Posts for Kuwaga


Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Doesn't beat the RTA in terms of entertainment for me, still massive yes vote. I liked the Deku stick ISG backflip, very stylish Ganon fight. How highly optimized is the cucco collection part? That seems almost impossible to find the perfect route for.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
9.8 on a scale from 9 to 10
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
The problem I have with these runs is they seem kind of dull right now as it is. But if we got one of these published and somebody eventually finds an improvement to save like 5 presses (not so unlikely at all over the course of the years imo), I'd be very impressed and excited about that. I guess the big problem is there isn't any real competition yet, and thus virtually no discourse about possible improvements and little community effort involved. I'd give the concept a chance by publishing this run. I have voted meh because I couldn't bear the autoscrollers, but after some thinking I'm now all for publishing this. I'm looking forward to seeing some improvements to this in the future.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
I've found this to be pretty boring in the autoscroll levels. Meh.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
I know it's hard to imagine somebody would get 0 entertainment value out of this run, but if it happens to be that way so be it, that's what averages are for. I personally wouldn't rate it a straight 0 even if I hated the heck out of it because I'd know it's a potentially highly entertaining run to some people. So I would probably never rate it lower than 1. It's ok to base your rating on purely subjective preferences as well though. It seems that's what Cardboard has done and quite obviously to me, there's nothing wrong with it. If we were voting to determine what's the best food, should people who hate pizza not be allowed to rate it a 0? Because why would they rate it if they didn't enjoy it? That attitude doesn't make sense to me. It comes close to censorship imo. Edit: If you're saying Cardboard has obviously rated it a 0 only because he hated the surrounding drama, fine, maybe. But I'd say he's innocent until proven guilty and the evidence seems to be pointing towards him being innocent. He just happens to dislike OoT runs. You need to be able to accept that. There are all kinds of people in this world.
rog (below) wrote:
All i would ask is that he also give it a technical rating.
By what rationale? He knows he hated the movie and got no entertainment out of it. He doesn't feel competent enough to judge it on a technical level though.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
This seemed ok to me. Voting meh.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Oh, I'm sorry. It seems only Firefox displays it correctly, Internet Explorer does something weird, and it breaks the page for Chrome users. That's bad. [URL=http://www.abload.de/img/firefoxpostegrz8.png]Here[/URL]'s what it looked like in Firefox.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
This had me laugh out loudly on so many occassions! Massive yes vote! One minor issue I had with this run was that annoying sound your ghost friend liked to make on close to every second screen.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
It's not a hard science, but there are many scientific approaches applied, which makes it somewhat of a grey area. Things have certainly improved over the years. Freud wouldn't be taken seriously nowadays anymore. The days where theories get wide acceptance just because they sound like they could very well be true are over. Its main problem is still how to interpret research data, but the data itself tends to be very solid.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
It has to move faster to stay exactly above the observer since being higher means you have to travel larger distances to orbit the earth in the same time. As it falls down it should retain this higher velocity. Unfortunately, I didn't manage to figure this out by myself, even though it should be a fairly easy problem, it seems counter-intuitive. (Hurray for run-on sentences) I think our flawed intuition about this might be based on conveyor belt like constructions we can observe on the earth, and we think of the earth as a conveyor belt that attracts air. Since it doesn't attract air/objects that are further away as strongly, we think they wouldn't be dragged along as much by it. But that's just totally wrong, isn't it?
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
