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.
Messages - Flee
Pages: 1 ... 163164165 166167 ... 520
4921
« on: April 26, 2016, 03:09:33 PM »
That is the most American thing I've read all day.
4922
« on: April 26, 2016, 02:32:46 PM »
I really hope they fix the viable weapon classes soon. Lot of truth to this post. It is pretty disgusting how my +10 dark sword currently does considerably more damage per hit, more critical damage, hits faster and drains less stamina than my Corvian Great Scythe at +9. The lack of poise really hurts weapon variety and viability when estoc and straightword R1 R1 R1 reigns supreme by being faster, more accurate, inflicting more damage, uses less stamina and has obscenely good tracking.
4923
« on: April 26, 2016, 01:18:37 PM »
what does everyone study
Law.
4924
« on: April 26, 2016, 12:13:50 PM »
Thesis.
Legal advice to a business for practicum.
Moot court on IP enforcement and privacy.
5 exams making up 100% of my grade for all their respective classes.
Busy times.
4925
« on: April 26, 2016, 05:45:18 AM »
Woah, this is actually pretty big.
People have discovered that DS3 actually has a poise system that is pretty much identical to what it was in DS1. It's currently just turned off and can easily be turned back on by making a few minor edits. The lack of poise is currently one of the biggest gripes the community has with the game (especially the PVP), so if From actually deliberately put this in there to experiment with and potentially later change, this could mean some serious changes for the game.
Hopefully they do change it, because from what little I understand of the pvp, the way it works now basically makes most strength weapons and heavy armour useless doesn't it
Heavy armor is definitely useless, yeah. Full Havel's gets stunned by the R1 from an estoc, so there really is no point in going for it in that aspect. And with defense coming from armor already being pretty minimal and there not being that much of a gap between mid - heavy armors, there really isn't much of a point in going for them. Vitality really does not have much of a use now. I wouldn't call strength weapons useless though. They're definitely outclassed by other weapon types (katanas, straight swords and thrusting weapons reign supreme) who often deal comparable damage while still being faster and consuming less stamina, but they're not useless if you know how to use them. Baiting and trading hits is still a valid tactic with them. But yeah, they definitely don't compare to other weapons. Not much of a point in using them when random estoc user #523 will stagger you out of every swing like it's nothing. DS1 poise really was the best in the series. It could be a bit more fluent and work with smoother caps, but the general idea behind it is really good.
4926
« on: April 25, 2016, 05:13:17 PM »
Good luck. Of the 20 applications I've filed in my life, I've never gotten so much as a phone call.
Filing the first two for this summer. Not excited... at all.
Stuff like this is moderately demotivating, as I'm only filing one.
4927
« on: April 25, 2016, 03:48:56 PM »
Woah, this is actually pretty big.People have discovered that DS3 actually has a poise system that is pretty much identical to what it was in DS1. It's currently just turned off and can easily be turned back on by making a few minor edits. The lack of poise is currently one of the biggest gripes the community has with the game (especially the PVP), so if From actually deliberately put this in there to experiment with and potentially later change, this could mean some serious changes for the game.
4928
« on: April 25, 2016, 03:26:36 PM »
Tip for anyone rolling dex/pyro: The Astora Greatsword infused with chaos scales C/C/A/A and has relatively low stat requirements.
Pyro scales with faith and intelligence now?
Yep
Kind of a pain having to level both/either though. It was nice in DkS1 to just scale directly from the glove.
There goes my plan of adding a fire buff to my main account.
4929
« on: April 25, 2016, 03:09:57 PM »
Why didn't you apply to a gun store?
Despite never having fired one before, I think I have a better practical knowledge of guns than most but I'm nowhere near an expert. Gun regulations, criminology and their role in the justice system are my interests. Actual guns themselves don't do much for me at all. That, and I live in the fascist state of Europe. Gun stores are few and far between.
4930
« on: April 25, 2016, 03:04:22 PM »
Tip for anyone rolling dex/pyro: The Astora Greatsword infused with chaos scales C/C/A/A and has relatively low stat requirements.
Pyro scales with faith and intelligence now?
