Exocrinous @ exocrinous @lemm.ee Posts 14Comments 691Joined 1 yr. ago
Iron Man: they are executives at the same company that developed the tech
Black Panther: the bad guy literally just couped the government of Wakanda
Ant Man: the villain is a former business parter of Pym
Dr Strange: they trained at the same monastery and the bad guy trained for longer
I think these fights are boring most of the time, but they're not implausible. They have plenty of plot justification.
Also the character who copied Hawkeye was a girl who was inspired by his heroism and spent years learning archery and martial arts and still sucked at being Hawkeye when she met him
There's one example of freezing in space done right. In the finale of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure Battle Tendency, Kars gets shot into space and tries to course correct with air jets, but then he starts freezing over, air jets first.
In Phantom Blood, we were shown Dio's special technique for freezing people by evaporating the moisture on his skin. This is to introduce viewers to the fact that boiling a liquid makes it colder. Kars froze because the moisture in his air jets boiled in the vacuum and became freezing cold. Kars didn't know this detail of physics because he's an ancient Aztec.
Qapla'!
How about "speak friend and enter" in elvish?
Yeah, I bet. The internet hates nuance, it hates when someone corrects their "own side" or seeks a truth independent of sides. I got banned 6 months ago from Hexbear for saying there's such a thing as gender neutral pronouns. There was a lot of discussion about the topic, and it emerged that there were two different interpretations of what I said, and they both hated me. Half thought I was advocating they/theming everyone, and hated me for refusing to gender binary people. Half thought I was advocating they/theming nobody, and hated me for insisting on gendering nonbinary people. Neither of those two positions is my position, and of course they're mutually incompatible with each other.
But these two sides both hated me, and teamed up with each other without ever realising they had completely different ideas. Because, as you say, the fact I had a small disagreement or clarification of their views meant I had to be the enemy. Whereas those two sides had completely different views, but they didn't voice their disagreements to each other, so they were able to assume they were on the same side. Have a nuanced position like mine, in questions of religion or gender or anything else, and both sides will team up to kick your ass.
Trough?
I remember years ago back when I was an atheist, I read someone on Reddit or somewhere saying the fact humans get sleepy after sex is proof of evolution. They said it proves evolution because humans go to sleep when their job is done, which is to reproduce. Now, at the time I was an atheist, and of course I still 100% believe in evolution today, but that random person's comment stuck with me for years.
See, the idea that people go to sleep after sex because their job is done makes for a good story. I don't know if it's true, but it sounds good. Thing is, the good story isn't exclusive to evolution. Bible says Elohim told humans to go forth and be fruitful. So if Elohim had created humans, he would have made humans sleepy after sex too. Obviously.
This random guy on the internet whose comment I read years ago, he saw a piece of evidence that made a good story for his views, and he didn't actually check whether it was evidence against the opponent's views. I think he just assumed that the two models had to be opposed in every single way and any evidence for his views was evidence against the opposite. He was basically the same as the banana guy.
You know the banana guy? "Bananas are proof of Deus because they're perfect for eating ". Guy didn't do his research and didn't realise humans made bananas the way they are. He found a good story and didn't check if it was also a good story for the other guys. Same as the sleepy sex guy.
You gotta be able to see the other side's viewpoint enough to check whether your evidence can be explained by their views, or if you're just embarassing yourself. That's the bare minimum of understanding other people's views. Without it, you end up like the banana guy.
Hexbear thought I was a troll because I have a xenogender. Eventually I got banned for saying gender neutral pronouns exist and whiteness is a social construct. They said that's reactionary.
Well, I'm not going to have any interest in the game now.
My problem isn't that animals died to make the game. That's a bad thing, but my actions can't affect it. They're already dead. My problem is that this game is going to further extremes than any other game to deliberately include and glorify animal killing. I kinda forgive it in games like BOTW or Horizon because it's part of the story, they're just portraying life as it exists for some people. They're not thinking about their actions. The dragon's dogma people are. They are intimately aware of the fact they're glorifying death, they took the time to think about it and said "that's a good thing".
And a web app for accessing first aid resources should have a tight process.
"Yes, people are dying, but won't someone think about the money?"
Look, the crystal maze is absolutely essential to run Woodchips without a waterslide. You can complain all you want, but unless you want to run back to Microsoft for your woodchips deployment, this is the way. I'm not saying Gumbies is perfect, here, just that it's the only viable unix implementation. If you want come up with your own sandcubing solution for Flurble, be my guest.
Okay but that's still not an algorithm and it still has nothing to do with where human consciousness comes from. Are you even paying attention?
So your argument is that consciousness in the human brain is explained by the fact ANNs are technically algorithms because they use Matrix multiplication?
I think we can class you as a non-reasoning organism who just says whatever pattern of words sounds right.
That would be so cool! We could do a kind of Asimov story with them if they're intelligent. What are some good rules for mechs to follow in the Apex Legends universe?
Trump is the Antichrist.
Corvidae, huh? So it's a crow?
It's philosophically a problem. It means the fundamental foundations of knowledge are questionable.
Anyway, reality is fake and bad, become a soulist.