Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Neutral [chat] Hotel

17810121385

Posts

  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary Your Dark Descent FriendRegistered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    I'm against gnomes on a case by case basis, as everyone should be.

    Paint the gnome, punt him past the line.

    And thus was Horde football born.
    2ItqRJ7.jpgSteam/Origin/PSN: Corehealer / Core's Streamtastical Livestream (Streaming Wildstar Beta later this year).
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    Speaking of hyperboners...
    QP7yF.jpg
    h1DI1.jpg
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    I'm against gnomes on a case by case basis, as everyone should be.

    eeeeh

    generally, it is prudent to be wary against gnomes.
    xlh6c3.png
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    In much more important news than space exploration or resource depletion, I've finally joined this WhatsApp channel my brother set up for pictures of Jack. :D
  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    i am all for government investment into science and technology, but believe that space is one of the worst, least efficient and most pointless ways to spend that investment.

    Don't tell the internet!
  • DeebaserDeebaser Way out in the water See it swimmin'?Registered User regular
    i should just go home
    i am worthless
    #FreeThan
    #FreeScheck
    #FreeSKFM
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    Will would you like Space Exploration done with robots?
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    because the only real historical benefits of sending people into space are spinoff technologies that you could get from doing less-expensive research into something actually useful.

    i am all for government investment into science and technology, but believe that space is one of the worst, least efficient and most pointless ways to spend that investment.

    I agree with this so hard.

    At least, for manned space flight in particular.
    I am comforted by Richard Dawkins’ theory of memes. Those are mental units: thoughts, ideas, gestures, notions, songs, beliefs, rhymes, ideals, teachings, sayings, phrases, clichés that move from mind to mind as genes move from body to body. After a lifetime of writing, teaching, broadcasting and telling too many jokes, I will leave behind more memes than many. They will all also eventually die, but so it goes. - Roger Ebert, I Do Not Fear Death
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    I want to get a 3d printer and make nicholas cage themed warhammer miniatures

    fund my kickstarter
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    You think space travel should be private enterprise instead of publicly funded, will?

    I would have no problem with that if it were a workable model, but how are they going to make money?

    they probably won't

    because space exploration is a pointless hobby

    Why?

    because the only real historical benefits of sending people into space are spinoff technologies that you could get from doing less-expensive research into something actually useful.

    i am all for government investment into science and technology, but believe that space is one of the worst, least efficient and most pointless ways to spend that investment.

    defense technologies are a close second.

    science and technology aren't strictly speaking the same thing!

    astronomy is still a good thing to spend money on, the technology from it is just a bonus
    xlh6c3.png
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Will would you like Space Exploration done with robots?

    as long as those robots are telescopes

    yes
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary Your Dark Descent FriendRegistered User regular
    I want to get a 3d printer and make nicholas cage themed warhammer miniatures

    fund my kickstarter

    Suffer not the Cage to live.
    2ItqRJ7.jpgSteam/Origin/PSN: Corehealer / Core's Streamtastical Livestream (Streaming Wildstar Beta later this year).
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    I wasn't aware there were bad GMOs. Unless we are talking about Monsanto, and that isn't GMO but business practices that are pure evil.
    3FMmC.jpg
  • emnmnmeemnmnme Heard about this on conservative radio:Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    because the only real historical benefits of sending people into space are spinoff technologies that you could get from doing less-expensive research into something actually useful.

    i am all for government investment into science and technology, but believe that space is one of the worst, least efficient and most pointless ways to spend that investment.

    I agree with this so hard.

    At least, for manned space flight in particular.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2HzHSeV9v8
    FrenchCat2.jpg
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    Um defense technology is a vital industry how else are we going to defend ourselves Jeez William!
    _J_ wrote:
    If we only allowed pedophiles to be parents, then we would never have to worry about children being left alone, unwatched.
    XBL: Fanatical One AIM: itskagera
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Are you saying that progressives are overly panicky about genetically engineered crops because they often lack sufficient education on the subject Spool?

    Because on that we'd agree, also nuclear power - the progressive hateboner for nuclear energy has contributed to global warming as much as raw profit has

    I wasn't speculating really on the why... just shooting the shit about what I think progressives will be on the wrong side of, in future history.

    But yeah, I'd agree with both of those opinions.
    Successful Kickstarter get! Drop by Bare Mettle Entertainment if you'd like to see what we're making.
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    spool32 wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    Beyond repairing "flaws", I believe progressives of today will be opposed to augmenting the body to make it better or genetically modifying babies in utero to be "better".

