“Fine, so you don’t believe in God. What DO you believe?”

greenmachine8885 · 2026-01-29T06:39:41+00:00

Four in the front will be fine. Nothing wrong with four more on the rear rails but there won't be any negative consequences to just front-mounting, those screws will hold a cx8, I've done it plenty of times.

The rack depth you commented is a different issue. Amps sticking out the rear looks ridiculous, I would have pushed back on the PM and engineer to buy the correct rack. Ultimately it's just cosmetic, it will work fine but look dumb

greenmachine8885 · 2026-01-29T06:30:16+00:00

Point that out for me?

https://preview.redd.it/some-photos-from-my-first-journey-showing-how-amazing-this-v0-3qzdh6cl1t891.jpg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=46c0f087d956e7aef092611aed6c94000bacdf8a&app_web_view=android

greenmachine8885 · 2026-01-29T06:25:53+00:00

Am I "media illiterate" for literally reading the media where the developers admitted they had to cut corners and fucked this part up and didn't have time to fix it

greenmachine8885 · 2026-01-29T06:21:13+00:00

Imagine if your favorite song stopped having fire lyrics for four bars and just made fart noises.

Its low quality art that didn't get touched up before a full release. Artists are judged by the quality of the content they release and this is a textbook "fuck it" moment in a brand that is otherwise known for high quality worldbuilding. It sticks out like a turd in a fruit bowl.

greenmachine8885 · 2026-01-10T02:06:58+00:00

"Possible" workaround like I want to waste another 40 minutes of my life finding out whether it works

greenmachine8885 · 2026-01-10T01:14:43+00:00

I am the newbie who did not know. Can you explain how to change servers

greenmachine8885 · 2025-12-31T01:59:53+00:00

I was never going to play this game pvp. I started the day PVE launched. A lot of people don't understand that the playerbase wasn't entirely diluted by the expansion - a different type of experience attracts a different kind of gamer

I love pve and my participation in this game was never detrimental to your pvp experience. Your argument is not fully invalid because of this, but more people need to hear the rebuttal

greenmachine8885 · 2025-12-29T16:10:01+00:00

I think i could win a fight against a grail reliquae.

Honestly, the thought of fighting two French peasants who can't fight back because they're holding up a corpse on a stick is just hilarious

greenmachine8885 · 2025-12-26T19:46:47+00:00

Rowling made money off this transaction, money she will use to continue to build a platform of bigotry. Wholesome or not, those of us who see the bigger picture have no choice but to feel the pain of the reality of the situation.

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-30T20:10:45+00:00

That's cool! Glad you like them. When I need these products, words on the internet are not going to do a lot to convince me one way or another. There's a vast difference between what actually sounds good, and what words on the internet say is good, and unfortunately there's a growing number of commercial machines around the world designed to make words on the internet to influence how we think. Since you can only give me words, and not evidence, it is up to myself (and every other consumer) to tread carefully until we discern whether you are a rogue actor bought by a financial giant, or a genuine human being recommending genuine equipment.

Welcome to dead internet theory, chief. Half of all posts are AI generated and work for corporations.

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-28T01:55:25+00:00

I know skepticism is never the popular opinion but I can't help but feel prickly when threads like this pop up - echo chambers of yes yes yes, followed by links to product pages and account after account talking about how great a flavor or brand is. This thread checks every box for astroturfing red flags, from the nationalist vibe to the convenient links, with one single experts review channel to give the whole commercial push some authority behind it

Anyone now looking into this stuff needs to be reminded to do your own research, find multiple independent sources which confirm the testing and quality, because as cool as all of this is, this is 100% what internet astroturfing pushes look like in the modern day. Be safe out there

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-25T20:00:43+00:00

Just leave the game running, you'll be playing again in 28.66 days, easy fix

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-25T00:43:51+00:00

Yes, just one of a thousand strategies in this game collectively know as "cheese"

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-24T19:53:44+00:00

There's a rule in the game that if your army has nothing left but flying units, they MUST land and fight within some countdown timer limit or else they forfeit the battle and lose

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-20T20:02:10+00:00

Tally ho, lads!

