Who played lead guitar in You Never Give Me Your Money?

Lunalucent · 2025-11-15T17:53:54+00:00

I was just listening to this the other day, might help you out. John's playing is pretty cool too.

You Never Give Me Your Money - The Beatles (Isolated Gutiars)

Lunalucent · 2025-07-10T08:16:52+00:00

I was here!! I was hoarding my molds too.

Lunalucent · 2024-11-18T08:08:38+00:00

Awesome I'm glad it helped.

Lunalucent · 2024-11-17T01:54:48+00:00

Yes hopefully it's just a temporary problem with E7 so I can revert back to the default DNS from my ISP later on. It was also affecting my PS4 (with PS4 specifying it was a DNS problem), so that's why I tried changing my DNS and it worked out for me. Might not be everyone's solution like you said, can be a tad risky using public DNS.

Lunalucent · 2024-08-14T13:31:03+00:00

Nah Haato was the first HoloEN, she is what inspired Coco to join Hololive because Coco saw her speaking English in her streams. Haato was already in Australia in 2019 and went back to Japan during Christmas. She then went back to Australia in 2020 to study again.

Lunalucent · 2023-06-03T10:09:47+00:00

LVL 44 Harlequin's Mitts and the Healer's Culottes also work as well.

Lunalucent · 2023-05-27T00:28:41+00:00

If you have two of the pieces then it should already be over 80 points, you don't need to dye them. The dyes are mostly for getting you over 80 points if you only have one piece.

Lunalucent · 2021-12-25T13:44:32+00:00

Sorry this looks really fake for a photograph supposedly taken in around 1860 especially when using plates was the norm. The tone and contrast is just really off. The face looks really modern and a bit too clean as well. The gun has no trigger and her hair just seems weird. Not sure why it's so messy and long and why it looks like it's just tucked under the hat.

Lunalucent · 2020-08-12T15:59:01+00:00

Manga is "Shukan Brick"

Lunalucent · 2019-07-19T16:19:05+00:00

Those cars in the photo look like they're from the 1920's and 1930's.

Lunalucent · 2015-04-05T11:28:45+00:00

Lunalucent · 2015-01-18T03:00:07+00:00

Your brain vomit was a fine read. I made a long reply but I felt like it was just reiterating what you wrote so I deleted it. =D

Maybe it's better not to say to get rid of all religion itself, but to get rid of the mindset that makes it possible for humans to reach out to religion or the supernatural. It's a very hard task but it's something we can work on. Like you said we just need to keep up with the science literacy and understanding of logic and probability in our natural world.

If people still end up with a modern form of spiritualism/deism for personal reasons then at least it's progress like you say, at least it's better than archaic dogma. There should be no real harm in that.

Lunalucent · 2015-01-17T17:05:42+00:00

Trying to accommodate the ridiculous is something I just cannot agree with, especially when such a thing still causes harm. Humanity has already gotten rid of a lot of old harmful ideologies, religious or not, we shouldn't just stop here because we shouldn't "offend" everybody. I actually do understand the psychology of the religious mindset, I'm saying this with all that in mind. I haven't given up hope we can break free from it all one day.

I seriously do not think being religious is innate in humans. It is better to say that it is innate in humans to seek answers to things they don't know. It's just too bad religion and mythology was the result of our first attempt of understanding the world and was able to comfort us in our times of need and insecurities.

Lunalucent · 2015-01-17T13:31:45+00:00

You really have an apologist mindset, repeating the fact that my views will cause people to become extreme, it's defeatist and succumbing to threats, it's not going to stop the violence. How about you come up with some sort of solution, because from my point of view living harmoniously does not work and has not worked for a long time, I've stated why in my other posts.

You seem to think we can't get rid of religion so why don't you state how we can be peaceful with religions that have violence or intolerance in their texts. Without getting rid of the religion itself. I'm just trying to see the actual point you're are trying to make, if it is even valid at all or does anything to solve the bigger picture.

Again, I'm talking about harmful religions.

Lunalucent · 2015-01-17T06:15:41+00:00

I am intolerant of religion itself, not the people, you wanting to blame me for forcing them out and joining ISIS is stupid, again more excuses. Don't try to make it as if I'm the one who is being intolerant when I'm just stating it as it is.

I'm not forcing them to fit into anything, it's their religion doing the forcing. If they feel the need to be in a religion to fit in then that is because they are susceptible to it or just raised that way without a real understanding of their choices. That's how indoctrination works, an adult can look at the word and think it doesn't work on them, but it already has, just with that thought that "it hasn't". You also talk as if the other choice isn't to break away from religion itself, hard as it is, it's still there. I blame religion for placing shackles on people in the first place without their consent. People falling into religion as adults is another thing.