    Also, the issue of equality and fairness will lead today's progressives to oppose technological augmentation that give the rich a competitive advantage in the marketplace that is insurmountable by 'natural' humans and is unavailable except at a high price.

    Social justice progressives who oppose space exploration (because we should spend that money on the poor) will also find themselves on the wrong side of the argument in the coming decades.

    it's not obvious to me that genetic enhancement will break along party lines. if anything, i'd guess that conservatives will tend to oppose it out of the traditional right-wing troika of "religious objections," "fear of change" and "general orneriness."

    the left-wing objection would be that it gives those who can afford it an even larger advantage. it's worth noting that these sorts of ideals haven't really done anything to influence politics since, like 1910.

    publicly funded space exploration will continue to be a stupid waste of a money-pit and will be eliminated as soon as private exploration makes some minor strides and the big defense companies see the writing on the wall and stop lobbying their republican congresspeople for space funding.

    I think today's conservatives won't oppose tech-oriented body modification in 30 years - we're pretty comfortable with technology and with body modification - and neither will our children, but tomorrow's progressives will oppose it on fairness and equality grounds. I don't know how much traction it'll get but I think more than in the past because inequality of wealth won't have the same visceral rejection factor as purchased inequality of the body / genes. Today's progressives are already often on the wrong side of the argument when it comes to "natural" things - India's salvation in the form of dwarf wheat was vigorously opposed by progressives worried about overpopulation.

    In fact the entire issue of "overpopulation" is going to find progressives in the uncomfortable position of arguing that we should let a lot of people die so we can save the planet for organisms that are not us.

    I think you're pretty off-base here. Progressivism isn't about stopping people from excelling on principle. It's about making sure people don't excel at the direct expense of others. It's about making sure people don't create massive power structures that oppress blocks of people. It's about making sure that everyone has a fair chance at a decent life.

    There's nothing inherently in progressivism that says you can't genetically modify your children to have an IQ of 200. All progressivism is interested in is making sure that your genius kids don't use their intelligence to effectively enslave people. And maybe if the disparity in the population becomes too great, progressivism will tax your genius billionaires to supply genetic engineering resources to everyone.

    It's about pulling people up, not stomping everyone down.

    I wish I could believe you about that, but I'm not sure [chat] is the place to dive into it. I see progressives very much aligned toward taking from the successful they believe have enough, toward equality of outcome rather than opportunity.

    But we were only talking about what we imagine tomorrow's progressives will be wrong about, not trying to get into a discussion of the nature of the progressive mindset. Maybe you believe that tomorrow's progressives will be wrong about nothing at all!

    I don't.

    The government takes from me, proportionally, the most it takes from just about anyone in the entire country. I'm single, I have a high-paying job, I don't own a home. At no point have I felt the government actively hindering my success. They aren't taking so much from me that I cannot eat, cannot provide myself housing, or even buy myself great stuff any time I want. My life outside work is easy and my money provides me with everything I need. It would be crazy to say I'm being held back to promote equality. I am being taxed an amount I can spare to provide a bare minimum life for those who don't have what I have. That's progressivism.

    but somewhere, a black guy has a better life than you

    somewhere, a poor person got something they don't deserve

    somewhere, someone is cheating the system

    where is the outrage, dk?

    where is the outrage?
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    that's pretty much exactly what I'm saying FCC

    however there's a huuuuuuuuuuge "anti-gmo" movement that just plain hates GMOs of all stripes and won't listen to facts
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Also worth noting that you could probably produce a workable metal AR-15 lower receiver on any of a number of consumer-level desktop CNC mills without too much difficulty.

    Hell, looking at it you could probably do it by hand with a manual milling machine if you took your time over it.

    Yes, this is a thing that people do now. The law allows it for private use. Selling it runs into a bunch of potential issues.

    It's just interesting that there is hysteria over 3D printed guns when the tech is considerably less mature than and comparably expensive to basic cnc equipment.

    I suppose it's because people can envisage 3D printing being a true consumer technology (in the "one in every home" sense)? Or they're just not thinking that hard about it.

    Basically I think that if you were a generally bad person looking to make (as opposed to buy, or steal) an untraceable gun for nefarious purposes you'd almost certainly buy or rent a CNC machine and use that with any of the freely available schematics online before you'd even consider 3D printing.

    I think it's more that people just aren't aware that making guns isn't some super tricky arcane art that only wizards can do.

    They think that, and then see 3D printed guns and go "oh shit!"

    Possibly a failure of the printer analogy.