4931
« on: April 25, 2016, 01:17:58 PM »
Hey Flee, I've seen all your post. Each one of them is amazing in their own way. You're an inspiration and I love you man.
Best friend confirmed.
4932
« on: April 25, 2016, 11:18:01 AM »
Just how "deep" does it go, metagame-wise? The combat and mind game aspects go pretty deep. Some weapons are objectively better than others, but pretty much every build, weapon or playstyle is viable and valid. Not that it's some insanely deep and complicated system, but there is a pretty high skill ceiling. Does Dark Souls have anything resembling a competitive scene, like Pokémon or Street Fighter? Do people hold Dark Souls PvP tournaments? Not really, unfortunately. People sometimes host fight clubs or small tournaments, but they're nothing major at all. Dark Souls is a game that can be very competitive, but it was never designed with a real competitive scene in mind. A lack of LAN the host advantage online, the way "player pools" work and how it can be a real pain to match up with the people you want, the lack of customisable rulesets, the possibilities of abuse and no way to validate certain things (if the build is legit, if the levels are equal and so on) all make it very difficult. But if DS actually had like proper matchmaking for just 1v1 in an Arena where people start out from the main menu and go in on equal footing, I have no doubt it would actually be a very popular competitive game with an active scene and big tournaments. The only thing I know is that it's generally frowned upon to drink Estus during a "formal" duel, so I can only assume there are other stipulations as well. In Dark Souls 1, there is no way for invaders to heal with estus. They can only use healing miracles and humanities to replenish health, both of which are very slow and leave you wide open for attacks, and the cost of humanities being quite high. It's a big advantage the host has over the invaders, being able to heal and send the invader home by entering the boss arena. But yeah, people often look down upon healers in "proper" duels. The way I look at it is that when people summon each other through a red summon sign (meaning that the host explicitly and directly consents to that particular invader coming into the game at that time by selecting "yes" on a prompt asking him if he wants to summon an invader), it's kind of supposed to be a an actual duel where running and healing is pretty lame and in bad taste. If during a random invasion, the host decides to bow at his opponent and makes clear they're going to duel, I also feel that healing is a bit cheap, but so be it. But during random invasions where it's the invader trying to fuck up the host? In that case the host should heal and do whatever he can to survive and win. Like I said, the host has a pretty big advantage over invaders and should do anything in his power to win. Is there any struggle or point to becoming "the best" Dark Souls PvP player ever, or is it just a matter of who has the bigger/stronger/faster weapon?
Not at all the second. Dark Souls PvP is very much and almost entirely skill based. Some weapons just are better than others, but good players will beat bad players with everything. You also see this in videos of some of the well known "pro" players who stream and have youtube accounts dedicated to Dark Souls fights. Despite all of them being amazing players, they all use a wide array of different weapons ranging from heavy clubs to thrusting swords, greatswords, katanas, scimitars, spears, spells, axes, bows and so forth, using pure melee builds, hybrids, quality characters, pure dex / str, pyro, faith, magic and so on. So it's generally well accepted that within each category of weapon, there are a few that stand out above the rest, but all categories are equally viable on their own, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.
4933
« on: April 25, 2016, 10:56:53 AM »
I applied for McDonald's last summer and I got rejected
😥
That's encouraging.
4934
« on: April 25, 2016, 09:58:10 AM »
PvP is by far one of the best things about the Souls games and hands down one of the most clever and innovative multiplayer systems I've ever seen. It's what keeps people pouring hundreds of hours into the games after having beaten it a dozen times and knowing everything there is to know. To me, it is the most challenging and fun part of the games. No, they're fine with PvP. They, like me, just hate the lack of consent involved. Otherwise, it's perfectly fine.
Fair enough. I think it's executed very well and that you consent to all aspects of the multiplayer by becoming human and accepting both the good and the risks that come with that choice, but that's something we've already discussed to death.
4935
« on: April 25, 2016, 09:51:28 AM »
TL;DR
A couple of my other Dark Souls-playing friends told me that co-op shouldn't ever be done, because it makes the game too easy, and that playing single player offline is the best way to go. To them, multiplayer takes from the spirit of the game, and the invasion system only serves to make the game more frustrating and less fun. What do you make of that?
