Lurker > darkknight109

Realistic: You will not sink, and will instantly be burnt to a crisp (Star Wars 3)

Star Wars lava is not realistic. Obi-Wan and Anakin would have caught on fire and been killed long before getting anywhere near the lava just due to the ambient heat it gives off; they would not be engaging in a lightsaber duel mere feet above the surface of a river of lava that is so hot it actually has incandescence and decent flow properties.

Zeus posted...

Pretty sure there's some sinking with the real lava? Or is it too solid to actually sink through?

Lava is molten rock; a human body doesn't have the density to sink into it. Basically the same reason why people don't sink in the Dead Sea, just many times more potent.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Muscles posted...

VII would be viewed much better if VIII and IX weren't such trash imo

VII was fine at the time and it was a good way to get everyone settled down after the Disney purpose. It was a very "safe" movie - basically a soft reboot without looking like a reboot. I agreed with that approach at the time, even though I knew it wouldn't stand the test of time (because you can't remake a legend like ANH - one of the most successful movies ever - and hope to catch lightning in a bottle a second time; it would be like remaking Citizen Kane or Gone With the Wind).

And my predictions largely bore out. TFA is a fine movie on its own merits, but too derivative to hold my attention on repeated viewings. If I want to watch the story of ANH, I'll just go watch ANH.

wpot posted...

The big problem IMO wasn't him, though, it was that VIII/Last Jedi was directed by Rian Johnson who had more or less the complete opposite approach: respect nothing, end the Jedi, and end 'romantic heroism' in general in favor of flawed/unhappy characters. Star Wars without heroes is...I don't know, but it isn't Star Wars.

The lack of cohesion in the trilogy was a serious issue and the fact that the two directors had opposite views for how the trilogy should look definitely messed things up. I personally think the issue was with Abrams more than Johnson, though - he did what he usually does, which is set up a bunch of plot threads that seem really interesting on first blush, but which realistically have no satisfying conclusion (Rey's heritage being a prime example - I thought Johnson's answer to that question was far, far more satisfying than Abrams' and it annoyed me when Episode IX did a super-sloppy retcon so it could resurrect that particular plot point). If I had the choice between an entire trilogy directed by Abrams or an entire trilogy directed by Johnson, I would go with Johnson every time, because he was the one who actually brought something new to the series and made it interesting.

Not sure I get your complaints about VIII.

"Respect nothing?" What didn't he respect? Is this that line from a disenchanted Luke about the Jedi being a bunch of failures who allowed the rise of Vader and Palpatine through their own hubris? Because a) he immediately gets pushback on that view from the person he's talking to and b) that's not an entirely wrong view of what happened, even though it's not the whole story. I actually really liked that touch because one of the big disconnects between the OT and the PT is how Obi-Wan in the OT describes the Jedi as a group of enlightened warrior-monks bringing peace to the galaxy, but the PT shows them to be a bickering council more consumed with internal politics and bureaucracy than anything to do with the study of the Force (which is exactly why Qui-Gon is such a divisive figure in their ranks). Johnson just acknowledged that in-universe and gave Luke a overly-pessimistic view of the Jedi to contrast with Obi-Wan's overly-optimistic one, with the truth somewhere in the middle. I thought that was a nice touch.

"End the Jedi"? He literally did the opposite. The Jedi effectively didn't exist at the start of the movie, but they did by the end.

"End romantic heroism in favour of flawed, unhappy characters"? Hasn't that always been what Star Wars was about? The entire second half of the original trilogy was Luke fighting the temptation of the dark side and coming a hair's bredth from losing that battle. And how was Finn flawed or unhappy, beyond what we saw in Episode VII? How was Rey? How was Poe's arrogance any different from Han Solo's in the original trilogy (both of whom's overconfidence in their own abilities/connections put their friends in danger)?

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

What_The_Chris posted...

all three sequels sucked, made the prequels, well, some bits of the prequels, look good in comparison

As bad as parts of the sequels got (and TRoS got really fuckin' bad at points), they will never plumb the depths of banality and utter putrescence that Episodes II and III reached. Episode VII was derivative but mindlessly fun, Episode VIII I still hold to be decent, and Episode IX was really stupid, but none of them were as aggressively bad as AotC or RotS.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

SunWuKung420 posted...