    CNC equipment is much closer to "load up file on computer, put raw material in machine, send file to machine, completed part comes out" than 3D printing is at the moment, but people don't know what a CNC mill is, what it does, or how it works, but do know what a printer is.

    Ok that's totally true.

    I thought stuff like the maker replicator was basically like that.

    It's also SIGNIFICANTLY less cost prohibitive than a CNC mill for anything but really tiny stuff.

    like, star trek replicator? or?

    because if not then no

    guns, for example, are generally made of metal, or something that can get similar properties, and you'd be hard pressed to print that out.
    xlh6c3.png
  • 21stCentury21stCentury Raiding Relics Everyday Registered User regular
    I want to get a 3d printer and make nicholas cage themed warhammer miniatures

    fund my kickstarter

    Will you Buschemize minis as a stretch goal?
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    but somewhere, a black guy has a better life than you

    somewhere, a poor person got something they don't deserve

    somewhere, someone is cheating the system

    where is the outrage, dk?

    where is the outrage?

    This is why, as white and upper-middle class, I "take a penny" even when I don't need one.
    h1DI1.jpg
  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    You think space travel should be private enterprise instead of publicly funded, will?

    I would have no problem with that if it were a workable model, but how are they going to make money?

    they probably won't

    because space exploration is a pointless hobby

    Why?

    because the only real historical benefits of sending people into space are spinoff technologies that you could get from doing less-expensive research into something actually useful.

    i am all for government investment into science and technology, but believe that space is one of the worst, least efficient and most pointless ways to spend that investment.

    defense technologies are a close second.

    science and technology aren't strictly speaking the same thing!

    astronomy is still a good thing to spend money on, the technology from it is just a bonus

    There's a problem of finite resources.

    If we had infinite resources to spend, putting a few billion dollars in space flight would be trivial. Hell, they could take a few trillion, the greedy bastards. I'm guessing Will would agree, not to put words in his mouth.

    But we don't have infinite resources, so we need to worry about where they'd best go. Doing prestige things like landing a guy on the moon or working to land a guy on Mars are cool, but are they necessarily the best use of our finite resources?
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    equality of opportunity is bullshit.
    xlh6c3.png
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Will would you like Space Exploration done with robots?

    as long as those robots are telescopes

    yes

    So you're not a fan of mining in space either?
  • ShivahnShivahn Registered User regular
    I went to the doctor last week and got weighed.

    Apparently I have lost weight on estrogen?

    Not complaining, but... what? That's entirely unexpected!
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    we need us some space infrastructure already
    xlh6c3.png
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    There is buzz going round the internet that Tom "Draco Malfoy" Felton should play Quicksilver in the next Avengers movie.

    ubkTVPF.jpg

    I could see it working.
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Also worth noting that you could probably produce a workable metal AR-15 lower receiver on any of a number of consumer-level desktop CNC mills without too much difficulty.

    Hell, looking at it you could probably do it by hand with a manual milling machine if you took your time over it.

    Yes, this is a thing that people do now. The law allows it for private use. Selling it runs into a bunch of potential issues.

    It's just interesting that there is hysteria over 3D printed guns when the tech is considerably less mature than and comparably expensive to basic cnc equipment.

    I suppose it's because people can envisage 3D printing being a true consumer technology (in the "one in every home" sense)? Or they're just not thinking that hard about it.

    Basically I think that if you were a generally bad person looking to make (as opposed to buy, or steal) an untraceable gun for nefarious purposes you'd almost certainly buy or rent a CNC machine and use that with any of the freely available schematics online before you'd even consider 3D printing.

    I think it's more that people just aren't aware that making guns isn't some super tricky arcane art that only wizards can do.

    They think that, and then see 3D printed guns and go "oh shit!"

    Possibly a failure of the printer analogy.

    CNC equipment is much closer to "load up file on computer, put raw material in machine, send file to machine, completed part comes out" than 3D printing is at the moment, but people don't know what a CNC mill is, what it does, or how it works, but do know what a printer is.

    Ok that's totally true.

    I thought stuff like the maker replicator was basically like that.

    It's also SIGNIFICANTLY less cost prohibitive than a CNC mill for anything but really tiny stuff.

    It kind of is, but they're really still enthusiast products for people willing to put the time into setting them up and experimenting.

