metadigital

Fanfiction.com: "Romance/Angst"

To me a trekker is someone who is dumb enough to walk out into the wilderness with too little food and a cold tent, then comes back after a week, bragging about all the dangers and starvation he's been through. Geez, why would I be impressed by someone who is stupid enough to put himself in danger?! STUPID TREKKERS. Erm. Right. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sure, but without lunatics like polar explorers (of which Trekkers are a lesser cousin) the boundaries of human knowledge and existence would be the poorer, so I can't be too hard on them. If they go beyond their limits that's fine, Darwin says they'll not be around long enough to polute the gene pool. Without hijacking the forum, Star Trek (the original series in the sixties) was the first science fiction series on television and it brought with it many things, including far-reaching cultural phenomena: - the "demographic" model of market research - the first inter-racial kiss on US broadcast media (Kirk and Uhura) - a medium for discussing politics in an oblique way (using Klingons to represent Russians, for example). -- service resumes -- Now that I scan the list again the D&D fundamentalists (y'know, the ones in the corner of the University guild hall who never seem to wear clothes that have been washed and they are a little hydrophobic, too ) are quite a scary bunch.

I believe it is equally likely that you have a physical psychosomatic manifestation of in internal (mind) anomaly. (Who knows the untapped power of the mind?) But most likely is you have not attended to your physical upkeep and dental hygiene. If I was in the Spanish Inquisition, I don't know if I wouldn't say it was a punishment from God to the unbeliever, though... "

Trekker is more apt than Trekkie. (Trekkies is the pejorative term used on the losers who "live" Star Trek -- learning Klingon as a foreign language, getting married in a Romulan service (WTF!), etc.) Trekker refers to those of us who have an appreciation for ST without becoming obsessed. Yes I've seen all the movies (but I didn't see the last three at the cinema) and a lot of the series (I hated the first two seasoons of Voyager and Next Generation, and all of Deep Space Nine). There is a difference, though I expect this not to matter as the flame wars begin ...

Garbage. One MAJOR difference between Revan and the common criminal. The common criminal isn't the most powerful being in the known galaxy. "The will of a sith lord is not so easily manipulated." If they restored her original identity, she would, with ease, escape and continue her conquest of the galaxy, as if nothing had happened. In this case, there are no non-lethal control methods, besides somehow convincing her to stop what she is doing. And if you think "talking her out of it" would work... well, it wont. Again, "the will of a sith lord is not so easily manipulated." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No. I also doubt whether you could talk Revan out of evil, but -- for example -- Charles Manson is not easily dissuaded from his psychopathic urges, either. You just have to contain Revan in isolation to prevent harm to others and self. What does this have to do with anything? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Merely stating it to point out that if this is true the Jedi Council didn't "choose" to wipe Revan's mind, it was due to circumstances beyond their control.

Yes. *Contemplative thoughts* Deep dive into Meta-ethics! I like the sound of Moral Universalism, but, truthfully I hadn't thought about this aspect before. I guess I would subscribe generally to moral anti-realism, and specifically I am a Moral Skeptic. This means that I think there are absolute moral essential values, just we don't know what they are and can't determine them. For example, I would hold that Killing a person is wrong, but not absolutely in all cases. If a person was about to kill a busload of children and the only way to stop him (and the statistics tell us it would be a him) is to shoot him just beforehand, then I have no ethical qualms with that. Methinks a deontological moral absolutist definitely would, but I would argue we wouldn't know the true Moral Universalist position because of my Moral Skepticism. Does that help?

I have to tip my tam-o-shanter to that Jung-Freud tete-a-tete, as well.

I have to admit that is just awesome How much does it take to paint one? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Baley, I like your current Avatar (occluded Kenny) better than your last (creepy blue vampire) one.

Yeah, Arthur C. Clarke wrote a novel that contained some "future sex" in it with more than one partner. One of his most recent novels, but about ten years ago, I think. (Was it one of the "Rama" or "Odyssey" sequels? Can't recall ...)

This is called the "Golden Rule" in philosophy. Confucius said "Don't do anything to others that you don't want them to do to you" 150 years before Christ is attributed with saying "Do unto others what you wish done unto you." Is it a universal moral law? I don't think you will ever answer that -- otherwise we wouldn't have philosophers subscribing to "cultural relativity / moral relativism" and the polemical "moral universalism".

