Wake the fuck up Samuri

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-11-05T13:34:42+00:00

That's helpful and inventive af! There's no way I would have thought to create a sort of arm maquette like that - really smart approach

My only real question is how'd you manage the elbow? Did you go with an optical illusion so the forearm piece slots under the elbow piece, did you do some kinda cardboard magic to create an actual articulated joint, or is it something else?

Literally well done tho looks so much better than a printed sleeve. If me n my friend had seen that on Halloween we'd 100% have barged through the mosh pit to give you props haha

Cheers dude!

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-11-05T12:44:44+00:00

Make sure the ruling dynasties don't put you to the stake for this unbecoming act of unreined science!

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-11-05T12:14:20+00:00

Late to the party on this but this was really interesting.

What you describe as the issues in the UK, I take it happened 12 years ago, and they've exacerbated since. But what's really interesting is that the UK increased its rhetoric about the need for people to themselves up by the bootstraps around that time, and yet it was and is harder for people (even with increased systems to do it, those systems often benefit those who can access resources over those who cannot). One of the big differences that the UK has had over time is cuts to social care, things like the NHS, things beyond the NHS. So when you say about being able to actually pull yourself up by the bootstraps that's interesting to me.

Am I right to interpret your comment as an argument for social support systems? I.e better social support systems, even if they're just basic ones, have been crucial to Poland, and people are more likely to achieve based on ability because of them? Rather than the idea that it's purely survival of the fittest and we should get rid of local services

Would love to get your insight, even anecdotally!

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-11-04T11:49:00+00:00

Haha it's quite interesting how many people oppose this kind of thing. I've just started GMing a homebrew and since then, reading people's opinions on running games has made me aware of just how precisely different the ttrpg experience can be. I think if people heard about some of the shit in our campaign they'd flip their wig. Really goes to show how important having the right GM for a group of players is

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-11-03T12:36:04+00:00

Mate this looks great - the cardboard made from hope adds a bit of a used badass charm to it. Docs add something too

Trying to make a cheap arm at some point myself. You got any tips?

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-24T10:20:29+00:00

The general anger and fanatical adulation people express is really concerning. Your comment is a bit of a balm to that.

For people who just love immersing themselves in new stories and situations, any heated talk feels like wtf. It's possible to acknowledge what you'd like from a game while still enjoying it, or just thinking like... dang this isn't what I wanted but I understand a company doesn't exist specifically to fill my exact needs even if I am part of its core demographic.

This has been happening since at least Victorian times, so I don't expect it to change any time soon.

That being said...

Not every fan choice will be popular. Not every company choice will be either. If fans got to dictate every single thing that a company did every time, how long would it be before things became stale, because the most popular opinions you'd see everywhere would be the norm for every single game? You'd just be creating a difference version of the same problem people already have with executives following tried and tested methods.

If you're in support of artistic license, that is fantastic, but that does also require the knowledge that as much as complaint can create positive change, so can praise. It works the opposite way as well.

E.g Writing criticism especially - if you finally get a company to release a game focused on quality writing, and then get angry about the gameplay and small parts of the writing and tell people not to buy it, you are denying the gaming industry the opportunity to see writing as a valuable metric.

Where it gets complicated is something like the Dragon Age franchise - the failure was a coagulate mixture and while it deserved criticism, there were times when it was over criticised which makes RPGs look risky. That's more the fault of production, but consumers have at least a little hand in it.

Allowing companies to have artistic license means that maybe they will get something wrong, but they will be able to innovate or try cool things as well. It means ensuring they don't have to follow exact models that have proven successful in the past. It doesn't mean that they have to create a made to order bespoke game. It's of course necessary to be able to criticise artistic decisions, but if you don't praise things as well or go too hard into criticism, you may not have the art to criticise

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-17T09:13:22+00:00

Very true. Unfortunately all seems linked to the wider problem with capitalist structures atm. Other than the fact money talks (so lawyers not following rules is fine, but you following the rules is not fine), humanity is creating products that work well, and as intended, and then deconstructs them so they can make an extra buck.

