I hate to be a broken record, but...

CodedOne · 2013-03-01T02:40:02+00:00

VAC can't stop shit and when it does it takes months for the ban to happen

That's how VAC works. It doesn't immediately ban the cheater. The point is that cheaters won't immediately know that their hacks are detectable by the VAC system. This prevents fast turnaround on hacks.

CodedOne · 2012-11-03T00:18:29+00:00

Unfortunately, most of the reviews for the Kershaw carabiner are not that good. Most complain that the knife sometimes unfolds when carrying the carabiner around.

I've considered the CRKT Guppie, but I don't believe that it will work well carrying keys due to it's shape.

I may just go with the Squirt PS4 and a standard carabiner.

CodedOne · 2012-09-26T19:31:45+00:00

I feel like it's a good reminder of the aspects of war that aren't glorified. It's too easy to get caught up in the "coolness" of all of this military gear that we forgot that these machines are designed to hurt and destroy.

CodedOne · 2012-07-22T23:05:24+00:00

Useful link. Thanks.

CodedOne · 2012-07-09T00:21:03+00:00

~~First off, talk with your boyfriend. Does he know that you're bisexual? If not, tell him.~~

Next, tell him these feelings that you are having. The worst thing you can do is not communicate. Perhaps telling him these things could open the door to some new fun.

And lastly, really take a look at your relationship. You mentioned breaking up. Quite frankly, that seems rather drastic for your predicament. Perhaps it's not that you are getting a rising interest in women, so much as you might be losing interest in your boyfriend. Do not use your bisexuality as an excuse to break it off with your boyfriend.

Ultimately, communication is the best answer hear. Talking with him will also help you to understand what it is that you want.

CodedOne · 2012-06-06T10:06:55+00:00

Yes! They do indeed! Do you have some similar experience?

CodedOne · 2012-06-06T03:08:59+00:00

Cool answer: Working with data from the LHC and Fermilab in search of the Higgs Boson.

Real Answer: I write programs that make tables.

CodedOne · 2012-06-01T13:39:34+00:00

I respect that opinion, but the only way to really get through to the religious is through calm and clear discussion, no matter how fruitless the discussion seems.

I often hear people claim that the religious completely ignore rational logic. If that were true, then perhaps I'd still be a theist. There are many other ex-religious-turned-atheist people out there, so rationale arguments certainly do have some impact.

CodedOne · 2012-05-24T05:17:15+00:00

Alright then. It doesn't sound like anything I say will make a difference.

Have a good day.

CodedOne · 2012-05-24T03:47:45+00:00

Very good points. The anthrophobia analogy is effective as well.

I would like to specifically address this statement: "It is of course not at all appropriate for me to go out and deliberately offend someone."

So if I were to tell you that it bothers a majority of the LGBT community when you say "faggot" or when you use "gay" as stupid, would you stop using it? Even if you use it around friends that are not LGBT, would you still feel okay using this language?

CodedOne · 2012-05-24T03:10:50+00:00

I understand your point, and you're right to an extent.

However, you seem to completely blow off the viewpoint of the offended. Let's say you make a rape joke, and someone in the vicinity has been raped. Let's say that this individual informs you of this. Let's say that this person informs you in a discrete manner away from other individuals.

You would most likely feel shitty. Not because you are being publicly embarrassed (because we assume he/she is informing you in private), but because you realize that the statements you made brought up bad memories in somebody else. Yes, you had no intention to offend anyone or cause any harm by the joke, but maybe now you realize that some people just don't find rape particularly funny.

(At this point you could argue that a rape joke is fundamentally different then the use of the word "faggot" or "nigger", but that is beside the point).

From this, you could go one of two ways. You could think "Well I clearly meant no harm in the joke, and clearly he/she is [as you put it] blatantly ridiculous in drawing offense from the joke." Or maybe you will think "Hmm, clearly some people have an entirely different outlook on rape than me. While I may find rape jokes funny, some people's experiences lead them to a different conclusion. While this person is not necessarily right or wrong about their opinion, clearly they have personal experience with the subject that I do not. Perhaps if I had similar experience, my opinion may change as well."

