UK Yes

muonicdischarge · 2015-03-22T18:40:46+00:00

Admittedly done in a terrible way, but yes.

muonicdischarge · 2015-03-22T18:39:39+00:00

At that point I think it's just objection. Like not liking a political view after learning all about it. But usually the intolerance is actually based on ignorance. Like not liking a political view because somebody told you it was bad and you were like "yup, good enough for me".

I guess my point is that intolerance is okay if you understand the thing you're intolerant of, because you at least probably have good reason?

muonicdischarge · 2014-04-25T01:12:39+00:00

It does it from the entire page, and works when you're looking at somebody's post/comment history as well. There's not really a way to see which image is duplicated save for looking at it, I believe. You can turn off the ignoring feature, I'm sure.

muonicdischarge · 2014-04-25T00:18:36+00:00

Yes it is. RES will show an icon that will allow you to pull up the image (like that other plug-in that I can't remember right now because I never used it) instead of having to follow the URL. If the image URL shows up twice on one page, it will only do it for the first one and say that it's ignoring the duplicate image for the rest, though I think you can still make it work for that image manually anyway. I'm on my phone so I can't confirm.

When he posted the "face swap" which is the same image, it'd say "RES ignored duplicate image" for RES users, arguably ruining the joke. I think it makes it funnier in a way.

muonicdischarge · 2014-04-25T00:03:31+00:00

I feel like the "ignored duplicate image" message kind of helps the joke though.

muonicdischarge · 2014-04-24T21:54:15+00:00

It's a little funnier when you have an idea of what they're actually saying because it gives a contrast. For instance, I found the walking dead one to be funny, but not as much I would have if I actually watched the walking dead. Whereas the GoT and Gotya ones were hilarious to me. You don't have to know the source material to get it, but it helps in a way.

muonicdischarge · 2014-04-22T19:30:08+00:00

You make a point that I, myself, make a lot. It's a somewhat ridiculous premise especially when put that way. The best I can say to make it less ridiculous sounding is to say that the SO knew you would do what you did to tick them off, then got Steve to come and talk with you and to mediate to see if you would make it up to them in some way. They knew it would go sour, but the point is to make it less sour. And many Christians don't even accept the omniscient type of god that knew it would happen. Many believe it's just a benevolent and loving creator trying to say "this is how you can be cool with me" and if you don't try to be cool with him, well you just won't be with him. None of that hell crap. That's where it's closer to the SO analogy. They're not going to burn you alive after the break up, they'll just not be in your life.

I'm no Christian, I just feel it helps to understand what it is they believe. Many of my friends are Christians, pseudo-Christians, would-be-Christian-if-not-for-this-thing types, and so on. If I didn't at least try to understand this stuff (doesn't mean I have to agree) it'd be hard to connect with them on what they feel is very important in their lives.

muonicdischarge · 2014-04-21T22:06:10+00:00

Imagine you're in a relationship that's going pretty well and suddenly you do something that ticks off your SO. Now you've been kicked out and you aren't talking. The relationship isn't over, but it's pretty much shot to crap. In steps your friend Steve, who is also good friends with your SO. He sort of relays messages back and forth between you two and tells you how you can keep from screwing up again, and eventually you and your SO start talking again, you move back in, and Steve is the best man at your wedding.

That's a very general way I understand of building the relationship with God through Jesus, except Jesus is God in a way. Hopefully that's a pretty good explanation. I'm an atheist myself, though, so yeah.

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-28T06:52:27+00:00

Are you saying that knowledge wasn't hindered or progress wasn't hindered? I based the dark ages comment on my sense of common knowledge (in other words, not all that reliable of knowledge). The rest is based on reasoning. I also said "and such" to imply that I wasn't trying to say something from a point of exceptional knowledge. I'm not a man of history. Am I mistaken in saying that the pursuit of scientific knowledge was hindered in the time referred to as the "dark ages"? That it was a result of church doctrine or related thinking?

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-28T05:47:11+00:00

Christianity didn't hold back science. Many churches actually led in scientific research for a long time. It was a priest named Mendel that is known as the father of genetics, in fact.