Disagreed on the invasions, kinda agree on the co-op. PvP is by far one of the best things about the Souls games and hands down one of the most clever and innovative multiplayer systems I've ever seen. It's what keeps people pouring hundreds of hours into the games after having beaten it a dozen times and knowing everything there is to know. To me, it is the most challenging and fun part of the games. Co-op, a little less so. I'm not going to rag on anyone for using summons to beat the game as they can play it however they want. That being said, it undoubtedly does make the game a lot easier. Another person to deal damage, help explore, bait out enemies and draw attention away from you helps out so much. I personally never summon anyone because I feel it detracts from the "real" experience and prevents you from overcoming obstacles at their best and most challenging. People also often use it for less than honest purposes and just summon a number of people to just wait and gang up on invaders instead of beating the area, which can both be incredibly fun and frustrating as an invader. Pretty decent mechanic serving as good balance against invasions, but I wouldn't recommend it on your first playthrough as I do think it detracts from the game somewhat.
4936
« on: April 25, 2016, 09:33:44 AM »
Lucky
I need to wait another year
Why so eager?
4937
« on: April 25, 2016, 09:12:07 AM »
From experience, I'd like to encourage cautious optimism. From the 325 applications I submitted from 2013 I netted 8 phone interviews, 5 face-to-face interviews, 2 work trials and 1 successful employment opportunity. This was without a degree but with work experience in IT/Statistics from 2010 onwards, and almost all of them would be considered 'entry-level' jobs, so the context may be completely different for you.
Best of luck with your application fam.
Well, I currently submitted just a single one. Hoping it'll go somewhere good and get a 100% application/success rate. But yeah, the context is pretty different I guess. They make it pretty clear they're not even considering applications that don't at least have a Bachelor's, a Master's in Law (LLM) and an additional specialized Master's in IT or IP Law or related field, all with excellent results and at least a distinction. Thanks for the advice, cautious optimism is what I'm going for. Don't really have a back up plan as of now though, so I'm really hoping here.
4938
« on: April 25, 2016, 06:48:01 AM »
going back to biting dogs i presume
Eh?
another flea joke
Oh, of course. It's really strange how puns and jokes work in a secondary language when you only use the word in one way only. Kinda like how I think of Turkey the user rather than the country or bird when I see the word. But yes, I'm an idiot.
4939
« on: April 25, 2016, 06:42:11 AM »
What kind of job?
Academic research at a university institution. It deals specifically with IT and IP law, which is kind of my thing.
4940
« on: April 25, 2016, 05:05:42 AM »
going back to biting dogs i presume
Eh?
4941
« on: April 25, 2016, 05:05:08 AM »
Are you working at the Flee Market?
I could, there's one in town every saturday.
4942
« on: April 25, 2016, 04:09:21 AM »
First time in my life doing something like this. Fingers crossed, friends.
4943
« on: April 24, 2016, 11:38:03 AM »
Never had to.
4944
« on: April 24, 2016, 08:59:27 AM »
no seriously guys how do you have fun with this
The good fights make it worth it for me. I really like DS3 but I definitely hope they do something about the connection. It's almost as if they intentionally made everything more laggy and lenient so that the host doesn't have as much of an advantage as he did in DS1. The result is that now every single fight has a slight delay on every move which is incredibly infuriating.
4945
« on: April 24, 2016, 05:20:49 AM »
Phantom hits are something you just kind of have to get used to.
I really hope we don't have to. It's worse in Dark Souls 3 than it was in DS2 and especially 1. I have my fingers crossed for From to release a patch and improve the current situation.
4946
« on: April 24, 2016, 04:31:08 AM »
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2515674/Its-official-Circumcision-DOESNT-affect-sexual-pleasure-according-biggest-study-issue.html
Get fucked, wormdicks. I look better downstairs AND still almost end up in pain because of how fucking sensitive my cock is.
