Social Social Thread - Talk About Anything (You Are Allowed to Talk About)!

[ballin4life]

Not really. Global warming is hardly a doomsday scenario. More like... A really huge inconvenience. Pollution in levels that will wipe out humanity isn't at this point a reality. Conservation of the environment is important, but some of the stupidest charities out there are environmental. I mean, when you get right down to it, trying to save the polar bears or whatever is a lot less important than saving other humans.

I don't know what a fletching idea is (perhaps you meant "fledgling?") but I sincerely do not believe that trial and error will have any effect when NO ONE has ANY IDEA what to try. If that's the dumbest reasoning you've ever heard, you've lived a very sheltered life. Show me a budding cancer cure and I'll show you something that will never, ever work.

stem cells mayeng - regrow your cancerous organs n ****

also it's pretty clear that people have some idea what to try since
a) charities exist
b) WE HAVE CANCER CURES ALREADY - chemo/surgery/etc

Did you know that people die because of the harmful effects of smoking all the time? I know, let's invent a totally affordable and healthy cigarette, with all the extant positive effects and none of the negative! It'd save the lives of millions of people, in the long run!

Oh wait, that's a stupid idea. Because no one knows how to create such a cigarette. In the same way, we have no idea of how to cure cancer.

Heh. It's called *thing I can't mention here*

People figure it's a matter of time because hey, we cured polio, but this is a whole different animal. It will take an entirely new treatment to cure cancer, and giving money to alternate causes is a far more efficient way of raising the overall felicity of the human race.

At one point polio was that "whole different animal".

Plus they're going to cure aging at some point so cancer will be one of the few things standing in the way of an indefinite lifespan.

Basically, I'd donate every penny I had to the search for a Cancer cure, if my money would have any noticeable effect. It's ridiculous to just throw money at something, assuming that a cure will materialize.

No one's money has noticeable effects for any charity (okay, maybe bill gates) just like it doesn't make sense to vote because your vote isn't going to swing the election. People give to charity and vote anyway because it makes them feel good.

 

[asianaussie]

Those cancer cures you listed are only applicable as preventatives before cancer takes hold. If they really were cures, nobody would make such a huge fuss about cancer. The current trials are either tweaks of old treatments or so cutting edge (genetic medicine that targets proteins in cancerous cells, etc) that nobody has the money to fund them or knows where to go with them. Donating to them is arguably worthwhile, as individual trials are not as costly as most people think. Saying that donations won't make a difference is true if you expect the money to be divided among all the cancer research trials of the relevant organisation, but that's never the case, as a donation of $100 would give an insignificant fraction to each trial.

Additionally, smoking does not cause a huge amount of death in the way cancers and diseases do. It simply decreases quality of life on a large scale, with death as an eventual but ultimately preventable problem (it's called quitting, you can't quit cancer).

why has the social thread turned into the debate hall

actually im not even arguing against anyone

 

[rpotts]

Did you know that people die because of the harmful effects of smoking all the time? I know, let's invent a totally affordable and healthy cigarette, with all the extant positive effects and none of the negative! It'd save the lives of millions of people, in the long run!

Oh wait, that's a stupid idea. Because no one knows how to create such a cigarette.

Uhh, it's called the e-cig

 

[DemonicInfluence]

I'm gonna go on a smash hiatus lol. I got a bit bored of the game, and more enamored with Dota

I should be back sometime though.

 

[malva00]

did you know kids in chicago in the 1990s loved to say the word BOGUSH?

I heard about this like 11 years ago and Zhinshin has now confirmed this

<malva00> so
<malva00> say it in a sentence for me
<malva00> ^__^
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> I think Bogush is used more prominently in Latin/African American Neighborhoods
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> Alright
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> Say i'm writing with a pencil,and it breaks on me after one stroke
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> I'd say
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> "Man this pencil is bogush as hell!"
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> It's used like an adjective

<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> Say you don't let me eat some of your spaghetti
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> and we're really cool with each other
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> I'd say
<»ªVª«ZhinShinª*ª> "Dude why are you being so bogush?"

 

[DMoogle]

you're trying to place a monetary value on something that can't have a monetary value.

Um, what do you mean it can't have a monetary value? Of course it can. If it had cost a penny to completely protect all U.S. soldiers from being killed in a war via some kind of super armor, thus saving thousands of lives, then we would do it. If it had cost a trillion dollars per soldier for that protection, then we wouldn't do it. The breakeven point in between is the value of a human life. Just because it's difficult to pinpoint doesn't mean that it can't have a monetary value.

