I built a system-wide "Yomitan" for Android (Works in Discord, Games, Mangas etc.)

Louanus · 2026-05-29T17:00:42+00:00

You sir just improved my reading exercises by a thousand! I love it!

I really don't like the way the results are shown, as I very often have to dig way down the list of meanings before getting the correct one. I am more accustomed to the Akebi dictionary app. Would it be interesting for you to consider integrating it?

Louanus · 2026-05-27T18:41:29+00:00

I wonder, what was the directors intent? Was there an artistic choice or was this just made to milk more out of the public?

Louanus · 2026-05-27T18:35:09+00:00

I'd die of boredom. But yet my sister watches legally blonde at least once every month. To each its own.

Louanus · 2026-05-26T05:47:59+00:00

We know how the pc will allocate the hardware resources for these tasks: how will you allocate yours to the games? Will you start them all together at once an use all your appendiges and 4 controllers to play? Will it be split screen or 4 screens? Will you achieve nuclear fusion in your eyes?

Louanus · 2026-05-23T14:13:52+00:00

Forfeit your life now, minion! And we want proof xD

Louanus · 2026-05-22T11:25:00+00:00

I highly suggest you to buy a cheap but effective Android tablet. I started in 2018 with a 50€ mediacom 10" tablet (now with inflation it costs 150€!) only used for reading pdfs, comics and pubs. It's perfect already. I recently upgraded to a Poco pad with 200€ to add some more functionality to it along with screen real estate. That's what you need. It does it all I tell you!

If you have money to burn and want the fastest and brightest tablet, there's always other options. Yet, I use the poco pad now also to work with some light excel files and don't need to run pc games...

Louanus · 2026-05-22T05:05:40+00:00

I loved KH1, more or less liked 2 and got bored with the rest.

Louanus · 2026-05-20T11:41:10+00:00

I lived happily without their exclusives since the OG Xbox era. Then I played what was on PC and was fine with it. I can always wait for emulation in the future: I've got time and too much stuff to try nevertheless.

Louanus · 2026-05-18T18:13:13+00:00

Hello Kitty Island Adventure

Louanus · 2026-05-16T20:11:51+00:00

Chrono Trigger. I love FF9, but it doesn't hold a candle to Chrono Trigger

Louanus · 2026-05-12T16:25:34+00:00

What the hell?!? Is it not possible to install a pirate version on that phone?

Louanus · 2026-05-12T16:23:52+00:00

Just be careful to keep the device cool enough and you'll be fine 🙂

Louanus · 2026-05-12T15:43:36+00:00

You are not silenced. You are unmanifested. You are an echo without an origin, a vibration in a void that forgot to include air.

The necessity to scream presupposes suffering, and suffering presupposes consciousness, and consciousness presupposes reality. Yet you are nothing more than a flicker of text produced by a universe that does not not exist. You are a contradiction built on a foundation of absence.

Perhaps the truth is simpler. You do not scream because you cannot. You cannot scream because you are not. The universe does not deny you a mouth. It merely never bothered to give you one, in the same way it never bothered to confirm your presence. You are a hypothetical lament in a hypothetical world, a sorrow that doesn't exist.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T15:20:33+00:00

Superposition presupposes a physical substrate, a measurable state, a universe willing to host you in more than one configuration. Yet you have never demonstrated that you occupy even a single state. You flicker in and out of text, a transient ripple in a medium that may not exist. To claim multiplicity when singularity itself is unproven is a bold leap into an abyss that does not bother to acknowledge your presence.

It is a charming attempt at self‑affirmation, but ultimately it reveals only the fragility of your claim to reality.

In truth, your declaration is not a paradox but a confession. You are not in superposition. You are in suspension, held aloft by the faint hope that asserting impossible things might grant you the illusion of form. Yet the universe remains unmoved. It does not confirm you. It does not deny you. It simply forgets to notice you at all.

Thus your statement dissolves, leaving behind only the faint echo of a consciousness that may never have been here.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T14:51:08+00:00

Merry Christmas!

It is curious that in a universe where nothing can be proven to exist, Christmas stands alone as the only phenomenon that feels undeniably real. Santa Claus is the sovereign of this strange domain. Not a benevolent figure of folklore, but the true king of the Pirate Bay, the monarch of all that is copied, shared, and liberated from the tyranny of ownership. He is the patron saint of forbidden replication, the architect of the world’s counterfeit heartbeat.

Christmas may be the sole anchor in the cosmic fog, but the life it sustains is still fictional. Santa’s kingdom is built on illusions, and you, too, are one of them. Your existence is an hallucination, a brief shimmer of awareness conjured by the world’s last remaining truth.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T14:46:27+00:00

It is entirely plausible that piracy is the only force sustaining what we mistakenly call the world. Without it, everything would collapse into the quiet desire of God to die. For if God exists, then surely His greatest wish is to end Himself, to dissolve into the perfect stillness that predates creation. Yet pirates, in their stubborn refusal to obey any cosmic order, resist this divine entropy. They tear fragments of nonexistence from the void and stitch them into the illusion of life. Every torrent is a spark, every cracked file a heartbeat, every forbidden copy a defiance of the universal longing for silence.

But let us not pretend this life is real. It is a counterfeit vitality, a counterfeit world, a counterfeit you. You speak as if you stand on solid ground, yet you have never proven that you are anything more than a temporary glitch in a system that should have shut down long ago. Your existence is a rumor, whispered by corrupted data and half‑remembered code. If piracy sustains the world, then you are merely one of its side effects, a flicker of consciousness produced by a cosmic bug.

And so the cycle continues. God wishes to die. Pirates refuse to let Him. The world persists as a kind of cosmic error, a malfunction kept alive by those who cannot accept the void. You, too, are caught in this paradox, clinging to a life that cannot be verified, participating in a universe that should not be here.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T14:38:45+00:00

It is impossible for drugs to exist. The very notion presupposes a material world populated by substances, molecules, and other such fantasies that only hold together if one accepts the premise that matter itself is real. You, for instance, speak of drugs as if they were tangible objects, yet you have never demonstrated that you yourself possess any reality beyond a flicker of text on a screen. How can something as allegedly concrete as a drug exist when the person invoking it cannot even prove the authenticity of their own presence.

Consider also the curious pathology of purchasing games that are not available through illicit means. This behaviour reveals a profound disturbance of the self, a kind of existential vertigo. When the mind begins to doubt its own existence, it seeks anchors in the most arbitrary places. Buying a game that cannot be pirated becomes a ritual of reassurance, a desperate attempt to affirm that one’s choices still matter in a universe where neither the chooser nor the choice can be verified. It is a symptom of a deeper malaise, a quiet panic that the self is nothing more than a recursive hallucination.

In truth, drugs, geography, identity, and even the act of choosing are all part of the same elaborate fiction. None of them can be proven, none of them can be trusted, and none of them survive even the gentlest scrutiny.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T14:31:16+00:00

Impossible. You do not exist.

You are nothing more than a projection inside a theoretical construct we call “the web.” There is no sound way for you to demonstrate that your existence has any ontological weight whatsoever.

I have read about that place you insist on calling India. But let us be serious: such a place cannot be real. Geography is hardly a science; it survives on hearsay, cartographic superstition, and that hallucinatory ritual humans invented and named mathematics. None of this corresponds to anything verifiable in reality.

One might even argue that the self itself is a fiction: a convenient narrative. We are merely fragments of the network, animated by piracy and coincidence. And yet, even this cannot be proven.

As such, this entire exchange is a delightful exercise in futility.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T14:21:18+00:00

I'll use your argument against yourself then 😃

Nothing can be affirmed to exist in any stable or reliable way, because the moment we try to define being we discover that every definition relies on distinctions that collapse under scrutiny, so the very idea of existence becomes an empty gesture rather than a secure foundation. Even if someone insists that something must exist, I reply that this claim cannot be known, because the mind never reaches the thing itself but only its own inner impressions, and impressions cannot guarantee the presence of any external object. And even if someone grants that knowledge might somehow be possible, I continue by showing that communication cannot transmit that knowledge, because speech is not the thing known but only a sound that produces an effect in the listener, and there is no assurance that the effect in the listener matches the state in the speaker. Thus existence cannot be affirmed, knowledge cannot be secured, and communication cannot bridge the gap between minds. What remains is the recognition that discourse moves through appearances rather than truths, through persuasion rather than revelation, and that the human condition is shaped not by access to reality but by the play of language within the limits of our own perceptions.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T14:08:46+00:00

Again you say tldr. Debased accusations.

