Recent posts by TheBSG on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Human Stupidity

There’s a whole group of the population who really don’t think much and just sort of do. I really don’t fault these people much for anything. Then there’s people who are thinking at all, and most of those people think they’re super smart for thinking. Then there’s people who’ve coopted their brains to just be good at things. These people are specialized. A very few people are really good at synthesizing and cross referencing all of these tools. These people often feel very ill equipped for the world and lack certain simple and basic understandings often, because they can’t specialize or do tasks without relating them to others.

On the whole, there might be sorts of bell curves in various measurable things like memory and spacial awareness, but the beautiful mosaic of variables that make up a person mean their intelligence is hardly something that can be measured in any linear way. Talent is the description of this meta phenomenon, and our perceptions about how talent is innate or grown, and how we foster our talents really depends on how successful we are. Someone with strong determination need not be very good at math, and that’s why we sometimes have highly motivated people in roles they aren’t entirely equipped for technically.

Understanding what resources you yourself have, and how they integrate together and with those around you, is in itself a strong talent that I think if you’ve got at all, you should foster. Managing your personal values and how you grow them is more important than knowing everything or thinking about all of the things in the world. Designing actions and following through with them is equally important as all of this.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Theoretic Wonders: Infinite power! Unlimited fun!

First two paragraphs in your post are completely betrayed by the strawman in your third paragraph. I never claimed to know what happens in the future, you and vika did. I agree with your original point about classism to a degree, but I also understand vika’s limitations to that point and believe that classism will be much to the same degree as it is today. What I disagree with is that there’s some way we can know from our perspective (or from the limitations of an interesting discussion in the thread I created and would prefer didn’t include) how to tackle those issues, or that because laws may be redefined by our discoveries that we can never make predictions that don’t include what is currently considered impossible. A claim does require some bounds in order to, by it’s nature, make a prediction.

I’m going to be frank, but I think people kind of lead people like Vika (and at times myself) down really pointless and pedantic lines of reasoning just to say what is most often assumed in specified ways of knowing. Like when people argue with theists about what is clearly their parables, forcing them to defend what needs no defending. Vika is saying that the laws of physics as we know it don’t allow for certain things. She’s not wrong. Your argument that the laws of physics may at some point be redefined is not wrong, but ostracizing Vika’s for not specifically saying that and characterizing it as “dangerous” is just instigation and reactionary. Plus it’s not even relevant to the whole classism discussion which I don’t think vika even adequately addressed.

We’re talking about the efficacy of science 500,000 years from now in a thread that I specifically requested we not do that in. Please kindly, find a different thread of your own. This thread is for discussing fun ways to use unlimited resources in scientifically realistic ways, governed by today’s technologies and known limitations.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why are you Atheist?

Why would you for a second engage that non-argument, WindStalker? These forums are so exhausting. Some people think not having a belief makes you hollow or uninteresting to talk to. Deal with it. There’s nothing to discuss there.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Theoretic Wonders: Infinite power! Unlimited fun!

The laws of physics didn’t change when we went faster than the speed of sound. You also tied an argument where you were right to an argument where you were wrong. Your belief that human augmentation will create a class system is an anthropological argument that you could absolutely argue and cite instances and cases where it shows human behavior would be similar. You’re right that nothing about the laws of physics predicates that. Then when Vika picked on the fact that perpetual motion machines are impossible, you argued with that instead? You’re wrong about the laws of physics ever changing and impossible things becoming possible. When an assumption we made is broken in science, we modify the model and it shows why we thought what we did before. Your point is really laborious and kind of irrelevant to the thread. Argue about the point of augmentations creating classism, not that the bounds imposed by our scientific understandings are flexible and could one day be surpassed in order to serve your classism argument. It’s not becoming or interesting to read, or worth 2 pages.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Theoretic Wonders: Infinite power! Unlimited fun!

Luckily this thread has to do with current knowledge.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Theoretic Wonders: Infinite power! Unlimited fun!

I’ve been away all weekend unexpectedly and the time I was going to devote to research for this thread was compromised. Apologies, as I won’t have until next weekend to contribute any real time. These will just be brief ideas.


