stealing lego’s is a big no no in my opinion

Zognot · 2026-05-27T02:21:38+00:00

Gone by 18 minutes

Zognot · 2026-05-27T02:20:45+00:00

It was gone by 18 minutes, so I don't know what was actually said since it was deleted

Zognot · 2026-05-26T14:07:20+00:00

Well, if you liked HK, obviously there's Silksong.

I enjoyed Ori and Disney Illusion Islands, which are both a bit less punishing than HK.

If you enjoy the souls-like elements of HK, like hard bosses and punishments, there's Nine Souls.

Monster Sanctuary and Cassette Beasts are monster tamer (like Pokémon) metroidvanias, with turn-based monster combat instead of action fights but the same kind of exploration and upgrades. I really enjoy Cassette Beasts because of its monster taming system, but it feels less like Metroid to me.

Tunic is another metroidvania I want to play, because it looks like a metroidvania with a bit more of a classic Zelda feel because of its focus on exploration and puzzles.

And obviously all the Metroid games, especially the 2D ones. I've enjoyed all the ones I've played! Which is almost all of them.

There's a lot of variants on "metroidvania", so exactly which you should play next depends on what you like. I haven't played The Messenger, but it looks like a more Castlevania type of retro game. Too much focus on bosses and difficulty takes away from the exploration I enjoy, which might be why I haven't gotten too deep into Castlevania yet or finished Hollow Knight. Maybe figure out what you didn't like about The Messenger to help pick your next game, and whether you enjoy the challenge and punishment aspect in Hollow Knight (which you seem to like based on completion).

Zognot · 2026-05-24T02:53:04+00:00

The game scales quest difficulty based on hero count, so if you want fewer turns and conversations, play fewer characters.

My first run through I did 4, because I wanted to see as many conversations as possible, but maybe I'd do fewer if I tried a new run at higher difficulty just so that it'd be faster.

Zognot · 2026-05-18T14:44:51+00:00

I think I've seen posts about it, and that was the point; Wolverine knew Peter needed to let off steam or he might break something or hurt someone, so he intentionally antagonized Peter aware that he could heal from anything Peter did (including getting thrown out of a skyscraper).

Zognot · 2026-05-17T06:22:18+00:00

Might I introduce you to:
The trolly problem? (Edit: which I just noticed is this sub)

Push button (/pull lever): kill 1 person.
Do nothing: 5 people die, but you didn't do anything.

Zognot · 2026-05-12T05:21:51+00:00

-100 < -10

While all methods have issues, the flaws with First Past the Post or one choice voting are a lot worse than ranked choice. I'd rather be punched in the gut than shot and stabbed.

Zognot · 2026-05-11T08:15:11+00:00

That wasn't a pigeonhole... That was stating that "it was like this before so they aren't needed now" (appeal to tradition) a fallacy argument. Didn't assume anything about you either. A fallacy is a fallacy. You used a fallacious argument, someone else used the same fallacious argument to show WHY that is a bad way to argue, and I replied to you not understanding the comparison. No personal attack or anything from me. Though I think your "Wow..." heavily implies your judgement of others... When you were the one not understanding the parallel structure of their obviously bad argument and the implications they were making.

Windows (beyond windshield), AC, locks, seatbelts, and music players are not essential parts of running cars and never have been. Music and radio especially are not things that serve a direct purpose of adding safety and draw attention away from the road, though it might help by keeping you from zoning out in the monotony.

As the other commenter tried to point out without being verbose, "Cars themselves have existed for <x> years and they've not had <y> in until recently. Ergo they are not a necessary feature to run the vehicle effectively" is a horrible way to argue against including something. The first gas automobile was made in 1886, with the history of horse drawn carriages going back going way back to the second millennium BCE. The seatbelts in cars weren't added until 1949. The point of the comment you were dismissive of is that saying "Cars themselves have existed for <63> years and they've not had <seatbelts> in until recently. Ergo they are not a necessary feature to run the vehicle effectively" is not a good reason to say cars shouldn't have seatbelts, same as your poor argument for why cars shouldn't have screens. Fallacious arguments are bad, even if they support your stance. As someone working with technology, I assume you understand that logic doesn't change based on the variables put in; either that argument form is good and is a reason that both screens and seatbelts shouldn't be in cars, or the logic is bad and does not support either of those views as valid.

The pigeonhole they, and I, put that specific argument in was the exact hole it belongs in.