Umm, if a pilot has an undiagnosed medical condition that can lead to a stroke or heart attack, and has am event while piloting, the crashes of surviving that plane crash is less than 1%.

If someone is exposed to covid without a vaccine, they have 99% survival rate. If a vaccinated person is exposed to covid, they have a 99.1% survival rate.

There is no need to require proof unless the vaccinated are still unsure the vaccine gave them that extra 0.1% advantage. Or we could stop being fearmongered.

Ignoring the fact that your numbers are both wrong (the overall survival rate for COVID is 98.2%) and misleading (the vaccine reduces your chances of infection by about 90% and your chances of hospitalization and death by over 95%, which has the combined effect of making the overwhelming majority of COVID deaths - as in, over 95% since vaccinations became widespread - be amongst the unvaccinated), let's dig into this a little more, shall we?

If pilots had a 99% survival rate while flying their planes, every major airport in the world would be having multiple plane crashes every day. The bigger ones would be having double-digit crashes every single day. Would you fly under those circumstances?

Or let's say that terrorists struck your country and every time there was a sports game, they detonated a bomb in the arena that killed a few hundred people. Would you think to yourself, "Well, 99% of them made it out, so no big deal."?

Of course you wouldn't. No one would find those situations acceptable - in the first every air fleet would be grounded until massive safety overhauls could be implemented and in the second there would be a massive manhunt for the terrorists responsible, potentially coupled with security lockdowns until the threat had been neutralized.

That's what this vaunted "99% survival rate" you're tossing about actually translated to in a large population: millions dead and needlessly so. Except it's even worse because those who die use up hospital space and medical resources on their way out, preventing others who aren't anti-vaxx dipshits from accessing medical care for situations that were beyond their control. I have a doctor in my family who lives in the US and the other day one of his patients with a serious brain tumour got his surgery pushed back because there's no space in the hospital he was supposed to have the operation at.

This continued "who cares about the pandemic" bullshit is nonsense and it's selfish nonsense at that.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I have more of a problem with the fact that we live in a world where irresponsible assholes and idiots have made it necessary to ask for proof of vaccination in the first place.

Until people grow the fuck up and learn to be better humans, they kind of forfeit the right to complain when the system tries to force them to do the right thing.

This exactly. I have reservations about essentially forcing people to disclose medical history, but there are plain and present reasons why this is necessary right now, all of which have to do with morons that don't understand science. It's ridiculous that we have to do this... but we do have to do it.

Zeus posted...

A shitty claim that's been used to justify all kinds of horrific things throughout history.

Fortunately, this isn't a horrific thing, so trying to tie it to any historical event like this is just dishonest scaremongering.

BUMPED2002 posted...

I just won't be visiting any of those businesses because getting a vaccine is like any other medical or health decision we have to make from time to time and it's up to us to decide what's best for us on an individual basis, not the government and not any businesses.

The government and those businesses aren't making your healthcare decisions for you; they're simply saying that if you are a health risk, you are not welcome inside.

You are free to refuse the vaccine all you like, but - like many medical decisions - your choice will have consequences that you will need to be prepared to own.

I will, however, point out that the decision not to get vaccinated affects more than just yourself; as such, the government and society at large does have a vested interest in your decision.

Zeus posted...

The fact that they're asking at all is a fundamental overreach and something we wouldn't tolerate in any other facet

This is factually wrong.

You want a driver's license or to work in a safety-sensitive job? You'll need to pass an eye exam and prove that you do not pose a risk to others. Want to fly a plane? You'll need a medical every few years (increasing to every year as you get older) certifying that you do not have any medical conditions that would make you unsafe to fly. Want to participate in vigorous or dangerous physical activities? Frequently the waiver you sign will include a clause where you attest that you have no serious medical conditions that could be aggravated by the activity in question.

Governments and businesses can and do absolutely ask about certain elements of your medical history when there is a clear and pressing need for them to do so, because the information is critical to the safety of yourself or others. This is no different.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Redfeather posted...

I am not american, but I figured trump was his own thing and only doing what suited his needs. Chaotic neutral work?

Chaotic neutrals generally believe in freedom for all and that all should be free to pursue their own desires.

