Lurker > adjl

Wait, Ducktales is older than I am? I totally thought is was a 90's thing. Shows how much attention I pay >.>
---

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

This reminds me that I should probably take out the chicken breast I'm planning on cooking tomorrow night.
---

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

zebatov posted...

It is sad that people block people because they dont like hearing that theyre wrong.

You blocked me because I insisted that you provide a more credible argument than "it just is" for your claim that "what Trudeau has done to Canada" is worse than anything WW2-era Japan did.
---

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

Kyuubi4269 posted...

It absolutely is as you challenge either to defeat its credibility. If you ignore misinformation, you allow it to claim legitimacy from being unchallenged factually.

Anti-vax misinformation has already been thoroughly debunked with facts. There's no reason to worry about that. Giving it a platform alongside those facts would do far more to legitimize it than a couple of conspiratorial nutjobs whining about their freedom of speech are ever going to be able to do.
---

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

HornedLion posted...

Again, in my comment I stated that I didnt remember exactly the percentage. It was before I cared about the subject so I didnt retain it as well as I would today. But I do remember the fact that there was a significant reduction in autism rates for children being vaccinated after age 3.

If you can't cite your source, I have no reason to believe what you're saying. Again, your hypothesis is a very easily tested one. Get out there and do some research. If it's worth believing in, you'll be able to support it empirically.

HornedLion posted...

ow, since you seem to have dug your heels into your position, Id like to comment... are you saying that EVERY. SINGLE. PROCEDURE in the world has risks involved and yet vaccines are purely magical with no risks whatsoever?

Of course not, and you've seen me say this several times before. Of course vaccines have risks. As you say, every medical procedure does. The position is not that vaccines are perfectly safe, it's that vaccines are light years safer than the diseases they protect against.

I also don't know why you're equivocating "vaccines don't cause autism" with "vaccines have no risks." ASD is not the only potential side effect a vaccine could have, nor would it be the most significant even if it were actually a side effect.

There is also no reason to believe that vaccines cause autism because the only study to ever find that link was always garbage science (n=12, which is meaningless), even before it was proven that the guy who published it knowingly falsified the entire thing because he was being paid by lawyers representing some parents who were trying to sue a pharmaceutical company. This is not "big pharma funded a study to prove vaccines don't cause autism," because that is logically impossible (can't prove a negative). This is "there was never any concrete reason to believe this in the first place."

And no, your dentist only noticing developmental issues after their kid was vaccinated is not a concrete reason to believe it. Subjective anecdotes are not concrete evidence, especially when they're as emotionally charged as that would have been. You need actual statistics and medical records for a large number of people in order to even identify a genuine correlation, let alone start inferring a casual relationship from it.
---

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

Kyuubi4269 posted...

HornedLion posted...

A while back it was presented that among a group vaccinated children within the first 3 years of life the Autism rate was 8%(give or take, was a while ago) but for the group vaccinated post 3 years old it was less than 1%(again give or take). The belief being that those who got vaccinated after 3 and were autistic it was because they were actually born autistic and not due to vaccine injury.

Considering how the rate is about 1% in the UK for anything on the spectrum, a country that does several vaccinations before the first year, I'm going to call bullshit on that.

The CDC's most recent data for the US (2014) says 1.7%, so yeah, I'm gonna need to see a citation on that.
---

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

HornedLion posted...

You guys already know what I think on the subject.

Last time we talked about this, I remember you suggesting that the best course of action was to delay the vaccine schedule by a year or so to deliver them at a less developmentally sensitive time and reduce the supposed risk of developing autism. In response, I challenged you to find data on autism rates between the many children that already follow a modified vaccine schedule (for any number of reasons) and those that follow a normal one, since your hypothesis was an easy one to test. Unfortunately, I never made it back to that topic, so I don't actually know: did you ever rise to that challenge?

OhhhJa posted...

Are people really dumb enough to believe that unvaccinated kids are guaranteed death? I think they've taken too many memes at face value. You could not get vaccinated in first world countries and the odds of you ever getting one of those diseases would be extremely slim

Obviously it's not a guaranteed death, but as vaccination rates drop, the risk of encountering these diseases absolutely does increase to significant levels. There are measles outbreaks ongoing as we speak, which isn't something that should be happening in a country with MMR vaccines so readily available. None of us or our children are particularly likely to die from these diseases in the current situation, no, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be vociferously objecting to people increasing that risk by being stupid.
---

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

ultra magnus13 posted...