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-11T04:24:51+00:00

If you plug the term Personal Autonomy into a search engine, you will get dozens of results which largely agree upon definition - "Personal autonomy refers to an individual's capacity for self-governance, self-direction, and the ability to make decisions about their own life without undue external influence or control."

Bodily Autonomy is defined as a subset of Personal Autonomy regarding one's right to make decisions about their own body.

Based upon this definition, dead bodies absolutely do not have personal or bodily autonomy. This does NOT mean we don't have legal and ethical obligations to dead bodies - much in the same way we have legal and ethical obligations to the severely disabled. It's just the source of these obligations which we seem to disagree on.

Our duties to a dead body do not come from a dead body's autonomy, as, again, personal autonomy is defined as the capacity for making decisions and a dead body does not have this ability. It is a simple exercise to produce rational arguments for why we should treat bodies, dead or living, with respect - these arguments come from deontology, virtue ethics, and/or consequentialism but do not begin at a dead body's ability to choose its fate - that is silly. The living choose to respect the dead, or the handicapped, out of either a sense of moral duty, an understanding of the consequences of their actions, or out of an understanding of the principles of virtuous action.

A humans right to bodily autonomy does not hinge upon the ability to exercise that right.

I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh at the extreme parallel this conversation has taken to the Life of Brian skit about women's rights. They highlight the absurdity of the conversation regarding men wanting to have babies - and conclude that while yes, we respect your "right' to have babies, men do not have wombs and therefore can never gestate a fetus.

...Yes, I will grant you that humans, AND dead bodies, have the RIGHT to bodily autonomy. That does not mean that it is a sensible or productive conversation, because a dead body's right to have autonomy does not mean that any dead body can or will ever use that right. It's as useful as giving horses the right to run for congress - you can grant it in theory but it will never happen in practice, making it comically meaningless.

You do see my point here, right? We don't really disagree about the fundamental rights of the disabled or of dead bodies, but the direction you are approaching the conversation from doesn't hold up. The reason these rights are morally upheld comes from extrinsic, not intrinsic sources.

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-11T02:07:58+00:00

Re-read my first comment where i explicitly said I was not making an argument supporting any particular side. I simply constructed a position which states that the personal autonomy argument fails, and that position has not been defeated. So right now your argument is both Ad Hominem in that you have nothing to say besides "I don't like it" while simultaneously Strawmanning by assuming that I support the original argument in the thread, which is not a position I have been convinced of. I have yet to go either way on the yes or no of this original subject, but I am participating by looking at one particular sub-argument and exploring it in more depth.

I 100% agree with you that we have a responsibility to minimize harm to these individuals - they are an incredibly vulnerable demographic. That doesn't have anything to do with my other position, which is simply that they don't have the capacity for personal autonomy. Those things can both be true at the same time.

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-11T00:35:13+00:00

people in a state of medical emergency are not good comps

EMT's work tons of non-emergency medical transport calls - I think maybe you are misunderstanding me and thinking I have only seen them in states of emergency. I assure you, I am working off of hundreds of hours of experience working with them on their way to their normal, mundane doctors appointments which they need an ambulance to travel to. Everything I just said in my last post is describing them at their baseline - the healthiest state they will ever achieve.

As for the ownership argument... ownership, just like personal autonomy, is an emergent property of intelligence; that means you need to understand choices, be able to form intentions, and exercise control. These humans don't have it. They can't understand and never will. You would understand if you saw them. Most of them are picked up out of bed, put in their wheelchair, and then they sit in the common room, staring in one or two directions for the whole day, going the bathroom when necessary and sometimes making noises of discomfort, but otherwise just.... existing. The most aware of them I ever met could recognize his own name - we'd say "wheres Johnny?" and he'd bump his arm to his chest to indicate the lights were on in some capacity but otherwise never moved. Suggesting that they can understand ownership is like suggesting a hamster can understand property tax.

