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.

Rabbit Season! Duck Season! [Chat] Season!

18889919394100

Posts

  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    Alt response:

    The Rank is but the Guinea stowp,
    The Man's the gowd, for a' that
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. Risk is our business.Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    SKFM annoys me the most on this board.

    hes an economic elite who believes property rights trump human rights

    you're a social elite who believes birth rights trump human rights

    the two of you would make a great sitcom together

    I wouldn't call him "elite" in any sense of the word. I'd just call him rich and thats it. To believe that someone is elite needs to have something else. Rich people cannot be classed alongside the dukes and counts of Europe for example.

    true dat

    rich people have power and influence

    Only in America, I think, they do. Elsewhere in the world the forms of elitism has continued, if hidden behind the veil of equality, unchecked and still continues to do so. Unless of course scandals break out which is then somewhat exposed.

    Only in America.

    And Britain and Europe and China and Australia and the Middle East and Russia and Canada and and and

    Completely disagree about the Middle East where Royalty still shines true and bright and has continued on.

    Aw, I've missed you.

    If you have proof, I'd love to see it.

    Proof of what? Rich people having power all across the world and monarchies being increasingly meaningless?

    May I present to you The World As It Was: May 16 2013.

    I can think of like, Jordan and Saudi Arabia as I guess technically being accurate for your view, but honestly your point is wrong.

    The monied have far more power and influence than any prancing duke might play to.

    I think your mistaking money = power which then becomes money = elitism. Which is wrong.

    Money never equals to elitism, at least the non-American sense of the word, because it isn't about how much you have its about who you are. A peasant cow herder can win the lottery and become a millionare but that will never remove the fact that he and his descendents are nothing but cow herders. Money might allow you to buy things but it will never remove who you are.

    The example of Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza Shah is clear cut in this case. If you didn't know Reza Shah was nothing but a soldiers who aspired to be a Shah. He was entirely not from a bloodline that came from kings and there is currently, at least to my current knowledge, a search going on based on a small factoid that the Pahlavi name that he adopted was bought from someone who was an actual Pahlavi.

    In the Middle East the monied are the true elites and there is no others who can compete with them within their domains, geo-political issues aside, thus people like the Imam of Yemen, the Saudi King or even the Jordan King are the true elites. Not only in the Middle east but you can see it in Morocco and Brunei where the Sultans are one of the most power and true elites in the world.

    If you think about it, there isn't a king alive who isn't descended from some kind of goat farmer.

    Well no. If you stretch back to African descendants maybe. The Saudi king came from a noble family who was already controlling territory and was considered a kind of leader. Similar to the King of Jordan. He claims descent from the Prophet's tribe and has ruled Mecca in some form of another until the British support during the First world war.

    In Iran the Safavids and the subsequent descendants dynasties with the exception of Reza Shah where noble Turkmen, some in form or another. None were common goat herders. Even Chinggis Khan was a noble.

    All a king is is the richest goat farmer in goat town who passes his goats down the family line.

    It means literally nothing else.
    Lh96QHG.png
  • ronyaronya hmmm over there!Registered User regular
    Back in the day (i.e., well through the 20th century), my father’s father’s family basically owned and ruled the village of Shalez, and some adjacent parts of Ghazni province in Afghanistan. They did not acquire this land by purchase: the clan came in from the Khyber Pass and seized it by force from the previous holders. (They also built karezes, but that just added hydraulic despotism to conquest.) The terms my ancestors offered to their tenants were in no meaningful sense market-driven, being partly customary and, to a much larger degree, driven by the relative military power of various clans. They certainly had markets and money, but there was a whole huge sector of the economy where decisions were not being made by market mechanisms, and any attempt to introduce them would have met with powerful opposition.

    It wouldn’t be quite accurate to describe this set-up as “feudal” — my great-grandfather wasn’t Amir Abdurrahman‘s vassal in the sense that William Marshal was King Henry’s — but it was of the same general ilk. There were compelling reasons why agrarian societies generated arrangements like this, where big chunks of the economy fall under the sway of specialists in armed coercion, who hold clearly-defined pieces of territory as tenaciously as they can. (These reasons are clearly explained by people like Ernest Gellner and William McNeill, or for that matter ibn Khaldun.) As Jacob Levy notes up-thread, Adam Smith was very clear on the importance of neutralizing people like my ancestors. (Remember that the classical trio of factors of production is land, labor, and capital.) This is tricky enough, but neutralizing them without just setting up the central government as oppressive landlord in their place was even harder. A surprisingly strong case can be made (see McNeill again, or Mark Elvin’s The Pattern of the Chinese Past) that the breakthrough to sustained, market-driven exponential economic growth ought to have happened in Song dynasty China, but it was that last bit which tripped them up.
  • ronyaronya hmmm over there!Registered User regular
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    MadCaddy wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    the thing about population issues in growth is that it is completely dominated by industrial takeoff. as long you have some surplus to divert to takeoff - and, in the modern world, you can always borrow this surplus from a country that has already taken off - population has little obvious relation how well you can vault into growth.