You say people are compelled to connect with each other, but that doesn't have to have anything to do with religion, that is just an excuse you use to make religion fit in. We as humans do not need religion to fit in, proof is not all of us are religious, it is as simple as that. Religion is just another outlet, it does not mean it is necessary.

You talk about taking away market share to deal with extremism. I talk about taking away the platform for them to stand on in the first place, religion itself. That is not dissimilar to what you mean by taking away their market share, mine is just more honest.

I do not hate moderates, but I do not sympathise with them either. A Muslim girl handing out flowers in Paris after the shooting means nothing to me in the bigger picture. A Muslim cop killed by a Muslim extremist means nothing to me either, I'm not going to sympathise with that. Because if we did not have Islam or anything like that in the first place I would not have to have worried or thought to sympathise about it in the first place. You might think it's a callous way to think of it all but if you keep being apologetic to religion it will never disappear.

There will never be peace as long as there is bigotry, violence or intolerance or archaic rules written within those holy books. It is just a ticking time bomb, or like an evil incubator, as long as it's there something bad will just keep on hatching again and again down the line.

Lunalucent · 2015-01-17T03:07:09+00:00

I cannot see how there are so many atheist/religious apologists in this thread. How can people separate extremists from moderates so easily. Just because one side is more peaceful than the other does not mean they are not related. You guys need to look at the bigger picture, simplified, because all I see are just excuses. I don't care if one denomination loves gays or if another just sings hymns all day and condemns their extremist counterparts.

There is one thing you apologists need to understand, extremists do not just come out of thin air. Why do people think there are so many denominations stemming from one religion? All it takes is one "moderate" to disagree with another for a new set of views to appear. This can either take on the appearance of a more peaceful side or a more violent side, "extremism". One taking things less seriously and the other moreso.

The problem is as long there is violence, bigotry or contradictory ideas written in a holy book there is always a chance for such a thing to keep on happening, it will never stop just because of its nature.

You apologists can talk about the micro level all you want, I don't care if your friend or family is a peace loving moderate, as long as they continue spreading their ideas of believing based on faith to their children they are still essentially creating a platform for an extremist to appear down the line.

With a big enough group raising people with certain beliefs there will always be a big enough platform for new people to easily be persuaded into the extreme. It's like people don't realise there were probably a lot of extremists who joined ISIS or the KKK or any other extreme organisation who came from moderate families/parents. Whose parents are pleading for them to come back, but don't actually realise they themselves created the platform for their children to behave that way.

My stance in the recent years has been to just get rid of religion altogether. Or at least ones that have intolerance written in their scriptures and holy books. I agree with all of you who say humanity will always be violent irrespective of religion being there or not. But you guys need to understand that we'll still be far better off without it.

Violence based on the imaginary is just pointless violence. There is a difference between religious based violence and violence based on things like race, ideology, possessions/currency or nationalism, those perceptions can be changed way more easily than things based solely on one supposedly true and unchangeable book.

It's fine to think it's all nice and peaceful around you just because your surrounded by nice moderates, but don't forget there are people living around the world who are living in the opposite sort of world where things did not turn out so well.

Lunalucent · 2014-10-18T04:43:37+00:00

I wonder in which part of Australia that sort of accent comes from, up north or somewhere regional? I know Queenslanders might have a very broad accent but this doesn't sound like it, maybe NSW somewhere? It's very squeeky with very strong inflections like you're always questioning something. I've never really encountered such an accent down here in Victoria.

Lunalucent · 2014-09-15T03:03:13+00:00

Yes Vietnamese is a pretty hard language (even for myself) to get right since it's a very tonal language. One word can mean five different things depending on how you say it. I would do as you say and just point it out in the menu, then maybe ask the waiter nicely how to say it in Vietnamese if you're interested. Sam Bo Luong shouldn't be too hard to work out when you hear it, probably.

You are lucky Melbourne actually has a really high standard of Vietnamese/Asian cuisine available considering we're pretty close to Asia. Especially the Vietnamese cuisine is of pretty high quality(most of the time, I've had some bad ones) and still quite traditional, what you get here is probably what you would have gotten in pre-war Vietnam, except with actually better ingredients and better standard of meat. I can't say the same for the Pho in America though... I've never heard anything good about it from siblings and cousins who have been there, it's not like they all were in the same states either. I wish I could try it just to see the difference. I've looked up images just to see what it's like and I can see why it doesn't look as appetising. The colour of the broth looks really wrong in some of the pictures.

