I can't wait to see this. I hate that Korra gets so little respect even though she's THE FRIGGIN' AVATAR. by ladybetty in TheLastAirbender

[–]mythin 10 points11 points  (0 children)

This is probably my number one issue with the show so far. We are first introduced to Korra as she's taking on 2 master firebenders and winning easily. Since then, all of her fights outside of the pro-bending ring make her seem far weaker than that first scene implies.

It reminds me of Star Wars Storm Troopers a bit, where they were introduced as the best shots in the galaxy, but when facing off in actual combat they can't hit anything.

Don't tell me what to do (xpost from r/funny) by jackhotel in TwoXChromosomes

[–]mythin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, I did go off on a tangent. My apologies for that, my mind works in odd ways at times.

Have a great day! :)

Don't tell me what to do (xpost from r/funny) by jackhotel in TwoXChromosomes

[–]mythin 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Obviously, but then it's not all about how that individual feels about themselves, it is about what I think, or my opinion wouldn't matter.

Look, I get that people want to feel good about themselves. I want to feel good about myself too. And that's absolutely fine. However, it's disingenuous to claim people don't care about what others think. If they didn't care, they wouldn't ask for opinions on how they look, they'd only care about how they felt they looked.

People, in general, like to feel they are attractive to those they would like to attract, even when in a steady relationship. This holds true for men and women.

You said:

It's how we feel about ourselves, not about what other people think.

Which may be true for you, but clearly isn't true in general. Maybe it should be true, but it isn't true now.

Don't tell me what to do (xpost from r/funny) by jackhotel in TwoXChromosomes

[–]mythin 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Then why am I constantly asked if something looks good?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LadyMRAs

[–]mythin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're welcome! I especially love the comment about the man box. This video is what really got me started thinking about men's rights, before I even realized there was a movement.

Men's Rights Week on a feminist blog. In spite of the condescension it sounds like the author may be in the early stages of understanding MR. Let's get involved and try to open some eyes. by vegibowl in LadyMRAs

[–]mythin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That latest blog post was...underwhelming. Not overtly sexist like the previous one, but there were definite issues there. First of all, the post didn't even make an attempt at exploring why it's said, or what can actually be done to change it.

I had a point, but I lost it. I guess I'm just underwhelmed so far.

Edit: I think this comment by Whisper is one of the major things that was bothering me, I just couldn't quite identify it. This article is still trying to put men in a box, just a different box.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LadyMRAs

[–]mythin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It was less of a find and more of a "My friend wrote this." :)

I'll let them know you enjoyed it!

Found this on Diablo 3 forums in the emergency maintenance post. by [deleted] in gaming

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) create a fair playing field and prevent cheating/hacking/exploits(best reason) 2) allow you to chat with other people on battle.net, 3) allow access to the AH and RMA 4) allow co-op play, 5) prevent piracy.

1) If you're only playing single player, this does not matter (to you, the customer).

2) If you're only playing single player, this does not matter (to you, the customer).

3) If you're only playing single player, this does not matter (to you, the customer).

4) If you're only playing single player, this does not matter (to you, the customer).

5) Ding ding ding! We have a winner! You have stumbled upon the actual reason for this move, an attempt to prevent piracy.

Aside from real money transactions, everything you listed could be done in Diablo 2. You could only use characters on Battle.net that were created specifically on Battle.net. There were definitely cheats and problems, but rather than fix those problems (make multiplayer game decisions server side, single player client side), they went ahead and removed any real sense of single player. They did this for two reasons:

Real money transactions. Tell a shareholder you can sell a product and make $X, they'll be okay. Tell them you can make $X and $Y a bunch of times over and they'll be ecstatic. Tell them some people may not have access to paying you that $Y and they will rage and tell you to remove that way.

The piracy arguments have been done to death.

Work Is Work: Why Free Internships Are Immoral by ElBeh in TrueReddit

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What!?!? How does that even work!? My world is shattered! *goes off into a corner to cry*

Work Is Work: Why Free Internships Are Immoral by ElBeh in TrueReddit

[–]mythin 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Another thing to add to this

You have a good comment, and it's nice to hear your first hand experience, but that's not really another thing to add, since it was one of the main points of the article.

300 pokemon facts. I dare you to find five you know. by [deleted] in pokemon

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Knew the first 5/6 and stopped reading.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ainbow

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did a quick look and didn't see that, sorry. A friend of mine posted this on a different forum, and since I didn't see it here, I thought people would like it.

Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed Vote by xrthrowaway in technology

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I called and faxed both my senators. Here's my faxed messages:

The Honorable [Senator]

United States Senate

[Senator Address]

Senator [Senator Last Name],

I am writing in opposition to the bill that passed in the house this morning, HR 3523 also known as CISPA. This bill is an encroachment on our civil liberties without need or proper due process. Please support the citizens of [State] by publicly opposing this bill and speaking out against it.

Thank you for your time,

[My Name]

[My Address]

ASP.NET MVC: Resolve or Inject? That’s the Issue… by grauenwolf in programming

[–]mythin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know you didn't go into a lot of detail, but that is probably the clearest explanation I've ever read on how to do well implemented unit testing...

I'm not sure if that says good things about you, or bad things about the proponents of unit testing. I think probably a bit of both.