Yeah, I used to work swingshift at a casino as a croupier. A typical day went something like this: Wake up about midday. Go to the gym, do 2.5 hours weights. Eat a BBQ chicken from the store across the road from the gym. Go home, Shower, eat lunch. kick around for a couple of hours (depending on whether I had a 7-10pm start), during which time I would eat dinner. (Fast metabolism: I would eat constantly. This helps stay awake, by the way.) Finish anywhere from 2am-4am (unless it was peak season, then I worked about 100 hours each week). Go out drinking. Repeat. I have found that my experience agrees with the accumulated sleep debt model propounded by Dr Dement; I can avoid making 8 hours sleep a night for, say the weekdays, but I have to catch up on the week-ends.

No offence meant or taken ( ), this is a meritocracy of information. I still say your information is flawed. Here's why: Doesn't matter who is wrong, it is still wrong. I have tried numerous sleep experiments. But don't take my word for it, go and try it yourself. (I warn you now, though, despite your assertions below, don't try to have a life whilst sleep deprived, it will severely impact on it.) Perhaps your recollection is impaired by the lack of sleep you have taken -- there is a correlation between REM sleep and acuity of memory, too. Dr Dement experimented on army personnel in bunkers below the Earth's surface to limit the external stimuli. This is how, for example, the circadien cycle was found to be slightly longer than the 24 hour sidereal period of the Earth. As I said earlier, there is precious little research. You may be right, but I haven't seen any evidence of it in my research. (Remember, my partner was suffering from a sleep disorder, so I have a motivation to research this.) There are different types of hallucinations. The hallucinations brought on by sleep deprivation are dream-like mental episodes. I have no idea if they actually accomplish anything, if they are different from other types of hallucinations, per se. This is experimental data -- feel free to conduct your own independant tests to corroborate or disprove it. There are very, very few people who can survive on small amounts of sleep. Most, like Edison, for example, used to claim they only needed 4 hours sleep a night but made up for it in short "catnaps" throughout the day. The total was within normal deviation of the average (8.5 hours). No need to take a swipe at me. I wasn't patronisng you, I was trying to correct what I see as a potentially dangerous viewpoint. According to your logic there is no need to pull over when you are driving for hours / days, so long as there is enough traffic to provide sufficient visual stimilation! I am quite adult and capable of admiting when I am wrong. There is no shame in seeking the truth, and I have no fear of mistakes: they are merely stepping stones to higher understanding. I don't believe I am wrong, however. I am not sure where you are quoting from, I would be interested to read your sources. I am interested in all knowledge. I have given you the best quoted source I have found, but -- to be sure -- there are lots more out there. Information wants to be free.

I could be badly mistaken but they both have Upper Class accents -- and England is such a classist society. Didn't know the House thing, that would tip things in his favour, though Mr Fry has done his share of films, too; and he is a successful writer. It is? *looks at date* Hey, it is! (why did I know this?) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Mother's Day, May 11, 1920 was my father and his twin sister's birthday. Happy birthday Dad and Auntie Joy.

Yes, you get lightssaber parts as rewards where you usually would get a lightsaber. I did Korriban as my first planet and than Dxun. I got I finished my first lightsaber on Dxun. The most powerful item ... well, I did not open many crates and didn't really get any good items. Obviously the Ossus robe... I was very lucky though to get at an early stage a zabrak vibrosword giving melee-finess as a bonus feat. Very helpfull for my high DEX bulid. And of course, the stealth enhancing belts and headgears were most welcome. To all who say there is no point in rushing through the game: I played the game twice "normally". And then quite frankly it starts getting boring. Some people will want to try everything out and see whether they can unlock additional cutscene and dialogues. Others will try to rush through the game. This is about finding a way to get some mileage out of the game. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I concur with thos sentiments wholeheartedly. You can also use the level-jump of light-/dark-side mastery to the Prestige class, if you can get to it. Might affect the strategy?

No, option 2 is what a group of Paladins would do. Right or wrong, Revan is Revan and, unless Revan wants to change, they have no business forcing Revan to do so -- or killing Revan, either. Killing your opposition comes about because the killer is not able to excert sufficient control on a given situation to prevent the evil-doer from harming others and themself. It is the least-worst option. Theoretically there should be non-lethal control methods, otherwise you would have police shooting burglars because they are about to escape ... But you are forgetting that all they were able to do was keep Revan alive after the damage caused by Malak. (Unless Bastila was lying.)