Trump is more chaotic evil, given that he only supported "freedom" for those in-groups who agreed with him.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

I've done martial arts for the last 30 years and even I don't like my chances against Iron Mike, even at his current age (doubly so if it really is "fists only" - i.e. no kicks, grapples, or other shit I could pull that might give me an advantage) - dude is a beast.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

scott3439 posted...

He has autographed and sold copies of this image on eBay.

If this is found to be CP like he states, then isn't this considered distributing CP?

It could be, yes.

He would be unlikely to face any repercussions for it, though. Prosecutors have discretion on who they prosecute and why and I can't imagine any of them would think it worthwhile bringing this guy up on charges for it.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Zeus posted...

Can you even sue for CP? That sounds like a criminal thing.

Sure.

First of all, you can sue anyone for anything, particularly in the US. Whether or not the suit will be successful is another matter entirely.

Second, just because it's criminal doesn't preclude you from seeking civil damages; to the contrary, it's relatively common for victims of crimes to seek financial compensation from the perpetrators, assuming they're not so poor as to be judgement-proof.

DiScOrD tHe LuNaTiC posted...

He's also suing Chad Channing, and Chad wasn't even in the band when that photo was taken.

If Channing received financial gain from the album, there would be reason to include him as a party to the suit, regardless of whether or not he was involved in the actual wrongdoing (the logic being that if the album is found to be exploitative or otherwise legally "troublesome", anyone who has profited off it could potentially be pursued for compensation).

GastroFan posted...

The problem is that, if his parents gave Nirvana permission to use that photo, he's going to have a hard time winning his lawsuit. I haven't heard anyone yet mention whether or not his parents consented to letting Nirvana use that photo because, if they did, since he was a minor at the time, he doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.

Not true at all.

If he was suing because he felt he was owed a share of the profits and wasn't properly compensated, then this would be accurate. But that's not what he's alleged in his suit - he's saying the fact this photo was taken and published at all was a violation of his rights due to it being illegal and abusive, and that case would (hypothetically, not considering other specifics of this particular case) hold regardless of whether the parents granted permission for the use of the photo or not.

As an example, if Person A sues Person B because Person B stabbed them when they were a child, Person B could not defend themselves by saying that Person A's parents signed a waiver allowing Person B to stab their child. If a court finds that the cover shot is actually CP, the parents' consent becomes completely immaterial. The claimant here isn't suing for unpaid royalties, he's suing for damages - two different things.

DiScOrD tHe LuNaTiC posted...

You know the lawsuit is bullshit when the lawyer is claiming it's CP because the photo, allegedly chosen by Nirvana's late frontman, Kurt Cobain, suggests a "sex worker grabbing for a dollar bill."

THE DOLLAR ISN'T EVEN IN THE REAL PHOTOGRAPH, YOU STUPID FUCK. It was added during the development process

It wouldn't matter if it was in the "real photo" or not; what matters is what was released to the public.

If I took someone's face from a completely normal picture and edited it onto a porn star's body, then released it as a magazine cover, I would be opening myself up to all sorts of liability issues and no, the statement, "The original photo wasn't pornographic at all before I edited it, so it's fine," would not stand as any sort of defence at all.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

MartianManchild posted...

No doctor is faking giving a patient a vaccine.

You realize that doctors aren't responsible for administering vaccines, right?

No, actually, I guess you wouldn't realize that...

Anyways, as others have already clarified, getting vaccinated doesn't render you immune to the virus, it renders you resistant to its effects. I find it rather telling how you posted the raw case numbers rather than breaking it down into how many were hospitalized, how many died, and what percentage of those numbers were unvaxxed, because everywhere else that has suffered this problem has seen that the vast majority of those suffering severe complications are unvaccinated and those who caught the virus after vaccination almost universally did not require hospitalization.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

KaijunoKami posted...

If they don't have the majority, how can they filibuster?

Filibuster is used by the minority party, not the majority.

Do you not know what the filibuster is?

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

KaijunoKami posted...

But the democrats own the majority of all three, so how would Mitch be able to kill anything?

Not up to speed on how the senate filibuster works, I take it?

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Like a stomach misses an ulcer.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

He's fully vaxxed, so this is unlikely to result in anything beyond minor illness.