I think nanotech and electric engineering are a bit too science fiction for making computing plants. I think a more realistic but still unstudied reality would be using certain known and reliable genetic traits to compute large fuzzy or abstract problems. If 2 stems grow on one side of a strawberry plant for some genetic reason, and 3 stems grow on the other side for a related but different genetic reason, can we manipulate and breed that relationship to be more complex and useful in an artificial setting? I am more interested in grown sculptures for living, and wonder if a tree could be designed to provide for a very very large number of people. I dare flirt with the idea of space faring plant ships that grow food and air for us, but I think that’s a little out of the scope of this thread.


I think a more realistic hoverboard is some kind of a rink or park where a magnetized floor could be supercooled and conducted, while uncooled magnets could be used as the boards themselves. Different areas of the park could make the boards go faster or slower, and variable power output on the board itself would allow for gaining speed and air manually.


Dyson spheres seem unnecessary considering this thread provides for unlimited power, and complete dyson spheres are hardly even necessary for potential harvesting of a sun’s energy for current human needs and beyond, but that’s besides the point of this thread. Terraforming a planet is not currently within our knowledge as a species, either.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Theoretic Wonders: Infinite power! Unlimited fun!

I was watching The Game Theorist episodes on the practical realism of the Bioshock series’ two unlikely cities, Rapture and Columbia when I thought of an interesting sort of forum “game” we could have here.

What would you build with infinite resources, time, and help?
Describe an invention, structure, or feat mankind could conceivably achieve with today’s technology and understanding of that technology, but is simply impractical as far as resources, time devoted, or importance goes.

The goal of these creations is intended to be interesting, and needn’t be entirely useful or important at all. Considering we’re relying on infinite resources, I urge against trying to debate the logic of devoting any time or resources to it. Being serious discussion, the major goal is to support the actual feasibility of your creation. Use links, cite them, and debate the realism of other people’s ideas using your own understanding and citations. This should be fun. Try to avoid using fantasy interpretations of quantum physics and whatnot, and stick to experiments we’re doing today.

(Don’t feed the trolls who invent things to make poor people into food or some dumb shit like that please, thanks. I don’t care what it does so much as the technological feat or new perspective that creation would give us. This isn’t a moral debate thread.)

Examples could be turning the grand canyon into a ball pit and whether there could be a reliable system for retrieving children. Or what about creating a manmade lava flow in my house, can I do that safely? Is there any kind of way we could build a ship to send someone inside of the sun and survive? Could my body withstand the forces that a bouncy ball experiences, because I really want to build a giant one with a shock-absorbing harness inside and get thrown around a giant gym, or would I not get the same intense speed as a real superball?

[P.S. I think I’ll tackle the sun one tomorrow, but in general, I just wanted to get things going with some unresearched ideas]

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Pledge of Mindfulness (Or BSG's last ditch effort)

While that’s nice of you to say, I said 3+ years ago for a reason. I was a chat moderator for 6 years, 3 of which I was quite active for. Then I spent more time here. Because I was directly involved in discussions and Phoenix was here, I was able to take more of a traditional user role. For example, I’ve absolutely had snarky posts of mine deleted that I probably knew didn’t belong here in the first place. Had I instead chose to take a more responsible route, I honestly might have been able to get a job with Kongregate, and I sort of regret that. Sort of.

Considering I’m now a bit disenfranchised with the website, specifically these forums, and I am no longer a chat moderator or in any way associated to the administration, I think it’s incredibly inappropriate for me to suggest as much, even if I wanted to. Read: I really really really don’t want that unpaid position where I have to be a public relations officer without any of the power with even more of the responsibility. Donseptico is the crazy bastard that accepted that fool’s errand. You really ought to put your faith in him and hear what his plans are instead.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Pledge of Mindfulness (Or BSG's last ditch effort)

Do I have to? To be honest I kind of gave up on this pledge and this place. Not a whole lot to save when I can just e-mail the 4 remaining people I even like. I probably should’ve cared more 3+ years ago and asked to moderate SD but hindsight.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

Vika: My creepy snuff film comment was totally couched in playfulness as well, and I think your clarification actually somehow legitimized that exchange, so thanks :P

Thread: I wish people didn’t give me credit for the whole pledge thread since I actively abandoned it, myself.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

When I said “Bang” I meant slang for “Sexual Intercourse.” I’d think the penetrative gun simile would be retained in whatever language or culture. You want to see them shoot eachother. That’s stranger and somehow creepier than you wanting to see them bang.