[URL=www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL8G5pBZ5CI#t=2m24s]Loverboy - Working For The Weekend[/URL] Despite my overall bad taste in music Edit: Logging a Youtube session [URL=www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVYO56z3j3k#t=28s]Depeche Mode - Everything Counts[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa2nLEhUcZ0]The Cure - Firday I'm in Love[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SuSsvJUqKI]Diana Ross & The Supremes - My World Is Empty Without You[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z59EVHU8MjI]Four Tops - I Can't Help Myself[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ly79mkffp7M]Frank Zappa - Keep It Greasy[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFDW9b_ejfI]Focus - Hocus Pocus[/URL] [URL=www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8l7l1j1v3A#t=40s]Janne Da Arc - Strange Voice[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6klKSqnP6A#t=3m12s]Pierrot - Enemy[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYzeddKp-Pc]Stephy Martini - Fall In Love[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWslspxKp98]Monique - Another Day With You in Paradise[/URL] Wow that went downhill really quickly. [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl8AJGo5mmA]Gazette - Kugutsu E[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlVyBbx8VAs]Merry - Tozasareta Rakuen[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KwZUR8yp7g]Blink 182 - Apple Shampoo[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y1auwIvR1U]Blink 182 - Please Take Me Home[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_isNHeGC3s]Buck Tick - Kick Daichi wo Keru Otoko[/URL] [URL=www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejv-IuhpeeE#t=1m23s]Buck Tick - Memento Mori[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsL0CS7CxOI]Mindless Self Indulgence - Backmask[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5XtpCw4SDo]Mindless Self Indulgence - Kill The Rock[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlPlmHGmYWU]Mad Caspule Markets - Asphalt Beach[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Js-l-w56mU]Mad Capsule Markets - Introduction 010[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUfDWcyUu4Q]Mad Capsule Markets - Mob Track[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2rUWF1RYzs]Moi dix Mois - Monophobia[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbZu1ByuYkk]Malice Mizer - Syunikiss[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cG21qrV2oTU]Tagtraum - Einmal zu oft[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TacMH6X-ygE]Tagtraum - Tagtraum[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUiTQvT0W_0]Sinéard O'Connor - Nothing Compares 2U[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c5d0gRfdqA]Siam Shade - D.D.D[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n3yqkanP44]Luna Sea - Tonight[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWBGw1ytBoE]Jimmy Eat World - Call It In The Air[/URL] ^ One of the best songs. [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8t0NILJQN-8]Our Lady Piece - Is Anybody Home[/URL] [URL=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGrUVHqt2mE]Feeder - Just A Day[/URL] I think this has gone too far.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
More on how to find stuff in Dolphin with Cheat Engine. Sorry for not having used 0x00 notation to properly indicate hex values. It took me quite a while to find out how to add custom value types to it, the secret is that you have to right click the type selection combo box. The first thing you should be searching for is the game ID of the game you are playing, which you can find by right clicking a game -> properties -> info (then do a text search). You should find about two addresses that end in 0000. The first one is usually the start address of the region of the game's RAM that you are interested in. Then you look for the pointer to this address, either by right clicking the found address, once you've drag- and dropped it down to your watch list, and selecting pointer scan, or by searching for it as a 4byte hexadecimal value. You are looking for an address that will remain constant within a certain build, no matter how often you are restarting it. If you've done a pointer search you should have found something like Dolphin.exe+435C4EC (this the result I got for the 3.0 516 x86 TAS version build), if you've done the hexadecimal value search, you should have gotten an address that if you add it to the RAM watchlist below and doubleclick it will give you the same result. Great. Now whenever you are looking for some real addresses you want them to be in the range > of the address that Dolphin.exe+435C4EC points to (let's say it's 0b130000, then you are looking for 0b-something results). Let's say you find an interesting value at 0b4f45f6, then you now need to subtract 0b130000 from it to get an offset of 3c45f6. You now want to add a new address manually, check pointer, fill in Dolphin.exe+435C4EC as the pointer and 3c45f6 as the offset. Now you won't have to look for that value again everytime you resteart anymore. Success! Another complication is that you won't be able to scan for Big Endian Float or Double in the newest official release, but you can join the beta testing group of the 6.2 version of Cheat Engine [URL=http://forum.cheatengine.org/groupcp.php]here[/URL] or just get it from [URL=http://cheatengine.org/temp/CheatEngine62Beta6.rar]here[/URL] (the link might be dead by the time you are reading this). This is the code that you should paste in to enable Big Endian Float and Double support, as provided to me by mgr.inz.Player: Big Endian Float - full AA script
alloc(TypeName,256)
alloc(ByteSize,4)
alloc(ConvertRoutine,1024)
alloc(ConvertBackRoutine,1024)
alloc(UsesFloat,4)

