you with almost a full set of 66 armor for your class, but Oricon can be tough. Level 50HMs have been rendered stupid easy by power creep, but the 55s are a different story—if you are pugging them, expect a 50/50 fail chance. Also, I would PvP as much as you can before hitting the cap, as the system is borked so that before level 55, gear is basically irrelevant, but at 55 if you are ungeared you are cannon fodder. It's also a rather fun break from grinding comms/XP/cash/rep. edit: yay I broke the quote. Getting old here.

Heh, missed this. But then you are simply offering a description of extrinsic qualities and magnitudes gathered by observation (albeit with the mind's eye), rather than applying qualities by association with objects. Here, the objectification allegation cannot stand beyond the acknowledgment that the physical form of a human being is, much like any other matter aggregate, a parcel of reality and therefore susceptible to description. I'm trying, but I don't see how rejecting (implicitly or not) a specific physical trait from the mental image that is the physique of your ideal woman could conceivably constitute objectification, in the strict sense. It's also worth noting that an ideal image is not an actual, real person and hence, no possible objectification of real women can occur as a result of its description. I'm not excluding it—I'm dismissing it as irrelevant. If only because the opposite argument is also possible and it also adds nothing. Describe any woman in the most abjectly demeaning terms you can, and there's bound to be "some" that will be pleased, for whatever reasons. That's why I was asking for a bit more rigor, as anyone can have a poorly formulated, badly grounded, and grossly misinformed opinion, but when it comes to defending it before others (and, more to the point, expect to change how other people view the world), one needs a solid bedrock of clearly defined ideas upon which to build the discourse. I'm not flat out dismissing it either, I simply see no reason to accept that it should be acknowledged simply because it comes from humans. I'm trying to get to the crux, without getting bogged down in the minefield that is "opinion", because an opinion is born out of a combination of feeling and reasoning. Discussing feelings is frankly mad and, ideally, a perfectly informed opinion that rests on flawless reasoning is actually a theorem. Yes, I suppose I see how describing an actual someone by the role they play in human society could be construed as objectification. I'm not sure I agree on the point that idealization must necessarily ascribe only "positive" (whatever that means in the context, and that may be the source of the contention) qualities—my perspective may be warped by a strict or out-of-context definition of idealization (as in, an ideal gas). Regardless, I'd contend that, going by the way you describe idealization, objectification may result from a specific choice of qualities or properties in the construction of the archetype, but it's not the necessary result of describing an ideal concept, where applicable. To use your own example, I could modify your description of Mother Teresa to simply the quintessential old, pious, selfless woman. That fulfills your requirements of a total lack of nuance for the character and focus on positive qualities. However it says nothing of her role and is otherwise not objectifying in any way I can see. Thanks for the mental gymnastics, btw. Maybe once this is clear, the next point is the central role of sex in this whole objectification debate.

I can't help but think the game would have been so much better if it all ended there on Earth. You're actually defeated (so no happy ending), the enemies have won, and all of that which they wished to portray happened. But noooooooooo, they had to add spacekid rather than a proper "you're screwed over, here are the results of your loss" (an awesome thing Game of Thrones had when loosing the bossfight, but here it would be just the generic ending, taking in account what you did in the past). I'm sure some people still would be dissapointed (as always seen with non-happy endings), but it wouldn't be as **** as the current way. The way I see it, if you're going to man up and write something that deviates significantly from the "and they rode off into the sunset" formula, you need to be very careful with a buildup that justifies the final nut kick and make it consistent with the overall mood of the setting. The whole ME theme seems to be about good ol' human ingenuity and courage saving those poor silly aliens (from themselves, often) and overcoming apparently unsurmountable obstacles. It's basically one huge ego stroking journey. That's why I don't think a "you lose!" ending could ever work in this context. I've for years praised Lacroix's and Ming Xiao's endings in Bloodlines. They made perfect sense within the lore and the setting, and by choosing either the player shows to have been, deliberately or not, ignoring the writing on the wall. No such thing in ME3. You just jump through the last hoop... to fall flat on your face. Unjustified shoehorning brought about by a writing inability to bring the plot under control and the divorce between a not-so-clever unfathomable evil and a medium that is all about interactivity. I did the same thing when I played it, and was infuriated that the last save point was just before jumping into the beam-thing on Earth. Stumbling forward very slowly down long corridors is not a fun way to end a video game that is mostly about being a kickass sci-fi commando. Doing it twice, doubly so. That was dreadful. Funny thing is, that's actually not the last savepoint. The game autosaves just before the conversation with the kid... only to automatically overwrite that save when the conversation ends. It's possible to alt+tab and manually make a copy of the autosave and reload it later to avoid the tedium that is fighting Marauder Shields and dragging yourself through the Citadel corridors... I wonder what the hell they were thinking.