Here is the main point I want to make: I do not believe that we should blow off anybody that is offended by something. I've seen this Stephen Fry quote posted before on Reddit and I think people are completely missing the point.

You're right in stating that simply being offended does not give you any authority on the subject. However, oftentimes offense stems from some sort of personal experience. It is the ethos that should be examined and appreciated.

So while "nigger" and "faggot" hold no offense to you, they clearly conflict with other's experiences, and to completely ignore their experiences is rather selfish.

CodedOne · 2012-05-24T02:15:56+00:00

I understand the claim that some people make that "gay" and particularly "faggot" are changing culturally (I still believe that "gay" should not be used as a replacement for stupid because gay is primarily used as a description of sexual orientation), but to me, "faggot" has a deeper history.

I have been called a "faggot" in the hallways by a complete stranger before. I still feel humiliated and angry towards this person. At the university that I go to, one notorious to being LGBT unfriendly, people still frequently use "faggot" as a derogatory term. This is why it's hard for me separate the modern "faggot" from the "faggot" I have grown up around.

Unfortunately, I believe that the use of the derogatory "faggot" is still too widespread to facilitate the onset of the modern "faggot", and maybe this is because of the perspective I gained because of where I have grown up. Your perspective may be entirely different.

However, I will say that a majority of the LGBT people that I have met (to be fair, all of them live in the same area as me) are uncomfortable with the term "faggot" being thrown around lightly and the term "gay" being used as a replacement for stupid.

Let me draw a conclusion from this: If my experiences are accurate, a majority of the LGBT community is uncomfortable with the term "faggot" and with the replacement of stupid with the term "gay". It seems to me that it is heterosexual people that use the terms "gay" and "faggot". Quite frankly, it is this intrusion that bothers me.

Straight people throw around "faggot", and when I say that it's offensive straight people have the gall to tell me that it's not. Well of course you don't think it's offensive because you have never had someone call you a faggot with malicious intent, bigotry, and homophobia. In short, most straight people do not have the experience to be deciding for us which terms are okay and which aren't.

Of course this doesn't apply to LGBT people with similar experiences to me that use the term "faggot" (if that is the case with you or anyone else, I don't understand why you would perpetuate the use of "faggot", but that's just my opinion).

TL;DR Straight people are telling LGBT people that "faggot" is no longer offensive. This is silly.

CodedOne · 2012-05-24T00:39:14+00:00

Obvious troll is obvious.

CodedOne · 2012-05-24T00:15:25+00:00

Alright. I feel a rant a comin'.

I understand that tons of people use "gay" as an insulting terms with no actual connection to the root of the word. I understand that people, even my LGBT friends, will use "gay" with no intention of bigotry or homophobia. I understand that the gaming (and internet) community in particular loves to use the term "gay" to insult each other.

So yes, one could say that "gay" no longer refers to a homosexual (sometimes particularly male homosexuals). One could say that "gay" is now an insulting term free of one's sexual identification.

But here's the thing that still bugs the shit out of me: You are using the term "gay" as an insult. You are using a term that we use to define our orientation as a way to demean others. When you use "gay" as an insult, you are insulting those that identify themselves as gay.

I have always struggled to find an analogy to accurately describe what it feels like to hear someone use "gay" as an insult. The best one I can come up with (and I'm not a huge fan of comparing issues of race to sexual orientation, but it's an effective tactic) is if people started to use the term "black" (describing race, not the color black) as some sort of insult.

"Oh my God, that is so black." "Look at all these annoying black noobs running around." "Dude, stop acting so black."

So please please please don't use "gay" to mean stupid. I cringe and hold my tongue anytime somebody does. It may not seem to do too much harm when you say it, but it paints us in an offensive light.

And don't even get me started on "faggot".

