There are significant portions of christianity which don't have a problem in believing that the Universe and the Earth are millions of years old, and that the creation story is metaphorical, depicting a very long process.
However, the Bible says that there was no death before Adam sinned, which is in contradiction with what the theory of evolution says (millions of animals died before humans evolved).
Death of the physical body is not the only death the Bible talks about.
Consider this: Basically 100% of programs in any desktop OS (very especially the Unix-based ones, eg. Linux, but also mostly true for Windows) use the libc library (as well as a bunch of others). And this means everything: Not only programs you run, but basically everything the kernel runs, such as device drivers, windowing systems, window managers, all the tiny apps your window manager runs... The amount of different programs running in your computer can be really large.
And basically 100% of them use libc, and a bunch of other system libraries. Even programs which have been written in a language completely unrelated to C will most probably require libc when run.
libc is not a small library (and neither are the majority of the others). Imagine if every single such program had linked it statically to itself. This would mean that the entire libc library would be duplicated in RAM as many times as there are programs running. That could be well into the hundreds of times.
Instead, libc and the others are dynamically loaded. The advantage of this is that all the programs using libc can share the one and same libc instance in RAM, so it only has to be loaded there once. All programs will then call that one instance.
Then there are also the so-called static libraries. These libraries are linked to your program at compile time. The advantage of this is that your program becomes faster to compile (because you don't have to compile the library each time), and disk space is saved (because the object files of the library are not copied in your disk for each program source code which uses that library).
Warp, I'm sad to see how seriously you're taking all of this. How's that dream of getting some friends and some girls and stuff going? Seriously. Want to talk about it?
Please read my last post in this thread (besides this one, of course), which I wrote after I calmed and realized my mistake.
Oh, and by the way, since it has caused a bit of confusion (although I really can't blame anyone for that): My suggestion to remove the voting system completely was not serious. It was sarcasm. I was just dumping my outrage which I was having at the time.
I'm all for the voting system, and I fully endorse the expanded voting suggested elsewhere (ie. two questions with 4 or 5 options each).
One side keeps believing in Bible interpretations, the other in scientific theories, and neither acknowledges anything the other has to say.
The ID movement has had one unfortunate repercussion: Now everyone thinks that all christians are Young Earth Creationists, and thus the whole christianity is being mocked because of the ID movement.
Of course this couldn't be farther from the truth. There are significant portions of christianity which don't have a problem in believing that the Universe and the Earth are millions of years old, and that the creation story is metaphorical, depicting a very long process. Not all christians believe that scientists are a satanic conspiracy dedicated to eradicate christianity.
What the ID movement has achieved is that many christians are now ashamed of saying they are christians because people immediately assume they are Young Earth Creationists.
If this is the case, I don't think that this was done maliciously.
I can't deny that I let my anger overwhelm my common sense, and that I blew things completely out of proportion. While some things here might have been a bit dubious, my behavior was not proper.
I would like to apologize for my behavior. I shouldn't have gone so extreme with this.
This will (once again) teach me that I should think things overnight before posting anything inflammatory. Now that I have reviewed the whole thing, I feel rather ashamed of myself.
I have to admit that I let my feelings overwhelm my common sense, and made the post without thinking it through. The situation is certainly not even near as bad as I depicted, and I blew it out of proportion. I apologize if I insulted anyone.
However, I still feel that the "rules" of the site are quite vague, which sometimes can lead to inconsistent behavior. I think it would be much clearer if eg. when a submission is rejected, the reason could be stated like "it does not fully comply to rule #x", rather than "I found this boring".
People say that this is not a democracy. However, would it be a really bad thing if this was slightly more a democracy?
Warp, voting is supposed to give the judges guidance, not telling them what to decide. Mind you, again, adelikat's new super mario bros run recieved 52% yes votes (37 people), while 10 people voted no (14%) and 24 people voted meh, which in my book means they are pretty neutral about the run. So who are you really representing and arguing for?
I'm sorry, but that argument is just bullshit. The Madou Monogatari submission got 83% of yes votes, and it was still rejected (guess by who).
The percentage clearly has no meaning.
I think you are taking this way too seriously. I also think you are actually causing more damage than helping this site with your endless arguments.
Don't you think people making submissions are not going to get discouraged when they get a slap in the face when a single judge rejects their submission because he finds it boring, regardless of all the positive feedback from other people?
Fine, if this is the official position of the site, then the admins should at least have the decency of making it official, rather than giving the illusion that voting actually matters. At least then it would stop being hypocritical.
From the latest events it has become quite clear that the whole voting process of submissions has become a total farce. Judges are ignoring popular opinion and accepting/rejecting submissions on their own whim, completely regardless of how positive or negative feedback the submission gets.