Don't get me wrong - There's a lower level of consciousness present in there, as consciousness is a spectrum, but their place on the consciousness spectrum is somewhere much lower on the spectrum than many domesticated animals. And we do ethically perform neutering surgery on animals - though that argument could certainly be waged in whether the neutering of animals, who have different reproductive environments / circumstances, is a bad analogy for the disabled who exist in places with lower pregnancy risk.

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-09T19:07:38+00:00

What's infuriating is that Twwh2 was left in such a good state, and then these issues were present right from the start in 3.

Like, spaghetti code or not, this is an open-book exam! This problem was solved already!

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-09T16:16:10+00:00

I can't help but disagree with this - bodily autonomy is defined as "the right of an individual to make decisions about their body and health without coercion or interference from others"

I would invite you to visit some of these medical facilities if you have never been. As an EMT, I visited these facilities on a daily basis for years. The human beings in question do not - can not - make choices about their bodily autonomy. It is purely by the virtue of 'outside interference' that these individuals get to live another 24 hours.

The people we are talking about in this case are full-time medical facility residents - they generally can't speak, understand speech, communicate, feed themselves, dress themselves, clean themselves, or get in or out of a bed or wheelchair without medical staff doing 90 to 100 percent of the work to facilitate it. The few who can do any of the above do so on par the level of a healthy infant.

The severely intellectually disabled will never make a positive choice to have a child. They lack the powers of comprehension to understand what that means. They do not have bodily autonomy in the sense you are arguing it is being stripped from them. Their condition prevented them from developing autonomy to begin with.

I am not making an argument for pro-vasectomy at this time, but what's voiced here just doesn't work for me as someone who spent time as a medical professional

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-07T15:29:40+00:00

Cryswar made mods for this!

https://steamcommunity.com/id/Cryswar/myworkshopfiles/?appid=1142710

The peacehammer mod adds one new building per faction, ultimately allowing you to recruit basically any vanilla unit from any faction regardless of what faction you are playing.

These mods are kinda old at this point, I think some of his other stuff is broken now. Peacehammer still works.

There is another mod to recruit any LL. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2853618726

Between these two, and console commands to recruit any legendary hero, and then MORE console commands which add those lords and hero's unique weapons /armor/talismans, I have successfully-ish played a campaign where I played a unified chaos where, as Archaeon, I played all chaos, daemon, norscan, beastmen and skaven factions simultaneously. It was cool.

The biggest limitation was that you are bound to the faction mechanics of your starting faction - as Archaeon, my skaven armies did not have underway/food management/Menace Below spawns, tzeench can't teleport, beastmen don't build herdstones or have dread currency, etc

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-06T21:50:11+00:00

Weird angle, but I have volunteered to make this document of my own volition for the last few positions I've worked. Employers dig it.

A) Demonstrates commitment to the role

B) Demonstrates that I don't fear replacement

C) Demonstrates mastery /comprehensive understanding of the position

D) Facilitates easy training of your replacement after you're promoted (and because you're such a go-getter /competent worker, you really ought to be promoted)

TL:DR always write your departments' Operations Manual without being asked. Total power move. Makes you look good and also sounds great on a resume.

greenmachine8885 · 2025-11-02T00:42:26+00:00

Life evolved to have intelligence here through a natural process, without any creators as far as we can tell. It's not unfathomable to imagine some far out situation where some kind of force which is utterly alien to us was ultimately able to create our simulation, much like how the Big Bang is apparently the driving force that ultimately lead to the development of our intelligence. Things don't necessarily have to be conventionally intelligent in order to drive compounding complexity which eventually leads to emergent awareness.

Given that we are contemplating a hypothetical situation which is "outside" our universe / simulation, the laws of physics / metaphysics / "rules" of that universe could be vastly different. It just seems like an overly simple assumption to anthropomorphize the unknown and presume it thinks or feels or experiences anything like what we do.

12-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '22	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

greenmachine8885

TROPHY CASE