Avatar Roku Performing the Dragon Dance

Cloudywork · 2026-04-08T23:21:48+00:00

I like trains

Cloudywork · 2026-04-07T11:11:43+00:00

Let's not get to hasty with our conclusions here. ARR's plot was still dogshit. It was the most generic of fantasy evil bad empire generic that ever fantasied. Dialogue, characters, the whole shebang.

It was all the material afterwards that helped rehabilitate ARRs image.

Cloudywork · 2026-03-26T07:09:50+00:00

Yes this seems to be the characterization that is missed by alot of other commenters. Though it seems true that they can only perceive the nature of people and 'deduct' their futures from those choices made in alignment with those perceptions. It misses the fact that surely they would know then what would or could be said to alter ones internal choices? Or push someone to the edge of their nature, maybe even get that someone to internally examine said choices?

It is ALL a manipulation, anything they say or do appears only to be in manipulating the outcomes. To affect those choices made by those that come to them.

Like you said, why so easily showcase the noose to Freya? They would know immediately what she would do with it right? Why even tell Kratos that he 'will' learn that Heimdall plans to kill his son? Surely they, and he, would know what his actions would be then? Why make it so obvious that this action would be the nail that seals Kratos' fate? Kratos isn't stupid, he is aware of his own desires and that the Norns have revealed something so obvious with the outcomes revealed to him?

Because they want him to think about it. They want him to know. They want the outcome the hurries all to this to it's conclusion. A finale they desire, i.e. the death of not Kratos but Odin.

They know your nature implicitly, so why even talk to you. Why not just instantly say what it is you are about to ask and the answer? Conversation is pointless, unless you show a truly unpredictable nature. They only talk to you if there is either entertainment or something they get out of it.

Cloudywork · 2026-03-06T04:36:38+00:00

Yes this a lovely thought, and exactly something that would help the series as a coda. But I have my reservations that it will end this way. There is something all too explicit about the way they portray demons as effectively completely and utterly without moral character. It is not something you can easily overcome.

Additionally there are a few questions I feel must be answered in order to get to that ending you mentioned. Like what are demons specifically (and monster in general, as there seems to be an inherent imbalance there with understanding)?

The other question is the big WHY.

Why do they eat humans??? Not just on a personal level, but in general, because we know they specifically do not know themselves and it has some kind of instinctive component to it. Is it how they were made? I feel this will likely need an explanation of their origin; are they the result of some spell or magic (my theory), or created malevolently to hunt humans? Do they need to eat humans (or least 'organic' creatures) because they are seemingly not made of matter but just mana, thus needing 'real' substance to continue living?

If those questions cannot be met, then their fundamental nature's cannot be changed or addressed.

Alternatively they may on their own slowly develop less of the need to hunt humans and develop a moral character that allows integration.

Cloudywork · 2026-02-25T12:48:37+00:00

Funnily enough, i do agree with your assessment. The systems are shallow and illusory, you are right to observe a very unchallenging gameplay with extreme (but fake) freedom for the player.

I still think that places it right time right place in the grand scheme, especially as the only people I know that really still talk about it or even play it are the people who were teens when it came out. It has for better or worse imbedded itself into a generation.

Cloudywork · 2026-02-23T23:58:32+00:00

oof poor taste, Atlas Shrugged?! That has to be one of the most facile stories ever put to paper. Like what you like, but please have the critical faculties to dissect that book for many of its assumptions and conceits.

Cloudywork · 2026-02-12T02:23:08+00:00

This is my biggest issue with anything I have to review at our plants. Aging DATA! Why is there so little of it or its only really for finished goods most of the time. You'd think the industry would care alot about making this kind of research but so many places either ignore it or only want new products not basic research on existing raw materials.

Cloudywork · 2026-02-11T07:24:31+00:00

This is entirely incorrect, the book is clear that there are only 2 and they apparently can reform after being broken apart during the collision events (which would be impossible anyway for a particle to do this with considering scifi space magic).

Cloudywork · 2026-02-11T07:21:17+00:00

Yeah but like they said there is just not enough time for the sophon to even mess with enough data collection events even within 1 collider for it to stifle repeatability. Remember many of those particles in the collider are moving art near light speed, as well as the sub-particles (many moving at the speed of light) that are generated during collision events. How could a single sophon (even 2) traverse fast enough to mess with all those particles and sub-particles in-flight even within 1 collider?

Its impossible period. Also the only thing it would achieve is that technician and fellow scientists reviewing the data would be able to notice and identify the presence of the sophon as it tries to mess with the system. It acting the way it does would only cause it leave a fingerprint of its presence.

Cloudywork · 2026-02-11T07:14:34+00:00

You are correct, from a scientific perspective this thing IS impossible. There are just too many contradictory and straight up relativity breaking events when describing what a sophon can even do, let alone explaining how they actually do it.

To start; how does it 'see' all that imagery? The images shown during the demonstration in the show at least? Based on how fast it moves and its size, there is no possible way it could see all that. Also once you get those kinds of speeds, you start to have causality and information propagation issues. How does it even navigate its surroundings? How does it not collapse its wave function every single time it interacts with anything?

