Lurker > adjl

Blightzkrieg posted...

this has literally never been true

Eeyup. For as long as there have been reviews for games people are excited to buy, people have been enraged by negative reviews because they've decided the game is great before playing it. Twilight Princess is one of the more notable examples in Gamestop's recent history.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Further on the subject of good deals from Humble, December's Humble Choice Premium currently gives you all 14 games and is currently ~40% off, a bundle which includes Children of Morta and One Step From Eden (the two games that swayed my decision to buy it).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LinkPizza posted...

What they are saying is that it's only an option. Bully are going to bully regardless of uniforms or not.

Pretty much. If you can't bully them for clothes they wear to school, you can bully them for clothes they wear outside of school. Or some other aspect of their appearance. Or their hobbies/interests. Or what toys they have. Or what their parents do for a living. Heck, in North America, where uniforms are pretty much just a private school thing, the fact that some students (often scholarship ones) can't afford a new uniform and need to buy a second-hand one means uniforms themselves a potential avenue for bullying. Bullies will find a way.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LuciferSage posted...

Are we reading the same post? What childhood vaccine did I miss that had to be taken every 3 months for the rest of my life?

What part of "booster shots, yo" suggests that any childhood vaccines have to be taken every three months?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LuciferSage posted...

That's a lot of words you posted, and I still can't tell if you're trying to prove my point, or disprove it.

"Booster shots, yo" rather completely dismantles it, so...

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LuciferSage posted...

Even once you get Covid, the antibodies don't stick around. Even the miracle vaccines we're being promised buy you 90 days.

Booster shots, yo. Short-lived natural immunity is nothing new for immunologists, and there's no shortage of ways to work around that with a vaccine.

Furthermore, what are you even trying to suggest by saying that? If vaccines are hopeless because the immunity granted doesn't last long enough, herd immunity can never be achieved. Give up on trying to contain the virus at all so life can go back to normal, and it will kill a very sizable portion of the population because it's not going to stop until we have a population density too low to sustain it. Sure, the vast majority of people will survive their first infection, and their second, and their third, but with only three months of immunity, they can expect to catch it 3-4 times a year. You can only roll the dice so many times before you get double snake eyes. The only way out of that outcome is if it spontaneously mutates to be less lethal, and there's really no reason to expect that such a mutation would spread throughout the viral population because there are no evolutionary forces pushing it (given the already-low lethality, there's virtually no selective pressure to promote becoming less lethal). I dunno about you, but I'd rather wear a mask than leave the future of humanity to some infinitesimal chance that the virus decides to leave us alone for no reason.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Unbridled9 posted...

Not when Biden spent a massive part of his campaign hiding in his basement.

Do you think that maybe there might be something going on in the world that promoted that, which the substantial majority of Biden's voter base understood quite well?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

I'm all for them though as it does limit bullying as everyone will be wearing the same.

You have a rather optimistic view of schoolchildren if you think uniforms make an appreciable difference in bullying rates. You take away the option of bullying people for their outfit choices, sure, but there are many aspects of individuality that a bully can pick on beyond outfit choices. Anyone looking to be a dick to one of their classmates will have no problem finding something else to focus on.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Because it's not that serious to individuals

Ever notice how it's always people that haven't had a symptomatic case saying things like this? I wonder why that could be...

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

brian577 posted...

Like I said, nobody has any real answers, it's all BS.

Nobody has any real answers for why gravity works, either. Does that mean physics is BS?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Far-Queue posted...

This reviewer spent half the review complaining how your pronouns are assigned based on what voice you choose for the character

https://www.polygon.com/reviews/22158019/cyberpunk-2077-review-cd-projekt-red-pc-ps4-xbox-one-stadia

That's Polygon for you.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Unbridled9 posted...

Dude. They've been saying he won due to Russian collusion/interference almost since he got elected. The liberals can't take a loss.

There's a world of difference between saying that Russian interference was a factor in Trump's win (whether or not it's the only reason he won is hard to say) and saying that Biden didn't win. Especially so where there was reason to suspect Russian interference (which was later corroborated by a full-blown investigation), compared to there being no reason whatsoever to suspect fraud in favour of Biden.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Nobody believes in Santa or the Easter bunny because media moguls are using their platforms to spread misinformation to further the divide between Americans so we can be more easily controlled by the greedy.