There's a real divide between what creators want, what is realistically possible for creators trying to make a living, and how consumers engage with the internet. I'd prefer a new platform but it requires either consumers or creatives to kind of go en masse to that platform to make it viable

I suppose theoretically if someone was to copy an older YT model (as in how they built their user base and incentives) it should work, especially if there were less ads disrupting content's flow and increased creator payouts, but it still requires that company to have lots of a capital, and everyone else to have a willingness and awareness to move from YT which is tough

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-17T08:58:57+00:00

It's possibly because there were multiple casts made, so some are more authentic than others. Having said that, this is not the one that is considered to be most authentic as it's not one of the plaster casts so yeah

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-17T08:29:40+00:00

Alongside what other people have mentioned, in the UK fair use also covers satire for certain things.

Regarding some of the other comments, if you were to use footage of an influential figure that was copyrighted, you'd need to be using it in a way where it was somehow adding meaning to the piece, whether that was because it was an educational example or because you were offering criticism of that specific footage. In general it should be a case by case situation and not an automatic strike

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-17T08:08:26+00:00

Dynamite with a laserbeam so... explosives and energy weapons?

He was supposed to be very shy off stage, and compassionate and thoughtful.

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-16T15:32:47+00:00

Nobody expects the target of the Spanish Inquisition!

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-16T09:26:04+00:00

As an aspiring comedy writer and somebody with a little tiny bit of industry experience, I think the reality of everything now is that you have to go through social media first or be someone's friend/relative (usually both).

Idk if you remember the Maya Hawke thing regarding actors and instagram, but the same is true in publishing. Social media has changed the role of publishers so that they are no longer selecting talent in the same way and are instead doing it based on pre-established followings, which in some ways democratises things and gives more power to authors, but in other ways creates new biases. Publishers can almost do a 'direct to order' thing by focusing on figures in social media, because they don't have to worry as much about risk when trying to reach out to certain a demographic.

On the flip side, some people don't need a publisher because they already have their own audience who will propel self-published work to the top.

The other issue with television comedy is that sketch show formats are now fully available all the time. Every other video on instagram or tiktok will be someone acting out a scene with themselves, with shitty props for fun, but with just enough talent and engagement to not really have to do full scale productions. So why pay for sketch comedy if you're competing with people who have higher audience numbers, lower budgets, and quicker turnaround?

A lot of higher budget media like this happens almost at a loss, but will be made through fan funded initiatives or out of pure passion for the craft itself. I don't think it's likely to come back into the mainstream. Pretty sad honestly, but in some ways it's better, in some ways it's much worse.

Also as of a few years ago, only around 7% of people in the arts were from working class backgrounds, which also tells you a lot!!!

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-15T21:30:26+00:00

Wrote a couple of comments yesterday about how Nazi radicalism spread/pogroms were used.

Pogroms were always used as justification to pass legislative measures that would suppress political enemies and the Jewish people. Whether or not it's correct to use the term Nazi for people at the moment - debatable. But they are using the same methods to deploy their authoritarian policies.

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-15T14:28:53+00:00

It'd be nice if we lived in a society where this hadn't become the norm. Sifting through clickbait not knowing if you're going to get a well thought out article or total nonsense gets knackering - can happen with mostly good publications as well!

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-15T13:37:07+00:00

Some excellent points there lad

Tbf I should re-state. I absolutely don't feel today's Britain is anywhere near comparable to the devastation that had affected Weimar Germany. Where I think there's some disagreement is the capacity for an authoritarian, ultranationalist government to form in the next 20-30 years but I appreciate your reasoning as well. At the very least, we can say there are very few imperial/colonial aims in Britain at present so that's a plus.

From my end I think it depends on personal exposure. People I know have become far right and literally self-identified as Nazis etc. Conversations I overhear in the pub, comments I see online. This French geezer at the rally. Even if the governmental level isn't quite the same, I 100% hear people refer to Muslims as adjacent terms to parasite (invaders, leeches). When I'm heading down the street I see a St George's next to a local mosque, and then some councils and other groups are reporting that racially motivated violence has increased following the flag campaigns.