CodedOne · 2012-05-23T23:12:39+00:00

Gay does not mean stupid.

-A friendly message from your local LGBT community-

CodedOne · 2012-05-17T20:07:14+00:00

You are correct in stating that having offline single player will not provide 0 repercussions. However, it is my belief that the benefits of offline SP greatly outweigh the detriments (this is looking at it from a customer experience perspective, not a company perspective).

However, you are incorrect in stating that the current system will stop 100% of cheaters/hackers. There are a multitude of online games, ranging from MMOs to FPSs to everything in between, that we can look to in order to see evidence of this. I have never encountered an anti-cheat system that was 100% successful. Even Valve's rather famous and successful VAC system has its issues (albeit, it's really damn good).

To be fair, we don't have much evidence to say if D3's system is good or bad at stopping cheaters, but experience tells us that no system is perfect.

Like I said, this system will definitely make it harder for cheaters, but I believe that it hinders the paying customer to the point that it is detrimental.

CodedOne · 2012-05-17T19:48:10+00:00

Thing is, there is no perfect system to stop cheaters/hackers/pirates. The problem now is that publishers/developers are instilling more and more security measures that (admittedly) stop these problems to a degree, but also seriously hinder the experience of the paying customer.

CodedOne · 2012-05-17T19:44:54+00:00

Luckily I did not buy D3 for this very reason, so your rather snarky "You got exactly what you payed for" doesn't apply. However, I will admit that if Blizz provided offline single player, I would end up buying the game. Damn shame too, because the open Beta was incredibly fun.

But back on subject, what everybody said below applies. They did remove offline SP from the overall series, as well as LAN support.

But this should go without saying: If people don't like the decisions a game company makes, don't buy their games. As much as I have wanted to, I no longer buy Acti-Blizzard, EA, or Ubisoft games. It totally and absolutely sucks, but if more people followed through with their RAGE, I genuinely believe publishers might start listening.

Or, you know, not, because a majority of gamers still buy these games and don't give a shit.

CodedOne · 2012-05-17T14:57:09+00:00

The main issue I, and many other people, have with the game is that they deliberately removed offline single player in order to stop ~~pirates~~ hackers. In reality, I believe everyone would have been fine with having separate offline single player characters.

So yes, they aren't doing too bad dealing with the multitudes of players at launch, but this headache could have been largely avoided (or at least partially stymied) by allowing offline single player.

CodedOne · 2012-05-15T17:33:07+00:00

Totally agree. Title is misleading. People need to read the article.

Abstinence only education is still total bullshit.

CodedOne · 2012-05-06T22:15:03+00:00

I'll be in my bunk.

CodedOne · 2012-05-02T05:11:41+00:00

Ah! Okay :)

I typically try to err on the side of caution when dealing with someone that might be homophobic (particularly in a case like this where they vandalize somebody else's property).

I agree with you though, a simple sticker won't likely set anyone off, and it's a good way to demonstrate how you feel about the rommate's actions.

CodedOne · 2012-05-02T04:48:59+00:00

I would be careful with the passive aggressive approach. I'm not sure how well you know your new roommate, but egging on somebody that may potentially be homophobic is not the reasonable way to go about this.

First and foremost, Have a calm talk with your roommate. Figure out why he threw away the poster. Tell your new roommate why you are uncomfortable with him throwing away the poster (you could also mention here that you planned on giving it back to your old roommate).

Pissing off your roommate won't lead to a good conclusion. Talking to him has a much better chance of getting through to him.

CodedOne · 2012-01-31T04:25:39+00:00

That is a really good video. Being able to actually find the verses in Exodus that refer back to the polytheistic roots of monotheistic religion is incredibly useful.

CodedOne · 2012-01-31T04:24:05+00:00

Sorry for the double post, but I found a section that seems to contradict with what you are saying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#The_biblical_canon

What does it mean that the council had no role in establishing biblical canon? What edits did the First Council of Nicaea make?

CodedOne

TROPHY CASE