Except if Verizon did that, guess who stops subscribing to Verizon? Almost everyone.

The providers that survive are the ones that provide a balance between price and service quality that the consumer is willing to pay for.

If ISP's competed properly, everyone would be offering Google Fiber speeds for half of what they currently charge and there'd be no bandwidth caps. ISP's don't compete properly. Net neutrality laws were introduced to stop them from continuing with trends like throttling competitors' content, and there's absolutely no reason to believe they won't start that back up again now that the laws have been repealed.
---

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

LinkPizza posted...

Maybe they should have both the boys and girls meet everyone...

Eeyup. There's really no reason to gender-segregate a leadership event.
---

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

MrMelodramatic posted...

faramir77 posted...

Contractions in general are strange. We're shortening common expressions to save syllables. Isn't is just a particularly strange contraction.

While we're at it, it's strange that English doesn't have a plural second person pronoun. The closest we have to one is "y'all", interestingly both a plural second person pronoun and a contraction, but whenever someone says "y'all" they get shit on for having lazy English.

We do. You. The single subject pronoun is thou.

Yep. It's just very much fallen out of use.
---

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

ultra magnus13 posted...

VeeVees posted...

Granted 99% of EU is complete trash, there are still plenty of ideas to steal from it.

It's probably easier to just do completely new stuff vs digging a few pieces of gold and silver out of the massive garbage fire that is the EU.

While you're not wrong, choosing to take that route and then complaining about how it's hard to make the movies because there's no source material to draw inspiration from is just laughable.
---

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

aDirtyShisno posted...

Instead this is literally attempted murder: same race vs attempted murder: different race. Its race based sentencing.

There's a distinct difference between "X murdered Y, who is black" and "X murdered Y because Y is black." Namely, in the former case, you've just got somebody with violent tendencies who is dangerous because of that. In the latter case, you've got somebody who would commit genocide if they had the opportunity, which is a whole lot more dangerous.
---

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

Muscles posted...

It used to be free before we decided to start society and currency

... I don't even know how to respond to this.
---

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

That's exactly what your union rep is there for, including supporting you legally if they try to punish you by transferring you or whatnot.
---

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

Muscles posted...

LinkPizza posted...

Muscles posted...

So it's ok to do immoral things if you can make extra money off of it? Got it

How is it immoral?

Because they are withholding content to get extra money, seems like a scummy move to me

How about making extra content instead like netflix?

There's nothing immoral about releasing the content you create when you want to release it. It's a TV show. Nobody's going to die because they had to wait a week for the next episode.
---

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

Ogurisama posted...

Muscles posted...

Nothing seeing as things pretty much calmed down to a utopia in Aragorn's reign

Wasnt that suppose to be the case after the empire fell in SW also? Look what we got.

The difference being that everything after RotJ was basically just fanfiction with Lucas' stamp of approval, whereas everything after RotK was written by Tolkien himself.
---

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

It did feel a little contrived, and the fact that you could pretty easily rent all of the items at once with no penalty really kind of took away most of the sense of progression and choice. I think a better system would have been to offer a choice of three items as a reward for beating each dungeon, so you'd still have the freedom to decide what order you want to do the dungeons in, but you'd actually have to work to get the items.
---

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

Noop_Noop posted...

adjl posted...

Bill Clinton: *Gets blowjob*
Entire US Government: Yeah we'll impeach him.

Donald Trump: *Bribes foreign presidents with foreign aid money in an attempt to get dirt on political opponents and undermine the election process and publicly admits to it*
Entire US Government: We're not sure how bad this is so we'll have to conduct a thorough investigation before taking any sort of action.

PRIORITIES

Clinton was impeached for lying under oath you little nugget

Yes, which is indeed a valid reason to impeach him because that is clearly illegal for a very good reason. Comparing the gravity of the two situations, however, nonetheless paints a pretty ridiculous picture.
---

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

Attended almost all, with the exception of taking first-year stats in fourth year because it was a joke and I skipped most of those lectures. I also overslept and missed a few classes in my last semester, but in retrospect I think I was struggling with a bit of depression at the time, so I'll blame that.
---

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

Turkey, apple, and brie is a god-tier sandwich.
---

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

Bill Clinton: *Gets blowjob*
Entire US Government: Yeah we'll impeach him.

Donald Trump: *Bribes foreign presidents with foreign aid money in an attempt to get dirt on political opponents and undermine the election process and publicly admits to it*
Entire US Government: We're not sure how bad this is so we'll have to conduct a thorough investigation before taking any sort of action.