So what do we need the voting system for at all? If judges are going to overrule popular opinion anyways, then voting is a complete waste of time, and a complete mockery of the people who go through the trouble of watching the submissions and voting on them.
So either:
1) stop the elitist bullshit and start actually listening to what people have to say, and start acting consistently on your judging, or
2) remove the voting process, because it's a joke. And not even a funny one.
If you remove the voting process then people will at least not have the misconception that their opinion matters the least bit. Just publish whatever you want to publish and keep the site as the personal collection of the judges' favorite runs.
I don't really see this problem, I'm sure adelikat would have published this even if it hadn't been his own movie.
Indeed I would have.
Can you explain to me why you would have published this NSMB movie even if it hadn't been yours, but you rejected the Madou Monogatari movie, even though that had significantly more yes votes and more positive feedback?
Is this going to be the general policy under your rule as site administrator: You overrule popular opinion at your own whim? If you don't like a movie, it gets rejected regardless of popular opinion, and if you want something published, you publish it regardless of public opinion?
What do we need the voting system for, if you are going to ignore it anyways?
This whole voting system is becoming a total farce. It would be a lot less hypocritical if it was completely removed and you started to simply publish and reject submissions as you like. The tasvideos.org site can then become your personal collection of runs you like.
Because of arrogance and badwhilling all over the place (that basicly what you and gia are showing now), yes, i kinda need to be rassured that a DS "can" make it all the way trough the crowd of guys whinning like this
Your explanation makes even less sense than your previous post.
You make it sound like people had objected to the publication because it's a DS game. That's actually exactly what you are saying.
Exactly how does that argument make any kind of sense? Nobody has objected to the publication because it was a DS game. Nobody has objected because of the emulator used (I can't even understand why you are bringing up the emulator to the discussion, because as far as I can see nobody has even mentioned it in the whole thread).
I also find it rather baffling that someone publishing HIS OWN RUN with complete disregard of public opinion is not arrogance, but people objecting to this elitism is.
I never saw a movie published with a non working emulator (i tought it was not possible at least), ok theres concept demo from dos games, who cares, im just player so im looking to make tas, not looking to get complains about technical matter or whatever
Can you explain to me exactly how would rejecting this submission indicate that the emulator is not working?
As I said, I can't even understand why you are even bringing the emulator to the discussion. What does it have to do with anything? I'm just completely puzzled here. I can't understand you.
The only thing I'm hoping for is a less elitist attitude from the judges/admins, which is fairer towards "regular" people who contribute and who have no special privileges.
I don't really see this problem, I'm sure adelikat would have published this even if it hadn't been his own movie.
Would have published a sub-par run with known flaws and sloppy play (which have been pointed out well before the publication) for the sole reason that this is the first DS TAS, before the voting and the discussion reaches a consensus and completely disregarding public opinion?
That actually doesn't make it much better.
The questions I have asked many times are still unanswered: Why was it imperative for this to be rushed into publication? Why couldn't it have been remade with the flaws fixed?
Is that so hard to answer?
I started POR run also, because, if theres a submition, that more likely will end up accepted, this mean i have chances to submit too, if it was rejected, in the middle of me doing POR run, i would have troubled and who know, could have resign then, this didnt happened, im rassured because i know if im doing good work it will be ok, and i will have no unwanted troubles (like it was for resident evil 3 hacks for exemple, preventing submit and now my run feeling all dusty)
I'm honestly baffled by this. I just don't understand what you are talking about.
You are encouraged to make your own TAS because adelikat rushed is own flawed run to publication? I don't even understand how that should be interpreted.
Does that mean that you will also make a flawed run and demand it to be published on the grounds that the flawed NSMB submission was also published?
It sounds to me that what you are trying to say is that "now that I know that the emulator works and can be used to create TASes, I can make my own". However, I can't understand how that's in any way related to publishing a submission with flaws in it, bypassing public opinion. I can't see how the status of the emulator is in any way connected to the publication of this run.
What you write sounds like you were saying that if this submission had been rejected, then it either means that future DS submissions will also be rejected (what utter nonsense), or that the emulator is flawed (what's the connection???)
Yes, I'm utterly confused by your post.
If you don't nip this kind of problem in the bud, it begins to get worse. Then, you've bought yourself a one way ticket to the site's slow death.
Things have been going in a bad direction for a while now, and this nonsense makes it actually possible for the site to go down the shitter permanently. Better to deal with the problem now and make an example out of the person who caused it then wait until later when it's too late. It'll cause hell, but in the end the site will be better for it.
