Quote from: Dome on December 09, 2011, 03:14:57 am
FFT: Arena sucks because you can't even control your characters
I lol'd at this one.
Show posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
41
Spam / Re: Raging Rentless Rant on FFH's Rarely worked on Hacks
December 09, 2011, 09:02:59 amI lol'd at this one.
42
Spam / Re: Whoever gets the last word wins!
December 01, 2011, 08:35:08 am
Xifanie won!
...wait, now I lost. Because Dome the spam mod won
...wait, now I lost. Because Dome the spam mod won
43
Help! / Re: Map editing woes
November 23, 2011, 08:35:13 am
Either make both of them Impassable and Unselectable, or shrink your map size to remove all of the area you are not using. Those four pillars of floating land you have there will have to go though. Here's how to do that from Gomtuu's instructions:
This also means that if you resize to the size of the blue area, you will need to move all of the blue area down and left, as Ganesha doesn't just trim the all 4 edges of a map, but rather it builds from 0 on the XY axis.
Quote from: Ganesha InstructionsTo resize terrain, you must be in terrain mode. Press D (or d) to display the Edit Terrain Dimensions dialog. Enter the new dimensions and click Ok. The terrain will immediately be resized to the new dimensions. If you make the terrain smaller than it was, tiles around the edges will be removed and lost permanently. If you make the terrain larger than it was, new flat, "Natural Surface" tiles at height 0 will be created around the edges.
This also means that if you resize to the size of the blue area, you will need to move all of the blue area down and left, as Ganesha doesn't just trim the all 4 edges of a map, but rather it builds from 0 on the XY axis.
44
Help! / Re: Map editing woes
November 22, 2011, 12:01:12 pm
I'm with Cheetah on this one, that's the only thing I can think of. But it should still not have been working in the first place. Could you post a screen shot?
45
The Lounge / Re: FIGHT THE INTERNET CENSORSHIP ACT
November 17, 2011, 04:31:24 pmQuote from: Pickle Girl Fanboy on November 17, 2011, 02:17:49 pm
What does the war in Libya have to do with this conversation? Are you one of those liberals who belives that we should have just sent Gaddafi a sternly-worded letter, and then let him slaughter his people (like we did to Bahrain, and, to a lesser extent, Yemen)? War, though usually bad, is sometimes necessary.
I'd answer that question about the war in Libya, but you already answered it. War, though usually bad, is sometimes necessary. Contrast that to what you stated earlier about war and being obsolete with an information AI. That was the point I was speaking against. I suppose I could have continued using hypotheticals, but I figured a real world example of how growth of information would not have prevented the war would work better.
And thank you for providing an example to help me: WWII. If Japan had access to information that US bombers were heading their way with atomic weaponry, they would have used that information to gun down those planes, thus prolonging WWII in the Pacific. In this case, a military secret helped end a war. But if that secret had been exposed to everyone by the info-AI, the war would have trudged on.
Basically, the point I was trying to get across was that information is a tool, neither good nor evil inherently. Some will use their information, this tool, to built, to create, and to foster a greater place (a la FFH, like you said), but there are those of mankind who would use their tool to destroy, to take, and to oppress.
I can't argue with the rest of your post because I agree.
Quote from: Pickle Girl Fanboy on November 17, 2011, 02:17:49 pmHow do you fight a corporation with hundreds of billions of dollars at it's disposal, and fingers in every concievable pie?
A solid question here. My thoughts are to quit giving those companies money. Which is most of the reason I am against this bill. It's not that we deserve this pirated information (music/movies/tv shows/video games) for free, it's that some of those industries have been overcharging us for decades because they can (music and movies and to some extent tv shows). Like you said, they "will keep fucking with us until we fuck with them." However, their response in some departments has been backwards: we pirate movies because theatres are too expensive, so they raise prices to compensate for losses when they really should have lowered prices to attract more people (and perhaps stop paying movie stars kajillions of dollars to do less than one years work).
My response is similar for government. If we want government to quit playing in our lives, we should quit giving them more power and more money.
46
The Lounge / Re: Fire Emblem 6 One on One fights
November 17, 2011, 02:09:22 pm
Roy's our boy! Roy's our boy! Roy's our boy!