Do you happen to know the etymology behind their name, Metadictionary? In English it looks like someone left out the last "e", but its the same phonically in Russian ("нарвал"), which is curious...maybe an inuit or Lapp word? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Norwegian, or Danish narhval from Old Norse nhvalr : nr, corpse (from its whitish color) + hvalr, whale. Question to you FarimirK: do you not follow my links that I spend extra time and effort researching for such useful background information?

There was, it was dubbed and AFAIK unremarkable. (But without playing the film again I ain't going to be able confirm that -- I know I couldn't recongnise/remember any of it last time I watched it and I was trying ... the only reason we remember that snippet is in cse we are ever stuck on a dying planet and need to pretent to be a Klingon to get off ... )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Verily that is modern art! Well, contributions to the Way Off-Topic forum don't count anyway: also I think Baley (mostly) has valuable input. (but don't tell Sir Spam-a-lot I said that. :D ) This is a safe environment where even the most vulnerable may have their say. The rules are fair and binding. That is quite a comfort to a lot of people in this world, where their daily lives are far from fair, and they have little or no impact on their lives and have no say.

I thought all the sight-impaired people were given priority to be umpires ... "

The frightening answer is no one knows. Dr Dement did his tests in the seventies, I think (might have been the sixties) with the help of the US army (think about the amount of support: 3 shifts round the clock monitoring all the subjects and flashing lights in peoples eyes...!) It is just too cost-prohibitive to appeal to anyone. (Drug companies fund most scientific research, and they aren't interested on anything without a ROI.) Dement's patients were tested for only 2 weeks. After this everone is extrapolating or guessing. I heartily recommend the book. (It's less than $10/

As I've said before, my pursuit of knowledge gives me happiness. I come here to conduct conversations, and (if I'm being honest) I do enjoy show off what I know. I have found that the act of passing on information to other people helps me to cement the memories in my mind better, so it is a Win-Win prospect. I like internet discussion fora because they are an idealised world where we are all on the merits of our posts, so it is a very humbling meritocracy. You point of view is not enhanced by having a more expensive computer, or a faster internet connection (but on this board, at least, the quantity of posts somehow adds credence to the alleged quality, via the silly "Level" indicator next to the total posts accumulation).

I am sorry but you are mistaken. How long have you ever managed to go without sleep for? Go on, this is an experiment everyone can try at home (I know I have). Some facts: - The record is just over a week. What eventually happens is the person will start to hallucinate (dreaming whilst wide awake). - The full understanding of dreaming is unknown, but Dr Dement's scientific studies demonstrated that people need to dream: subjects that were disturbed (read: woken up) at the onset of REM sleep were noticeably less rested, less able to concentrate and more irritable; they remained so until the body had a chance to catch up on the REM sleep. (Can you imagine being woken up like this -- I would have had to be restrained: I would have killed them!) - Interrupting other parts of sleep (non-REM stages) had little or no effect. - Those people as above who had disturbed REM sleep would have proprtionately more REM sleep over the next available nights. - Sleep cycle is about an hour and twenty minutes long, cycling through Phase 1, 2, 3 4 (all deeper than the previous) thence to REM, and back again. (These phaes are easily identified by brainwaves using an electroencephalogram EEG) Total REM sleep is about 40-90 minutes a night, I think (a couple of minutes per cycle). - Everyone dreams, every night. - Babies and toddlers (up to the age of 2) have more REM sleep than adults. - The reason you don't remember your dreams is because the neurochemical the brain secretes (melatonin, from memory ) to paralyze the muscles (so that when you dream of running you don't start moving your arms and legs) has the side effect of impairing the transfer of memories from short term to long term. The current theory most favoured by neuroscientists is that dreaming is a sort of filter or "defrag" for the brain, where the important moments of the previous day's stream of consciousness is somehow converted into long-term storage.

The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can fake that you've got it made. (Jean Giraudoux, French diplomat, dramatist, & novelist 1882 - 1944)

The "Chow Chui" bit is "activate the teleport now", Maltz is the guy's name on the Klingon ship. (Star Trek 3: The Search for Spock).