Clickbait-tier article title aside, that study is pretty heavily criticised. It's done by a molecular biologist with no actual degree in medicine who picked no more than 36 studies out of the 2,700 available medical and scientific articles on the effects of circumcision on sexual activitiy and then concluded that out of those studies he read the ones finding no or just a tiny difference were of higher quality than the ones disagreeing. Numerous articles have addressed that study directly while many other more recent ones dismiss it indirectly, including the Royal Australasian College of Physicians who have been at odds with the man for years. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsm.12703/fullhttp://file.scirp.org/pdf/ASM_2015041614065853.pdfhttp://file.scirp.org/pdf/ASM_2015033116102429.pdfhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4364150/http://www.circumstitions.com/Docs/morris-2013-ann.pdfhttp://www.skeptic.org.uk/magazine/features/64-published/711-does-science-support-infant-circumcision-a-skeptical-reply-to-brian-morrishttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15265161.2014.991000?journalCode=uajb20http://muse.jhu.edu/article/578428https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brian_Earp/publication/281976691_The_need_to_control_for_socially_desirable_responding_in_studies_on_the_sexual_effects_of_male_circumcision/links/5622e95608aea35f2681e7fa.pdfhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15265161.2014.990760?journalCode=uajb20http://www.circinfo.org/CanadaCircumcisionPolicy.htmlhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17441692.2015.1004356http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2014/04/04/circumcision-health-risks-and-benefits-experts-respond/http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/41/1/312.fullAlso, because I know you'd like that kind of stuff, the guy conducting the study isn't free of controversy himself. He's been accused of bias and academic dishonesty numerous times, has a financial interest in promoting circumcision, is a member of "circumsexual" fetish groups and supposedly the "Gilgal society" Jewish interest group, and is a general outcast when it comes to this topic because of how extreme and criticised his views are. I don't usually care about all this stuff, but it might be nice for you to have a look at as you're usually not too fond of the Jew. When even the generally pro-circumcision American AAP chooses not to include any of his work in their latest review, it does say something about the man. http://www.circumstitions.com/morris.htmlhttp://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2013/08/16/medethics-2013-101614.abstract/reply#medethics_el_16775http://www.intactwiki.org/wiki/Brian_J._Morrishttp://mondofown.blogspot.be/2011/02/critique-of-brian-morris-of-circinfonet.htmlEither way, none of this really matters. It's nearly impossible to qualify something like sexual sensitivity. People who got cut at birth have no way of ever comparing the two and will rate their own experiences accordingly, while those who got cut later during life almost always do so because of some condition which likely prevented them from enjoying sex much in the first place. Surveys here are generally useless because of that and usually don't reveal much of a difference either way. However, there are a few things we do know for a fact. The foreskin is riddled with thousands of nerve endings. It is made up out of around 15sq inches of erogenous tissue that has been found to be one of the areas the most sensitive to fine touch in the entire human body. During sex, it helps with lubrication and performs a sliding motion pleasurable to both parties. Its removal results in a thickening of the glans due to chafing and abrasion by being unprotected and rubbing up against clothing, making it less sensitive to fine touch, and completely gets rid of a lot of very sensitive tissue. No one is saying that sex sucks when you're cut. I'm really glad that it doesn't for you. Science is not out to say you're wrong and shouldn't feel that way. But studies comparing surveys of cut and uncut men being asked "how good does your junk feel" are pretty flawed. Common sense and logic dictate that cutting off a ton of erogenous tissue and nerve endings while simultaneously exposing one of the most sensitive parts of a body to constant chafing and numbing is not going to improve sexual sensation.
4947
« on: April 23, 2016, 04:37:09 PM »
You're blindly accepting No, I'm not. I wouldn't have been able to defend the practice at all if that were the case.
http://www.cirp.org/library/death/
Nice little list of a few of the reported cases of children bleeding out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
Person who ended up losing their dick as a child due to circumcision and suffered GID due to being raised as a female.
http://www.learning-theories.com/eriksons-stages-of-development.html
1. Infancy: Birth-18 Months Old
Basic Trust vs. Mistrust – Hope
During the first or second year of life, the major emphasis is on the mother and father’s nurturing ability and care for a child, especially in terms of visual contact and touch. The child will develop optimism, trust, confidence, and security if properly cared for and handled. If a child does not experience trust, he or she may develop insecurity, worthlessness, and general mistrust to the world. Just to point out how important attachment is at a early age and how if that isn't met, the child can be fucked up after.
ayy it's nice to see Eriksons work again, I never really thought to apply it to something like this either so kudos for that.
