Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
why the hell is this still on the workbench it is clearly not emulated well
like i said something played at realistic speed would be totally publishable but this submission is not
move along
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
Oh, uh, hey, I forgot I made this topic.
I don't know all the answers, but personally I'm fed up with a world where children die from malnutrition while others live in extreme luxury.
Those who are with me, keep spreading the word, and those against me, I don't care what your "argument" is, this is disgusting.
Kisses,
Alden
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
Would probably vote yes if this were well emulated, that is to say if it were emulated in a way that resembled it being played on contemporary hardware.
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
Signed, though I'm not sure my grandparents could ever sign one of these given the level of difficulty I experienced creating an account and voting :\
Not to derail/steal your thread, but here is another great petition, which aims to end corporate citizenship:
http://movetoamend.org/node/2325
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
Seems to me the OP would rather solve problems by proposing solutions that create work for other people, than say, encoding stuff on the workbench really fast himself.
"Contra 14 posts without an encode. Seriously, how hard can it be to make a NES dump?"
Then do it?
Just sayin'.
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
It's not boring it's awesome!
Also yeah that prejudice male dominated blah blah was me trying to push your button, so I guess I win the internet! go me
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
well, it sickens me that again the prejudice of this male dominated forum must once again "reject" such an entertaining movie. i mean, sure, it's not seizure-inducing or anything, but this is not only entertaining but also a record. anyway.
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
hmm yeah when you posted about your new avatars from MLP:FIM
I said to myself "Self, if it's good enough for Ferret Warlord, it's good enough for me" etc
ps quoting that image for truth
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
OMG did you see the ferret in the new episode? It was very brief IIRC.
Also yeah uh I forgot to watch your video. I will get right on that in the future, hopefully?
PS you may not have been the reason for this thread, but I do squarely blame you for pushing me over the edge of curiosity and watching this show. So, thanks!
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
For the record (since this is the internet and my opinions are PRETTY important) I have no problem with violence, only military propaganda. I trust most people to dissociate reality and fantasy, but when people are lied to, for example military games where civilians cannot be injured, that is a problem for me.
On topic: please don't ever make me almost accidentally read cupcakes again :\
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
What's wrong with spreading ponies? It is an awesome show and everyone should watch it. Most people are skeptical at first (I was!) but everyone I have shown it to has really enjoyed it. Friendship is Magic != the old poorly written and animated MLP.
On topic, will watch this after I finish watching the season 2 premiere :P
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
Warp wrote:
alden wrote:
I could be wrong, but I think it's only non-deterministic from our frame of reference, much like we have free will from our frame of reference. I think that there is far more information in "reality" that we don't (can't) have access to. Just because *we* can't predict something doesn't mean it is truly unpredictable. In other words, stuff that we can't perceive could be determining quantum outcomes, but since we can't view the input we can't predict the output.
As I have said, I'm by no means any kind of expert whatsoever on QM, but my understanding is that the stochastic nature of many quantum phenomena are truly random and non-deterministic. This does not mean "too hard to predict", but "not predictable". Literally. It cannot be predicted. (Also, if I understand correctly, being able to predict some of these phenomena might cause the breaking of some of the most fundamental laws of physics.)
It's just a theory though. Just like gravity.
Avoid confusing the colloquial term "theory" and the scientific term "theory" because they are certainly not the same thing. (The colloquial term means the same as "conjecture" or "hypothesis". A more apt term for the scientific term would perhaps be "model".)
IANAP either, and I don't pretend to make informed conclusions based on anything that could be considered academically rigorous.
That said, since this is the internet, I feel i must defend my words here :P
First of all, you say "This does not mean "too hard to predict", but "not predictable". Literally. It cannot be predicted."
I completely agree that something cannot be predicted. By us. From our frame of reference. It is totally possible that there is un-knowable information. Possible, even, that there exists information so un-knowable that it is impossible for us to ever "scientifically" prove that it exists... and even more impossible for us to read. So, in my mind, the theoretically "random" nature of QM does not contradict my feeling that from some frame of reference everything is predictable. Call me a romantic.
Second, I find people who say "OMG the theory of evolution is just a theory" to be annoying too. However, I don't think my use of the word here is the same thing. In fact, go ahead and replace it with "model" and my point still stands. We only have a "model" of gravity. It's pretty fucking solid! But still, there is no certainty that it will continue to be valid in the future. That's the raw bit about the future: it hasn't happened yet. Or, should I say, it hasn't happened yet from our point of reference. Basically, my point is that "science" is really based on faith. I do readily concede though, that since it can actually perform miracles, unlike most faiths, it is a very worthwhile faith. I haven't yet padded my ceiling in fear that gravity will stop working tomorrow.
tl;dr
jimsfriend, i tried making this invisible but failed
Experienced Forum User, Player, Published Author
(120)
Joined: 2/11/2007
Posts: 1522
People here have pretty much expressed what I think already, but I think I can add a subtle point on the "non-deterministic" nature of that quantum shit.
I could be wrong, but I think it's only non-deterministic from our frame of reference, much like we have free will from our frame of reference. I think that there is far more information in "reality" that we don't (can't) have access to. Just because *we* can't predict something doesn't mean it is truly unpredictable. In other words, stuff that we can't perceive could be determining quantum outcomes, but since we can't view the input we can't predict the output.
It's just a theory though. Just like gravity. Tomorrow we might start floating around because gravity will stop behaving in a predictable manner. Science is identical to prognostication, but it has an amazing track record of successfully predicting results. That, however, is no guarantee of future success.