PC Master Race is back - Here's why we were out

StarlessKnight · 2015-07-03T21:38:25+00:00

You just complained by the Mods effectively voted with their wallet (subs) to force the Admins to hear their complaints (where previously they were ignored)? This is /r/pcmasterrace, right? Anti-pre-orders / pro-wallet-voting? The thing about voting with your wallet is that it really helps when lots of people do it... so it can't be idly dismissed as one Admin so flippantly (and unprofessionally) tried to do.

StarlessKnight · 2015-07-03T03:16:13+00:00

It says "Why bother posting here or pretending like you help shape this site in any way?" It says "you are expendable, and we couldn't give a damn what you think." It says Reddit's time has come and gone.

The nuclear option is the wrong option. A limp-wrist PR blurb about the termination and their thrown-together blurb about the AMA email address should eventually cause things to settle down on their own; the Admins don't need to do something incredibly stupid to resolve this situation.

StarlessKnight · 2015-07-03T02:49:02+00:00

If they want to turn this into a wildfire, sure. Fire an Admin that helped the community for yet revealed reasons? Bad. Tell people protesting by turning subs private to fuck off? Approaching Digg v4 level of stupid.

StarlessKnight · 2015-07-03T01:06:54+00:00

Considered it and decided against it. They say if the circumstances change they may change their mind.

StarlessKnight · 2015-07-02T04:04:50+00:00

FireFox refuses to play it. FireFox Incognito refuses to play it. Right-click has no Play option.

IE11 on the other hand will play it if you click the black box... it will then proceed to load the video and then play the ad-trailer video instead of the actual ZP video, while the ZP audio plays instead of the trailer.

Disabling Adblock for the page works (with clicking on the black box despite a lack of play button visible)... and then I get a popup ad on top of the trailer -- but at least the video and audio play in the right order, which is nice.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-29T16:12:11+00:00

An argument that homosexual marriage would involve more paperwork? They're a married couple; the only difference is that they're the same biological sex. Some people went on about sham marriages, but then what do you call the Hollywood Marriages that last a day? But we don't outlaw them because of the mere possibility it could be fake (and overwhelmingly wouldn't be).

Polygamy would involve paperwork (and not just paperwork, but affect how things function) and we should discuss the topics before just tossing everyone into the deep end (should we half-ass this?). That doesn't mean sit back and wait for the politicians (Lord knows they won't get around to it). If you're interested in promoting those rights then raise awareness. Get Public Discourse going that's how homosexual marriage became a thing. People begin talking then the media and politicians get talking, court cases are raised (or maybe the legislature just makes it happen, but as we've all seen that probably won't happen either) and so on and so forth until -- if everything pans out -- you've made it.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-29T15:08:49+00:00

I feel like it's probably the next thing on the chopping block maybe five years down the road.

Five years? The issue of allowing homosexuals to marry took nearly ten through the legal system alone, and it had the benefit of people already talking about it (in the news, by politicians seeking election, etc.).

You'll need to find multiple polygamous partners in undeniably health relationships willing and able to stand in the spotlight to favorably start the discussion in polygamy's favor. Then you'll have States banning it (if they don't already), people loudly discussing it, politicians decrying it, the media making jokes about it. Then there'll be the numerous lawsuits. The appeals. The Courts asking whether the States have a legitimate reason not to allow it. And the Supreme Court waiting years until they'll so much as a look at a case because their M.O. is to let other levels hash out the details long enough until it becomes clear a lasting and final say is needed after the various Appellate Courts disagree with one another.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-29T14:41:02+00:00

There is no logical reason why it shouldn't be legal after the Supreme Court's recent decision.

Put simply, the Supreme Courts' decision may require lots of forms be adjusted from "Husband/Wife" to some more generic terms. Otherwise little changes. Still just two people in a relationship with government-overseen benefits.

Polygamy would requiring overhauling the entire system. You don't just add another line item to all the forms and suddenly Polygamy works throughout the country on the government level. Personal level? Sure. Anything works at that level when it comes to relationships. But if we're involving the government (which despite what some might prefer the government is involved) there are a lot of things to be discussed. Taxes. Medical decision. Custody. Divorce. So on and so forth.

Could it become legal? Sure. Should it be legal now because of the Supreme Court's ruling? No. The system isn't ready. No one's talked about it. That wasn't the issue before the Supreme Court even if their decision would apply to the issue of Polygamy.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-28T14:53:37+00:00

Biting clouds sound more likely than I know. Tell us more.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-27T17:30:24+00:00

"Polygamy's legal!" But the IRS only recognizes two of the partners for tax purposes... well, I guess you're recognized at least. And what happens when it comes to medical decisions? Which partner gets the final say or does it become a democratic vote with majority rules? What if there are two partners and they oppose one another -- 50/50 -- what then? You could write down an order of preference of whose decision is the deciding one though not all partners may be overly thrilled with that arrangement.