PRIORITIES
---

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

Noop_Noop posted...

*snip*

Have you tried ALBW or BotW? ALBW in particular specifically aimed to recapture the open-world feel of LoZ, and there's very little story-based gating of dungeons (it follows the "do these three then you can do these eight" thing, but you can do each set in any order) because the items needed for the dungeons can just be rented/bought outright. If it's the open-world freedom you're looking for over anything else, it might be worth giving a shot.

And then, of course, BotW eschewed the dungeon focus of other Zelda games in favour of having a big open world that can be freely explored. It's just an open-world game.
---

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

Aaantlion posted...

We reduced an apparently pointless $5bn expenditure which is more money in American taxpayers' pockets.

Do you know something about a commensurate tax break that we don't?
---

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

Lokarin posted...

Solid Sonic posted...

..."Why the hell does anyone prefer Breath of the Wild to Skyward Sword?"

I mean that should be considered trolling.

Even though it's true.

How can an interrogative be true or false?

The question itself cannot, but the implications loaded into it can be.
---

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

NightMareBunny posted...

wolfy42 posted...

I mean when your already spending $5 + per cup of coffee...why not add delivery fees, service fees and tips to the mix!!!

Also, your at freaking home, if you like coffee, you should have a way to make it there.

depends on what you like...me while i don't go to starbucks(i do drink their ground coffee) i can say that whenever i go to mcdonalds I'm likely to get one of their coffee drinks that i probably won't be able to make at home for one reason or another

stuff like the cinnamon cookie latte or a caramel mocha

and honestly when you live out in the sticks you don't really have much options in terms of making delicious flavored coffees

Honestly, you can get a passable home espresso machine and milk frother/steamer for under $1000. If you're spending $5 on such a drink from starbucks every day, you'll pay for that in a year, even accounting for ingredient costs. It won't be quite the same quality, particularly where there is some skill involved in making lattes and the like, but you can save a ton of money that way.
---

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

Veedrock- posted...

PK_Spam posted...

lmfao, imagine thinking the surplus of streaming services is a good thing

It is though. Netflix doesn't have everything, so more options means more choices and more content. Why would less be better?

Inb4 flawed cable analogy.

Because having more services means the same amount of content is going to be spread out among a larger number of services, making each of those services less worthwhile individually. Having the ability to pick and choose which services have the most content you want is a good thing, compared to paying a blanket fee for a whole bunch of stuff you don't care about (much like cable), but ultimately we're going to be spending more money for less content because each service won't have as much as a more monopolistic one would. This is to say nothing of the added complication and security risks that come with needing to have more accounts, as well as the fact that people already have difficulty keeping track of just how much they're spending on subscription fees, a problem that will only get worse with more to consider.

That said, the fact that studios and networks are launching their own services means they don't have to pay the same licensing fees for their content that Netflix or another third party would. That is a good thing, because it means larger, more consistent libraries are possible (keeping track of what's appearing on and disappearing from Netflix each month isn't the easiest thing). The fact remains, though, that as the content available to be streamed gets splintered up among a larger number of services, the streaming market is going to become too saturated and a lot of those services will fail. That content will then be snatched up by other services, consolidating the market again, and the cycle will begin anew.
---

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

The easy answer is that exploring an overworld has traditionally been a central part of Zelda games, and BotW's overworld is light-years better than SS's "Here's a sea of nondescript white clouds with three holes that will teleport you to the levels you want." For most fans of the Zelda series, that alone is going to be enough to put BotW ahead. On the dungeon side of things, though, SS definitely had the better dungeons (some of the best 3D ones, awkward swimming aside), so I can understand why somebody might have preferred it if they don't care as much about having an interesting overworld.
---

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

PK_Spam posted...

Most of the Blades were designed by different artists

I'm not sure about their actual model designs, but the drawings of them in the blade codex will actually say which artist drew them.
---

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

AllstarSniper32 posted...

AllstarSniper32 posted...

Nope, it seems the communities of the games did that.

_AdjI_ posted...

The communities didn't create and sell the skins.

_AdjI_ posted...

It's the community that then ends up treating non-paying players differently,

Right, that's what I said.

Yes, and then I said
_AdjI_ posted...

there are absolutely things the developers can do to prevent or encourage that, depending on how much they want to capitalize on that social pressure.

Do you have cause to disagree with that statement?
---

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

AllstarSniper32 posted...

Yes, but this is clearly not the company doing the manipulating.