TypeName:
db 'Float Big Endian',0
ByteSize:
dd 4
UsesFloat:
db 01

ConvertRoutine:
[32-bit]
push ebp
mov ebp,esp
mov eax,[ebp+8] //place the address that contains the bytes into eax
mov eax,[eax]   //place the bytes into eax
bswap eax
pop ebp
ret 4
[/32-bit]

[64-bit]
//rcx=address of input
mov eax,[rcx] //eax now contains the bytes 'input' pointed to
bswap eax
ret
[/64-bit]

ConvertBackRoutine:
[32-bit]
push ebp
mov ebp,esp
//[ebp+8]=input
//[ebp+c]=address of output
push eax
push ebx
mov eax,[ebp+8] //load the value into eax
mov ebx,[ebp+c] //load the address into ebx
bswap eax
mov [ebx],eax //write the value into the address
pop ebx
pop eax

pop ebp
ret 8
[/32-bit]

[64-bit]
//ecx=input
//rdx=address of output
bswap ecx
mov [rdx],ecx //place the integer the 4 bytes pointed to by rdx
ret
[/64-bit]
Big Endian Double - full AA script "(it's not perfect conversion)"
alloc(TypeName,256)
alloc(ByteSize,4)
alloc(ConvertRoutine,1024)
alloc(ConvertBackRoutine,1024)
alloc(UsesFloat,4)
alloc(PreferedAlignment,4)
alloc(TEMPVAL,8)

TypeName:
db 'Double Big Endian',0
ByteSize:
dd 08
UsesFloat:
dd 01
PreferedAlignment:
dd 04
TEMPVAL:
dq 00

ConvertRoutine:
[32-bit]
push ebp
mov ebp,esp
//[ebp+8]=input
//example:
mov eax,[ebp+8] //place the address that contains the bytes into eax
mov eax,[eax]
bswap eax
mov [TEMPVAL+4],eax

mov eax,[ebp+8] //place the address that contains the bytes into eax
mov eax,[eax+4]
bswap eax
mov [TEMPVAL],eax

finit
fld qword ptr [TEMPVAL]
fstp dword ptr [TEMPVAL]
mov eax,[TEMPVAL]

pop ebp
ret 4
[/32-bit]

[64-bit]
//rcx=address of input
mov rcx,[rcx] //eax now contains the bytes 'input' pointed to
bswap rcx
mov [TEMPVAL],rcx

finit
fld qword ptr [TEMPVAL]
fstp dword ptr [TEMPVAL]
mov eax,[TEMPVAL]

ret
[/64-bit]

ConvertBackRoutine:
[32-bit]
push ebp
mov ebp,esp
//[ebp+8]=input
//[ebp+c]=address of output
//example:
push eax
push ebx
mov ebx,[ebp+c] //load the address into ebx

finit
fld dword ptr [ebp+8]
fstp qword ptr [TEMPVAL]

mov eax,[TEMPVAL+4]
bswap eax
mov [ebx],eax //write the value into the address

mov eax,[TEMPVAL]
bswap eax
mov [ebx+4],eax //write the value into the address

pop ebx
pop eax

pop ebp
ret 8
[/32-bit]

[64-bit]
//ecx=input
//rdx=address of output
mov [TEMPVAL],ecx

finit
fld dword ptr [TEMPVAL]
fstp qword ptr [TEMPVAL]

