Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - V3X

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 252
1
But almost all superheroes, in every comic, in every pose, of every gender, are almost always depicted with unreasonably exaggerated emphasis on their sexy bits, and their bodies in general are drawn as oversexualized caricatures that would never work as real human beings. I thought that was part of the genre. People act like this spiderwoman pose is the first time a comic book has suggested that sex is a human interest (god forbid).

2
What's really sad is that GC is 24 years old, and still thinks racial slurs are funny.

I blame the fact that the Internet has gone from being a way to meet new people and share ideas, to being a way to completely avoid that kind of thing. If something doesn't happen soon to stop us from insulating ourselves completely from any threat of exposure anything that challenges our personally customized echo chambers, I think humanity is pretty well done for.

And I dunno about you, but I think the solution is the Shox BB Professional player shoe from Nike.

3
still a better troll than glompchomp

4
I may be asking the universe for more fun than I really want, but I am more than a little disappointed that in 10 years of this place, through all the iterations and cast members and brouhaha and civil wars and grudge matches and shit-slinging hatefests, not a singular one of these trolls has ever truly achieved the kind of lasting legacy of He Who Shall Not Be Known or Noted. Is it asking too much to have more than one? Why must we always graze on the low grass of these half-brained idiots? And why do they stick around for so long practicing the art of trolling, even when it's been years since they had any reasonable hope of ever being any good at it?

5
The Fermi Paradox exists because all of the considerations about the rarity of conditions and the vastness of space have already been tabulated by people who are much smarter than I am, and life should still be so prevalent that we should be tripping over each other. Granted, some of the assumptions in those numbers are probably unfounded, just like the assumption some futurists make about Dyson Spheres and Civilization types based on how they use energy and where they get it from. But if the numbers are errant, they are probably too conservative, because they operate on assumptions about what is possible based only on what we already know to be possible.

Even if it is impossible to to achieve faster than light travel -- which we do not actually know to be a fact, our best science just says it would be very hard to do -- the universe and our galaxy itself have existed long enough for some intelligent species to have arisen and colonized the entire expanse the slow way. Even if our current technology can only hope to receive and identify artificially generated signals originating within an insignificant fraction of space, that fraction is still so incredibly huge that it should be filled with intelligent communications.

6
Let me take it a step further and propose that even if we did develop interstellar travel, it would be far more practical and economical, and probably have a better expectation of survival, to simply infect a big mass of frozen rocks with our DNA and jettison it out into space. I mean, if all that matters is perpetuating our DNA elsewhere in the Universe.

Just sayin'.

Sure, but that wouldn't really count in most people's minds, for exactly the reasons I gave in the OP. It isn't them experiencing it first-hand or second-hand, so it's unlikely to ever be a thing we do.

7
I'm sure there are many perfectly sane and reasonable reasons to expect such a thing, but I don't think those reasons are being all that careful to avoid making unnecessary assumptions just because we have only one example.

8
That's an interesting hypothesis.

It's also possible that because all matter in the universe is approximately the same age, that all life in the universe is also all approximately the same age and at the same stage of development.

I think that's a stretch, to be honest. First, there are a number of factors that have both sped and slowed our own development. Climactic changes, the fact that we have large pools of nearly ready-to-use fuel hanging around at depths we can easily drill to, an absence of multiple competing (and genetically incompatible) top-of-the-food-chain predators, for example. We also know (or are pretty sure) that our own planet is about 1/3 the age of the universe in general, and that there are many far more ancient planets. There were star systems complete with planets billions of years before our sun ever sparked into being. There's no guarantee that other intelligences would develop at a rate comparable to our own. They might be much smarter, or dumber (though that's hard to imagine). My hypothesis pure amateur conjecture is that civilization itself requires a combination of individualism and collectivism where the emphasis is a little to high on individualism for viable interstellar civilization to ever be possible, or at least practical, but civilization is a prerequisite for even imagining such a thing.

9
OBVIOUS DISCLAIMER IS OBVIOUS: THE FOLLOWING BULLSHIT IS 100% CONJECTURE


It's a safe bet that the term "Great Filter" is already known to most of the people on this board, but because typing is fun, I'll give a brief explanation here anyway. Statistically speaking, based on a few safe assumptions dealing with the size and age of our galaxy, the prevalence of certain elements in the cosmos, and various things we know from the history of biological life on Earth, the universe should be teeming with alien life. Life should be more common than fat people at Wal-Mart. That there is life "out there" should be a safer bet than guessing that the neckbeard who lives across your street in his parents' basement listens to Rush and has at least one imitation Samurai sword. Our galaxy alone should be home to something like seventy quadrillion metric fuckshits of advanced civilizations. All the math that goes into this assumption is as sound as we can make it, and even Republican scientists are more or less certain of its truth.


The problem is, if our galaxy is so full of people, WHERE THE FUCK ARE THEY? We have no evidence of alien life anywhere, unless you listen to that asshole Georgio Tsoukalos or various hillbillies who can't tell the difference between a girlfriend and a cousin. Even considering the vastness of space, the relatively slow speed of electromagnetic wave-based communication, and our recently developed ability to eavesdrop on said communication, we should be receiving so many god damn artificially generated signals that talking to our own satellites should be like trying to tell the guy in the fishnet turtleneck whether you want X or acid at a Skrillex gig. But space is silent. Why?