If this doesn't make sense to you, then I can describe a ton of different scenarios. Better yet, pick up a copy of DUCY?, and check out the chapter "Money as Measurement." The chapter "Disputes Between Principles and Pragmatism" would be a good read too.

it comes down to what you care about. you can say that donating genetically modified vegetation would help more, but it does not help more in my mind. I buy all my food from a local farmer's market, which doesn't benefit from the genetically modified vegetation, in fact it does just the opposite

I gave that as an example. I don't know what would be more beneficial toward mankind - cancer research or better food. I suspect that better food would be though. I'm pretty sure there are way more lives to be saved by fixing world hunger (via creating edible crops that can flourish in ****ty conditions) than there are people with cancer.

Again, that argument doesn't put into consideration the expected value of each dollar, so I can't say which one for sure would be more beneficial.

so I see no reason for my money to go to it instead of attempting to find a cancer cure. you want to donate to that instead? sure, go ahead, but don't tell me that I'm illogical just because you disagree with my value of things, that just makes you an *******.

You're either a liar or illogical if you donate to a charity where you know it's not the optimal place to put your money, and you claim that the only reason is to save lives. You would be a liar if you have a personal vendetta against cancer (because saving lives would not be the only reason to do it). You would be illogical if there are other causes that that you know about that save more lives per dollar (because you're knowingly going against your objective).

If you're neither of these things, then you're simply probably ignorant, because there are almost certainly better charities to donate to (meaning those that complete the objective more efficiently, i.e. save more lives per dollar). However, this is totally acceptable, because there are so many different causes with so many unknown factors that makes it literally practically impossible to determine the best cause to donate to to fulfill the objective.

 

[The Star King]

why has the social thread turned into the debate hall

I kind of like it this way. The Melee Social thread is mostly mindless fluff.

Plus they're going to cure aging at some point so cancer will be one of the few things standing in the way of an indefinite lifespan.

For some reason, the thought of a world with negligibly senescent humans bothers me. I can't put why into words.

I know it'll happen eventually, though.

 

[Olikus]

Okay a pokemon question...

I went to route 34 on Pokemon SS and met on a Ralts and got suprised since I didnt know that you could get him on SS. And after I caught it I checked the pokedex, and it stood area unknown. I know that you can get pokemon on the game even if it stands area unknown (safari zone, from people etc). But when you actually can catch them in the grass, why does it stand area unknown? It also stood on bulbapedia that you could catch it on route 34 so idk.

 

[asianaussie]

It's a swarm thing - check Mary & Oak's radio each day and it'll say that a certain pokemon is swarming - this is either a rare a normally rare Mon (Chansey, Marill) or otherwise unobtainable Hoenn/Sinnoh Mon (Ralts, Kricketot, etc). You don't have to check the radio to get the swarm, hence why you found it without knowing why.

The swarm changes each day, so get them while you can. It changes with the passing from 11:59 to midnight, so you can abuse the DS clock to find swarming Pokemon.

It could also be because you were playing Hoenn Sound, but iirc Ralts is a swarm.

 

[Ocean]

Um, what do you mean it can't have a monetary value? Of course it can. If it had cost a penny to completely protect all U.S. soldiers from being killed in a war via some kind of super armor, thus saving thousands of lives, then we would do it. If it had cost a trillion dollars per soldier for that protection, then we wouldn't do it. The breakeven point in between is the value of a human life. Just because it's difficult to pinpoint doesn't mean that it can't have a monetary value.

If this doesn't make sense to you, then I can describe a ton of different scenarios. Better yet, pick up a copy of DUCY?, and check out the chapter "Money as Measurement." The chapter "Disputes Between Principles and Pragmatism" would be a good read too.

You're either a liar or illogical if you donate to a charity where you know it's not the optimal place to put your money, and you claim that the only reason is to save lives.

that's not the cost of the life, that's the cost of the armor. you cannot buy a human life. you cannot sell a human life. you cannot trade a human life. it is not a material thing, able to be represented by currency. you can try and place a value on it, but the value is so controversial that it has no meaning. money is not everything.

will do, economic reads are always good reads.

and you're still not listening to what I'm saying. it comes down to opinion on what you believe is more important. and again, ridding a charity of all funding just because you claim there is a better choice is a **** move.

 

[ballin4life]

So A$ any more thoughts on your boy Sklansky and his book?

 

[Ocean]

I want a red wii.

 

[NixxxoN]

wtf is up with you guys involving money into everything. Human lifes dont have money value and public health is priceless.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

I'd have to agree with NixxxoN.
Money is not everything in life.

 

[The Star King]

that's not the cost of the life, that's the cost of the armor. you cannot buy a human life. you cannot sell a human life. you cannot trade a human life. it is not a material thing, able to be represented by currency. you can try and place a value on it, but the value is so controversial that it has no meaning. money is not everything.

If you can argue "that's not the cost of the life, that's the cost of the armor", others can argue that determining the more cost-productive charity isn't placing a value on human lives. "That's not the cost of the life, that's the cost of the cure". Not in this argument, but just saying.

Money isn't everything in life, but it's a pretty ****ing big part of life.