mov rax,[TEMPVAL]
bswap rax

mov [rdx],rax //place the integer the 4 bytes pointed to by rdx
ret
[/64-bit] 
Another neat trick is that you can look at AR codes inside Dolphin, which will usually contain very useful addresses as their leftside expressions. F.e. 023c4c09 00000150 continuously writes 0x150 to the offset 3c4c09. Try searching for one AR code yourself and Dolphin will load a list of readymade codes for the game for you. Thanks for your attention.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
To clarify, I do think his work was groundbreaking.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Here is some typical Freud. You can read some more of it and make up your own mind on whether you think it should still be regarded as scientifically valid. The general consensus is that it's not, and I trust that most people capable of critical thinking should hopefully come to the same conclusion. If you think his theories are spot on, you can always carry out experiments by today's standards to finally prove them to be right, good luck. (you should maybe read the first quote before reading the following paragraph) F.e. in the case of the hat, I'd suggest something like a study where you (actually it probably shouldn't be you because you could subconsciously manipulate the experiment because after all you want to prove Freud is right, it should be a pretty neutral person instead, preferably one who doesn't know that Freud thought it symbolizes a penis) try to talk one group of people into interpreting the hat as a nipple instead of a penis, tell both groups it's generally accepted by science, see if more people admit it's truly a penis. Then you'd also have to find out if people are more likely to admit that symbols in dreams should be interpreted as a penis in general, so maybe it has nothing to do with the hat after all. And this would just be the start, you'd just have proven more people admit it's a penis, not that it truly symbolizes one. If you ask me, the whole idea is just silly. Even if it turns out in 10% of people's dreams a hat really symbolizes a penis, it still doesn't prove you should just interpret it as a penis in everybody's dreams. It's just ridiculous imo. We also know nowadays that psychotherapy does pretty badly when trying to cure agoraphobia, whereas confrontational therapy does very well. Most of his stuff is just dated.
Freud in Traumdeutung wrote:
1. The hat as the symbol of a man (of the male genitals): * (A fragment from the dream of a young woman who suffered from agoraphobia as the result of her fear of temptation.) - * From "Nachtrage sur Traumdeutung" in Zentralblatt fur Psychoanalyse, i, Nos. 5 and 6, (1911). - I am walking in the street in summer; I am wearing a straw hat of peculiar shape, the middle piece of which is bent upwards, while the side pieces hang downwards (here the description hesitates), and in such a fashion that one hangs lower than the other. I am cheerful and in a confident mood, and as I pass a number of young officers I think to myself: You can't do anything to me. As she could produce no associations to the hat, I said to her: "The hat is really a male genital organ, with its raised middle piece and the two downward-hanging side pieces." It is perhaps peculiar that her hat should be supposed to be a man, but after all one says: Unter die Haube kommen (to get under the cap) when we mean: to get married. I intentionally refrained from interpreting the details concerning the unequal dependence of the two side pieces, although the determination of just such details must point the way to the interpretation. I went on to say that if, therefore, she had a husband with such splendid genitals she would not have to fear the officers; that is, she would have nothing to wish from them, for it was essentially her temptation- phantasies which prevented her from going about unprotected and unaccompanied. This last explanation of her anxiety I had already been able to give her repeatedly on the basis of other material. It is quite remarkable how the dreamer behaved after this interpretation. She withdrew her description of the hat and would not admit that she had said that the two side pieces were hanging down. I was, however, too sure of what I had heard to allow myself to be misled, and so I insisted that she did say it. She was quiet for a while, and then found the courage to ask why it was that one of her husband's testicles was lower than the other, and whether it was the same with all men. With this the peculiar detail of the hat was explained, and the whole interpretation was accepted by her. The hat symbol was familiar to me long before the patient related this dream. From other but less transparent cases I believed that I might assume the hat could also stand for the female genitals. * -
Freud in Traumdeutung also wrote:
(Dream of a young man inhibited by a father complex.) He is taking a walk with his father in a place which is certainly the Prater, for one can see the Rotunda, in front of which there is a small vestibule to which there is attached a captive balloon; the balloon, however, seems rather limp. His father asks him what this is all for; he is surprised at it, but he explains it to his father. They come into a courtyard in which lies a large sheet of tin. His father wants to pull off a big piece of this, but first looks round to see if anyone is watching. He tells his father that all he needs to do is to speak to the overseer, and then he can take as much as he wants to without any more ado. From this courtyard a flight of stairs leads down into a shaft, the walls of which are softly upholstered, rather like a leather arm-chair. At the end of this shaft there is a long platform, and then a new shaft begins... Analysis. This dreamer belonged to a type of patient which is not at all promising from a therapeutic point of view; up to a certain point in the analysis such patients offer no resistance whatever, but from that point onwards they prove to be almost inaccessible. This dream he analysed almost independently. "The Rotunda," he said, "is my genitals, the captive balloon in front is my penis, about whose flaccidity I have been worried." We must, however, interpret it in greater detail: the Rotunda is the buttocks, constantly associated by the child with the genitals; the smaller structure in front is the scrotum. In the dream his father asks him what this is all for- that is, he asks him about the purpose and arrangement of the genitals. It is quite evident that this state of affairs should be reversed, and that he ought to be the questioner. As such questioning, on the part of the father never occurred in reality, we must conceive the dream- thought as a wish, or perhaps take it conditionally, as follows. "If I had asked my father for sexual enlightenment..." The continuation of this thought we shall presently find in another place. The courtyard in which the sheet of tin is spread out is not to be conceived symbolically in the first instance, but originates from his father's place of business. For reasons of discretion I have inserted the tin for another material in which the father deals without, however, changing anything in the verbal expression of the dream. The dreamer had entered his father's business, and had taken a terrible dislike to the somewhat questionable practices upon which its profit mainly depended. Hence the continuation of the above dream-thought ("if I had asked him") would be: "He would have deceived me just as he does his customers." For the pulling off, which serves to represent commercial dishonesty, the dreamer himself gives a second explanation, namely, masturbation. This is not only quite familiar to us (see above), but agrees very well with the fact that the secrecy of masturbation is expressed by its opposite (one can do it quite openly). Thus, it agrees entirely with our expectations that the autoerotic activity should be attributed to the father, just as was the questioning in the first scene of the dream. The shaft he at once interprets as the vagina, by referring to the soft upholstering of the walls. That the action of coition in the vagina is described as a going down instead of in the usual way as a going up agrees with what I have found in other instances. * - * Cf. comment in the Zentralblatt fur Psychoanalyse, i; and see above, note (8) in earlier paragraph. - The details- that at the end of the first shaft there is a long platform, and then a new shaft- he himself explains biographically. He had for some time had sexual intercourse with women, but had given it up on account of inhibitions, and now hopes to be able to begin it again with the aid of treatment. The dream, however, becomes indistinct towards the end, and to the experienced interpreter it becomes evident that in the second scene of the dream the influence of another subject has already begun to assert itself; which is indicated by his father's business, his dishonest practices, and the vagina represented by the first shaft, so that one may assume a reference to his mother.
http://www.psywww.com/books/interp/toc.htm
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
It's very stimulating to the psyche, there's a community around it and it's normal to defend what's stimulating to the psyche. There's bright colors, big eyes, girly voices, magical powers, characters to like more than others and everything's cute. As opposed to Spongebob, I think this is way more stimulating for adult males.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
I've made a decent midi, some parts are bad, there's no panning, ending is random, didn't feel like redoing it. Posting here so I'll hopefully never try to improve it. Edit: Improved by removing the bad part at the end: [URL=http://dl.dropbox.com/u/47215851/shipz/church%20sparrow.mid]Song Doujong[/URL]
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Slowking wrote:
I'd also like to know what specific theories of his were debunked.
As good as none and that's part of the point. His theories are unfalsifiable and based on anecdotal evidence, and thus not scientific. You can't just make up random theories anymore that'd explain everything but are at the same time unfalsifiable, so at the same time they also don't really explain anything at all (compare to God). Psychology as a science has advanced beyond that. They don't need to be debunked, they just shouldn't be taken too seriously. I think most universities take the same stance.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Sorry, voting no. I don't think glitching up the password screen is entertaining. And I guess we all know what this run would look like to the average viewer. (Please don't argue semantics, I know it isn't actually glitching up the password screen)
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
The only thing that's slightly annoying is Bomberman's slow walking speed. Great game, great run. 100% would be nice.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Johannes wrote:
You might find this interesting: http://www.scribd.com/doc/34551310/The-Principles-of-Social-Competence