You literally just said that mainstream media corporations are the reason people don't believe in Santa. You literally just said that.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

DirtBasedSoap posted...

yep, and taking this shit to court with zero evidence lol

And having it thrown out of court for having zero evidence and still believing it to be true.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Fierce_Deity_08 posted...

Maybe you didnt see how some liberals have been complaining for four whole years.

Complaining about a terrible president, sure. Saying that he didn't actually win the election, though? That's a whole new realm of denial.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I disagree. I've not seen these efforts.

I listened to one on Saturday when my provincial government gave a briefing to update people on the current state of the second wave we're in the midst of (and again a few days prior to that, and so on). You can read one on the Covid information pages offered by countless public health agencies, including the CDC. I personally exert such efforts pretty much every time I talk about the subject, and I'm far from alone in that regard.

If you haven't seen those efforts, you haven't been looking for or listening to them. If you refuse to listen to people's efforts to rationally inform you, you don't get to complain that nobody's rationally informing you. For the most part, the people complaining that nobody's rationally informing them of the situation are either deliberately ignoring any rational explanations that don't yield conclusions they like, or they think sternly worded admonitions of their current behaviours are the same thing as being irrationally yelled at. Yes, there are people that have been treating them with unnecessary, counterproductive hostility since the whole thing began, and that's not good, but the fact that one person sharing this information was mean to them doesn't mean they shouldn't listen to anyone else that agrees with the meanie.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

They want people to take precautions that they won't take themselves. Apparently they don't think it's that serious of a threat either. They aren't persuaded by their own information.

A whole lot of people need to learn a very important lesson about the world: Somebody being a hypocrite means they're an asshole, but it doesn't indicate that they're wrong. Yes, there are many people that will publicly claim to be in favour of the precautions and then neglect them when they think nobody's looking. They should follow the precautions better. That doesn't mean the precautions don't matter, as is very obvious to anyone that takes the time to understand why they're being implemented.

It's also worth noting that a whole lot of the "look what a hypocrite Fauci is because he's not wearing a mask in this one picture" sort of accusations are less a matter of actually demonstrating hypocrisy or a lack of commitment to the recommendations and more a matter of these people being subjected to constant scrutiny by people that are desperate to catch them slipping up so they can discredit them (generally because they've decided a priori that they don't want the recommendations they don't like to be valid). People make mistakes. Nobody's perfectly compliant with these rules, and even those who believe in them completely will bend them from time to time if they feel following them is going to be particularly inconvenient or unnecessary (such as going the wrong way down an empty aisle in a store). That indicates absolutely nothing about whether or not they believe in the recommendations in general, and indicates even less about the validity of the recommendations.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Then there was the "civil unrest". The lockdown doesn't apply to you if you're "peacfully" setting fire to a civic building, looting stores, or toppling statues so long as it's for a cause your local politician agrees with.

I want you to find me three examples of people actually saying that the BLM protests did not present a Covid transmission risk. I encourage you to ensure that your examples are people in positions of authority and/or obviously possess reasonable competence on the matter, to make them more difficult to dismiss outright. I also encourage you to ensure those examples come from May/June so they aren't enjoying the benefits of hindsight, since the fact of the matter is that those protests have defied all expectations and not resulted in the massive spikes everyone was preparing for. Apparently, consistent mask use, being outside, being cognizant of distancing, and being aware enough of the disease risk to stay home if sick and get tested regularly actually did a very good job of ensuring that the protests were fairly safe.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

They may call a wedding a super spreader event but there's no risk of contagion here.

They only call weddings super spreader events when it is determined that the disease has spread superbly because of them. Typically, the only weddings that stand a chance of achieving such status are indoors, with few people wearing masks and little regard for distancing.

In contrast, the BLM protests have not been observed to be super spreader events. This surprised virtually everyone, but most people present were following public health guidelines reasonably well, and combining that with being outside seems to have been enough to prevent massive spread.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Metalsonic66 posted...