These posts are going to get deleted for being off topic now, not cause they’re dirty. That’s kind of sad to me.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

You have strange kinks if you want to watch that snuff film. :V

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

If you guys don’t bang in the next year I am going to owe someone money.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

Originally posted by vikaTae:

I wouldn’t say it is beyond help, especially since users stillactually wish to be here, and to contribute. I’ve seen other communities where usership was also highly anonymous, and yet a real sense of community was formed. MUDs are good at that, so was TinyMush. So are most communal virtual environments (although they fracture, obviously). It’s not the lack of full ID that’s the problem, but the lack of any real direction or hard-and-fast rules with real consequences that’s causing the headches here.

Most of us old-timers on the forum are used to frankly, getting our own way with no real come-uppance if we push too far over the line. As a result we’ve all become a bit sloppy at noticing where that line actually is. Some more than others, but we’ve all done it. Whereas a newer user without the volume and gestalt of clout we’ve accumulated over the years, does not have anywhere near as free a reign, and when they try to copy how we’re behaving, it all comes unstuck for them.

EDIT: Apparently my spelling is ‘beyond help’ :P

I’m really guilty of perpetuating this, I feel.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

Social Justice Warrior.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

I strongly disagree that any of the owners want any users’ accounts banned if they can manage it. When the people paying you don’t understand the efficacy of your metrics, you do everything you can to maintain and grow that digit.

Your whole “SJW” whining is pretty annoying though. Usually generalizations like that are revealing. Edit: Oh, you meant to do that

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Metadiscussion On "Serious Discussion": A Comprehensive Analysis of Its Components and Purpose

A little ironic but otherwise, good post. I’ll read it next time I get the bad idea to post here.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Curious observation about weed users.

I’ll try one more time:

My posts are half hyperbolic and tongue in cheek. I’m sharing my flippant view (which is somewhat accurate to what I anecdotally experience, but not something I’d argue in a forum or claim objectivity to.) to illustrate how this is neither serious discussion, or a philosophical conundrum. If in a specific situation someone is an asshole, just assume THEY’RE the assholes and not everyone who wears the same colored shirts.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Curious observation about weed users.

Many and most plastics give off worse chemicals than cannabis or cigarettes do. Fluorescent lights also give off some pretty toxic gases, and do so persistently for far longer than second hand smoke does. You can’t smell and don’t know shit about these things and therefore they don’t bother you and many people would fit in the ven diagram of caring about one and thinking people who care about the other are vapid and selective in their cares. This site is so full of posts like this. “I had one or more minorly inconvenient or shitty encounters and couldn’t see far enough past my nose to give people the benefit of the doubt and now I’m applying those beliefs wholesale to everyone. Validate my emotions in a pseudo-intellectual forum so I don’t have to reconcile the differences in the universe.”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Curious observation about weed users.

Also, cars cause significantly more damage to your lungs in a day than individual smokers, is the point. People are selective about the things they care about. If you’re not an environmental activist but you complain about cigarette smoke, and you don’t see the [yes, actual] irony in that, you’re daft. I totally hate the smell of smoke by the way, and grew up with an incredibly entitled father who smoked in the home even though we asked him not to. He was a jerk about it. Smoking, however, is not innately a jerk thing, and when anyone mentions cannabis, the first complaint is “pew someone I once knew made a stinky weed and now I think all weed is stinky and it infringes on my nostrils.” Stinky stuff sucks, but let’s put the complaint in context and in perspective. ESPECIALLY e-cig vapor, which all statistics for are laughably without context.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Curious observation about weed users.