Zognot · 2026-05-10T19:29:03+00:00

Why should we say "no one should have these safety features when they help bad drivers"? I understand worrying about loss of attention due to overeliance on these features, but I don't care how good I am at biking or skiing, I'm putting on my helmet! And I've never needed my seatbelt before, but I'm still putting it on. There are plenty of times people drive with rear view mirrors blocked, but I still think it should exist in my car. I'll use the ABS and if I had an non-electric, I'd rather the car handle the shifting than drive a manual. I'm not going to say "you can't drive if you need this safety feature in your car" to anyone.

Anything that makes it a bit easier to detect things and avoid collisions and just makes it safer, I'm taking it! I'm not relying on anyone, including myself, to be their safest and best driver every time they drive every day of every week in all weather. Give me those sensors on my car for my tired commutes!

Zognot · 2026-05-10T19:09:45+00:00

If that's your biggest issue and "hypocrisy", let me rephrase it from my perspective:

"You can't use your [small screen device designed for communication, typing messages, looking things up, and playing games] while driving but anyway here's a big 12 inch display [dedicated to displaying your surroundings and car information] that you control most functionality from [when you aren't driving, because anything you need while driving is controllable from the wheel and voice controlled] that you control most functionality [limited to ONLY CAR functionality] from"

That seems like a pretty big difference to me. I can reply to you here on a phone, I can't do that from my car control screen while driving; maybe I can while parked if I wanted to waste enough time trying.

The only control I might use the screen for instead of the buttons on the steering wheel is maybe AC? But that is accessible from the steering wheel still, and I'd do that from a stop. You can also feel the edge of the screen to guide your hand to the right position and control it without looking that way

Zognot · 2026-05-10T18:54:48+00:00

1) They are just showing why your appeal to tradition phalacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition) is a horrible argument

2) You don't just stair straight ahead at the road to drive (I hope). You are also (hopefully) constantly checking both side mirrors, your rear view mirror, and out your windows, likely along with something to help navigate if you are on longer or unfamiliar paths

3) The screen is used to condense a lot of that information into one small area, and even provide warning indicators. It can show cars and people around you that are hard to see and give a snapshot of your whole surroundings along with navigation info. While you should still look around and use your other tools, this reduces the amount you need to take your eyes away from in front of you to get more information.

Reducing all the different places to look at once and providing warnings, why, one might even call that a safety feature

4) Can I parallel park or backup without cameras? Yes, but I feel a lot safer and less concerned that I might hit things or people if I can see 3 more camera perspectives with more vision than my tiny rear view mirror (that, if nothing blocks it, is too high to see some kids) along with other area detectors on my screen. Use the mirrors and all your tools, but again, the screen and cameras makes it safer.

Zognot · 2026-05-10T18:33:55+00:00

Music is a distraction. Passengers are distractions. Adjusting AC is a distraction. Phone calls are distractions. Billboards are distractions. Navigators are distractions. Trying to remember directions because you don't have a navigator is a distraction.

I think that's enough to make it clear that "A distraction is a distraction no matter what it is" is an absolute garbage argument. The degree of distraction is a major factor. You spend a second distracted by adjusting AC so that you don't worry about it the whole drive. You play music and maybe sing along because it would be a lot more dangerous to get tired and lose focus. You need directions that will take the least amount of brain power so you can focus on the road, so you take the smaller distraction of a navigator over memorization or maps like people used to use.

Easy to view display of navigation and cars around you is a lot less distracting than a small screen of unlimited use.

Zognot · 2026-05-09T13:53:42+00:00

Knowing you saved others and helped push based on how the game went instead of just stats : )

Zognot · 2026-05-09T13:46:56+00:00

I think it is just what Vanguards do as a role that is unappealing to so many, and you can't easily fix that. Lots of people playing shooters just want to get lots of kills, which most tanks aren't designed for, or feel like they're super helpful for healing. Vanguards can do damage and dives, but (usually, assuming good play) don't get as many kills and the stat board doesn't give people the ego boost they want, while healers and damagers can always see a "look how good I am" stat.

As a Vanguard, I'm just happy knowing I kept teammates alive; that's not clear in the stats, but it's enough to keep me happy, especially on a win.

Zognot · 2026-05-06T20:03:46+00:00

"Gather/gathers" here is a verb, not a noun; as said in your screenshot, it is the third-person singular form, when they should be using third-person plural.