Zeus posted...

You mean a guy who got the vaccine still got COVID and you're crowing about it because...?

"Making a topic" doesn't exactly constitute "crowing" about it, but mostly because this dingbat is one of the two most active governors - DeSantis being the other - in trying to keep his population sick and infected by actively fighting against basic, common-sense health measures like mask mandates.

Accordingly, Texas and Florida collectively are making up about a third of all new COVID-19 infections in the entire country at the moment.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Hilarious, considering that this is Trump's plan that Biden is executing.

Which, yes, is a fiasco, but Trump doesn't exactly have much room to criticize here. Four successive administrations - including his - bungled the Afghanistan file and at no point did the US seem to understand what the fuck it was doing there.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Query, Zeus - given that the timeline for withdrawal was set out by Trump in his administration's negotiations with the Taliban, with Biden simply following that timeline, do you believe that Trump made a bad decision in choosing to withdraw troops from the country?

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

zebatov posted...

I dont remember Republicans/righties crying this long about the other side losing after the last election.

Then you don't have a very good memory.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

As of yesterday, fully one-fifth of all new infections in the US were in Florida.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

adjl posted...

https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/the-red-blue-divide-in-covid-19-vaccination-rates-is-growing/

It is indeed a gross exaggeration to say that only Republicans are dying, but across the country, Republicans are falling way behind on vaccination rates. Given that being vaccinated reduces the risk of death by somewhere in the range of 99.5-99.9%, that's going to create a political bias in death rates. Based purely on those numbers (46.7% of democrats vaxxed, 35% of republicans, or 53.3% and 65% unvaxxed, respectively), we can expect roughly 22% more republicans to die of Covid than democrats.

Of course, that's not the full picture (several other factors play into any potential political bias), but it's quite reasonable to predict that more Republicans than Democrats will be dying in the coming months. That's not the virus being biased, that's Republicans biasing themselves to be more vulnerable to it.

As an aside, though, sub-50% for democrats is pathetic, given that they're the ones that are doing the best. Y'all need to step that up.

Other things to consider:
-Republicans are more likely to ignore virus prevention methods like masks or social distancing
-Republicans are more likely to be older, which significantly increases the risk of death or serious complications from COVID.

Even without considering the substantial difference in vaccination rates between the political parties, Republicans are more likely to catch COVID due to their more flippant attitude towards virus prevention methods and more likely to die from it due to demographics.

Honestly, I don't actually think it's going to have the major political impact some people think, at least in terms of the Republican voterbase shrinking as a result of die-offs (620,000 Americans have died from COVID since the pandemic started; even if you pretend that every single one of them was a Republican voter, that's not even 1% of Donald Trump's vote total in the last election), but who knows, maybe it'll be enough to tip the scales in some of the swingier spots of the country.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I'm not sure any of the websites I used to go to half a lifetime ago even exist anymore.

One of my favourite websites from the 90s is still up as an archive, bless its heart. IcyBrian's RPG page, which was a standard late-90s home grown fansite for *insert hobby/interest here*. It mostly focused on fanfics and fanart for RPGs, which was a genre I was absolutely obsessed with at the time.

Behold this lovely slice of late-90s internet design:

http://www.icybrian.com/

Not quite half a lifetime ago for me, but it's the only website from that era or earlier that I used to frequent that's still around in any capacity.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Zangulus posted...

People respond to this obvious troll/gimmick seriously?

As adjl said, I'm less interested in responding to an obvious troll account and more interested in debunking obvious bad science and misinformation, especially as it pertains to a global pandemic.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

By the way, TC, yesterday Florida reported 24,753 new cases and Texas added 17,612; those "big Democrat states" that you referenced earlier? California had 12,254 new cases (reminder: it has roughly 150% of Texas's population and twice Florida's population) and New York had just 4384.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

MartianManchild posted...

California has had 1.3 million more cases and nearly 25,000 more deaths from the coronavirus.

adjl beat me to it, but you've conveniently left out that California has roughly twice as many people as Florida.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Largest coronavirus caseload in the US by far.

Yeah, bang-up job he's doing.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!

Just for any Republicans reading the topic who might be confused, this is called "holding people accountable", just in case you guys ever feel like trying it.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!