 

[Ocean]

If you can argue "that's not the cost of the life, that's the cost of the armor", others can argue that determining the more cost-productive charity isn't placing a value on human lives. "That's not the cost of the life, that's the cost of the cure". Not in this argument, but just saying.

Money isn't everything in life, but it's a pretty ****ing big part of life.

that's a very good point. however I still feel that trying to compare a superarmor and a cure for cancer doesn't work. something about it urks me.

yes it is, but it measures material goods. money's value is what it buys, and you can't buy life.

 

[The Star King]

that's a very good point. however I still feel that trying to compare a superarmor and a cure for cancer doesn't work. something about it urks me.

I'm glad you admit it's a good point, but why do you feel comparing the two doesn't work? They are both to protect human lives, and some methods are more cost-productive than others.

 

[Ocean]

I really don't know.

 

[Frogles]

any of you guys play black/white yet? i'm kind of scared of the encounter rate after playing heart gold. i'd get into a battle in literally 2-3 steps.

i remember being able to walk halfway through mt. moon without getting into a battle ;_;

 

[Gammelnorsk]

i thought you meant black and white the game


good game

2 was aight

 

[dandan]

slap the cow around

 

[Gammelnorsk]

i always picked the chimp

 

[Olikus]

It's a swarm thing - check Mary & Oak's radio each day and it'll say that a certain pokemon is swarming - this is either a rare a normally rare Mon (Chansey, Marill) or otherwise unobtainable Hoenn/Sinnoh Mon (Ralts, Kricketot, etc). You don't have to check the radio to get the swarm, hence why you found it without knowing why.

The swarm changes each day, so get them while you can. It changes with the passing from 11:59 to midnight, so you can abuse the DS clock to find swarming Pokemon.

It could also be because you were playing Hoenn Sound, but iirc Ralts is a swarm.

Thanks for the help. I shall check it out more.

 

[The Star King]

any of you guys play black/white yet? i'm kind of scared of the encounter rate after playing heart gold. i'd get into a battle in literally 2-3 steps.

i remember being able to walk halfway through mt. moon without getting into a battle ;_;

That's what repels are for. Super repels have the most steps/dollar (wut).

 

[Battlecow]

yes, I meant fledgling, sorry, just an error.
yes, no one has any idea what to try, but just letting the problem sit there will help absolutely nothing. who are you to say that a possible idea will never work? did you go through 4 years of college, 4 years of med school, 8 years of internship, and then spend a large chunk of your adult life researching cancer? I highly doubt you have, and you probably have about the same amount of knowledge about cancer as I do. you are in no position to say something will or will not work. being cynical about the entire issue will not solve anything.

I've done research. I don't have to be THE MOST knowledgeable about a subject to argue about it, as long as I'm somewhat informed.

creating a healthy cigarette is not the same thing as finding the cure for cancer. I'm not saying that we need a 100% accurate, 100% effective perfect cure for cancer, because that's extremely illogical, and will never exist. a typical cure is completely possible though. and what "alternate causes" would you suggest? you talk about how there's always something better to put your money towards, but what is it? it's better to put money to something that might work, then completely take away all it's funds just because you think it won't work.

I'm not going to give a laundry list of my favorite charities, but a couple of examples might be, say, the Institute for Justice, which is really well-managed and serves a pressing need domestically, or the American Red Cross, which does a lot of really good things, from what I've read. I suppose a cure is possible, in the same way that teleportation is possible. We don't have any evidence that our money will bring it about soon, though.

of course your wealth wouldn't have a noticeable effect, and it's stupid to think otherwise. but you're not just throwing money at something, assuming that a cure will materialize. you're putting money forth at the chance that a cure can be found. $1,000 added to a cause might not show for much, but it's better than sitting there, not contributing, just because you think that you wouldn't have an effect (when you would, it would just be unnoticeable to your eye).

Perhaps I was unclear; I don't demand to see results from specifically my giving (that would be ridiculous). I expect to see results produced as a result of overall giving.

you're trying to place a monetary value on something that can't have a monetary value. it comes down to what you care about. you can say that donating genetically modified vegetation would help more, but it does not help more in my mind.

If you only cared about cancer, this argument works, but then you'd be a terrible person, wouldn't you? I'm assuming that you care about alleviating human suffering, in which case it should be obvious, LOGICALLY, that there are better ways to do it than donating to cancer-curing initiatives.


Oh and a big P.S.- I don't really know anything about e-cigs beyond what wikipedia tells me, but I've always thought that they had their own little health problems and issues and whatnot.

 

[DMoogle]

that's not the cost of the life, that's the cost of the armor. you cannot buy a human life. you cannot sell a human life. you cannot trade a human life. it is not a material thing, able to be represented by currency. you can try and place a value on it, but the value is so controversial that it has no meaning. money is not everything.