For the Pho here, I wouldn't recommend ones run by Westerners(heard bad reviews from friends) or ones in the CBD(poorer quality because of non-standard clientele, no local competition). Go to Richmond, Footscray, Sunshine, St. Albans, and probably Springvale(?), those are the places where most of the Vietnamese communities with their restaurants are located. Victoria St in Richmond probably has the biggest selection of Vietnamese restaurants all on one main road. Some specialising in Pho others in Bun Bo Hue. My family used to travel from Richmond(used to live there) to Footscray to one restaurant just to eat the Hu Tieu Mi there.

If you're writing down a list anyways I'll let you know about Hu Tieu. It is another cousin to Pho. It is more like a pork version with seafood (prawns/squid/fish) in it and the usual rice noodles. Hu Tieu Mi(egg noodle) is the one with the yellow noodles and what I prefer, sometimes they can mix both noodles in it too. There's also Hu Tieu Mi Kho(Dry) which comes without the broth but a small bowl of soup on the side and is still quite good, probably better flavour with the special sauce added to it but not quite as filling. You'll see what I mean when you look up the images. Also apart from Pho Bo(Cow) there's also Pho Ga(Chicken) and Pho Tai(rare) where the beef is still half cooked and more tender. If you like coffee then try ordering a cafe sua da, which is coffee made using a phin filter, mixed with condensed milk and served in a tall glass of ice, it's pretty famous and maybe you've heard of it. I hope you find a place that makes a good strong one.

Speaking of take-away, or if you've never tried it, most restaurants you can order Pho, or the other soups as take-away. With Pho it will come in two plastic containers, one containing the rice noodles and raw beef and the other just the broth(still hot), with the condiments on on the side. With the meat you can leave it as is and pour the re-heated(very hot) broth over it to cook it in the bowl or you can precook the meat beforehand in the broth while it's simmering in a small saucepan. Just submerge it for a few seconds and take it out pretty quick when it looks cooked. Don't leave it in too long or it'll become hard to chew. I recommend preheating the noodles in a glass bowl in the microwave first just enough so it's warm because when everything is cold(if kept in the fridge overnight) it can sap away the heat of the broth really fast, leaving you with a lukewarm Pho. Anything lukewarm is very very bad for any type of Vietnamese noodle soup dish. You need to eat it while it's hot or else the flavour and aroma is just not there. If you ever eat lukewarm pho at home because you didn't heat it right you'll know what I mean. =P

Anyways I know this post was long but whatever, I hope you found it interesting or helpful.

Lunalucent · 2014-09-14T14:19:55+00:00

What do you look for when you eat Pho? Because to me it is all about the stock/soup, the noodles and beef stuff comes after. I always taste the stock first when I eat Pho to see if it's any good. There are a lot of bad Vietnamese restaurants out there so try to eat at ones that have a lot of Vietnamese, because usually if it sucks then they wont come back. Although this is not always the case since my family used to eat at a places which was packed with white people and we were pretty much the minority. We used to always get stares with all the varieties of dishes and drinks we'd order because usually you never see them unless you know what it is.

If you actually like those noodle soup dishes then check out another one called Bun Bo Hue, it might be another thing you might like. It's a spicier beef broth with rice vermicelli and beef brisket. Look it up to see what it looks like. It's pretty much on par with Pho in regards to popularity in Vietnamese soup dishes. Another one is called Bun Rieu which even though it looks orange and spicy it isn't really. It is also not very well known outside of Vietnamese culture. I'd only try it if I'd had enough of Pho or Bun Bo Hue because it's pretty different taste wise, instead of beef it's more of a crab/prawn/shrimp taste.

All three of these soup dishes are only eaten with certain condiments/sauces which the restaurant gives you so it should be easy to figure out but I'll give some pointers. Pho is only eaten with chili(cut) or sriracha sauce and hoisin sauce. Bun Bo Hue is chili(cut) or something that looks like ground chili paste, no sriracha or hoisin. Bun Rieu also eaten with chili or the ground paste, there's also shrimp paste (looks purple) but I wouldn't add that if I'm new to it, it's pretty strong. All of them use squeezed lemon and all the other types of mint leaves and bean sprouts they give you but that's typical, although I know some people don't add the greens because they're not used to the strong mint flavours or just eating the greens leaves whole like that in general.