(cue fond memories of SSBB)
(cue fond memories of SSBB)
47
The Lounge / Re: FIGHT THE INTERNET CENSORSHIP ACT
November 17, 2011, 01:39:27 pm
To PGF, I understand that. But if preventing war was as simple as making a nation feel self-conscious, war would have already been obliterated. What I'm trying to point out is that wars aren't started because one nation looks at it's forces and looks at another nations forces and says "I think we can take'em." More often than not, modern day wars are civil wars. Libya's recent war would not have been prevented with publicized secret information.
The way that I'm looking at it, superior intel would not have stopped WWI or WWII, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, or really any other major conflict. Superior intel would have just exposed more people to harm. Either way, if an internet AI existed, military communication would just move back to what it was before the interwebs, like in those wars I listed.
To Kaijyuu, you are placing your own translation upon the proposed law. If the law said "any website appearing to infringe upon a copyright," would agree with you. But the way you make it sound is that the law is being made so that a company can go above and beyond that law. If that were the case, making the law would pointless, because they could just go beyond the law now.
BTW, I suppose I should point out again that I am not for this law. I'm just not against it for what is being labeled as censorship.
The way that I'm looking at it, superior intel would not have stopped WWI or WWII, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, or really any other major conflict. Superior intel would have just exposed more people to harm. Either way, if an internet AI existed, military communication would just move back to what it was before the interwebs, like in those wars I listed.
To Kaijyuu, you are placing your own translation upon the proposed law. If the law said "any website appearing to infringe upon a copyright," would agree with you. But the way you make it sound is that the law is being made so that a company can go above and beyond that law. If that were the case, making the law would pointless, because they could just go beyond the law now.
BTW, I suppose I should point out again that I am not for this law. I'm just not against it for what is being labeled as censorship.
48
The Lounge / Re: FIGHT THE INTERNET CENSORSHIP ACT
November 17, 2011, 12:34:42 pmQuote from: Pickle Girl Fanboy on November 17, 2011, 11:29:24 amIt'll be pretty hard to fight a war when everyone knows where everyone's pieces are, and what moves they will make. If we can make something that does that, then war, opression... will become obsolete.
Unless an oppressive state has power, and the only thing that was keeping it from invading was proper intel on it's enemy. If the oppressive state believed it's enemy to be stronger, it would not invade. If you are the target nation, all the intel in the world will not guarantee safety from superior firepower. Or in the case of terrorist organizations that do not use computer hardware to communicate or coordinate their attacks, but could utilize this publicized information to attack ungaurded or weaker installations to minimize their losses whilst still dealing damage.
Quote from: Kaijyuu on November 17, 2011, 10:43:44 amRight here is the problem, I believe. The bill allows people to force ISPs to block websites, and rather arbitrarily.
I agree with that statement, aside from the 'rather arbitrarily' part. One of the lines you quoted said "an intellectual property right holder harmed by a U.S.-directed site dedicated to infringement." This states that the site would have to be dedicated to copyright infringement. It also kind of implies that the copyright holder would need to be harmed by the infringement. Now, I do believe this could be abused with false accusations of infringement, but like any false accusation regarding the law, a counter-suit could be filed to recover damages due to site down-time and defamation, and Gov't charge would be filed against them for making a fraudulent claim and waisting taxpayer money.
Either way, I don't think this legislation would affect FFH since I believe we are hosted in the good ole United States of Canada. So wahoo for that if I'm right.
49
The Lounge / Re: FIGHT THE INTERNET CENSORSHIP ACT
November 17, 2011, 09:11:32 am
Here is the congressional summary of the two bills that make up SOPA H.R.3261:
I'll get around to reading the actual bill once I get off work today. (That's a lie, I'll be playing Skyrim) I don't see much in the way censoring free speech aside from falsely identifying counterfeit drugs as real ones or falsely identifying something as being military grade when it is not. The rest is either anti-piracy or increasing penalties for already existing laws.
I'm not saying I'm for the bill, but could someone explain to me why this is being called an internet censorship bill? If you could point out specifics in the actual bills I would give you extra internet cookies.