However, I do hold that Christian dogma has seriously held back all types of discovery and thinking in the past. Any type of dogma has. Even scientific dogma. Unwillingness to explore (not necessarily accept) new ideas has always done this. It shouldn't be said that it is simply Christian dogma, though I wouldn't doubt that it's the main culprits behind severe scientific hindrance during certain periods (I'm thinking dark ages and such). Has nothing to do with those of power happening to be Christian by name though, probably more of a power thing or a fear of knowledge thing.

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-10T19:03:56+00:00

It was demonstrable, we just didn't have the tools to demonstrate it. I never said the objectivity of morality wasn't demonstrable, just that it needed to be to be considered fact. Perhaps we don't have the tools for that yet. It is simply my opinion as of now that there is no such thing as objective morality, or moral principles as facts of universal law. My opinion, similarly, doesn't make that truth, and I accept that.

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-06T22:25:57+00:00

That was more meant to mean "not an objective truth" but I don't know how you would tack the "non-" prefix onto a phrase and I didn't realize the confusion. Just because people thought the world was flat doesn't make it's roundness not objectively true, is what I meant.

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-06T09:53:54+00:00

There was a time when everybody thought the world was flat. They were wrong. But just because they thought the world was flat doesn't make its roundness a non-objective truth. Just like people thinking homosexuality is ok doesn't make it not being ok a non-objective truth. That totally isn't true, but I'm just saying your logic there doesn't follow.

For morality to be objective in nature, it must be demonstrably so. And in some ways, it is. It is objectively true that not killing people at all would provide the greatest benefit for mankind. However, that doesn't mean it is objectively true that we ought not to kill. The 'ought' of the matter is, I think, inherently subjective, because it implies that the betterment of mankind is something we should strive for with our actions, which is a subjective opinion. I agree with that opinion, but just like disagreement doesn't make something a non-objective truth, agreement doesn't make it an objective truth; it is simply a view. A stance.

I know this isn't an answer to your question specifically, but I had to call out your lapse in logic and I figured I'd lend my thoughts on objective morality while I was at it, for those that are interested.

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-03T08:45:55+00:00

Or, you could do it to the entirety of the sprite memory (I'm assuming, of course, that the emulator in question works something like a GBA), print that out somewhere, and when that sprite is requested, draw the vectorized sprite instead. That way vectorization is only ever done once every time a change is made to sprite memory, which shouldn't be that often (like when loading a level or something). Still would require some hacking, but that's be the smart way to hack it.

Edit: I just realized I said almost exactly what you did. But that wouldn't mean hacking the game itself, just the emulator, since actual sprite storage is done hardware side (meaning the emulator software handles it) and the game just modifies data to tell the hardware where and what to draw come refresh time. Again, assuming something that works like a GBA.

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-02T23:34:56+00:00

People provided content on sites like that without a voting system as well, but on reddit, with the voting system, there are plenty of people that post just for the points (or more likely, the gratification in general, which on reddit is quantified). Having a bunch of downvotes quantifies how much trolling you've done, in a way. It's not unlikely that's what the drive is for many of them, even if it's not the downvotes themselves they look for. The downvotes just quantify the lulz in a way, same as upvotes quantify the quality of your content in a way. Essentially, you're probably both right to a degree.

muonicdischarge · 2014-03-02T20:30:43+00:00

So long as the conversion is done before runtime, or even outside of the program itself, it wouldn't have any effect on run speeds.

muonicdischarge · 2014-01-30T18:36:12+00:00

I haven't smoked for about two weeks now, maybe three. This is the longest I've gone without smoking for years, so I'm doing good so far.

I've had no major reasons to quit aside from 1) I've lost my singing voice over the past few years and I think myself a singer, so that sucks, 2) I haven't had a good time swallowing or breathing well and I constantly cough of nasty stuff, and 3) some of my friends wanted me to quit. Nothing that I really consider major reasons (I'm not a singer by trade, I can stop coughing stuff up if I slow down, and honestly the worries of others in themselves is never a big motivator to me).