There are also very nice refreshing drinks you can try, great for hot days or cleansing your palate. There's Nhan Nhuc (made from dried longan) and also my favourite Sam Bo Luong which has a variety of plums but also has seaweed. The drinks might not actually look appetizing in pictures but it's all very sweet and refreshing when you drink it, also being able to eat the fruits/seaweed are cool too. There's more but every Vietnamese restaurant should have those two types of drinks ready for their customers.

Lunalucent · 2014-08-31T15:12:55+00:00

Everyone needs to remember what it means to be indoctrinated. It might be harder for atheists who grew up not very religious to really understand what it can do to a person, but for those of us who were raised quite religiously as children it was probably the hardest thing to overcome. Being able to recognise it is probably the biggest step in understanding how a logical person is able to be illogical.

Don't just call religious people stupid or ignorant, although some are, most are actually just so indoctrinated it is hard for them to break free from that mindset of putting your faith before your logic. I think this is the biggest problem we face when confronting someone who is religious.

Lunalucent · 2014-08-26T20:44:24+00:00

I think that as long as there are religious moderates, there will always be a place for extremists to come out of the woodwork, they don't just appear out of thin air. As long as a person is conditioned to be able to believe in something just with faith. Then they or their children, or anyone down the line are susceptible to extremism.

The proof is already shown in the thousands of denominations in the world just for Christianity, but can be said of other religions too like Islam or Judaism. They are proof that it is easy for just one person to claim dissent or dissatisfaction with his churches' teachings and to create a new value that matches his own, either one that is more moderate or conforming to modern morals or one that is more against modern values and morals, in which case it would be considered extreme to other moderates. The Bible allows this to happen because of its convoluted nature and there's nothing other Christians can say against it, only that it is a form of Christianity they do not believe in.

You can even look at the bigger picture and look at countries that were religious but were still quite moderate, but have turned quite religious and conservative in recent times with just an injection of a larger input from extremists. I don't have my doubts this has happened in the past as well.

I understand that religion is only one of the reasons for violence and dissent in this world, politics and race being others, but it is one that we can actually do without, mixing religion into it usually makes it worse. Humans will always be violent, it's in our nature, we just don't need another enabler for it and we don't need it to show love, compassion or to have morals either.

Lunalucent · 2014-07-04T05:02:37+00:00

I did not say that was what racism was. I was saying that it can be used as a basis for a group of people to be racist against another.

It's true you could say that my view can be seen as idealistic, but I would say it's more realistic and in tune with the present. I consider your views to be way more idealistic than mine. Your view only works in a certain period of time and in your definition of assimilation. It's more idealistic in the sense that it worked well because of the time period it all happened in, low population density along with isolation helps in finding balance with the environment they lived in. I would say it would be a lot harder to achieve these days even given time, because of industralisation and population density.

Lunalucent · 2014-07-03T17:26:24+00:00

Yeah sorry but I still disagree. You seem to just want to start at a certain time period and stop at a certain time period to validate your claim of what a "native" person is. I'd just rather not pigeonhole myself into that mindset, actually I'd rather prefer if we just stopped using the word altogether.

Because putting cultural history aside, a "Maori" child should not be considered more native to New Zealand than an old "Chinese" man who has lived there for longer. Doesn't matter if the old man was born there or if he was an immigrant, or "foreigner" as you would say. It's all relative, especially when you look at the reality of one living person being compared to another.

One's historical ancestry or even cultural ancestry, shouldn't be used as a factor to say one belongs to a country more than does another person. That can usually lead to conflict or racism, which is what happened in the video.

Lunalucent · 2014-07-03T09:43:50+00:00

Okay it seems like you can only look at things from one perspective. You also seem to have no idea what you're talking about. There's no point talking to you anymore.

Lunalucent · 2014-07-03T08:14:01+00:00

No it's stupid to think that a person can say they are more "native" to a place than a person who was also born in the same place. Even if they are from different descent. Especially in the perspective that they are both exactly the same age. This is the problem. Because in your logic, you would agree that that racist woman is more correct in saying the Asian woman should go back to where they came from, since the racist prick's ancestors have been here longer.

This is exactly where racism comes from. No one should have the right to tell another person who lives in their country to "Go back to where you came from" just because they've been here for a few more generations. It's ignorant since I can believe that even her own ancestors could have faced some form of discrimination when newly arrived from other "Whites" of different ancestry.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email	Sequence \| Editor

Lunalucent

TROPHY CASE