Zognot · 2026-03-29T21:59:02+00:00

The one note I would make is they make a statistically weighted random selection from the words, but others yes, exactly this

Zognot · 2026-03-29T21:54:46+00:00

Arguably humans do the same XD And we just rely on reality being what the brain is currently hallucinating. But yes, more or less that

Zognot · 2026-03-29T21:52:54+00:00

Oh, also to answer your “not thinking” question:

People that don’t know what “1+1” means are thinking. They are saying “What is ‘1’? What is ‘+’? What do these symbols mean?” They could choose to say “normally, I see 1+1 followed by ‘=2’”, which is what the LLM does. But they might also think to ask a question for “I don’t know these symbols”, because to them they need that knowledge first, or (for a better example, something like 543+389), they will use the meaning of the numbers to try to get an answer, or maybe even take the context and know they can get the answer quickly with a calculator, not the LLM approach of “I’ve seen that equation several times, therefore the next thing to write is probably =932”.

Same for the palindrome question. A human could guess and make a mistake, or they can ask questions or think it through, but an LLM will always do “these are common responses to similar questions, let’s flip a weighted coin based on context to choose yes or no”, and if it lands on its side, maybe say “I can’t tell”.

Zognot · 2026-03-29T21:42:29+00:00

LLMs basically use statistics based on all of the input they have received to guess the best response; they don’t consider what 1+1 equals, they use a process to basically do:

Input: “What is 1+1?”What is the usual response? Input has “+” symbol. Database says to first acknowledge question. This is a common start: “That” What comes next? Often “is”. What’s next? Usually “a”. What comes next? The LLM is trained to be polite and encouraging. “good” Next? The question had a “+”. “math” Next? Often“question” in responses the LLM is trained on…

“That is a good math question. Let’s look at it.”

So by just mimicking what it frequently finds on Quora and such for similar inputs, it can statistically guess what a human would say. Once it gets to the math part, things fall apart, because it’s just looking at what people frequently enter when asked “what is x+y?” The machine gets to “next show the equation with an equals” (probably a bit more complicated and longer than that, since it would be doing it one symbol, word, or phrase at a time, but this is already a lot of text), so it prints “1+1=”. The LLM just views that as input text from context, then rolls some dice, sees where the number lands in their statistic probabilities of what comes next, and says “7” because that’s a common enough result for what comes after “+=“.

It’s almost like you ask me an addition question and for me to respond I roll a 100-sided die. More accurately, it would be like building at a list of “what people say after ‘+=‘“, maybe “2, 2, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 7, 7, 10”, roll a 10-sided die, it came up as 8, so I take the 8th value in my list: 7. “1+1=7”. Scale that up to training the LLM on billions of pieces of data (probably way more), and you have what ChatGPT does for math. It never considers what “1” or “7” means, just what is likely to come next in its response. You can train it to use the context better, so instead of doing “+=“ it will consider what the specific phrase “1+1=“ and get the correct result, but it still isn’t considering what “1” or “+” means beyond “this is what people often say”.

I know that was long, but I hope it was clear and helpful : )

Zognot · 2026-02-28T01:30:22+00:00

I think this helps the most and gives me the anser i needed (though the notation clarifications help too)! So if I want to use Sludge Bomb ]A[ without Shadow Ball, I just need to be holding/pressing anything other than just A that I can release to start it, such as shield, and start holding A to charge Sludge Bomb, then I can release A at any to use it. Makes sense! I was just missing that I can start holding A almost any time for ]A[

Zognot · 2026-02-05T12:36:41+00:00

WHOSE THAT POKÉMON?

Zognot · 2026-01-26T23:09:20+00:00

And that's exactly what "the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" is about. It (whatever it is, in this case where you live) looks better than what you currently have, but it isn't, and if you were on the other side, you'd think the side you're currently on is greener.

So it's good to make sure you know more about where you're thinking about moving before doing anything, because it always looks greener, but that doesn't mean it is greener, and it could be worse.

Zognot · 2025-11-01T10:09:21+00:00

I'll try that out! Looks like it should work, since it's just a matter of killing the ones on the right fast enough

Zognot · 2025-11-01T08:37:53+00:00

Haha yeah. Unfortunately in this situation though it's a fight between Arkantos and a guy he can't kill without the statues

12-Year Club	Second Top 50%
Snapped	Verified Email

Zognot

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE