Amentep

Hard to say. Mathematics is study of such topics as quantity (numbers), structure, space and change. Algorithms, as I already said in my previous post, means a set of rules for solving a problem in a finite number of steps. Because question which is older comes to how we define when one has come to exists from instinctual behavior of an organism. Most of the early known work in math was actually built within philosophical thought. Cosmologies trying to understand how the universe worked and why it worked that way could be considered a proto-algorithm as they try to solve the nature of reality with a series of finite logical statements (for example, Plato's Timaeus dialogue). I'm not sure why the age of either matters though, not being privy to original discussion. Seems a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" argument. If we define math as a study of topics (including quantities, structure, space and change) the objects being studied have to exist prior to the ability to study them. So if we argue that Liebniz and Newton "developed" Calculus in the 1600s, we're not actually arguing that the area under a curve or relations between rates of change didn't exist prior to it, but that they gave us abilities to express those concepts that already existed within a mathematical context. Within this, however, we can argue that caluclus is "younger" than, say Number Theory (c. 1800 BCE) based on known developments within those concepts/disciplines.

Do we know its a bunch of "upper-class" kids? Yale (and Ivy League schools in general) don't have ridiculously high admissions requirements and presumably would have tuition assistance in addition to financial aid to pull in highly qualified but poorer students into their freshman population. Most faculty members (and particularly ones without iron clad tenure) aren't going to tell a student to **** off. Just not going to happen.

Hahahah, they did read a book. It was Alan Moore's V for Vendetta. Or more likely, they saw the movie version. Either way the adoption of the Fawkes mask is totally related to that book and its film adaption and not, weirdly enough, the Gunpowder plot itself or Bonfire Night*. And probably goes a good way to explain why you get reference to it in August because someone was probably quoting the book/movie. *Well tangentially, masks of Fawkes used to be used on bonfire night, but the modern masks are based heavily on Lloyd's look of the V mask.

Some refrigerators will have an on/off switch inside as part of what the owner has to do in the defrosting cycle. Or leaving the door open like Hurl said.

Again, that's just not true. Yes 100 or 50 years ago it could have led to punishment, that doesn't mean that it would excepting perhaps military college which have always had more stringent enforcement of rules of conduct. And again an outburst "in class" to a faculty member is totally different from an outburst involving residential faculty in a courtyard on campus with a student. Context is very important when considering student disciplinary matters and a "one size fits all approach" is rarely utilized with student disciplinary issues with the exceptions of situations that involve criminal acts or happen in the classroom.

That's not necessarily true; if the college or university has a "free speech" space and they were at it the student could say whatever they want. Also, generally speaking, colleges tend to try and give students leeway when not dealing with incidents "in-class" in the idea that their can be something learned from the moment. That said, I've read about the Yale Halloween stuff. Essentially the university sent an email out reminding people not to dress up in blackface or yellowface or be culturally insensitive with costumes. A faculty member then expressed that students should be allowed to be offensive with their costumes; her husband backed it up. That led to the confrontation between that husband and some students. Looking at that, I doubt Yale would do anything to the student for what she said. Also apparently Variety removed the line from the Fallout article without actually doing a correction to the piece which has a lot of people more angry than making the mistake in the first place.

Knowing you're friends, they'll try and hook you up with a nice single mother to celebrate. Because the old flame had twins or because he looks like a bloody eyed future zombie?

I thought about jumping and ultimately decided it was a bad idea and didn't.

Wasn't the original idea that you were only going to be able to camp at safe rest spots (available on only some maps) and that was changed because everyone hated the idea, but Obs didn't want to allow rest anywhere because resting anywhere also breaks immersion (Hmmm, troll nest...feeling sleepy...what bad could happen) so they went with an abstraction of the limited rest spots by using the camping gear? Seems kinda like (as many things have with PoE) they're damned if they do and damned if they don't...

That's true of most people; the idea is to answer based on what would be the "most common" action/reaction/feeling.

To me there's a lot to like and dislike in the prequels. I enjoy them, but also feel they were a lost opportunity and not really to the level of the original series.

Pretty much verbatim what I was going to say Myers-Briggs always pegs me as INFP and this was no exception. I'm a "turbulent" variant according to this website. I came out as turbulent as well! Twinsies!

Ah, Myers-Briggs, we meet again. I come out INFP ("the mediator")

The period I'm talking about was pre-Disney buyout so they had no influence on the toys. Now that they do, they're making other outfits available (Leia in Disney Infinity, for example, has the white outfit and the bounty hunter outfit). Not that any of that matters, I guess...

That was like a white jump suit? Or the burgandy-brown dress w/pants and a shawl thing she had on in Cloud City? (If I remember correctly - its been a startling number of years since I've seen Empire). Does it sell because that's what people want or does it sell because that's all they have? Probably a bit of both.

I've seen rumors of that, but no confirmation of a deal to make that happen.

Looking online, all I'm seeing is the latest Blurays are the tinkered with versions.

Sure, but literal a few years ago the only Leia toy you could find was her in the slave outfit. There was an outcry and I think they did the awards ceremony dress. So what some people are reporting as an attempt to remove the slave outfit may actually be an attempt to redress the balance that has been out-of-whack. In a perfect world the Slave Leia outfit would be one of many outfits for Leia toys. No one is forced to buy anything. But as I mentioned for a few years if you did want to buy something your option was Slave Leia or nothing else. And sure, in the context of the movie she kills Jabba in that outfit. After being captured by him in the first place and forced into the outfit. But yeah you can still swing that to be positive in a way. But toys divorce themselves from the context, so at some point the toy is a woman in a space bikini. Not that there is anything wrong with that. And if a woman chooses to dress like that for cosplay - more power to them. I don't think Slave Leia should be banned anymore than I think it should be the only Leia-based product available.

To be completely honest, I've always been surprised at how the Leia-in-the-hutt-slave-outfit became the go-to outfit for merchandising. For me white outfit from the first movie is more what I think of when I think of the character. Slave outfit is about as representative of the character as the award ceremony dress. Yeah its there for a reason in the story, but its about as representative of the the day-to-day of the character as Carbonite is to Han.

I can understand that; we all have things that appeal differently.

Yeah, I'm not interested in spoilers really, so been avoiding the leaks (although if it is FPSy and not RPGy, not sure it'll matter that much!)

I'm a whole package kind of guy. As long as the graphics work for the purpose of the game, I don't care. Mind you I also watch films like PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE for fun so my opinion of what's acceptable in games is pretty broad.

Thanks for the link, I'm not sure it spoils anything. Still not sure what to make of it as I can't get sound out of it to see what the vocal unsinking is like or not (but the guy in the background is hilarious regardless). Weirdly most Bethesda games the story is irrelevant to me, the fun is just wandering around the countryside until I get bored, and rarely do I get bored as there's something always over the next hill (until you reach the edge of game space).

It is an interesting premise; part of what intrigued me was that premise. Mind you the trailer looked "fun" too. It was a toss-up between this or Scouts Guide to the Apocalypse which also is kind of a horror-80s comedy kind of movie.

Mostly curious. I'm getting the game regardless of what the internet thinks.