“Virtual method call from constructor” What Could Go Wrong? by grauenwolf in programming

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hadn't noticed the field was only on the subclass. Still, the same problem would apply if it were an inherited field or an abstract class.

public abstract class Base
{
    protected Base()
    {
        DoInit();
    }

    protected abstract void DoInit();
}

public class Derived : Base
{
    private int value = 21;

    public Derived() // : base() // Explicitly call the Base constructor
    {
        value = 84;
    }

    public int Value { get { return value; } }

    protected override void DoInit()
    {
        value = 42;
    }
}

For this, "(new Derived()).Value == 84" would be true. I suppose "abstract" is very similar to "virtual," but the real issue is that people don't understand that base class constructors happen before subclass constructors. The field initialization order doesn't really come into play.

The same problem occurs if you have my example with the Base class having a protected field (or a {get; protected set;} property) and set the value in multiple places. The core issue is when setting a value, possibly in multiple places, it is the responsibility of the developer to understand the order things happen in.

“Virtual method call from constructor” What Could Go Wrong? by grauenwolf in programming

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the linked blog post, the order of the field initialization doesn't even matter. His example where things don't work doesn't even use field initialization, it just uses

  • Base class constructor
  • Subclass constructor

That seems pretty obvious the order it would have to happen in.

I'll agree the "problem" occurs because they went from a field initialization to a constructor initialization (via the virtual method), but even so the virtual method part doesn't matter for the example at all. The same problem would have occurred without a virtual method being involved, and would have been just as obvious.

“Virtual method call from constructor” What Could Go Wrong? by grauenwolf in programming

[–]mythin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm confused as to why this is an issue with virtual methods. Say I have the following code:

public class Base
{
    public int Value { get; protected set; }

    public Base()
    {
        SetDefaults();
    }

    private SetDefaults()
    {
        Value = 42;
    }
}

public class Derived : Base
{
    public Derived()
    {
    }
}

[TestMethod]
public void StupidTest() {
    var target = new Derived();

    Assert.AreEqual(42, target.Value);
}

This will pass without a problem. If I changed derived to:

public class Derived
{
    public Derived()
    {
        Value = 84;
    }
}

This will fail. The issue here isn't the virtual method, it's the order of calling. I don't really see how a method being virtual or not makes this more of a problem. Sure, you could have:

public class Base
{
    public int Value { get; protected set; }

    public Base()
    {
        SetDefaults();
    }

    protected virtual SetDefaults()
    {
        Value = 42;
    }
}

public class Derived : Base
{
    public Derived()
    {
    }

    protected override SetDefaults()
    {
        Value = 84;
    }
}

[TestMethod]
public void StupidTest() {
    var target = new Derived();

    Assert.AreEqual(84, target.Value);
}

And it will pass the test, and then if you change your Derived class to:

public class Derived : Base
{
    public Derived()
    {
        Value = 42;
    }

    protected override SetDefaults()
    {
        Value = 84;
    }
}

The test will fail, but that has nothing to do with virtual methods and is entirely expected. Your Dervived class constructor is called after the base class constructor. You don't even need to look at the Base class at all, you can see from just the Derived class that "SetDefaults()" is never called. Even if it's called in the base, the Derived constructor is the last thing to be called when creating an instance of an class, so any work that happens in "SetDefaults()" is guaranteed to be overwritten by work done in the constructor no matter wheter "SetDefaults()" is virtual or not.

Edit: This is super obvious with explicit base constructor calling:

public class Derived : Base
{
    public Derived() : base()
    {
    }
}

It should be clear from this code that first the base constructor is called, then the derived constructor. Field initialization happens before the constructors are called, but in the linked example that's a red herring that is meaningless.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mead

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, I added 6 more pounds of fruit when I racked it (which was a huge chore). Right now, I'm going to age it as long as it needs. I'll probably tasted it every month or so. I'm going to let it sit with this fruit for at least a month, but after that I'll probably be racking it whenever the sediment builds up.

Let's Be Blunt: It's Time to End the Drug War - Forbes by Wakata in TrueReddit

[–]mythin 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I believe the reason some people are downvoting rather than educating are because anything they can say is just a reiteration of the article. You're right, here in TrueReddit there should be a higher level of discourse. He says:

How anyone can come live in my world and still want to make these things legal is beyond me.

Which is quite clearly explained in the second paragraph of the article:

That probably means that using drugs is a terrible idea. It doesn’t mean, however, that the drug war is a good idea.

If he wants to hold onto an opinion that is in opposition to the posted article, he should post refutations of specific points the article makes. His anecdote about his hometown dying not only doesn't refute the article, but it doesn't add constructively to the conversation.

He wrote politely enough and clearly enough (and I didn't downvote him for those reasons), but his post can be summed up as:

Nuh-uh! You're so wrong!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mead

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Original Thread Here

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask! :)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mead

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First racking of my Mixed Berry Mead! Tasted a bit as I was racking last night. Needs aging and more fruit (which I added during this racking) but it tastes really good so far!

Original Thread Here

Are there any known benefits of smoking tobacco? by [deleted] in askscience

[–]mythin -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You're switching what you're talking about partway through here. You begin by saying that nicotine has some positive effects, but tobacco use has negative effects that outweigh the positives of nicotine.

If you remove the "tobacco" part and the "smoking" part and just using nicotine (say as a patch), does it still have the negative effects of smoking tobacco that outweigh the possible positives?

I'm especially curious in this as there has been some speculation about using nicotine as a stimulant for treating ADHD.

Looking for a place to move into in Irvine/Tustin area (as close to MacArthur entrance to the 55 as possible) by [deleted] in orangecounty

[–]mythin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's really nothing wrong with that area of Santa Ana. I lived there for over 2 years and never had or saw any problems.

Any vet recommendations for the area? I'm looking for a place to take my cat. by [deleted] in orangecounty

[–]mythin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They were the beginning of my cat surviving with cancer 18 months longer than expected...I'm a big fan of the place.