    We are drowning in so many possible explanations where population increases takeoff growth through the availability of local markets for industrially-produced consumer goods; certainly the raw regressions tell us nothing.

    it is true that as long growth is principally agricultural, population determines growth. But if you're stuck in this trap, you're screwed already anyway. There are no wealthy countries whose economic output is predominantly agricultural. Even if you have very low population per arable area.

    I watched the vice on Friday that spoke about how China's current Finance ministry is propagating a real estate bubble, and it just kept showing on the vacant McMansions in the ghost cities. Chinas prospects really aren't looking to hot with their current leadership, hopefully Bo has an ace up his sleeve for their sake.

    strong similarities to the 1997 asian financial crisis

    and it should be noted that whilst it was severe, the 97 crisis had essentially no impact on long-term growth

    Apparently China creates construction projects that never sell and adds them into its GDP, and this (according to VICE, so its probably exaggerated a lil bit) to the tune of 5 trillion dollars over the last 30 years

    I don't think it's quite so dire but China will be in for some turmoil if they hit a recession

    it turns out that it's actually rather hard to pour completely useless concrete; malinvestment is not as high as the Austrians would prefer. the world is more Keynesian: even if you added capital really, really badly, the amount of damage to wealth this does is second-order to first-order concerns like "how much capital do you have, and how low is your unemployment"

    I agree, and in the present term this is a huge boon

    The problem this is all a hugely inefficient use of resources and they can't keep up this pace forever, eventually it's going to be need to be replaced by some sustainable economic activity or they're going to have a huge problem

    it is sustainable

    they have a ton of people, who are not in cities, who want to be in cities

    you really think they can have a 10% growth in construction (off the top of my head) every single year forever? Construction can certainly be a big part of their GDP forever, there's no question, it's the rate of growth and percentage of GDP that trouble me

    by this definition of sustainable, no country is sustainable. look at every western country's burst of growth in healthcare/education.

    Construction is like 50% of their GDP

    You're the economics expert and if you don't see that as problematic I'll defer to you, but it kind of worries me (especially when much of it is financed by borrowing from their middle class)

    Edit: And I sure as hell see America's healthcare spending and increase as problematic and a recession in the making

    someone has to pour all the concrete that industrial societies live in. you are trying to argue that this concrete will not turn out to be useful. well, stare at a rural population chart until you have convinced yourself otherwise.

    and if you are trying to argue that construction must remain at 50% at GDP in order to avoid disaster, this is patently silly; stare at a history of Western sectoral change until you have convinced yourself otherwise.

    Their construction sector is full of corruption and inefficiency. Reporting bad numbers results in being told to stop being a trouble maker.

    I just can't parse how this is better than say, providing cheap housing for your rural citizenry, because that's not what they are doing. They are building housing that nobody can afford to live in.

    In fact the locations where this construction is happening are displacing rural economies and the people who live there can't even afford to live in the cities being built right over their farms

    then the price of it will drop abruptly, and someone's balance sheet will be wiped out, you get a 1997-style financial crisis, and the economy will contract by the extent to which the capital was badly invested. but, as I said, the world is more Keynesian than Austrian, and malinvestment effects are completely dominated by the primary forces of "how much capital do you have to begin with?"
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    okay it looks like I'm agreeing with everything TNC is saying and I'm not

    but like, look beyond the insanity bubbling there and there is sort of a point

    money does not equal power everywhere, and a useful definition of the elite are those with power.

    Not the kings and what-have-yous, those... well, there's not enough of them in any country for them to count as a group.

    But like, the people below them.

    Back when nobility mattered, but not so long back that nobody but the nobility got rich, it was very much the case that the nobility was still the elite and held most of the power, even though they may not have been all that rich.
    xlh6c3.png
  • Caveman PawsCaveman Paws Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Ludious wrote: »
    Seriously mods? Do we REALLY have to put up with this guy? SKFM got banned from chat why not him

    Censorship is bad mmmkay?