It's the company that created two visibly distinct classes of player in the first place. And regardless of whether or not they're actively, directly manipulating that social pressure, they're unambiguously exploiting it, which isn't much better.
---

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

Judgmenl posted...

adjl posted...

I also doubt they'll move away from the extreme customization they currently offer.

They confirmed that they were changing how sockets / links work.

So you mentioned, but nothing about that statement suggests you won't be able to customize abilities anymore. Care to elaborate?
---

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

Note that if you're looking to sear something in a very hot pan, you shouldn't use anything with a non-stick coating. High heat can cause those coatings to degrade and release toxic gases, which is bad. Stainless steel pans are your best option for searing.
---

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

AllstarSniper32 posted...

adjl posted...

It's not at all uncommon these days for kids to get bullied for using the default skins in Fortnite,

When has this been a thing? Citation needed.

https://www.businessinsider.com/kids-feel-poor-if-they-dont-buy-custom-fortnite-skins-2019-10

It's also not remotely surprising. It's this generation's version of being bullied for not buying Pokemon cards, because kids have always been and will always be terrible. The point here isn't that it's happening, it's that there is ample potential for psychological manipulation even in cosmetic microtransactions.
---

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

AllstarSniper32 posted...

Oh, this is the negative you're trying to say? Yeah, unless they're over charging you for skins, they aren't exploiting this part of the brain.

Doesn't matter what they charge, cosmetic microtransactions are still psychologically manipulative, relying on social pressure instead of addiction. It's not at all uncommon these days for kids to get bullied for using the default skins in Fortnite, and while Epic certainly can't be directly blamed for that, you can't tell me they aren't fully aware of and eager to exploit that tendency. Companies want a situation where people who don't buy skins are considered cheap/poor by the rest of the community, because then those people feel compelled to buy some in order to fit in.

AllstarSniper32 posted...

Buying a skin for your characters is like buying a painting for a wall in your house.

And then having every house in the neighbourhood opened for public viewing. Cosmetics in multiplayer games are an opportunity to show off and look unique, and it's very easy to make people feel bad for not taking that opportunity. That's the social pressure PO was alluding to.

AllstarSniper32 posted...

So are you trying to say all RPGs that have random in game loot drops are bad?

Of course he's not saying that. He's saying that all RPG's with random loot drops contain an inherently addictive mechanic. That addictive mechanic then has the potential to be exploited for monetary gain, which may or may not happen depending on what the company wants to do. MMO's with subscription fees do this: People will play a game for longer to get random loot drops than fixed ones, even if the fixed ones drop at the same rate as the random ones would on average (i.e. people are much more willing to run a dungeon an unknown number of times for a 10% drop than to run it exactly 10 times for a guaranteed drop at the end of that), and playing the game longer means paying more for it.

This also comes into play when talking about cosmetic microtransactions. The longer you play a game, the more likely you are to get bored of the default models and want something new. This is where comments like "Fashion Souls is the real endgame" come from (though obviously Dark Souls isn't a game with cosmetic microtransactions). Playing a game for longer also makes paying for microtransactions feel more justifiable because you feel like you've gotten more value out of the game. Those microtransactions aren't exploiting addictive tendencies as directly as loot boxes do, no, but addictive gameplay can still be very easily monetized, and you're kidding yourself if you don't think AAA corporations have psychologists on staff explaining that to executives.
---

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

It looks less like a completely new game and more like an expansion to the existing one with a different campaign. Presuming you mean cosmetic customization, I doubt they'll move away from their current, very-successful model of having pre-defined models for each class and making cosmetic customization a matter of gear and microtransactions. If you're referring to customizing their gameplay, however, I also doubt they'll move away from the extreme customization they currently offer.
---

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

Lol you're gonna be frenching a cow.
---

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

Eh, no regrets. The point stands that there is such a thing as having too much of a good thing, and wanting less than that threshold is not unreasonable.
---

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

VeeVees posted...

If you have a bunch of other expenses then you are probably not just working part time at minimum wage.

Uhh, what? Paying rent and eating means you're not just working part time at minimum wage? What kind of logic is that?
---

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

Muscles posted...

1 Beef most certainly is better than fish,

Not if you get good fish.

Muscles posted...

beef is the standard protein for a reason

That reason being that the majority of the US is too far away from water for fish to have been a viable protein on a commercial scale until relatively recently. Also, Americans eat more chicken than beef, so I'm not sure where you're getting this "beef is the standard protein" nonsense.

Muscles posted...

