Zeusthecat Posted September 10, 2013 No. We're trying to tell you that when you're ready... you won't have to. THANK YOU!!! That was one of my favorite forum exchanges ever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tegan Posted September 10, 2013 sometimes I wonder if I'm a robot and my whole life has been some kind of Truman Show deal to test how I react to various stimuli and situations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thestalkinghead Posted September 10, 2013 i sometimes wonder if america (and other countries) is just a fictional land where TV and movies are set, and england is truman island, and if i were to ever go to america i would just get on a plane that would circle the sky over the sea then return to the america set on truman island (yeah the truman show is one of those concepts that can make you go crazy too) but i (and possibly many other people) have been psychologically manipulated into not wanting to travel the world Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeremywc Posted September 10, 2013 THANK YOU!!! That was one of my favorite forum exchanges ever. Yes, it's like my high school lunch room sessions all over again. :-P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nelsormensch Posted September 10, 2013 As promised, Netrunner thread now exists: https://www.idlethumbs.net/forums/topic/8854-netrunner/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Codicier Posted September 10, 2013 sometimes I wonder if I'm a robot and my whole life has been some kind of Truman Show deal to test how I react to various stimuli and situations. Some people think there's a possibility the whole universe is basically a giant simulation run by our distant progeny, and have spent time figuring out tests we could run to find out if it was (but they would only work if we a beta universe!). http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2013/06/28/brainstorming-new-ways-to-test-if-cosmos-is-one-big-computer-simulation/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Problem Machine Posted September 10, 2013 If it were possible to completely simulate a universe within a universe, wouldn't that imply that the odds of this one not being a simulation are infinitesimal? Would it make any difference at all, one way or the other? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thestalkinghead Posted September 10, 2013 i think one day we will be able to simulate physics to such an extent that you could simulate the universe in super cheetah speed, so potentially we are just a simulation in a game that some alien kid is playing (spore 3000) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badfinger Posted September 12, 2013 Does that actually make anything you've simulated experiencing less real or true? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
clyde Posted September 12, 2013 If you change the scale of these questions of reality to that of an individual in typical daily human-experience, you can get an idea of what the knowledge that this is a simulation changes. The difficulty isn't that it's a giant simulation in which we all reside, but that we are all simulating our own realities (some more reliably than others). Realizing this can have a huge impact on a person's perspective and therefore, on the way they interact with the world. I went through a 4-year period of my life where I video-taped a large quantity of my daily doings. One of the odd side-effects was that I am far more willing to doubt my memory of events than I was before. A great way to test your memory is to video-tape an argument you have with someone, one where emotions are high. Allow some time for your memories of what happened to coagulate and then watch the tape. I suspect that you will experiene this uncomfortable dissonance when you see things go down a way you distinctly remember them not happening. Chronological order can also get super mixed up. We have a ton of perception-biases that affect our sense of reality and that is the information that can make a huge difference, more than whether or not the Earth is a giant computer being run by mice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Patrick R Posted September 12, 2013 Why do hot dogs come in packs of 12 when hot dog buns come in packs of 8? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeusthecat Posted September 12, 2013 Why do hot dogs come in packs of 12 when hot dog buns come in packs of 8? It's an evil ploy to increase hot dog sales. By doing this they ensure that we will buy 2 packs of hot dogs and 3 packs of hot dog buns to put our brains at ease. I think the real question we should be asking is why are they called "hot dogs"? I believe it is so whenever we hear "BigDog" we think "hot dog" and start thinking about the mismatch between packs of hot dogs and hot dog buns. Then, when BigDog becomes self aware we will be too distracted to notice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
melmer Posted September 12, 2013 "hot dogs" should really be called "chicken knees" And I always have 1 and a half hot dogs per bun. you're not living life to the fullest if you abide by a 1 dog per bun rule. Come on people, you need to turn it up a notch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeusthecat Posted September 12, 2013 And I always have 1 and a half hot dogs per bun. you're not living life to the fullest if you abide by a 1 dog per bun rule. Come on people, you need to turn it up a notch You're right, I do need to turn it up a notch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thestalkinghead Posted September 12, 2013 Can robots love? if you could understand the concept of love so completely that you could programme the ability to love, then yes robots could love, they could have all the feels if we understood how the brain worked properly, but we don't right now, so the best we could do is to make a robot imitate love Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeusthecat Posted September 12, 2013 if you could understand the concept of love so completely that you could programme the ability to love, then yes robots could love, they could have all the feels if we understood how the brain worked properly, but we don't right now, so the best we could do is to make a robot imitate love All we need is lightning. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
plasticflesh Posted September 13, 2013 Late entries on satisfying game endings that are certainly heavily tinted by nastalgia. The ending to 'zelda: a link to the past' had a wonderful epilogue cinematic showing all the characters going about their lives. 'Super mario world' also did a similar nice thing. As did toe jam and earl. Most of this content occurs during the credits, and feels optional. But endings change with the times. In elementary school I recall being taught dramatic 5 act structure of prologue, exposition, conflict, climax, epilogue. It was hard to think of a movie with falling action longer than a minute. I could only percieve 3 acts of exposition, conflict, climax. But watching many films from the 30s through the 70s, they might seem to drag on after their ending, because they actually had falling extended epilogues, for better or for worse. The core period of interactivity in games typically is the conflict act. If a game *wants* to mimic dramatic structure it adds conceits like time limits, ticket amounts, end bosses (or ancients) that need defeating, a sequence of linear capaigns/levels, and so on. But typically the journey is the destination. By this analogy, sandbox games could be argued as one act plays. Pure conflict. But I probably have a misinformed idea of dramatic structure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badfinger Posted September 16, 2013 Why do footlong hot dogs come sold by weight rather than by quantity? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