Just because it's controversial and different for everyone doesn't mean that putting a value on it is meaningless. How much would you pay to save a complete stranger? Multiple strangers? Friends or family? It may be difficult to determine (and it probably makes you uncomfortable to think about), but there is a number.

and you're still not listening to what I'm saying. it comes down to opinion on what you believe is more important. and again, ridding a charity of all funding just because you claim there is a better choice is a **** move.

There's a reason (or perhaps multiple reasons with different weights) you're donating to a particular purpose. I assumed the reason was to save lives, but it may very well be something else. Perhaps the reason is to maximize the happiness in the world (which isn't necessarily the same as saving lives). Or perhaps cancer is a particularly intriguing puzzle to you. Either way, there *may* be other causes that *may* fulfill the reason you're donating for more optimally. Then again, efficiency (in completing the reason(s) you're donating for) when compared to dollars donated isn't necessarily a linear scale. It may be optimal to have, for example, 70% of your donation in one cause, and the other 30% in another.

Economists (and other smart people) put happiness into numerical form all the time. The term for it is utility. Just because it's different for everyone doesn't mean that it can't be measured. It's just difficult.

So A$ any more thoughts on your boy Sklansky and his book?

He's the man.

He's totally full of himself in this book though (and totally weird on forums), but whatevs, he's still brilliant and I'm still learning stuff.

 

[Frogles]

That's what repels are for. Super repels have the most steps/dollar (wut).

repels dont fix the encounter rate they just get rid of it.

 

[asianaussie]

i'm okay with lots of encounters as long as there isn't ridiculous battle command lag like in D/P

 

[The Star King]

repels dont fix the encounter rate they just get rid of it.

I know, but that's why encounter rate doesn't really bother me outside of the very start of the game. I ALWAYS use repels.

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

i'm okay with lots of encounters as long as there isn't ridiculous battle command lag like in D/P

^ this

I liked the gba versions and below cause I could run away from battles easier and faster.

 

[asianaussie]

FR/LG has stupidly long animations when you encounter a pokemon...it's like 2 full seconds of the pokemon's silhouette panning across the screen

on the other hand it and R/S/E have the best pokemon capture animations by far

D/P/Pl and HG/SS have horribly boring and unnecessarily long animations...i get you want to put in tension, but seriously it gets stupid when you're trying to catch pokemons late-game, especially legendaries

 

[The Star King]

5th Gen is supposed to be more fast-paced. Which is good, because 4th Gen was horribly slow and annoying.

 

[ballin4life]

Economists (and other smart people) put happiness into numerical form all the time. The term for it is utility. Just because it's different for everyone doesn't mean that it can't be measured. It's just difficult.

Utility itself can't be measured, at least not in a way that you can do interpersonal comparisons (e.g. I have 200 utils, you have 150 utils so I'm happier - that doesn't work). Utility is just a direction (so we can say. I had 150 utils, now I have 200 so I'm happier than I was).

He's the man.

He's totally full of himself in this book though (and totally weird on forums), but whatevs, he's still brilliant and I'm still learning stuff.

The days of the Special Sklansky Forum were the best.

 

[Sempiternity]

So, Etrian Odyssey.

AHHHHHHH **** WHAT A DIFFICULT BUT GREAT AND SO SATISFYING GAME

That's what I've been doing all break long, despite having so many other plans.

Also, my wisdom teeth no longer exist in my head!

 

[DMoogle]

The days of the Special Sklansky Forum were the best.

I didn't even know you were a 2+2er. Sup, bro. Are you ballin4life on there too? I'm DMoogle.

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

I am getting into brawl hacking after messing around with melee hacking. I feel really lost and one huge problem I am having is I can not install a home brew channel in my wii because I do not actually own a copy of brawl (Did not own a wii until recently so I do not have a single wii game.) I would use my friends copy of brawl if I where not BURIED IN THE ****ING SNOW!

It is all good though winter and snow is my favorite time of year because it is so beautiful and peaceful, I just feel annoyed that I have it a brick wall for a lack of a better metaphor.

So far hacking melee is a lot more enjoyable that hacking brawl, but I wish to give brawl a chance before I decide that melee is better.

 

[ballin4life]

I didn't even know you were a 2+2er. Sup, bro. Are you ballin4life on there too? I'm DMoogle.

No I'm sup bro.

All county 1995

 

[DMoogle]

I was offered modship at BBV, but turned down the position because I was spending more time here.

SSB > teh pokers, apparently.

 

[th3kuzinator]

BBV some type of poker site?

 

[Sempiternity]

My roommate last year went through an online poker phase. The kid won hundreds of dollars before blowing it all in some tournament. Didn't stop *****ing for several weeks.

I don't think it really matters for him in the grand scheme of things, though... damn rich kid.

I do miss that TV, though. :'(