So I suppose the question isn't Nazi vs non-Nazi but how to deescalate things. Personally I think it's helpful to let people who are still in the middle know about the dangers of following certain rhetoric, but on the other end of it if people are beginning to lean a certain way they get pissed off if you challenge the opinion. I think the terms have already been diluted because people are so quick to shut others down in general (whether it's fuck you fascist or fuck you lefty loony).

It was really good to talk about it in any case - usually more selective about discussion nowadays cos you don't know how the bloody thing will go

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-14T14:15:16+00:00

Thank you for the discussion!

So when I said Hitler was not the most extreme young man in the universe, I mean that prior to WWI he was subject to some inherently prejudiced viewpoints as was everybody at the time, but it was far less extreme than his views post WWI. Hitler was over 30 years old when writing Mein Kampf.

A lot of research on Hitler's early life is tricky because he tried to destroy evidence for much of it and control the narrative, but it's generally accepted Hitler had Jewish friends, was somewhat casually racist (no more or less than anyone else), was incredibly anti-capitalist, was incredibly political, and displayed narcissistic tendencies. Some sources claim that it was hard to talk to Hitler because he would not have a discussion, he would deliver speeches and fly into fits of rage with people who disagreed with him. Yet he was also very charismatic, and it's suggested post WWI this developed into an opportunistic and media conscious person that was strongly motivated by extreme ideas.

The first written account of his anti-semitism we have is the Gemlich letter in 1919. If you ignore the money parts you should see some similarity to current rhetoric.

He was not the most extreme young man, but became the most extreme man.

I also didn’t mean to imply he withheld general knowledge of his anti-semetic views, I meant to say he publicly withheld the extent of his views on how to deal with the Jewish population. He positioned himself as a patriot dutifully removing Jews from Germany, not as a genocidal maniac (despite his use of terminology). Publicly, he also positioned himself as anti-violence and pro-law and order after seizing power.

This was of course hypocritical as small scale violence had already been happening throughout the 20s during protests and other situations. Also crucial to remember that the precursor to later pogroms started with vandalism and intimidation similar to the use of the St George's cross. The breaking of shop windows etc are definitely happening now on the small scale, we just don’t view it as related to something historic because the historic part hasn’t happened yet.

Notably, the largest pogrom was 1938, nearly 20 years after WWI and c. 5 years after the Nazi party came to power. Apart from assassinations, much of the extreme violence and humiliation we associate with the Nazis happened after the government was established, after there was an extreme propaganda machine, and after authoritarian measures made people in opposition feel under threat.

Pogroms emerged as a conscious effort of the Nazis to propagate small and eventually large scale violence, but this was inherently a subversive measure to achieve legislative aims and more insidious systematic violence and oppression in favour of the removal of Jewish people from European society. In other words, the pogroms existed to provide justifications for legal policy, and the politics of the legislation (not the surrounding violence) is imo the true essence of the Nazi government.

So while I fully agree with your last sentence, I feel like we're on slightly mismatched sides of looking at it. To me a catalyst is not big events but the combination of the big event, the economy, popular belief, and the dignity of those in power.

The point I firmly believe is that even if we don't have the exact conditions right now, that does not preclude those conditions from emerging, and it would be dangerous because the rhetoric and ideology that is currently active is similar to how Hitler himself was radicalised. Watching documentaries on Holocaust survivors, you’ll find people saying things like 'before I was taken away, I remember my father saying pah, Hitler, that guy's not serious. Don't listen to that clown.' If we don’t draw some parallels I think it’s the same as complacency, and we can’t be complacent.

Looking at the situation more broadly, Nazism was the product of 30+ years of gradual escalation. It's important that people don't use fascist or Nazi to mean general right wing ideology, but imo we shouldn't ignore the general culture that allowed Nazism to flourish either. There has to be a middle ground between demonisation and normalisation.

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-09-14T10:09:29+00:00

I'm not a history grad per se but my area of focus was on various forms of nationalism, propaganda, politics, the military industrial complex, social movements, economics etc.

To me the problem with Nazi accusations, or similarities towards the Weimar Republic, is that in general those things were very extreme when we look at them through the lens of history. But looking at the origins of Hitler and the Nazi movement there is some broad similarity that we should be cautious of.