The most annoying thing about the VC was that games you bought didn't carry over to the other systems

Which may be why they've kind of abandoned it for the Switch. I imagine it really didn't see that much success on the WiiU (even considering how unsuccessful the WiiU was in general) because people had either already purchased them on the Wii VC or were holding out for a commitment that they could keep their library moving forward. The whole "pay a couple extra dollars if you already bought a VC game on the Wii to get a slightly upgraded WiiU version" thing really didn't go over all that well. I feel like they would have been better off charging a flat fee to transfer and upgrade the entire library instead of individual games (since they did improve the service on the WiiU, though not by all that much).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

brian577 posted...

Define that, please.

Nobody can. That information doesn't exist in the current world.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

The same reason people always deny the seriousness of any public health crisis: If properly managed (which Covid hasn't been, but it's still been managed well enough to keep it from spreading to its full potential), they aren't likely to personally see the full damage it's capable of doing, meaning that risk is purely hypothetical from their perspective. Acknowledging the full extent of the risk is scary (and, in the case of Covid, extremely inconvenient and disruptive to everyday life), while denying it doesn't seem to have any immediate negative consequences for them (bonus points where the President publicly legitimized that denial), so denial is a much more attractive option than acceptance.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Properly? About 9 months ago, when my 18-year-old family cat died. That was more the circumstances than anything else, since she had to be put down shortly after pandemic restrictions started, which meant her last experience was being taken out of the back of the car by a stranger and kept overnight before they put her down with nobody she knew around. I really just felt bad for her, though of course it was also sad to lose such a long-time pet (though not that surprising, given her age).

Prior to that, I was at a concert with my girlfriend about a year and a half ago and they played a song that holds a ton of mixed emotions for me, given how much it meant to my late father. Prior to that was ~ 3.5 years ago, when my other family cat died at 15 (very sudden, first time losing a pet). Prior to that was ~6 years ago when my dad suffered a massive stroke out of nowhere and died. Couldn't tell you how long it was before that, since that had been a very long time.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

brian577 posted...

The recommendations are not the issue. The issue is their inability to end this and or even give an actual timeline for doing so. They said a year, now it's two, next it'll be 5. I want my damn life back I'm tired of their inability to do that.

And how do you propose they do that? Do you complain that a mechanic is incompetent when your car doesn't fly after you get it back from maintenance? Do you complain that a chef is incompetent when your food doesn't sustain you for a month? Do you complain that a doctor is incompetent when they can't cure cancer in a single regular office visit?

This pandemic is an extremely volatile situation that is completely unprecedented in modern history. Everybody has gone into this blind and is struggling to figure it out as they go along. That's simply how science works (and has always worked). People just don't usually realize that because they don't need immediate answers and therefore only pay attention to the end result when the researchers are done figuring it out. When the world does need immediate answers, you're going to see those answers (and the subsequent predictions and recommendations) change as the situation and the understanding thereof evolve. The necessary information simply does not exist to make definite, unchanging predictions. That's not incompetence on the part of doctors and scientists, it's empirical reality.

If you want something resembling a timeline, vaccines can be expected to roll out to the general public by next summer. Getting enough of the population vaccinated to make a significant difference will then take a few months, so you'll probably be looking at September-October before restrictions can truly start to be relaxed, though some relaxation will happen as case numbers start to drop (you can see this already in regions that have done a good job of containing the virus). That process will happen gradually, but by the beginning of 2022 things should be more or less back to normal. Expect to keep wearing masks for a few months past that to be on the safe side, though many regions will lift mandates. Working from home will continue for many fields now that its viability has been proven, though it will stop being a necessity. Governments will continue to experiment with ways to improve their responses to any future pandemics that might emerge, which will likely result in a number of new rules here and there (though the specifics of that are largely impossible to predict, beyond greater investment in pre-pandemic surveillance).

Give or take ~6 months from any of those time frames, that's about what the next year will look like. Life will likely never fully return to a pre-pandemic normal because this experience has proven that the world is hopelessly unprepared for such a threat (as well as that said threat does exist), but the new precautions stemming from that realization won't make a huge difference to everyday life. You can expect that a reasonable approximation of the "new normal" will be achieved within less than a year, depending on how bad local case numbers are.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

Assuming the opposite is also dangerous.

If you conclude that people are too stupid or uninformed to know what's good for them and rely only on instilling fear in them, then you wind up with people who will ingest fish tank cleaner because (according to the news outlets) the president told them to.