    And small CNC mills can be had for less than a grand (interestingly, there's a whole new generation of them based of the kind of hardware being used for the likes of reprap and other 3D printers, since the requirements for the control hardware are basically the same) or there are plans around to build them to reasonable precision from aluminium extrusion. Most firearm stuff would be within their capabilities, I would think, though you might need to break it into several operations.
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    fuel mining for mars and jupiter expeditions on the moon! orbital elevators! come ooooooon!
    xlh6c3.png
  • SarksusSarksus TEN FUCKING DOLLARS Registered User regular
    Will is the biggest Debbie Downer presumably born.
  • Donkey KongDonkey Kong and a cast of thousands Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    To be fair, I do on occasion glance at the untaxed income portion of my paycheck and declare that I am voting republican next election.
    Donkey Kong on
    dkmouthsig.png
  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary Your Dark Descent FriendRegistered User regular
    Space exploration should happen eventually, when we are ready for it. I agree with Will insofar as we should invest in technologies that will make us better overall as a species and more prepared to, one day, go out into space. For now robots and telescopes are the best we can do and it's probably for the best.

    Resources and overpopulation will be an issue eventually as well, but not for a long time, and we should use that time to be better prepared for that with what we have, and not simply say "Let's go colonize Mars!" and have that be a magic fix.
    2ItqRJ7.jpgSteam/Origin/PSN: Corehealer / Core's Streamtastical Livestream (Streaming Wildstar Beta later this year).
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Kagera wrote: »
    Um defense technology is a vital industry how else are we going to defend ourselves Jeez William!

    i'm not totally against it. besides it being my paycheck, there have been a lot of advancements that are really important.

    drones, for instance, have saved countless lives and saved billions of dollars.
  • redxredx Dublin, CARegistered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    japan wrote: »
    Also worth noting that you could probably produce a workable metal AR-15 lower receiver on any of a number of consumer-level desktop CNC mills without too much difficulty.

    Hell, looking at it you could probably do it by hand with a manual milling machine if you took your time over it.

    Yes, this is a thing that people do now. The law allows it for private use. Selling it runs into a bunch of potential issues.

    It's just interesting that there is hysteria over 3D printed guns when the tech is considerably less mature than and comparably expensive to basic cnc equipment.

    I suppose it's because people can envisage 3D printing being a true consumer technology (in the "one in every home" sense)? Or they're just not thinking that hard about it.

    Basically I think that if you were a generally bad person looking to make (as opposed to buy, or steal) an untraceable gun for nefarious purposes you'd almost certainly buy or rent a CNC machine and use that with any of the freely available schematics online before you'd even consider 3D printing.

    I think it's more that people just aren't aware that making guns isn't some super tricky arcane art that only wizards can do.

    They think that, and then see 3D printed guns and go "oh shit!"

    Possibly a failure of the printer analogy.

    CNC equipment is much closer to "load up file on computer, put raw material in machine, send file to machine, completed part comes out" than 3D printing is at the moment, but people don't know what a CNC mill is, what it does, or how it works, but do know what a printer is.

    Ok that's totally true.

    I thought stuff like the maker replicator was basically like that.

    It's also SIGNIFICANTLY less cost prohibitive than a CNC mill for anything but really tiny stuff.

    like, star trek replicator? or?

    because if not then no

    guns, for example, are generally made of metal, or something that can get similar properties, and you'd be hard pressed to print that out.

    If you want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, you can buy a 3d printer like thing that does metal. Like, it's existing technology in industrial use.

    RedX is taking a stab a moving out west, and will be near San Francisco from May 14 till June 29.
    Click here for a horrible H/A thread with details.
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Irond Will wrote: »
    but somewhere, a black guy has a better life than you

    somewhere, a poor person got something they don't deserve

    somewhere, someone is cheating the system

    where is the outrage, dk?

    where is the outrage?

    This is why, as white and upper-middle class, I "take a penny" even when I don't need one.

    you've already given so, so many pennies, matt
  • Dread Pirate ArbuthnotDread Pirate Arbuthnot Registered User regular
    I have $40,000 in tax credits O_O

    I guess I'm not paying taxes for... a long time
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    Um defense technology is a vital industry how else are we going to defend ourselves Jeez William!

    i'm not totally against it. besides it being my paycheck, there have been a lot of advancements that are really important.

    drones, for instance, have saved countless lives and saved billions of dollars.

    on the other hand, the jsf, the osprey, etc.
    xlh6c3.png
  • Mojo_JojoMojo_Jojo Tough on mime. Tough on the causes of mime Registered User regular
    Spaaaaaaaaaace.
  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    To be fair, I do on occasion glance at the untaxed income portion of my paycheck and declare that I am voting republican next election.

    Yeah, but everyone bitches about taxes, so that's okay. I hate paying taxes, but I love knowing that it's going to good things (like the war in afghanistan lol).
This discussion has been closed.