    So what if you don't agree with him, just enjoy the access we have to someone that different.

    Imagine what it must be like to grow up thinking that way.

    Then do the scary thing and wonder if your own assumptions/beliefs/etc are any better.
    Caveman Paws on
  • skippydumptruckskippydumptruck FAK U HODGEHEG Registered User regular
    I wonder if garmin and other nav makers are imploding with the proliferation of smart phones

    also car-based nav systems are universally terrible right?
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    actually, the middle east is interesting and I don't really know how shit works there

    I mean, I know they've got old-school absolute monarchies, but the royals don't count as "the elite"

    they rule the elite.

    But how do the top positions in business, government and society in those countries work?

    They are occupied by the extended family of the grand poobah.

    well there you have it. An "elite" that does not mean "rich". Since just being rich isn't enough to get to the top. It means part of some exclusive elitist group. Incredibly exclusive in this case.

    The Elite are The Rich.

    If not for delicious oil money they would not be The Elite.

    I guess he is technically correct, but mostly full of shit?

    *shrug*

    No, without delicious oil money, they'd be The Elite, just not as rich. They're the elite of that country, they're clearly at the top of society, and would be even without nauseatingly large yachts.

    The reason the elite =/= the rich there, is because even if you got rich, that probably wouldn't be enough to get you to the top. Not that people really all of a sudden "get rich".

    You aren't going to become rich if you aren't the king's cousin.

    The elite=the rich there. Because their great grand pappy happened to have his butt on the throne when we decided oil was an important thing and they're a big family.

    well, yeah. That's the point here.

    EDIT: But like, if you got super rich and moved there and was like what's up you'd probably find yourself being one of the few rich people who weren't in the elite.
    Abdhyius on
    xlh6c3.png
  • MadCaddyMadCaddy Riksadvokate Registered User regular
    it's not that hard to just not engage with crazies

    I don't know why chat can't do it

    Crazy's in the eye of the beholder, throwing around labels like that just gets people more entrenched in their positions. I know I've been called it more than a few times, and am thought of that way by kosh or w/e, but I still like to try and have civil conversations with the people that don't start talking about wanting to see people they disagree with over the price of tea in china be tortured, gelded and muted so that their audacity of having an opposing view point could go further.

    There's definitely a point you just quit engaging, but just let the posters choose that, until they start making threats/arguing in circles. I mean, we all have those few posters we just don't bother replying or reading, and I'm sure I'm a high hit rate for that filter around these parts. ;)
    League of Legends: SorryNotRly Steam: MMForYourHealth Hero Academy: MadCaddy
  • LudiousLudious Registered User regular
    Ludious wrote: »
    Seriously mods? Do we REALLY have to put up with this guy? SKFM got banned from chat why not him

    Sensor ship is bad mmmkay?

    So what if you don't agree with him, just enjoy the access we have to someone that different.

    Imagine what it must be like to grow up thinking that way.

    Then do the scary thing and wonder if your own assumptions/beliefs/etc are any better.

    no. wrong. Censorship by the GOVERNMENT is bad.

    It's a goddamn birth right (lol see what I did there) in private settings
    Google Talk: ludious83 My Blog: The Caustic Geek
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. Risk is our business.Registered User regular
    Seriously though, if Space got kicked after making an effort to stop being such a parody of himself, the date farmer needs to get got.

    THE KING OF GALLOWAY COMMANDS IT
    Lh96QHG.png
  • override367override367 Registered User regular
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    MadCaddy wrote: »
    ronya wrote: »
    the thing about population issues in growth is that it is completely dominated by industrial takeoff. as long you have some surplus to divert to takeoff - and, in the modern world, you can always borrow this surplus from a country that has already taken off - population has little obvious relation how well you can vault into growth.

    We are drowning in so many possible explanations where population increases takeoff growth through the availability of local markets for industrially-produced consumer goods; certainly the raw regressions tell us nothing.

    it is true that as long growth is principally agricultural, population determines growth. But if you're stuck in this trap, you're screwed already anyway. There are no wealthy countries whose economic output is predominantly agricultural. Even if you have very low population per arable area.