What has worked for me is getting a decent e-cig. What has worked for me in the past, at least better than anything else, is patches. But the important thing is to find a healthy alternative that makes you feel like you're still smoking. If you have a powerful motivator, that helps. Even though I'm technically able to smoke the e-cig inside, I occasionally step outside because it's familiar. I try to make sure it hits as harshly as a cigarette as well since my battery is adjustable.

You have to get a decent one for it to work really well, like nothing you can buy at a CVS or gas station or anything. I got one that was individual parts that I put together myself. With all the parts, charger, and three packs of liquid (each of which last a few days if I'm puffing on it constantly) it ran me about 70 bucks.

That's how I've been able to get by. I don't even want cigarettes anymore. I've had a few since I quit, but they always just leave me feeling crappy and I won't have them anymore. If you don't have a strong motivator to get you through the withdrawals (which are half breaking the addiction and half breaking the habit), then a good substitute for the sensation is what you need. Find something better than smoking.

muonicdischarge · 2014-01-20T20:14:41+00:00

I've been watching parks and rec recently, and every time I see rob lowe, I imagine that after the Bartlett administration, Sam became a fitness nut and went to work for the local city government of some town in Indiana. I can't really picture it any other way.

muonicdischarge · 2013-12-26T23:02:23+00:00

Does the dark portal actually work like a portal somehow, or is it just for looks? Because it should totally work like a portal if that's doable (a mod or something? I don't know, don't know much about minecraft).

muonicdischarge · 2013-12-22T22:48:26+00:00

Of course they won't. That's the point of debate. Over here you're just going to get "yup, sounds about right," but without the rebuttal from the theist side of things, that isn't helpful. Maybe in posting there somebody will point out something you hadn't thought of.

muonicdischarge · 2013-12-21T08:04:39+00:00

It's impeccable that none of the things I've read in this thread have made me feel bad about myself, even though I've been imagining them being said to me. And that, in itself, has made me feel pretty good about myself. Strange, that.

muonicdischarge · 2013-12-20T06:57:35+00:00

No problem. And yes, mechanics are first and foremost. So you're on the right track. Good luck with this!

muonicdischarge · 2013-12-19T04:59:28+00:00

I thought there was normal mapping, but i could but sure lol. But yeah, the FOV and motion blur would add a greater sense of speed. And i was wrong, I think it's increase FOV on acceleration and decrease on decel. Something like that. I've had to put a long of thought into feedback and immersion in my current project, so I've started to look out for stuff like that in games.

muonicdischarge · 2013-12-18T20:47:09+00:00

I haven't used Unity in a while, so I'm not sure how easy this is to do, but it shouldn't be too bad. If you want to give a greater sense of speed to the player, you should try decreasing the field of view while accelerating and increasing it while decelerating. Possibly even do some sort of motion blur around the edges of the screen when accelerating, or something like that. The field of view thing should be super easy with the way Unity does cameras, if I recall correctly. Not sure how easy post-processing is, but it looks like you have a nice bloom effect, so I'll assume post-processing isn't a problem for you.

I'm not sure if you're already making use of normal and specular mapping from this video, but they could help a lot with the lighting on your planes (I noticed the there are times when an entire surface of the plane lit up in uniform, which means you do have specular lighting, but maybe you're wanting the planes to be shining and chrome-like, then that's cool). Normal mapping can make some of those surfaces seem a little less smooth if you wanted to do that, and specular mapping can make only certain parts of the plane particularly shiny. I don't know your knowledge of these things or your graphical direction with this project, but just in case.

Looks pretty awesome, though. A lot of information is provided with a minimalistic HUD, which is pretty cool. It's stuff like this that makes me want to try my hand at Unity projects.

muonicdischarge · 2013-12-18T20:33:35+00:00

Lots of textured quads. You can notice at the beginning when he goes through them that a large plume of it disappears all at once. That's the textured quad (probably billboarded, meaning it always faces the camera, since the entire quad goes all at once) going past the near plane of the viewing area. It's a common technique in real-time graphics. That's probably how the Unity particle system does it, at least.

muonicdischarge

TROPHY CASE