Meanwhile the people who have sufficient mental faculties to think for themselves look at the first group wondering why the heck they would ingest fish tank cleaner since the president never said that. And what are they so fearful of since no one tried to inform them in a rational manner.

I can agree with that, but I'll also point out that there has been no shortage of efforts to inform people about this pandemic in a rational, educational manner. The ones that are getting berated now for refusing to wear masks or distance or what have you are the ones that have deliberately ignored the countless efforts to educate them in a less-hostile manner. Heck, there are countless "Karen freakout" videos out there now that begin with politely, rationally asking the Karen in question to put their mask on properly, only to be subjected to a thoroughly irrational tirade about freedoms and rights and how trying to limit the spread of disease is literally Hitler.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

If you mean me I assume you're misrepresenting the time I asked how you demonstrate harm against a cartoon character.

It was just about loli? In that case, I agree. Child porn is bad because it hurts kids, and consumption of it is lumped into that because it drives production. Loli, on the other hand, doesn't hurt anyone. There's room for debate around the question of whether allowing pedophiles a harmless outlet for their urges does more harm than good (though not very meaningful debate because there's very little real data on the subject due to how difficult it is to study), but the knee-jerk reaction of treating loli the same way as actual child porn is definitely not reasonable.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

They used to update them monthly, but the updates became considerably less frequent starting a year or so ago (presumably because they ran out of things to add that anyone cared about and/or they didn't want to withhold to allow for a subsequent remake release). It's a fun little bonus, but as others have said, most of the noteworthy games on there are playable in enough other places that it's not a huge deal.

dud posted...

VC used to be an actual decent selling point, but somehow their retro offerings have only gotten progressively worse while other companies have gotten better. I get why there isn't going to be stuff like Mega Man or Castlevania on there anymore but instead of doing what you did before with more gaps, why not try out GameCube or something

I just don't get why they didn't do so much more with the VC. They had the potential to launch the Wii with a library of literally hundreds of games people were dying for a chance to (legally) play again, but instead they trickled them out in a ridiculous drip feed of content that all but killed the hype for it, and they've only gotten worse about that with subsequent system releases. When they added some Wii games to the WiiU's VC, barely anyone even knew about it because the service was so limited that nobody cared (plus they did so with virtually no fanfare).

It seems like such a no-brainer: They have distribution rights for an astronomical amount of highly demanded content. It's absolutely trivial to upload a ROM for such games (especially where, half the time, they just take the ROM files from sites they've shut down and distribute those >.>), which would make many people happy and yield an excellent return on the near-zero investment involved. And yet, they don't, and I don't understand why.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Hot take - It's worse to breathe because water doesn't penetrate and water is a breeding ground for microorganism so it uses your breathe to keep viruses alive on your face.

That was actually one of the points raised back when scientists were debating whether or not recommending masks was a good idea. The potential benefit of keeping a barrier between external virus sources and your respiratory tract was was obvious, but there were concerns that trapping the virus on that surface would actually increase risk. Subsequent research - including a lot of empirical transmission rate data from regions that were already using masks extensively - revealed that that wasn't a major concern, though (or at least that it didn't outweigh the benefits of having a barrier, since mask usage yields a net reduction in transmission rates and infection severity).

There isn't actually any physical reason for it being harder to breathe with a mask. There have been ample pseudo-studies done with people using pulse oximeters to monitor their O2 saturation throughout entire days of wearing masks, and they never give any reason to believe that the person's breathing has been compromised. If wearing a mask makes breathing more difficult, it's either because of an anxiety response to having it there (which is not altogether illegitimate, but people need to stop trying to pretend it's anything more than that), or because the mask is contaminated with mould or other respiratory irritants (which shouldn't be an issue if it's being cleaned frequently enough and one doesn't do stupid things like putting undiluted essential oils on them).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

If the situation really were so dire wouldn't that on it's own convince people to take precautions?

This notion relies on two rather shaky assumptions: That most people are intelligent enough to arrive at reasonably optimal solutions based on the information available to them (a dangerously large percentage of the population isn't), and that most people are informed enough to independently draw such conclusions without needing to rely on summaries and interpretations from experts to guide them. The whole intelligence angle is a pretty questionable one to pursue, since fundamentally, "you're too stupid to make your own decisions" has a hell of a lot of potential to be abused quite horrifically, so I'm fine with ignoring that one.

The information aspect, however, is crucial here. The simple fact of the matter is that it is not possible for most people to be sufficiently informed to make good decisions in this matter (at least it wasn't when most of these policies and recommendations were first coming out). The Covid pandemic has been a complex, rapidly-evolving situation with very little precedent to draw on. Staying informed requires one to spend hours every day studying emergent literature on the subject, which the vast majority of people simply don't have the time to do (to say nothing of the scientific literacy, which is also something most people suck at). That means the only sensible course of action is to defer to the advice of professionals who do have that time (because it's their job) and the knowledge and skills needed to contextualize the new information into recommendations. Any other response is foolish. Nobody objecting to these recommendations is doing so because they've actually studied the matter comprehensively enough to form a well-reasoned objection, they're objecting to them because they don't want to have to follow them and will cherry-pick whatever bits of evidence and/or appeals to authority they can find to support the position they wish were true.

And certainly, regardless of whether or not we actually go so far as to say "you're too stupid and/or uninformed for your opinion to matter," we very much cannot base any conclusions on the gravity of the situation on the public's independent response to it. That's just an absurd suggestion.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

brian577 posted...

9 months of of competence have proven otherwise. Centuries of human knowledge apparently account of nothing.

If the last 9 months have taught me anything, it's that when people call scientists and doctors "incompetent," what they actually mean is "they recommended something I don't like."

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LinkPizza posted...

But I still think they may be lying about this so they can get extra time to think of a good excuse for not doing it. or to hope others forget fast enough...

Oh, they're 100% just saying that so they can pretend they'll change it later because they know everyone will have forgotten about it by then. There's absolutely no reason not to make a dress code more permissive mid-semester. Making it more restrictive, I can see deferring until the end of a term/year, since that's going to mean that some students will need to buy new clothes to replace the parts of their wardrobes they're no longer allowed to wear, but making it more permissive doesn't require anyone to do anything and therefore doesn't have to have any sort of grace period before coming into effect. Even with making it more restrictive, though, there's no reason they can't announce and commit to the change before bringing it into effect and enforcing it (in fact, they should do so), so this whole "we can't discuss changing the dress code now" is obviously nonsense.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Dress codes and uniform policies are technically different, but they both fall under the broad umbrella of dictating what students can and can't wear. Uniform policies just spell it out in more detail.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

captpackrat posted...

Herd immunity requires everyone to be exposed

That varies by illness, actually. You don't need the entire population to develop immunity simultaneously, just a high enough percentage that those without immunity are virtually guaranteed not to be exposed. The threshold depends on a number of factors, including how easily the disease is transmitted (easier=higher threshold), the mortality rate (lower=higher threshold), and the potential for asymptomatic transmission (present=higher threshold).

Off-hand, the only threshold I know is that for measles, which requires somewhere around 90% of the population to be immune to effect herd immunity. Considering how many of the above factors are true of covid (highly transmissible, relatively low CFR, asymptomatic transmission), it stands to reason that Covid's threshold will also be at least that high, and will probably actually be more in the 95%+ range. It's not quite everyone, but it's pretty damn close, and that's a whole lot of bodies.

And, again, if herd immunity is possible, then - axiomatically - a vaccine is possible. If a vaccine can't confer long-term immunity, then neither can natural exposure, so herd immunity will never happen naturally.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

adjl posted...

Why shouldn't more unnecessary rules to be challenged and changed?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

Opening the door for snowflakes just invites more to flood in.

Why shouldn't more unnecessary rules to be challenged and changed?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

The school should stick by their policy.

Why?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

Unless you can provide proof that's the reason you have no reason to believe it's homophobia.

I had assumed you had enough situational awareness to know that "painting your nails is effeminate/gay" is a very common sentiment among communities that overvalue "traditional" masculinity. That's pretty common knowledge, after all.

wwinterj25 posted...

The fact that not all men who wear nail polish are gay(as we have established) throws the whole notion out of the window

Stereotypes being false does not mean they aren't still commonly believed and applied. It throws nothing out of the window.

wwinterj25 posted...