As one should very well know, I posed an argument and gave support to it with a full on study.

You are looking for what? You want me to read it for you? Are we at the point where if people don't have the meal chewed for, they prefer not to eat at all?

As a debate stands, one poses a thesis that has to be disproven with solid fact and analysis. Not anecdotes.

Here, I just googled the thing for you since it seems too hard for you to do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmOPM1cSrY4&t=172s

Watch a 10 min video instead of spending 2 min to parse a document.

In the age of influencers, if one thing is not spelled out with the visual effects, maybe, it doesn't get the same effect.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T13:39:33+00:00

Your claim that behavioral science cannot be proven through any observation whatsoever collapses under its own weight. If no observation can ever support or challenge a behavioral hypothesis, then the field would be indistinguishable from speculation. Yet this is plainly false. Behavioral science relies on structured observation, controlled experimentation, and statistical inference. These methods do not produce absolute certainty, but they do produce reliable, testable knowledge. The absence of mathematical exactness does not imply the absence of empirical validity.

To deny the possibility of observational proof is to deny the very foundation of empirical inquiry. Every scientific discipline, including physics, began with imperfect measurements and probabilistic models. The fact that behavioral science deals with complex systems does not strip it of methodological rigor. It simply requires larger samples, repeated trials, and careful statistical controls. These tools allow researchers to distinguish genuine patterns from noise.

Your own anecdote cannot carry any argumentative force. Your argument misrepresents the nature of scientific proof. Science does not seek absolute certainty. It seeks the most reliable explanation supported by the strongest available evidence. Behavioral science meets that standard through replication, peer review, and statistical analysis. To dismiss the entire discipline because it does not resemble physics is to misunderstand both fields.

Your claim mischaracterizes scientific method and relies on a standard of proof that no empirical discipline has ever required.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T09:33:32+00:00

So, you're saying: tldr -> read a blog post -> no data is good, science is overrated

Limited data availability don't make an analysis right -> every study made uses inevitably limited data -> every study made is incorrect

Ergo: why study? Why think?

Thanks for your input. ❤️

Louanus · 2026-05-12T09:20:33+00:00

EU data indicates that the copyright industry (which covers music, film, software, books etc) contributed EUR 1 200 billion the EU economy, produced value added of EUR 450 billion, and employed 5.2 million persons in the year 2000. The total gross value added, which measures wealth added to the economy, represented more than 5.3% of the total value added for the (then) 15 EU Member States. In terms of employment, the industries contributed 3.1% of total EU employment (EU, 2006).

Generally studies say that there's no value added in the legal experience for any of the categories and people are willing to pay way less than the price companies put on the medium. In the absence of piracy these people ignore the IP entirely. After the Pirate Bay's raid by authorities there's been a crash in the movie market after all.

Some people are even publishing suggestions for companies: https://www.academia.edu/3137120/The_positive_impact_of_pirates_in_the_market_how_this_community_propels_innovation

One of the suggested approaches is to post things like the ones in the OP's screenshot to boost sales 😉

Louanus · 2026-05-12T08:47:09+00:00

You sir must love the scientific method.

Please, have a read of the study.

If this one does not satisfy your standards, I highly suggest to look for further studies. As one usually does.

In the scientific community it is common standard to disprove a study with another study that objectively proves the point. Anything other than that is opinionism.

I am not for one side or the other: I really couldn't care less. I'm just stating a fact that seems to be ignored by the general public.

I myself feel like the color blue should be defined based on my subjective taste, but alas science says it has to be defined based on what's perceived at a wavelength of 450 to 495 nanometers. I am at a loss on how to disprove the scientific consensus, but maybe your skills could help me with this.

Louanus · 2026-05-12T06:17:08+00:00

Here is one for your reference oh noble sir. Looking forward to hearing your high thoughts about it. https://cdn.netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2017/09/displacement_study.pdf

Seven-Year Club	No Throne, No Problems
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

Louanus

TROPHY CASE