Yeah, though I prefer Harlow's attachment work due to the colorful language and depravity of his work, Erikson brings up a good point of how children won't enter into further psychosocial stages when their most basic needs aren't met. As Flee said about how circumcision can inhibit the bonding between a baby and mother, it seems to me that the logical jump there would be noting how this may cause the first psychosocial stage to not develop properly.
I really hate Harlow. Sadistic bastard.
But eh, we learned from Unit 731, we learned from Mengele. So we might as well make use of what he found
But yes, maternal bonding already has enough obstacles without traumatising an infant like that.
Speculative wondering that maybe flee knows of a study, the wall of blue on the other page is a bit heavy tbh but has there been any study looking into links between PPD and circumcision of infants? I doubt it's a causal factor but I wonder if it elevates the risk factor of it developing.
PPD?
Postpartum depression.
I'm not aware of any studies there, but is sounds reasonable. One of the main causes of such a depression is usually child behavior, right? So it wouldn't come as a surprise to me if it's worsened or more likely in case of circumcision, as numerous studies have found that the procedure and trauma like it can impair baby-mother bonding and cause behavioral issues. Anyway, I'm gonna do one big post with sources and citations in it to wrap up my thoughts on this. Gonna keep it as factual and neutral as possible and incorporate both sides here to explain my reasoning. If you're still looking to respond Verb, you might just want to wait for that one.
4948
« on: April 23, 2016, 03:40:19 PM »
You're blindly accepting No, I'm not. I wouldn't have been able to defend the practice at all if that were the case.
http://www.cirp.org/library/death/
Nice little list of a few of the reported cases of children bleeding out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
Person who ended up losing their dick as a child due to circumcision and suffered GID due to being raised as a female.
http://www.learning-theories.com/eriksons-stages-of-development.html
1. Infancy: Birth-18 Months Old
Basic Trust vs. Mistrust – Hope
During the first or second year of life, the major emphasis is on the mother and father’s nurturing ability and care for a child, especially in terms of visual contact and touch. The child will develop optimism, trust, confidence, and security if properly cared for and handled. If a child does not experience trust, he or she may develop insecurity, worthlessness, and general mistrust to the world. Just to point out how important attachment is at a early age and how if that isn't met, the child can be fucked up after.
ayy it's nice to see Eriksons work again, I never really thought to apply it to something like this either so kudos for that.
Yeah, though I prefer Harlow's attachment work due to the colorful language and depravity of his work, Erikson brings up a good point of how children won't enter into further psychosocial stages when their most basic needs aren't met. As Flee said about how circumcision can inhibit the bonding between a baby and mother, it seems to me that the logical jump there would be noting how this may cause the first psychosocial stage to not develop properly.
I really hate Harlow. Sadistic bastard.
But eh, we learned from Unit 731, we learned from Mengele. So we might as well make use of what he found
But yes, maternal bonding already has enough obstacles without traumatising an infant like that.
Speculative wondering that maybe flee knows of a study, the wall of blue on the other page is a bit heavy tbh but has there been any study looking into links between PPD and circumcision of infants? I doubt it's a causal factor but I wonder if it elevates the risk factor of it developing.
PPD?
4949
« on: April 23, 2016, 02:13:11 PM »
So, wouldn't you concede that circumcision should only be done in cases where it is medically necessary such as phimosis instead? We don't remove the appendix except in cases of appendicitis, so why should this be different?
Reasonable.
This is pretty much just what people want. It's a fact that it's an invasive and painful surgery with many possible side effects and complications. The benefits are contested at best and even if they were all proven beyond all doubt, they're minimal. Phimosis and infection are pretty much the worst things that can come out of it, and they're both easily treatable and uncommon. So why not just leave it be unless it's actually necessary? That's really the only thing people want out of this, to be given a choice.
4950
« on: April 23, 2016, 02:06:38 PM »
So, wouldn't you concede that circumcision should only be done in cases where it is medically necessary such as phimosis instead? We don't remove the appendix except in cases of appendicitis, so why should this be different?
Reasonable.
+1
Pages: 1 ... 163164165 166167 ... 520
|
Show Posts