This read to me like a very elaborate troll and it made me giggle a lot, though I must say chapter II wasn't all bad if you cut out the feminism vs. manhood bs and read it not as factual but as a plausible life philosophy made up by some random community. It's badly written in that it's very obvious from the getgo that it starts with a premise (feminism bad, manhood good) and then proceeds to list lots of arguments for it. This style usually isn't very interesting to me, it can be done for any topic, it's not very convincing. Here are some of my personal thoughts that might be slightly insane, cynical and/or trivial: 1) Males have stronger sex drives and are generally very responsive to visual clues. Females are generally more interested in and more easily stimulated by other qualities. 2) As a result females have to focus a lot on their own visual appearance to find a good and healthy mate. This takes up time and energy. Men have to focus on being successful instead to find a good and healthy mate, even if they'd rather waste their time having fun. It's no surprise that men perform better in certain tasks, when there's more motivation for them to do well in them. Take a look at gay men for some evidence that motivation to invest energy in being pretty vs being successful comes largely from trying to impress potential mates. Trends such as the emo scene can be explained by an unhealthy form of narcissim, a failure to recognize that what is appealing to you is not automatically also appealing to the opposite sex or maybe even a desire to be able to exert the same powers onto others that the individuals in question have felt females exert onto them. Feminism is great, but it should not be overdone to a point of denying unpleasant facts about life and gender, I agree with the book in that point. 3) Males are biologically more disposable than females. They take more risks. It's ok if some men fail at life, as long as successful ones can carry on their genes instead. It's a great system. Women naturally don't take as many risks. (This also helps to keep them pretty) If they die while pregnant, their unborn child dies as well. They are the bottleneck in generating offspring. They need to be protected. 4) It's not a coincidence that men are usually more susceptible to all kinds of diseases and that in terms of intelligence they tend to be less average than females in that they tend to be either "extremely" intelligent or "extremely" unintelligent. Expressions of good or bad genes are exaggerated in males, they are naturally taking biological risks (f.e. by having only one X chromosome. Females can often compensate for malfunctions in one X chromosome, males obviously lack this capability). The Y chromosome mutatates very easily, it's taking risks. All of this is very good for natural selection. 5) As a male it's ok for you to take risks, it's ok to be a failure at life, it's ok to die alone. It's on the whole a good thing for our species, a necessary evil. So don't worry, you are already doing your job. If you don't want to succumb this subjectively horrible fate, you have to work hard and resist the temptation of instant gratification. If you can't and fail, idon't worry, idon't be so egocentric, it's not the end of the wordl, it's on the whole still a good thing for our species. There follow some even more incoherent ramblings. I hope they'll make you laugh. [URL=http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=313288#313288]Split into another thread[/URL]
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
[URL=http://tasvideos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=313289#313289]Find the hardly related paragraphs that have lead into this ones in another thread[/URL] As we can see, Nature is very wise by our standards. Though I feel the need to point out that this isn't evidence for intelligent design. I'd rather say that the fact that we can look at the result of possibly random processes coupled with natural selection (only what reproduces best will reproduce, so bad design will automatically disappear over time), and come to the conclusion that life must have been intelligently designed by an Intelligent Designer, is very good evidence for the fact that we can't be intelligent by any meaningful, universally objective standard, and should thus be disqualified from objectively judging what counts as being the result of intelligence and what doesn't. Of course we might turn out to be intelligently designed anyway in the end, which would refute all of this. It doesn't seem we can presently find the answer to that question. "But Occam's Razor! Evolution and Natural selection are enough to explain every facet of life on this planet (though I can't prove that anyway, but let's ignore that critical flaw in my argument for the time being), this makes it highly unlikely that we have been intelligently designed." Nope, this is a failure of basic reasoning. First of all, you should make yourself aware of the fact that in this case you are trying to deduce causes from their effects. This cannot be as reliably done as the opposite. You may have heard of encryption algorithms? Here's something resembling a thought experiment: "There's a dog paw print in the snow, so it must have been a dog that stepped on that part of the snow! By Occam's Razor we can deduce that no other animal has stepped onto that part of the snow because everything can already be explained by only assuming the dog as the cause. Hm, or at least it's very unlikely that other animals have stepped onto that part of the snow!" Nope, this is bad reasoning. Let's say there had only been one dog and a million birds in the relatively small area where the footprint had been made before the onset of the story, of which we know nothing about. Now we'd know it's not