The kid broke the policy rules. That's the bottom line here and he should know better.

adjl posted...

Remember kids: Never try to change rules that shouldn't exist.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

I'm suggesting that just because the policy doesn't allow men to wear nail polish this doesn't warrant throwing words around like homophobia and we have already agreed on that.

It absolutely warrants discussing homophobia, because that's almost certainly the motivation behind the rule. Unless you can provide a more likely explanation, you have no reason not to agree with that.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

When a uniform policy is in place turning up with things that are against it isn't changing anything.

It's openly challenging it to draw attention to the injustice in question, which is essential for gathering the public support needed to effect any sort of political change. Other options exist for drawing attention to such issues, but challenging them has always been a major avenue for effecting change. Heck, that's literally the entire basis for the Supreme Court setting legal precedents (a legal decision is made, the case is appealed to the SC level by people who feel it's unjust, the SC issues a ruling that sets precedent to define how similar cases are handled in the future).

wwinterj25 posted...

Any other notions you have in your own head is a reflection of you and your own views.

Are you really trying to suggest that there aren't a significant number of homophobic people who think that wearing nail polish is strictly for women and homosexual men?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

streamofthesky posted...

Speed doesn't kill people.

If you start going fast enough, stuff's gonna start disintegrating. Sure, that's several orders of magnitude faster than humans have ever been able to travel, but the theory is sound enough.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I really have to shake my head at the people who advocate for pursuing herd immunity while in the same breath saying a vaccine isn't likely to work (a claim which is itself based purely on the fact that a successful coronavirus vaccine hasn't been produced before, which is obviously nonsense). If a vaccine won't work, herd immunity won't either.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Firewerx posted...

Until someone finds a way to make super-soldiers resistant to being blown up, I'd prefer the chances of an average military drone operator.

Pretty much. The "genetically enhanced super soldier" trope is a popular one in sci-fi/fantasy, but the fact of the matter is that genes just can't accomplish all that much because the physical limits of the human body aren't that relevant for most of modern warfare (at least, not in ways that genetic modification can correct). The most successful armies in the world aren't the ones that are physically the strongest, they're the ones with the largest budgets behind them to help them outgun their foes.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

No however if this is school policy then you follow it or go elsewhere. It's not a difficult concept to grasp.

Remember kids: Never try to change rules that shouldn't exist.

wwinterj25 posted...

In no way is nail polish limited to gay men so it's not homophobia.

It's not strictly homophobic, as I said, but there's almost certainly an element of "guys shouldn't wear nail polish because that's gay" behind the rule. Nail polish itself is not limited to gay men, but many stereotypes around it are.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

mrduckbear posted...

a conspiracy theorist video that asked if the injection will implant 5G antennas inside people

Of all the absurd anti-vaxx notions out there, this one baffles me the most. Never mind the questions of the actual technology involved in creating transmitters tiny enough to be implanted through such small needles, nor the lack of any reason to suspect such a plot or the fact that "the government is microchipping me" is such a cliched paranoid delusion as to be borderline caricature at this point. That theory is very obviously nonsense because virtually everybody already has a tracking device in their pocket, which they're often using to share those videos. The government doesn't need to waste R&D funds coming up with sneaky ways to track people because they've already got the means to do so.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LuciferSage posted...

Let me ask you something as the living avatar of pedantic pedantry.

Since the creation of the TSA/DHS...has the threat level ever seen "green" so they could stop fondling our nethers to get on an airplane? Has the FBI ever stopped finding a patsy every year to provide the means of commiting a "terrorist act" only to bust them when they would never have found a way on their own?

Now that "Covid" has a color level, do you ever really expect to see "green" again, given what you've seen up to now? Of course not. That's how you lose funding and control.

Just look at face coverings where islamic fundamentalism took hold in formerly reasonable countries. The rise of Karen. Mask shaming. Rules for thee, not for me.

Do you actually see a world where we're all sitting at a restaurant singing cumbaya going forward?

Go ahead, get the vaccine so you can buy and sell.

By the time the ministry of truth cuts you your $1500 check, it'll be worth 1k, and the only place you'll be able to spend it is amazon, Walmart, or McDonald's.