Quote from: SOPA H.R.3261Official Summary
10/26/2011--Introduced.Stop Online Piracy Act - Authorizes the Attorney General (AG) to seek a court order against a U.S.-directed foreign Internet site committing or facilitating online piracy to require the owner, operator, or domain name registrant, or the site or domain name itself if such persons are unable to be found, to cease and desist further activities constituting specified intellectual property offenses under the federal criminal code including criminal copyright infringement, unauthorized fixation and trafficking of sound recordings or videos of live musical performances, the recording of exhibited motion pictures, or trafficking in counterfeit labels, goods, or services. Sets forth an additional two-step process that allows an intellectual property right holder harmed by a U.S.-directed site dedicated to infringement, or a site promoted or used for infringement under certain circumstances, to first provide a written notification identifying the site to related payment network providers and Internet advertising services requiring such entities to forward the notification and suspend their services to such an identified site unless the site's owner, operator, or domain name registrant, upon receiving the forwarded notification, provides a counter notification explaining that it is not dedicated to engaging in specified violations. Authorizes the right holder to then commence an action for limited injunctive relief against the owner, operator, or domain name registrant, or against the site or domain name itself if such persons are unable to be found, if:
(1) such a counter notification is provided (and, if it is a foreign site, includes consent to U.S. jurisdiction to adjudicate whether the site is dedicated to such violations), or
(2) a payment network provider or Internet advertising service fails to suspend its services in the absence of such a counter notification. Requires online service providers, Internet search engines, payment network providers, and Internet advertising services, upon receiving a copy of a court order relating to an AG action, to carry out certain preventative measures including withholding services from an infringing site or preventing users located in the United States from accessing the infringing site. Requires payment network providers and Internet advertising services, upon receiving a copy of such an order relating to a right holder's action, to carry out similar preventative measures. Provides immunity from liability for service providers, payment network providers, Internet advertising services, advertisers, Internet search engines, domain name registries, or domain name registrars that take actions required by this Act or otherwise voluntarily block access to or end financial affiliation with such sites. Permits such entities to stop or refuse services to certain sites that endanger public health by distributing prescription medication that is adulterated, misbranded, or without a valid prescription. Expands the offense of criminal copyright infringement to include public performances of:
(1) copyrighted work by digital transmission, and
(2) work intended for commercial dissemination by making it available on a computer network. Expands the criminal offenses of trafficking in inherently dangerous goods or services to include:
(1) counterfeit drugs; and
(2) goods or services falsely identified as meeting military standards or intended for use in a national security, law enforcement, or critical infrastructure application. Increases the penalties for:
(1) specified trade secret offenses intended to benefit a foreign government, instrumentality, or agent; and
(2) various other intellectual property offenses as amended by this Act. Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review, and if appropriate, amend related Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Requires the Secretary of State and Secretary of Commerce to appoint at least one intellectual property attache to be assigned to the U.S. embassy or diplomatic mission in a country in each geographic region covered by a Department of State regional bureau.
I'll get around to reading the actual bill once I get off work today. (That's a lie, I'll be playing Skyrim) I don't see much in the way censoring free speech aside from falsely identifying counterfeit drugs as real ones or falsely identifying something as being military grade when it is not. The rest is either anti-piracy or increasing penalties for already existing laws.
I'm not saying I'm for the bill, but could someone explain to me why this is being called an internet censorship bill? If you could point out specifics in the actual bills I would give you extra internet cookies.
50
The Lounge / Re: Skyrim
November 15, 2011, 06:58:51 am
Yeah, I ended up buying it and am sinking all my freetime into this game. It's a lot more like Morrowind, and I like it!
51
Spam / Re: *** Yeah, Seaking
November 11, 2011, 05:56:04 pm
It's like watching real nascar! Only with nyans.
52
The Lounge / Re: Skyrim
November 11, 2011, 09:07:08 am
I'm gonna wait til one of my friends gets it. That worked out well for me on Oblivion, since Oblivion was a let down for me.
53
Help! / Re: Since it was never answered...
November 09, 2011, 08:01:15 pm
You should have just bumped your last thread. And yes, I'm fairly certain those can be changed. How? That I do not know how to do yet.
54
The Lounge / Re: The greatest quote of all time
November 09, 2011, 07:17:35 pmQuote from: GeneralStrife on November 09, 2011, 06:41:39 pm
Tell me, how would you like to live over there? No womens rights at all just about.
Please take into account that over 80% of Islam is outside of the Middle East, and that the nation that holds the most Islamic people, Indonesia, has democratically elected a female president, something that the US has even yet to do.