2 let me rephrase that, you don't need to raise fish because you can go catch them in the wild

About half of the fish Americans eat is farmed, not wild-caught. Sure, the option of catching it in the wild exists (for some fish), but acting like aquaculture doesn't comprise a significant portion of the fish you can buy is just plain incorrect.

Muscles posted...

3 a boat ain't that expensive compared to a whole farm and the food for the cows

http://www.atlanticship.dk/en/Ships-for-sale/fishing-vessels/freezer-trawlers

Looks like the cheapest on that first page is $1.2 million, which is just the cost of the boat and doesn't account for the cost of employing a full crew and moving said boats hundreds of miles, plus a whole lot of insurance because commercial fishing is one of the world's most dangerous jobs. That's not to say you can't get cheaper boats for other fish, nor that cattle ranching is without its own share of costs, but I get the impression that you're thinking of some guy going out in a $200 canoe and catching a few fish, which is absolutely not an accurate impression of commercial fishing.
---

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

Muscles posted...

because it tastes better

Not if you get good fish.

Muscles posted...

also you don't raise fish,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquaculture

Muscles posted...

you just go fish for them

Which can be pretty expensive. Boats aren't cheap. Crews even less so.
---

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

LinkPizza posted...

I think beef is much easier to buy, and keeps longer (in the freezer).

This is the big thing. There's a huge drop in quality between fresh fish and fish that's even a day or two old. You can offset that by freezing it immediately, but that basically means having a full processing plant and freezer on the boat to freeze the fillets within minutes of them coming out of the ocean. Even then, any partial thawing that happens during transport is going to result in a drop in quality (even if it's not enough to be a safety concern), so you're still not going to get the same quality of fish inland as you can in coastal areas. Getting close is going to cost you more than you'd pay for a similar quality in less temperamental meat.

Basically, unless you live in a coastal area or a large enough urban centre that it's feasible to transport fish directly there from coastal regions, you're not going to get great fish. As a maritimer living in southwestern Ontario at the moment, this is really annoying because I like good fish.
---

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

I lime that some of them are being sold for more than legitimate accounts cost. Some people aren't too bright.
---

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

Yes, when we start getting into whether or not it's a good deal for consumers, even more problems arise (such as the aforementioned potential disappearance of games from the service).
---

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

EventualDecline posted...

Also, Wind Waker, while I do like the game and beat it (once), its still one of the worst 3D Zeldas.

Presuming you mean the GC one, you should see if you can play the remake some time. I used to agree that it was solidly outclassed by most other 3D Zeldas (Not TP, but probably every other one), but WWHD is a serious contender for best 3D Zelda. The remake just makes the game so much more enjoyable.

EventualDecline posted...

Thats OK. Beating a game 5+ times and beyond isnt exactly normal. Playing a game 2-3 times, at the most, then moving on to the NEXT GAME, is a healthy amount of times to play a game.

If you find it fun, there's nothing unhealthy about doing it (except in cases where there is some kind of inherent unhealthiness to the activity). Replaying a game (or conducting any other sort of leisure activity) purely out of a sense of obligation is dumb, yes, but if you enjoy doing it, why not?
---

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

Revelation34 posted...

Fierce_Deity_08 posted...

It would work if everyone had dependable and affordable internet but there are places even in the US that do not still.

That's not the issue. The issue is how much bandwidth the service it self uses. Google would need to strike deals with every single ISP so that their service is uncapped.

Both are significant issues. US Internet infrastructure simply isn't where it needs to be for streaming to have any hope of replacing traditional game distribution, as much as those pushing streaming services would like that.
---

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

Nade Duck posted...

people who actively want less of something are strange.

Large chunks of Japan actively wanted less water in March 2011. Was that so strange?
---

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

Judgmenl posted...

Oh apparently they're getting rid of linking gear. Fusings are being removed and the mechanic is being redone.
What a fucking joke lol.

Provided the basic mechanic of linking support gems to ability gems is preserved, I'm actually okay with that. 6-linking a main ability is a major power boost that's tied pretty much entirely to sheer dumb luck, and while that statement can apply to just about all ARPG loot mechanics, I always felt like 6-linking was just a little too unlikely for how central it was to many builds. I'd rather see 6-linked abilities become more attainable (preferably via something skill-based, rather than pure chance) and have content balanced around them than have to struggle to keep content from being either trivial with 6-links or impossible without them.
---

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

TheWitchMorgana posted...

youre just not playing the right games

Eeyup.
---

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