    I watched the vice on Friday that spoke about how China's current Finance ministry is propagating a real estate bubble, and it just kept showing on the vacant McMansions in the ghost cities. Chinas prospects really aren't looking to hot with their current leadership, hopefully Bo has an ace up his sleeve for their sake.

    strong similarities to the 1997 asian financial crisis

    and it should be noted that whilst it was severe, the 97 crisis had essentially no impact on long-term growth

    Apparently China creates construction projects that never sell and adds them into its GDP, and this (according to VICE, so its probably exaggerated a lil bit) to the tune of 5 trillion dollars over the last 30 years

    I don't think it's quite so dire but China will be in for some turmoil if they hit a recession

    it turns out that it's actually rather hard to pour completely useless concrete; malinvestment is not as high as the Austrians would prefer. the world is more Keynesian: even if you added capital really, really badly, the amount of damage to wealth this does is second-order to first-order concerns like "how much capital do you have, and how low is your unemployment"

    I agree, and in the present term this is a huge boon

    The problem this is all a hugely inefficient use of resources and they can't keep up this pace forever, eventually it's going to be need to be replaced by some sustainable economic activity or they're going to have a huge problem

    it is sustainable

    they have a ton of people, who are not in cities, who want to be in cities

    you really think they can have a 10% growth in construction (off the top of my head) every single year forever? Construction can certainly be a big part of their GDP forever, there's no question, it's the rate of growth and percentage of GDP that trouble me

    by this definition of sustainable, no country is sustainable. look at every western country's burst of growth in healthcare/education.

    Construction is like 50% of their GDP

    You're the economics expert and if you don't see that as problematic I'll defer to you, but it kind of worries me (especially when much of it is financed by borrowing from their middle class)

    Edit: And I sure as hell see America's healthcare spending and increase as problematic and a recession in the making

    someone has to pour all the concrete that industrial societies live in. you are trying to argue that this concrete will not turn out to be useful. well, stare at a rural population chart until you have convinced yourself otherwise.

    and if you are trying to argue that construction must remain at 50% at GDP in order to avoid disaster, this is patently silly; stare at a history of Western sectoral change until you have convinced yourself otherwise.

    Their construction sector is full of corruption and inefficiency. Reporting bad numbers results in being told to stop being a trouble maker.

    I just can't parse how this is better than say, providing cheap housing for your rural citizenry, because that's not what they are doing. They are building housing that nobody can afford to live in.

    In fact the locations where this construction is happening are displacing rural economies and the people who live there can't even afford to live in the cities being built right over their farms

    then the price of it will drop abruptly, and someone's balance sheet will be wiped out, you get a 1997-style financial crisis, and the economy will contract by the extent to which the capital was badly invested. but, as I said, the world is more Keynesian than Austrian, and malinvestment effects are completely dominated by the primary forces of "how much capital do you have to begin with?"

    So we're in agreement, then, because this is basically what I've been trying to suggest will probably happen at some point?

    The reason this is significant for China is their current political climate basically has their fingers in their ears at the possibility of such a thing happening, anyone suggesting such up the chain is told to be quiet because PRC will grow #1 forever. I can't begin to predict the specifics though, if I had to guess either a shift further towards authoritarianism or towards democracy (given China's attitudes, likely the former)
  • DasUberEdwardDasUberEdward Registered User regular
    Hey TNC.

    Is there a particular poster who makes you actually laugh out loud at the things they post because the content seems so absurd to you that it becomes comedic?
    Yet that is exactly what i see here.
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    Of course my assumptions are better, because they're mine!
    _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
    I'm descended from the Kings of Galloway.

    Do I get into your clubhouse?

    Confirmed lineage traced to Charlemagne.

    Bow before me.
    Successful Kickstarter get! Drop by Bare Mettle Entertainment if you'd like to see what we're making.
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    SKFM annoys me the most on this board.

    hes an economic elite who believes property rights trump human rights

    you're a social elite who believes birth rights trump human rights

    the two of you would make a great sitcom together

    I wouldn't call him "elite" in any sense of the word. I'd just call him rich and thats it. To believe that someone is elite needs to have something else. Rich people cannot be classed alongside the dukes and counts of Europe for example.

    true dat

    rich people have power and influence

    Only in America, I think, they do. Elsewhere in the world the forms of elitism has continued, if hidden behind the veil of equality, unchecked and still continues to do so. Unless of course scandals break out which is then somewhat exposed.

    Only in America.

    And Britain and Europe and China and Australia and the Middle East and Russia and Canada and and and

    Completely disagree about the Middle East where Royalty still shines true and bright and has continued on.

    Aw, I've missed you.

    If you have proof, I'd love to see it.

    Proof of what? Rich people having power all across the world and monarchies being increasingly meaningless?

    May I present to you The World As It Was: May 16 2013.

    I can think of like, Jordan and Saudi Arabia as I guess technically being accurate for your view, but honestly your point is wrong.