Again, I know lots and lots of totally awesome people who, when they’re annoyed by smoke, mention it. I’ve also seen a ton of shitty smokers who shrug when someone says they don’t like smoke, or who smokes right next to a bus stop full of people. It goes both ways. The difference is that society advocates telling smokers to fuck off before they’re ever given that grace. I personally don’t smoke, or smoke cannabis in public, so I’m not even being defensive of anything I do, I just wanted to balance the arguments out and show how anecdotes about people being shitty are just that.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Curious observation about weed users.

By the way, the only thing you accomplish by tossing passive aggressive personal insults at me is my lack of respect for you. I call smoke activists entitled whiners and you suggest an openly disabled member of the forums is having health problems and that’s why their opinions don’t align with yours? What’s the end goal with that kind of behavior?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Curious observation about weed users.

The fumes that a car gives off have billions of chemicals in far less cubic space than any imbibed substance’s second hand smoke. You’re selectively upset because of societal norms and nothing else. Since we were sharing anecdotal opinions, I think people who feel assaulted by toxins are vapid and probably do rude things all day that they don’t bat an eye at, but consider transgressions society has demonized to be secret opportunities to shit blood like they’ve always wanted.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Curious observation about weed users.

I have never liked anyone who complains about cigarette/cannabis smoke. Anyone who’s actually bothered by it (usually because they have a condition of some kind) is almost always really nice and either moves away or asks other people to please move. People who feel the need to declare how entitled they are to avoid gasses are just using social stigmas as an excuse to be important feeling. “Oh no, that smell was disagreeable to my nose. Wait, that’s one of those socially unacceptable smells, I get to bitch loudly!”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Philosohpy & Religon

I’m not fond of the ego inherent in modern American Christianity. I have a love/hate relationship with Catholicism, as I find shame to be disgusting, but Catholic Priests and Nuns have been some of the most philosophically, scientifically, and practically aware religious people I’ve personally known. I get along well with Baptist and grew up going to a friend’s Presbyterian church simply because I really enjoyed the communities, and when I move to a new place, I usually look for one of these churches to visit and meet people.

Some of my earliest enjoyment of literature was reading and dissecting the Bible, and appreciating Jesus’ response to the tyranny of Orthodoxy and how it served the masters instead of the individuals, but I’m not sure much of that is actually religious. The character I like is a revolutionary that challenges the faith people have in power and the privilege of the people making decisions. I find the reverence for Jesus’ sacrifice to be uninteresting, while the entire death of Christ, to me, is a fascinating dissection of what duty, sacrifice, and self even mean. The discussion Christ has with Pilate is deeply fascinating and talks about responsibility in a way few works do. One of my favorite plays, Jesus Christ Superstar captures the Christ story in a way I’ve always found a lot more meaningfully than most other materials treat it. Sure, we still get the morose cross dragging and fawning over Christ, but the dialogue of Christ himself is a lot more nuanced.

I am of the entirely debatable belief that Jesus probably spent time either with a teacher from Asia, or traveled on the silk road himself to Asia. Many of the phrasings in the Bible are either ripped off from Buddha to proliferate Jesus’ teachings, or the man himself was referencing Buddhist teachings he himself found when he went there.

I was incredibly interested in Buddhism as a kid, and attempted orthodox taoist buddhism for a few months and then fell back into a more casual American Shinto Buddhism for less than a year. Buddhism is a great personal belief, but fails in higher social orders, and relies heavily on a cultural adherence to conformity. I’m into Jewish and Muslim women for some reason. Their practical, no-nonsense nature tends to really appeal to me, and when we argue about the universe we’re both just attracted to the fact that the other one cares. I’ve definitely considered the possibility that I may one day live in an religiously intersectional family in the future.

I personally identify significantly with Rumi’s writings, despite being the logically minded person that I am. Sufism is a mystical Islamic school of belief that does away with the strict adherence to rules and regulations, and embraces more mystical, inexplicable things about life. They believe that love, beauty, peace, and anything that celebrates the creation of God Allah is holy. Some Sufi imbibe in drugs and the pleasures of non-marital sex, disbelieve in virginity, and were allowed many graces in conservative Islamic cultures. His poetry moves me deeply, and puts me into the closest feeling of religious oneness I get.

External ethical philosophy is a bit of a different, more argumentative thing that I will abstain from in this thread.