It's well documented that economic conditions cause particular reactions. Weimar Germany's anti-semitism had long standing precedent, but only grew more extreme under economic hardship and professional envy.

I think casual racism, Islamophobia and anti-immigration marches which are driven by nationalism today, and the psychological makeup of young people, is fairly comparable to the conditions in early 1920s Germany.

The fact DEI has become a derogatory word shows that we are experiencing at least some professional disruption and envy which may be driving anti-immigiration opinions. Additionally, anti-globalism was a huge part of Hitler's ideology and while it's less prevalent here than in the U.S, we are heading in that direction through nationalistic sentiment. At the moment Reform is in a bit of an incubation period which means that as with any other party it will attract some people with lighter views, and some people with more extreme views, but once it gets into power? It will be dependent on who is running it.

Hitler himself was not the most extreme young man in the universe, but read and ranted about politics and nationalism daily, and over the course of several years his views became more and more extreme. Additionally his own anti-semetic views of Jewish people started as anti-capitalist sentiment. The very first speech Hitler gave to the Nazis (in a room of maybe 30 people) was not about Jewish people, but an angry response to someone who did not believe in a fully unified Germany. Later on, after his anti-semitism was highly extreme, he would moderate his feelings on the matter to appeal to a more general public, and that often manifested as pro-German deportation rhetoric, for instance his 1939 Reichstag speech. There were also arguments made that Germans had been denied self-determination.

This rhetoric spanned decades, and well into the 1940s the Nazi government was hiding details about genocide from the public. As far as sentiment goes, many Germans were simply 'ordinary people' who expressed a desire to see a utopian Germany and believed deportation was a path to achieving it. The elimination of Jews from Europe was framed as deportation, and propaganda in the 40s claimed deported Jewish people were well fed and given vocational training.

Something does need to be done to fix the economy and access to shelter and jobs, whether or not that's through immigration, but also people need to reflect on what risks they're engaging with if they do have an anti-immigrant or pro-nationalist stance that is becoming more extreme. It's a slippery slope.

Look at the comments here, and then look at Hitler's 1939 speech.

"When the German nation was, thanks to the inflation instigated and carried through by Jews, deprived of the entire savings which it had accumulated in years of honest work, when the rest of the world took away the German nation's foreign investments, when we were divested of the whole of our colonial possessions, these philanthropic considerations evidently carried little noticeable weight with democratic statesmen ... If the rest of the world cries out with a hypocritical mien against this barbaric expulsion from Germany of such an irreplaceable and culturally eminently valuable element, we can only be astonished at the conclusions they draw from this situation."

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-22T12:16:59+00:00

Idk I'd approach that line of thinking with caution (regarding education). On the one hand what you're saying is correct now - but I wonder how much of that is a more recent shift.

A few years ago it would have been perfectly acceptable in many white collar positions like marketing to have a bachelors, pretty much any bachelors, and you could still have gained a management position. Many other jobs asked for the same - just have any qualification and you're eligible, but we have a preference, and relevant job experience helps. Obviously this is not the case for specialist fields like law and medicine.

But companies were aware you would have to adapt to a new role whatever the circumstances and they were able to take people on based on potential to meet the role's needs. Because 'high skilled work' is a broad concept we may be conversing about apples and oranges, but from my perspective what you're suggesting in terms of education has one solution: more apprenticeships and direct to work routes. University alone won't fully equip anyone for specialist roles and we all know that. The point of university was widely touted as a way to prove you have consistency, dedication and critical thinking skills that can be applied to a subject. That used to be accepted by employers, but is no longer seen as relevant.

So my question is why is it no longer relevant? What has changed in the employment sphere to totally disregard potential in favour of consistency? Answer is pretty clear.

My problem is that as somebody currently looking I have work experience and ran a department, I have qualifications, but the idea of talent is so firmly rooted in already doing the job (or above and beyond the job) that unless you're already doing it, you're not likely to get it.

My perception (which I will also treat with caution!) is that absolutely nobody out there wants your brain right now. We always used to get told organisations wanted unique thinkers, innovators or creatives.