Without knowing the internal workings, I doubt we'll ever know if it's a fail on their part, or humanity's. And considering how expensive big data analysis is, it probably falls under "trade secret". However, # of comments on news sites depending on the subject would seem to reinforce your point (no I have not actually taken a statistical approach, just my appreciation). I remember seeing a scumbag Steve pic that went like "has the power of the greatest information highway ever devised at his fingertips - uses it to look for porn"... so yeah.

Yeah, I'm going to butt in and add that HIIT is just not for everyone. A minimum level of fitness is required and due to how taxing it can be, a medical check up is in order before attempting it. Play it safe, folks.

Yeah... the ending was universally panned, with good reason. I get that the game is not supposed to be about a feel-good trip, but slapping you across the face by ignoring everything you have done so far for the sake of an "artistic vision" is a huge step back in this medium. This is also without getting into how nonsensical, quackish, and generally awful the writing that facilitates it all is. A collection of cool and touching moments, brought down overall by writer egomania. Certainly not the climactic finale it was set up to be. The MP was kind of addicting, though. You made the right choice the first time around, btw. Shoot the bugger in the face, then alt+F4.

I'd appreciate it if you post results in a couple of weeks, I'm interested if and how it works out for you. And about the drop-sets, those work well with dumbbell exercises and especially well with seated Arnold shoulder presses, one-armed preacher curls (try drop sets AND forced reps at the end!). I wouldn't use them with big barbell lifts because form inevitably suffers a bit and that can lead to injuries when doing very heavy BB exercises like standing military's or bench pressing. Barbell bench pressing without a training parter is suicidal, drop sets or not and I hope you're not doing that. Dumbbell bench pressing is more effective anyway because of better ROM, it works the stabilizers much harder, trains both sides of your body independently, allows a healthier grip and it can be safely performed without a partner. Will do. Solid advice on the bench press, too. I stopped doing it with a barbell some time ago due to the reasons you describe, and also the fact that my shoulder didn't agree with it... supraspinatus tendonitis is no fun at all. I'm mostly doing a combination of cable work, pushups and classic dumbbell exercise to substitute... and am not missing it.

Funny. I don't know if I agree with you or not. It does sound like endurance training, somewhat. However, the first 4 minutes or so work more like rest-pause or even tabata, but the similarity gets diluted as fatigue builds up and rest periods become longer. But it is a 15 minute-block after all, and no "normal" (for lack of a better word) strength training regime that I know of works like that. Impossible to judge results from a single session either. I guess I'll try for 2-3 more sessions and see if it actually does anything to break the plateau. And yeah, I love (read: hate) drop sets. But training without a partner, they are out of the question for the big barbell lifts. Then again, I've never used dumbbells for those...

Yep. But I'd hold it off a bit. You can always suicide later and you never know what's around the corner...

I know you can be more rigorous than that. You can, for any given premise, argue that some nebulous, nondescript "others" will react by XYZ—that doesn't mean it will actually happen and even if it did it adds nothing of substance to the argument you are attempting to reinforce. People gon' people. If you were to carefully word your description in such a manner that reification is absent, no claims that you are objectifying women could possibly stand. Granted, "objectification" may be little more than a mainstream buzzword, but let's try to avoid that? I'm genuinely interested in your idea that idealization = objectification. How you reached that conclusion, and if it's a general principle or only applies to women. Though I have a feeling that it's rather a difference of opinions regarding what idealization is.