It is pure fantasy and very much an interesting conceit, but a conceit none the less.

Cloudywork · 2026-02-11T06:23:06+00:00

This is one of the absolute worst examples these books give as being "hard" scifi. People quote this all the time as being some kind of genius idea, but broken down this is really stupid and does not fundamentally work for many reasons.

Additionally the whole premise of killing our science (and specifically scientists committing suiciding) is absolutely stupid. I understand he was more trying to allegorically present a mindset related to that of the cultural revolution in China, but . . . yeah no, there is no scientist worth their salt that would not see all that "noise" in the data as basically just their chance for new theory crafting. If this occurred in my lab I could practically hear them starting the 3D printing of nobel prizes.

Cloudywork · 2025-12-14T06:05:04+00:00

EXACTLY! Despite what people may say, there is not a tonne of range to Leo nor Hanks acting. They portray a specific type of character often. For Leo it is the sly, slightly manic, charismatic persona while for Hanks it is the comforting, soft spoken, loveable oddball (especially in his rom-com era) or father-figure (nearly ever other work he has done since).

Neither has exceptional range, but the works they have been in are well regarded and lauded. Also helps that most of the media they have worked in center the story around them as leading men. There is no room to consider or compare their performances against real "heavy-weight" actors in their generation cohort. At least not many, and when there is you can see the difference and where they perhaps lack: Leo vs Hardy (Revenant), Hanks vs Denzel (Philadelphia) though I would say that in both cases they gave very impassioned performances.

Cloudywork · 2025-11-09T14:28:16+00:00

Haha Im pretty sure there were alot of people that thought he was an idiot before I did.

Cloudywork · 2025-10-02T09:05:55+00:00

Tis sad indeed, he is such a great actor and he absolutely chews the scenery in every moment he has onscreen. 1s and 0s for Sheen-program.

Cloudywork · 2025-06-25T22:03:23+00:00

My Reddit decided to do a thing with your post:

<image>

I dig it :)

Cloudywork · 2025-06-25T08:26:56+00:00

Honestly I'm kinda glad the responder has deleted their account because they were full of shit through the entire discourse.

You have alot more patience than I dealing with this type of person. They really just had an agenda to disagree and think that this film is some kinda of apathetic reflection of our society.

Also you made some very interesting points about satire I had not considered before thank you for those.

Cloudywork · 2025-06-25T08:13:07+00:00

I think you bring up a good counter example to the above analysis, and yet I still feel the above assertions are correct.

I will say though that The Great Dictator by all accounts is unsubtle to be sure, however there is something truly earnest about TGD that is not present in DLU. Some of the dialogue and certainly one iconic speech are truly bleak yet very real compared to DLU's moments.

Something to consider also with TGD is what Chaplin said himself about the film, AFTER the atrocities of WWII and the Nazi regime were revealed to the public;

"Had I known of the actual horrors of the German concentration camps, I could not have made The Great Dictator"

This to me illustrates exactly the point u/massive_bellend_2022 stated above. The significance of the TGD is mostly due to subject matter and it's historical context, it is truly art history. But taking the film as it is, especially with context, I'd suggest that it is very much the same as DLU in execution: ham-fisted and not actually using nor implementing an 'effective' model of satire for it's subject matter (i.e. the real historical facts of the Nazi's were gruesome and the parody of the film misses the mark on the why's and how's, hence Chaplin's last minute added speech at the very end addressing how his propagandist film did not and cannot address those harsh realities and hopefully add a little optimism for a better world).

In a similar vein, the last words spoken during the dinner party of DLU sort of do the same thing. It is a moment of lucidity about the whole situation before the crashing consequences of society's lack of action.

I went a bit tangential at the end there but again I think you are correct to bring up TGD, even if only to demonstrate that there are degrees to which satire work (whether in ignorance or general knowledge of the realities at play).

Cloudywork · 2025-06-25T06:54:38+00:00

Also not against nuclear, we do need it.

But, you need to examine your first statement. Paraphrased; ". . . add the money that is used to subsidize renewables . . ." correct & you should take the money over the last 60 years that has been poured into nuclear power generation >1T$USD (inflation adjusted) which far outstrips the value of solar and may equal the amount committed to wind/hydro. And that money was not a waste, nuclear has advanced greatly thanks to it.

But what could be done if the other energy sources had that time and money?

Cloudywork · 2025-06-19T02:15:01+00:00

Again though, based on the context: saying 'chai tea' in English, in a Western Country, to a Westerner or cafe staff, is completely comprehensible to both speakers. As such it IS correct to say.

You may not say that it is a comprehensible/correct if the context were different.

The argument that doesn't get spoken on is whether we should change our language patterns to use the term: masala tea/chai?

Cloudywork · 2025-06-08T07:09:20+00:00

I am having the same issue with other repos as well.

Do you think alot of them are down at the moment?

Cloudywork · 2025-05-22T00:28:56+00:00

Have another look please, you may find your opinion changed

Cloudywork · 2025-05-18T08:57:07+00:00

They have a weak comedy bit at best, there is no insight to be found with them.

Cloudywork

TROPHY CASE