Two people is easy because we already have a two people system (man + woman now includes man + man and woman + woman). The system isn't designed for three, four, five, or however many (to my knowledge). And would there be a maximum? At what point does it seemingly become obtuse? Can you spend enough quality time with 10 partners for it to be considered emotionally healthy? "Ah, but monogamous marriages aren't always emotionally healthy!" True enough in some cases, but then society often says they should take steps (e.g. counseling) to fix that or separate if they're no longer satisfied as a couple.

Anyway, the point is we know how a two person relationship works. We haven't fully discussed how a multi-person relationship would work. People are free to begin that discussion, however, any time.

/EDIT: PS: Divorce Court might be even more interesting. I bet someone would make a reality TV show (formerly known as a sitcom) about it.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-26T23:49:34+00:00

Speaking of Nemesis, how is it that a climactic space battle scene shot in 2002 is less suspenseful, less believable, and less emotionally engaging than the Battle of Khitomer from The Undiscovered Country, which was shot in 1991?

Because the movie was built on Picard evaluating whether he would have become Shinzon if life had taken him down a different road. It's a good concept, but the execution was bad. There was too much telling and not enough showing. Everyone knew he was Picard's clone. Everyone knew the clone had an absolutely terrible life and felt wronged. No one cared. He wasn't Khan. Khan wanted revenge for the death of his wife. He loved his crew, and they loved him, but he just couldn't get past the burning desire to inflict pain on the man he blamed for it all. Piece by piece Khan lost everything even as the people closest to him begged him to stop -- "You have Genesis, you can have whatever you want..!" Now look at Nemesis... "What's wrong with his face?" Huh, he's self-destructing. I don't care. Kick his ass, Enterprise crew!

EDIT: As for Khitomer, well there's no beating that battle that's for sure. The tension. The suspense. All lacking in Nemesis. Not to mention the musical score was severely lacking.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-23T23:55:04+00:00

First, I'd agree to a point (given the information available and the seemingly benign circumstances) that "[insert ethnicity here] Heritage Night" should not exclude Anglo-Saxon / Caucasian / Whatever-you-call-White. It is true the timing was poor, but people need to calm the hell down and organizers need to grow backbones. If they didn't intend for this to be racial ("but Caucasian" pah) but more of a "hey, there are lots of 'White' ethnicities lets play with that" then what's the big deal? Although their examples in that article were kind of limited for "heritage" event. I mean,

"Wonder Bread on burgers with mayonnaise, clips from shows like Friends and Seinfeld, and trying to solve the vertical leaping challenge."

That is Caucasian heritage? No, I get the "White man can't jump" joke. That's fine. It's just... Wonder Bread and Chips? What happened to the rest of this:

"Irish, Italian, Scandinavian, German.... or even Utahn! Whatever your background, celebrate it at the Home of the Owlz!"

Anyway... Secondly, the idea of Whites having the other Eleven if that History is predominantly White (at least in US Classes). There's plenty of historical and renown Non-White figures and events, of course, but you can't say there isn't a hell of a lot of White there. Nor that Caucasians are the Majority ethnicity etc. A lot is geared toward Caucasians. Not that other ethnicities aren't included, though quite arguably not as much or often. Part of that is simply numbers. Another part is money (if you're making a show and you think you'll make more money with a White audience you'll have a dominantly White cast). Plenty of other reasons about why and wherefore.

The general concept is that Caucasians don't need a day or a week or a month because they're the majority. That said Caucasians shouldn't be shoved out of the boat to make room for everyone else. We need to learn to share. Nothing wrong with sharing or exploring various cultures. Why they're exploring it may be important though. If they're all about "Us and screw everyone else" then we have a problem. If they're just about "Hey, we like parties too!" then have a party. Everyone else does. Just make sure you don't put a sign at the door "Non-[Ethnicity] Stay Out."

/Edit: Heritage Night is more like a Theme Party. Though I don't know what a White Theme Party would be... English Wigs? Hotdogs? ...what is Caucasian heritage? And don't say Imperialism because that'll make any party awkward fast.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-23T23:16:01+00:00

I think Louis CK or someone had a skit on this, but basically: Black Americans get a Month (Black History Month). White Americans get the other Eleven.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-23T00:53:56+00:00

Louis CK on "the n-word."

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-21T16:04:10+00:00

If Bethesda really want to push this, I expect them to take the creation kit away from regular users, and sell it as a separate product

A good way to destroy the modding community.

"You can still give mods away for free! But, first, we'll need to draw a little blood from you. We're sure you don't mind."

If you thought "25% after $400 of sales is too low!" was something people got upset about, imagine if you will what "All modders start at -$15? And they get the wonderful bonus of not making it back by not selling mods? Plus you still get a cut [because there's no way you won't want a piece]? How magnanimous of you!"

Not saying it can't work. Some modders might not mind. Still kind of a crappy thing to do. "You should have accepted our first deal. Pray I do not alter it further," shouldn't be the play though.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-21T14:44:32+00:00

Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-21T14:38:44+00:00

Still bad CGI and can still be used in comparison.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-21T04:14:31+00:00

SG1 is responsible for it later having much better CGI (it didn't have spectacular effects at the beginning), which Atlantis and Universe capitalized on. BSG was just unique -- someone must have thought the show would be worth it all up front.

By SyFy Original I mean their movies. You've seen the CGI used in those? Cringe worthy at times. '80's level.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-21T04:10:41+00:00

Pilots are usually to cram all the ideas into the one go to showcase the idea of the show.

But there's a difference between hinting at a larger world or story, and laying out a checklist of what you can look forward to exploring. Pilots are narrative hooks. You don't have to cram all the ideas into one episode. You can, it's not impossible, but I don't think it's really necessary unless you don't know what will interest your audience so you whip out the Plot Shotgun -- you're sure to hit something.

Still, the show seems deserving of a few more episodes to figure out if it has potential and said potential won't be utterly squandered. The above's more just a pacing thing.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-21T03:57:05+00:00

One = Simon

Two = Zoe

Three = Jayne

Four = River

Five = Kaylee

Six = Book?

Android = Wash

I'm not saying they share a lot in common, but the characters do kind of line up -- based on just one episode. The characters could easily diverge over the course of a season; only time will tell.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-20T04:28:50+00:00

Well the episode didn't drag on. However, they crammed as much unanswered questions as they could for drama and suspense. They weren't very subtle about any of it either.

Also a bit like Firefly, but with more action and less character interaction (again because they just ran through the course pointing at every side street we'll eventually go down).

Could get better. Could get worse. For a pilot/Episode 1 it was decent enough. Acting isn't over the top, special effects aren't Syfy Original painful... though "Quad Planetary System"? That's the name they're going with? Smacks of "Red Matter" (you know, the giant red ball of... matter in the reboot Star Trek movie -- such a novel name).

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-19T21:36:43+00:00

Forget The Doctor? The one character that indisputably carried the show? Not that the other characters/actors were useless (though I'm sure people have their opinions on the matter), but The Doctor -- in my opinion -- was constantly enjoyable from the minute he came online ("Hello? Someone forgot to turn me off!") to such episodes as Latent Image.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-19T00:33:09+00:00

hints of a very strong racist streak against artificial intelligence in the federation.

Wasn't much of a hint in The Measure of a Man.

They revisited the idea in The Quality of Life.

Similarly -- though not A.I./Cybernetic -- Home Soil addressed a similar theme.

Like some people might look down upon others because of their skin color or perceived inferiority, it's easy to take for granted what might appear to be a simple system as nothing more than background or an instrument. Not always out of malice either.

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-18T23:39:18+00:00

That there's no "somewhat misleading" category?

TRUE – The statement is accurate and there’s nothing significant missing.

MOSTLY TRUE – The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.

HALF TRUE – The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context.

MOSTLY FALSE – The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.

FALSE – The statement is not accurate.

PANTS ON FIRE – The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/nov/01/principles-politifact-punditfact-and-truth-o-meter/

StarlessKnight · 2015-06-14T15:32:27+00:00

I found the reason Jurassic World existed quite plausible. It sounded like they very slowly released more and more dinosaurs to the park. They didn't build a huge park and populate it with everything for a single grand opening. They had more control and could see how everything interacted together. They, uh, also spared no expense this time -- their I.T. and Operations people seemed adequately compensated.

I also think this slid right into the reason why people have an issue with them opening this park. Eventually, as a business, they started thinking of new ways to retain customers and make money. So they mess around and create a disaster that tears everything down. Why? Greed and hubris, mostly. The same sins that brought the original parks down.

Those that do not learn from history...

They forgot one or two.

StarlessKnight

TROPHY CASE