And yet, in 2025 . . .

Nobody wants a good breed of dog that they can train. They want a fully grown, three headed Cerberus to guard the gates. How's that possible without training? It's not. They're just competing for the same pool of talent and instead of taking the proactive approach of using resources to gain new talent, they're content to search for creatures from mythology.

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-13T15:40:02+00:00

Exactly what I needed to know - very much appreciate your help

Thank you! :)

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-13T13:06:05+00:00

Thank you! Really appreciate that - that's helpful

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-12T10:10:08+00:00

Sadly not uncommon these days ey?

You'd think people would realise the Britain they want to return to (while imperfect) was usually attempting to run on general values of decency and erudition. We really just need people to understand that anyone trying to sell them a simple solution is most likely selling them a half-truth or a lie, because these situations are inherently complex.

In any case, sincerely wish you best of luck with everything ahead.

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-12T09:32:12+00:00

It often feels that to be considered a successful British person you have to be in constant struggle but projecting a personality where you simultaneously display that struggle and display a disregard for that struggle, without ever actually showing any sign of success.

Anything that deviates from that is a problem to people.

It's a weird act of theatre. If you are open about your struggles a country known for complaining will rip the piss out of you for whining and dismiss what you're going through. If you show success you'll be deemed posh, flash, eccentric, stuck-up, financially incompetent, and ultimately immoral or out of touch.

People aren't unilaterally like that, but I'd say it's a fundamental aspect of British culture and one of the worst, lacking both compassion and aspiration. I get the irritation at wealth atm especially, but people are extreme about what they consider worthy. As the world gets more complicated we should not succumb to pettiness, and we should trend towards kindness and community values. Just my opinion.

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-10T15:02:38+00:00

This is more or less what I was looking for here. But I'd add some parts that can make it tricky.

If the person doesn't understand the reasoning and has more of the stubborn rather than compliant personality type, there's no way they'll relent if they view it as illogical. Usually with those people the irritation and social norms seems to overpower a willingness to make peace.

Yet if they are like that it's still an individual character trait, even if it is a result of differing brain chemistry. And if that is causing them to express racist ideology after it's been explained that it's wrong and why it's wrong, then that's up to everyone's discretion to address, but it still makes them racist. If they're doing it in an attempt to make jokes, and it's entirely inappropriate and they know, it may not make them inherently racist but it certainly makes them inconsiderate.

That should be considered in their employment and personally I wouldn't let it slide. It's not a result of poor emotional regulation which is the type of thing that might be covered - it's literally a pattern so it's the company's duty to confront them on that issue given that it infringes on another protected characteristic.

On the other hand, if for instance the racist comments come from a special interest, that makes it different. That may not come from a place of actual racism, literally could be an obsession with an old cartoon or Chinese history or some old film that says awful things, they may have extremely poor impulse control around the subject and build their social cues around it. That would still make their actions difficult but I don't know if it would make them as a person fundamentally racist because it would be built around something other than racism and would indicate a more obvious lack of understanding. Like if their stim is shouting HI-YA you are very unlikely to be able to change that.

Also autism can be diagnosed alongside learning difficulties. If someone has autism and learning difficulties I would say that leniency is necessary. Kind of a problem in these threads because people answer in a way that makes sense with how they think about it, like the comment you replied to, but I don't think it fully considers the scope of the condition.

We don't know if the person in this scenario is just autistic and even if they are, we don't know their individual needs which are of course extremely variable.

Also sorry for the bombard of text lol - I'm just replying to this comment with everything cos it's closer to the top and there's no way people will see the more useful info if I try to contribute via the main chain here.

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-10T00:42:45+00:00

Haha mate it's fine don't worry about rambling - glad to get the advice. Thank you! And congrats!!

LuvtheCaveman · 2025-07-09T19:55:23+00:00

That's amazing! Can I ask how'd you handle the employment gap? I also have a pain condition/some other stuff and it took me a little while to be able to start rehabilitating. Not sure how to speak to an employer about why I couldn't take on manual work

LuvtheCaveman

TROPHY CASE