55
The Lounge / Re: The greatest quote of all time
November 09, 2011, 07:13:24 pmQuote from: Pickle Girl FanboyKeep in mind that there is absolutely no irrefutable evidence that either Jesus or Mohammed, or even Abraham ever lived
I'll give you the Abraham one, as it's hard to prove anyone singular person existed back in that time. With Jesus, disregarding Christian texts, I believe there are one or two secular texts that mention him, and another Jewish text that mentions him. They are all minimal in content and basically say in a sentence or two "There was this guy who claimed he was the king of the Jews, his name was Jesus, and he was crucified." Nothing spectacular there. For Muhammad, there is more than enough evidence he existed as his military conquest of Mecca is verifiable history.
However, I do see that word 'irrefutable' in your statement. It's true that we can choose to distrust old pieces of parchment, or at least call them suspect. I choose to believe that all of them existed. But, I wouldn't look down on anyone who doesn't believe they exist. Even if someone believed they existed, I definitely couldn't fault them for not believing that they performed any miracles.
Quote from: Pickle Girl FanboyThey aren't monolithic, they aren't afraid to call bullshit on one another if one of them does something shitty, which is something I never see Christians do.
It happens all the time. It's just the dissenters don't get much publicity outside of Christian circles, as they are the ones who don't have TV shows, several thousands people churches, or other public platforms in media, because they see most of "Christians" in those public arenas as fakers.
Quote from: Pickle Girl FanboyIt's like this. Jews were god's chosen people, but then he dropped them when they killed Jesus (Muslims don't believe Jesus died on the cross, but they do think an imposter died in his spot, and Jesus later died almost a hundred years later in what is now Pakistan). So then, Christians inherited the Chosen People status from the Jews (Muslims agree with this, but believe that Jews lost their status as god's chosen people because they were sneaky and stole all the money, while sacrificing children and drinking their blood - which should be funny as hell for anyone who knows what Kosher means). So everything's fine and dandy (unless you're pagan) until Mohammed announces his revelation and is rejected by Christians. Once they reject Mohammed, then - according to Muslims - god rejects them, and annoints Mohammed and his followers (Muslims, slaves of allah/god) as his new chosen people.
My response to this kinda address the YHWH = God = Allah situation as well. Muslims, Jews, and Christians all worship the god of Abraham. A lot of the big separation comes in on the person of Jesus. Christians say he is God. Jews do not believe this, obviously. Muslims say he is a prophet and that to believe that Jesus is God is a polytheistic claim which violates the first pillar of Islam, the shahada. So to Islam and Judaism, Christian belief in Jesus' divinity is blasphemy. And to Christians, Islamic and Jewish rejection of Jesus' divinity is blasphemy. I know much less about the divide between Judaism and Islam, though.
Anywho, as Judaism's non-you'll-burn-in-hell-ness, I'd say give any religion official sponsorship of a powerful nation, and they'll start using it to tell you what your sinful ways are and how they will condemn you. It happened with Islam during Muhammad's lifetime when he gained enough of a following to crusade against Mecca, and it happened with Christianity around AD350 when the state religion of the Roman Empire changed to Christianity. Judaism has never really had strong backing like that, so they are always on the receiving end. Sucks to be them.
56
Hacking/Patching Tools / Re: PPF-O-Matic Patch Time
November 09, 2011, 02:07:54 pm
My PPf-ing took less than 3 minutes, so, yeah, something is up with your patch. Try CDMage to get the iso.
57
The Lounge / Re: The greatest quote of all time
November 09, 2011, 12:28:58 pmQuote from: Pickle Girl Fanboy
Special mention for Jews - they don't actually have a heaven or hell the same way Christianity and Islam do.
What I find interesting is that for Judaism, the afterlife wasn't even a solidified concept until about 500 BC. Before that there was really only what was referred to as Sheol which means the dead place. No heaven, no hell, just the dead place. If there was an afterlife was irrelevant to them.
Quote from: Pickle Girl FanboyYHWH = God = Allah.
Not sure if I totally agree on this. It'd be like saying FFT and FFT:WotL are the same. They are the same, but they are not the same. That was a woefully inadequate analogy, but you get what I'm saying, right?
59
Spriting / Re: Virkum
November 07, 2011, 12:07:39 pm
Lydyn, I dig the sprite. I think you should use the half cape/scarf that Kage made in the other topic.
60
The Lounge / Re: Who wants my GBA SP stuff?
November 04, 2011, 02:09:03 pm
That is one helluva stash. I like your taste in games. If these were for the DS, I'd have bought them.