    The monied have far more power and influence than any prancing duke might play to.

    I think your mistaking money = power which then becomes money = elitism. Which is wrong.

    Money never equals to elitism, at least the non-American sense of the word, because it isn't about how much you have its about who you are. A peasant cow herder can win the lottery and become a millionare but that will never remove the fact that he and his descendents are nothing but cow herders. Money might allow you to buy things but it will never remove who you are.

    The example of Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza Shah is clear cut in this case. If you didn't know Reza Shah was nothing but a soldiers who aspired to be a Shah. He was entirely not from a bloodline that came from kings and there is currently, at least to my current knowledge, a search going on based on a small factoid that the Pahlavi name that he adopted was bought from someone who was an actual Pahlavi.

    In the Middle East the monied are the true elites and there is no others who can compete with them within their domains, geo-political issues aside, thus people like the Imam of Yemen, the Saudi King or even the Jordan King are the true elites. Not only in the Middle east but you can see it in Morocco and Brunei where the Sultans are one of the most power and true elites in the world.

    If you think about it, there isn't a king alive who isn't descended from some kind of goat farmer.

    Well no. If you stretch back to African descendants maybe. The Saudi king came from a noble family who was already controlling territory and was considered a kind of leader. Similar to the King of Jordan. He claims descent from the Prophet's tribe and has ruled Mecca in some form of another until the British support during the First world war.

    In Iran the Safavids and the subsequent descendants dynasties with the exception of Reza Shah where noble Turkmen, some in form or another. None were common goat herders. Even Chinggis Khan was a noble.

    All a king is is the richest goat farmer in goat town who passes his goats down the family line.

    It means literally nothing else.

    well, it's more like the goat farmer who can make people kill other goat farmers if they don't give him one of their goats, and then stopped goat farming and just did that instead
    xlh6c3.png
  • MadCaddyMadCaddy Riksadvokate Registered User regular
    I will probably disappear by the summer for a bit, or just lurk more then as I've been finding myself battling apples auto correct far too often for far too little reason while I should be paying attention to how people are playing instead of trying to win this Internet argument! :mrgreen::cry:
    League of Legends: SorryNotRly Steam: MMForYourHealth Hero Academy: MadCaddy
  • BeNarwhalBeNarwhal The Gatekeeper of D&D [chat] Toronto, CanadaRegistered User regular
    Let me tell you guys about the important of ancestral grasps at power.

    As a lounge upon my throne as the Grand Chief of the Americas.
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Kalkino wrote: »
    Well some of these Middle Eastern kings may be descended from the relevant prophet. That is quite fancy

    I imagine in most cases, it's some dubious claim of heredity to some person who is probably an oral tradition amalgamation in the first place, reinforced by money and power over hundreds of years. Just repeating the story and suppressing the dissent until no one who cares or knows the truth is alive anymore. And from there, you can work the magic of divine right.

    that's exactly it

    every poor hispanic in new mexico claims to have a direct ancestral line to castillian nobility

    but only the ones who get wealthy have the resources or influence to really fete each other for their "lineage"
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. Risk is our business.Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    I'm descended from the Kings of Galloway.

    Do I get into your clubhouse?

    Confirmed lineage traced to Charlemagne.

    Bow before me.

    Scotland was never part of Charlemagne's empire.

    *blows raspberry

    *looks lasciviously at a sheep
    Lh96QHG.png
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    one of the perks of being the king in the olden days is getting to fuck pretty much whoever you want

    so that plus time means that most of us are descended from a king
    xlh6c3.png
  • Caveman PawsCaveman Paws Registered User regular
    Ludious wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »
    Seriously mods? Do we REALLY have to put up with this guy? SKFM got banned from chat why not him

    Sensor ship is bad mmmkay?

    So what if you don't agree with him, just enjoy the access we have to someone that different.

    Imagine what it must be like to grow up thinking that way.

    Then do the scary thing and wonder if your own assumptions/beliefs/etc are any better.

    no. wrong. Censorship by the GOVERNMENT is bad.

    It's a goddamn birth right (lol see what I did there) in private settings

    Weak bitch settings. Don't "protect" others from some shit you can't handle or skip over.