I think people should be given a second chance before killing them.
Ok, I know I'm going to sound like a dick, but why are you voting twice? We already can see the votes using the "view results" button. Why put your vote in two places?
If you had at least explained why you made that vote, then that would make more sense.
And once again, I call for a permanent ban of adelikat, or at least a permanent demotion. This should never be tolerated here.
Regardless of my strong opinions about the subject, I think that would be too excessive.
The only thing I'm hoping for is a less elitist attitude from the judges/admins, which is fairer towards "regular" people who contribute and who have no special privileges. Listening to people rather than considering them morons goes a long way in making the TASing community more enjoyable for everybody.
Seriously, would it really had been such a huge burden for adelikat to remake his run with the flaws fixed? Was it really that important to rush the publication no matter what?
This movie is, at least slightly, entertaining -- and the ratings seem to support this. Average entertainment rating currently is 5.8, which is better than "average".
I'm not exactly sure why you are trying to ignore the primary issue being discussed here, and instead are trying to argue why it was a good idea for the movie to be published, with dubious arguments. You know perfectly well that even though 5.0 is in the middle of the rating range, it's not the true "average". This has been discussed many, many times, and it's more or less clear that the ratings tend to use "school grades", where less then 5 is "failed" and "average" is somewhere around 7.5.
Personally these are the issues that bother me:
1) The run was put through the regular submission and voting process, but then the resulting discussion and votes were completely ignored and the submission accepted well before the discussion and voting had reached any kind of consensus, making the whole thing just a show and a farce. Why put up the show if it was going to be published regardless? That's making a mockery of people who voted and discussed about the submission.
2) It's rather clear that the submission was rushed into publication, bypassing the voting process, for the sole reason that it's the very first DS TAS ever submitted. Yet judges are outright denying this, claiming that it has nothing to do with the fact. This is incomprehensible to me. Would some kind of honesty be too much to ask?
3) The one who accepted and published the submission was the author himself. No matter how trustworthy and professional the author may be, this is a bad breach of etiquette, makes a mockery of the whole voting process and the people who participate in it, and is unfair against other runners who must submit to the regular process and have no special privileges. The major problem with this is that admins abusing their powers like this, no matter how well-intentioned, degrades the moral standards of the community.
4) You are claiming that this would have been published anyways, according to the votes and the quality of the run. Yet submissions have been rejected in the past for much less, even when having significantly more yes votes and less objections. Submissions have been rejected in the past when clear flaws have been pointed out in them (even if they have not been obvious without knowing the flaws), pending an improved version by the author. This feels like highly inconsistent judging, subject to the whims of whoever happens to make the decision at that time and what his mood might be at the moment. Most importantly, this seems unfair for those who have had their submissions rejected with significantly less reason.
I knew what tool-assistance was from the very start, and I knew Morimoto's SMB3 run was tool-assisted. I never got surprised. I have also always had a positive attitude towards tool-assistance.
I'm not so worried about game bugs which randomly trash the RAM of the console, because that's rather obviously easy to emulate correctly in an emulator, and I assume all emulators do this perfectly. After all, the behavior of a program trashing memory is completely deterministic (because it's completely ruled by the CPU opcodes being run at precise ticks of the clock).
What I am worried about is when the trashing goes outside the boundaries of the console CPU, in this case the hardware which performs the saving of the data in the cartridge. I don't know how this happens in the real console, but I assume that it's not synced with the CPU (as most hardware I/O isn't). If two pieces of hardware are not perfectly synced to each other with the same clock signal, their mutual behavior becomes nondeterministic.
That's why I'm asking how well emulators really emulate this saving process: Is it a perfect 1-to-1 emulation of what happens in the real hardware, or is it just a "as long as it works, it's enough", without regard of whether the timings are 100% accurate?
Even if the emulation is not 100% accurate, how much does it really deviate?
If keeping "historically relevant" obsoleted movies downloadable is implemented and made official, then it might be a good idea to indicate this somehow in those movies in questions. Now obsoleted movies are listed with a "(obsoleted)" attached. Maybe for those which are obsoleted but still available for download, change it to something else which would indicate this?
(Hmm, what would be a good indicator? "(obsoleted but available)"? "(obsoleted but downloadable)"? Hmm, everything I can think of sounds bad. Any ideas?)
It may also be a good idea to restore some of the obsoleted videos which aren't currently available.
I think you nailed perfectly what I wanted to express.
A judge accepting and publishing his own submission is completely unfair to all the people who must subject to the regular voting process. As people have pointed out, submissions with even more yes vote percentage and clearly less known flaws have been rejected.
This kind of elitist and unfair attitude is rather discouraging.