too unlikely that another animal had stepped onto that part of the snow before. But Occam's Razor says it's unlikely that a million birds had been in the area. By which evidence? By the evidence that there's a footprint of a dog in the area. But that's completely unrelated by the laws of cause and effect to a million birds having been in the area. It cannot be deduced from the footprint of a dog that a million birds had not been in the area and thus it also cannot be deduced from that footprint that it's unlikely that another animal had stepped onto that part of the snow before by Occam's Razor. It can only be deduced by common sense, which is a largely a product of experience. Common sense dictates that it's unlikely that a million birds had been in the area, cause that's just unusual, but it cannot be deduced by Occam's Razor. But let's say those birds are actually invisible. In this case common sense and Occam's Razor will both come to the wrong conclusion (that it's unlikely for another animal to have stepped into that part of the snow before). They both aren't reliable and you can't logically deduce from any of them. Very nice, now let's apply this to Intelligent Design. How likely is it that we have been intelligently designed? Occam's Razor this, common sense that, they both aren't able to provide an answer. To get an answer we would have to know if there are millions of invisible birds in our multi-verse, things that intelligently design. How to find out? How do we know? Common sense... Occam's Razor... both don't help, so we can't help but to admit that we don't know. We cannot say how likely it is because we can only observe effects and know little about their true causes. "We don't see effects, so it's highly unlikely that there are causes that don't produce any clearly detectable effects" is bad reasoning. If we have been intelligently designed by invisible birds leaving hardly any detectable prints in the snow, and then Evolution and Natural selection took over, leaving big dog paw prints, it shouldn't come as a surprise that we don't need the birds/God/whatever to explain all presently detectable effects. Likelihood this, likelihood that, you cannot reverse deduce the likelihood of things by applying common sense in areas where it doesn't make sense to apply. We''d have to know more about causes, and make our deductions starting from them,to find a valid answer. So what has caused everything to come into being? We don't know a thing about it. We are disqualified from judging the likelihood of invisible dragons all across the universe. And who knows if the dog would have stepped into the snow if some invisible birds haven't guided him? Should we assume invisble birds? No, there's no evidence, and it's unfalsifiable, we can't just assume such things. Should we assume they're highly unlikely to exist? Nope, that would be very ignorant and bad reasoning. Here's an analogy. It's highly unlikely for you to win the lottery tomorrow, but it's very probable for anybody at all to win it somewhen. So there might not be insible birds, but there might be something at all! Oh yes, there might be more to things than meets the eye. What a surprise! Turns out we'll never know just how little we really know about the universe! Why is Occam's Razor still helpful? It helps us focus on what we can indeed find out. We observe some effects and can deduce some causes, but we can never know if all causes have been identified or there might still be hidden ones. However, as long as we are unable to detect the hidden ones anyway, we shouldn't even try, be satisfied with what we have and focus our attention on something else instead. Don't waste your time trying to fit a custom puzzle piece to fill in the gaps (God? Unfalsifiable theories based on anecdotal evidence?). Occam's Razor helps us to avoid that. It cannot be used to make logical deductions about reality though. I think I drank too much coffee.
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
And here I was looking forward to a Ganonless TAS. Is that never going to happen now? ;(
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Experienced Forum User
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
That being said, I'd really like it to have an updated version of this to remove redundant content once the big and glorious 120 star run arrives. Do more slower stars that normally use BLJs in the 120 star run. The obvious downside would be that this makes it even more arbitrary (I don't think that's a bad thing) and it wouldn't be a 70 stars no game breaking glitches speed record anymore, but that already isn't completely the case.* The good thing about it would be that there'd be more entertaining footage to sit through, but maybe it'd be the kind of footage that not many people would like to see. It'd explicitely be something like a no BLJ extension to the 120 star run. The proper place to discuss this would probably be the SM64 thread once the 120 star run is done, I hope I'll remember to bring it up then. The reason I can so easily suggest this is because records on non-BLJ star strategies are already kept. *) Cause HSWKs are game breaking, but it's difficult to draw the line between HSWKs and normal wall kicks, which to me means the very nature of this game forbids to make this category non-arbitrary. So the authors shouldn't take the blame for it, they should be celebrated for delivering this awesome treat. I am so happy to finally see Japanese and Western TASers work together on such a big and awesome project on this site. The arbitrariness of the goal selection doesn't take away any of the entertainment for me.