    (That sounds overly hostile but I have a hot mug of tea resting over my junk and so I gotta type fast then move it, sip, put if back, you know how if is.)
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    castillan nobility lost their wealth and power a long time ago.

    anyway it's not enough to be descended from someone

    you need to have inherited them

    being descended from a king doesn't mean jack shit if you didn't inherit his kingdom
    xlh6c3.png
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. Risk is our business.Registered User regular
    I bet if every one of us sat down right now, we could all come up with some claim to some throne that is just as accurate, reliable, and merited as half of the tales of monarchies around the world.
    Lh96QHG.png
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    I wonder if garmin and other nav makers are imploding with the proliferation of smart phones

    also car-based nav systems are universally terrible right?

    Garmin pulls in about half as much revenue (and growing) from sports products as it does automotive sat navs these days. Hence:

    sVhQHwu.jpg
  • EriktheVikingGamerEriktheVikingGamer Barbara Streisand! Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    one of the perks of being the king in the olden days is getting to fuck pretty much whoever you want

    so that plus time means that most of us are descended from a king

    Plus, you know, stuff like primae noctis.
    EriktheVikingGamer on
    Youtube channel: SuperVikingGamer
    Current Playthroughs: Neverwinter Closed Beta|Let's Build! Sim City
  • TL DRTL DR Registered User regular
    I'm descended from the rightful king who took power in a vicious coup, and that means something about the quality of my genetics or my leadership ability or whether others should defer power to me or something
    eokNV.jpg
  • TehSlothTehSloth On that ass like Charmin Registered User regular
    I wonder if garmin and other nav makers are imploding with the proliferation of smart phones

    also car-based nav systems are universally terrible right?

    That latter has been my perspective, might be different now days but most in car sat navs I've seen are from like, the mid-late 2000s. They might be good today, but like, with modern cell phones who needs em'

    The former is also probably true, I got one for my grandma for christmas because I used to have to show her how to use the sat-nav in her car every time I visited her and she doesn't have a cell phone or computers or anything. She says it's WAY better than the one that came with her car (a late 2000s clk) and is actually up to date which is nice.
  • TL DRTL DR Registered User regular
    My goats are the best-herded around
    eokNV.jpg
  • GooeyGooey Registered User regular
    china does not exist in a vacuum

    regardless of what the party does to stave off a housing crash it will happen, it is only a question of when
    919UOwT.png
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    TNC still hasn't explicitly stated what makes them elite
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    castillan nobility lost their wealth and power a long time ago.

    anyway it's not enough to be descended from someone

    you need to have inherited them

    being descended from a king doesn't mean jack shit if you didn't inherit his kingdom

    exactly

    either you inherited a kingdom or you didn't

    the "royalty" aspect is nothing but shabby pageantry and hokum

    at least in every country that isn't a third-world shithole
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. Risk is our business.Registered User regular
    TNC still hasn't explicitly stated what makes them elite

    god wills it
    Lh96QHG.png
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    also my descendants came in and tore the shit out of (and got rich off) charlemagne's crumbling empire and he never got close to us

    so I ain't bowing for shit
    xlh6c3.png
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    TNC still hasn't explicitly stated what makes them elite

    Consensus, apparently.
  • GooeyGooey Registered User regular
    TNC still hasn't explicitly stated what makes them elite

    more date trees, goats, and rifles than the next asshole
    919UOwT.png
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    I'm related to every other human on earth including the bad ones!
    _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
  • skippydumptruckskippydumptruck FAK U HODGEHEG Registered User regular
    TehSloth wrote: »
    I wonder if garmin and other nav makers are imploding with the proliferation of smart phones

    also car-based nav systems are universally terrible right?

    That latter has been my perspective, might be different now days but most in car sat navs I've seen are from like, the mid-late 2000s. They might be good today, but like, with modern cell phones who needs em'

    The former is also probably true, I got one for my grandma for christmas because I used to have to show her how to use the sat-nav in her car every time I visited her and she doesn't have a cell phone or computers or anything. She says it's WAY better than the one that came with her car (a late 2000s clk) and is actually up to date which is nice.

    the ones I've seen are all like

    okay let me take 15 minutes to use these knobs to laboriously spell out the place we want to go

    instead of just pressing a button on your phone and being like, siri find the nearest taco bell
  • AbdhyiusAbdhyius Registered User regular
    TNC still hasn't explicitly stated what makes them elite

    being the ones in power and everything?
    xlh6c3.png
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. Risk is our business.Registered User regular
    Abdhyius wrote: »
    castillan nobility lost their wealth and power a long time ago.

    anyway it's not enough to be descended from someone

    you need to have inherited them

    being descended from a king doesn't mean jack shit if you didn't inherit his kingdom

    you say that, but this sword, bag of gold, and army i have hanging out with me says bow before zod
    Lh96QHG.png
This discussion has been closed.