You're looking at an inexorable fear push to transfer the last bit of wealth upwards. Tax the rich. They're just going to see the money again when they're the only ones left standing when all is said and done.

That's all very nice, but it has even less to do with what I asked than the rest of the histrionic drivel you've posted in this topic. Perhaps I should spell it out for you:

You've been very fond of saying that the high-risk population should just take their own precautions to protect themselves and let the rest of us go about our regular lives. That's not a position that's without logical merit (even if it is selfish and myopic and callously disregards the suffering of a great many people). It is, however, impossible for many such people to avoid seeking out health care (as in, they will literally die if they don't). Therefore, even if we assume that vulnerable populations are the only people that should be taking precautions, people working in health care (who are going to comprise most of those vulnerable persons' human interactions) also have a clear obligation (both moral and professional) to take similar precautions to avoid infecting them.

Simply, high-risk folks do not have a choice but to be exposed to whatever transmission risks health care workers present to them. Therefore, health care workers must be held to a higher standard when it comes to minimizing transmission risks. Do you disagree with this? If so, why?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LuciferSage posted...

You don't understand shitizen. Be afraid. Be very, very afraid.

That's still not what I asked. Please try again.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

LuciferSage posted...

We're all going to die adjl. Piles of bodies in the streets. It's practically the End of Days.

That's not what I asked. Please try again.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

Also, they've been war gaming these pandemic lockdown scenarios every year since right before 9/11.

The government has been developing a pandemic response plan to help ensure that the country would be prepared in the event of a serious global disease outbreak? The nerve! Truly, there can be no explanation for that except a calculated erosion of personal freedoms. Certainly not any explanation that involves common sense or a realistic understanding of modern threats to national security. That's hardly plausible at all.

OhhhJa posted...

The first operation was called dark winter and if you notice multiple politicians, especially Biden, have repeatedly said that we've got a dark winter coming.

Because as we all know, when a conspiracy is afoot, conspirators will sneakily work its name into public statements, only to be found by the most astute observers who can remember the names of wikipedia articles they read a few years back. Truly, there can be no greater proof of such grand schemes than to decode such secret messages.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Technically, that policy isn't homophobic. It would presumably be applied to a straight guy that wore nail polish all the same. Of course, it's pretty much a given that the policy is rooted in homophobia, which is effectively the same thing.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GanonsSpirit posted...

Yes, it's time for mankind to have 2 dicks each.

I had a dream once where I had 3 dicks. I was really concerned because I needed to pee, but then I noticed that the bathroom stall I was in had 3 toilets positioned right where they needed to be for the directions my dicks were pointing. Then the dream ended.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Lokarin posted...

or they can be like Konami and make Megaman pinball

...
...
which would probably legit be good, you have a button for powerup selector which changes which targets/bumpers are valuable or something

Could be good. In all likelihood, it would not incorporate such interesting mechanics and would instead be a generic pinball game with Megaman artwork copy+pasted onto it.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Generally, I like the idea of questing for it best, and that questing should generally incorporate bosses, crafting (or at least obtaining materials as part of the quest line, which is effectively crafting), and exploration. Attaching some sort of lore value (whether tied to the main game or just for the sake of worldbuilding) to the gear and making it something that I have to tangibly progress toward is generally the most enjoyable.

Failing that, it mostly depends on how the crafting system works. If it's one that allows gear to be customized in great detail, with components that are guaranteed (or near-guaranteed) drops from their respective enemies/locations, that adds depth to the game and consistently rewards exploration and the challenge of defeating difficult enemies. If it's one that just means you have to kill a boss several times to either collect enough components or get components with low drop rates, that's basically just a boss drop system with extra steps, which is less fun and tends to be there just to stretch out the game (exception: Monster Hunter does this, but has so many different weapon types to invest components into that it still feels like the player can make meaningful choices).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

A lot of the anti-Russia sentiment is rooted in latent Cold War paranoia, which is silly, but another lot of it is rooted in very concrete, questionable actions Russia has taken in recent years, which is pretty reasonable.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Blightzkrieg posted...

Because when I was a teen I jerked to Elliot Page and now I'm scared

I'm afraid that makes you officially retrogay. There's no turning back now.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.