There are a number of competing theories as to why this might be the case, from "your math is just wrong" to "they are there, they're just using some kind of communication we don't understand." But the funnest theory is the Great Filter, which basically says that life is common -- even intelligent life similar to ourselves -- but that some Awful Thing prevents it from achieving interstellar travel or communication. So there could be billions of worlds like earth, each of them infested with horrible little worms like us, but they are all quarantined by the Great Filter. Usually it is assumed that they end up blowing themselves up with nuclear weapons or something before achieving anything like what we dream about in Star Trek.


While nuclear or biological or chemical warfare is a perfectly plausible explanation, I don't think it is the right one. Humans, for example, have had a good 75 years with access to nukes, and we haven't killed ourselves off yet. And, what's worse, all signs point to our collective lack of being serious about playing with our best toys continuing indefinitely. No, we will not be sterilizing the planet, at least not on purpose. I think the Great Filter is much more sinister than just an innocent collective autocidal incident.


It comes down to what makes a society a society. In order to achieve what we call civilization, our species relies both on collective intelligence and individual ingenuity. We must be able to function cognitively at a high level as distinct members of the whole, as well as to communicate with each other and our progeny efficiently in order to maintain the systems and infrastructure we construct. The problem is that at a certain point in every successful civilization, the relative comfort and convenience afforded individuals leads to a breakdown of the "social instinct." It becomes acceptable and even prudent to put oneself before one's community, because the individual loses sight of the fact that a society, like any kind of team, only works when it works together as a unit.


Such breakdowns are apparent throughout history as the causes of all kinds of social decay and collapse. But the real Great Filter comes in when we consider what kind of sacrifices would be required from individuals if their civilization attempted to colonize the stars. It is a task of such magnitude and scale, economically and temporally, that it holds no real interest for the individuals who would need to contribute to it. Those who began the process would have no hope of seeing it even halfway through. Biological life does not allow for lifespans that would make it worthwhile to travel from our star system to another one, for colonization or any other purpose. In order to accomplish that task, we would have to completely eliminate the entire concept of "I" and become a new sort of life form, multi-multicelled organism. Not in a figurative sense, but a real, literal sense. An actual colony organism where the individual cells are completely disposable and expendable, where intelligence resides in an organ or a process that cannot be comprehended by any of the individual units.


And we are unwilling to even take small steps in that direction. We are all about ME ME ME and MY MY MY. MY stuff. MY money. MY taxes. MY rights. Humanity is horrible at cooperating for anything other than fighting off an existential threat, and even then that threat must be immediate enough to directly threaten individuals (see: climate change). We just don't do things on a scale large enough to leap from our star system to any other. I think it is because everything we have achieved is because we are wired for individualism, and that wiring prevents us from achieving anything of any magnitude larger than maybe a planetary government (which will of course be a government of self-interested assholes that exists to facilitate the marginally interesting lives of other self-interested assholes).


So that is the Great Filter. That we are constitutionally prevented from shedding our egos to accomplish a task we can only dream of because we have egos.


Or something.

10
Aneristic Illusions / Re: OFFICIAL POLITICAL CARTOONS/PIC FREAD.
« on: September 17, 2014, 10:01:44 pm »
Why is there nobody distributing the BIP to schools?

Funding.



Why is Satan richer than Eris?

11
Petition to change forum name back to "No Exit" and force everyone to change names to original members so we can LARP the Good Old Days.

12
Aneristic Illusions / Re: OFFICIAL POLITICAL CARTOONS/PIC FREAD.
« on: September 17, 2014, 01:15:32 pm »
Why is there nobody distributing the BIP to schools?

13
This is perfect example of Tumblr tards knit picking.
 I also don't like the fact D/C making is making it's heroines more thick/curvy as a generic template. Something about Catwoman having giant tits/giant ass strikes me off. Since Catwoman was always portrayed as being slim/athletic so she can prowl/sneak around into vaults. I figured the slimmer she is the faster she would move/get away. But D/C panders to basement dwellers so fuck it let them fuck socks.

Marvel of the other hand is dropping down barriers introducing new characters, killing off others that aren't interesting anymore.

Yeah, well, Superman could still kick your dad's ass.

14
The Internet has decided that 2014 is the official year of blowhards at every extreme end of every obscure argument bellowing past each other in a fiery attempt to finally eradicate anyone standing between them in the center. The Genocide of Moderation. Of course, 2014 is no different from any other year in that regard, but I am now a creature of the Social Network, and I cannot remember that far back anymore.

15
I think we're reconfiguring our cognition. Who remembers phone numbers anymore? Who remembered seven digit numbers before there were phones? As tech does more stuff for us we can offload more and more of our cognitive function to it. GPS is better at nav than a brain so why bother using inferior brain-nav systems? Habit? Of course the downside is, unused functions will atrophy.

Once we have ubiquitous AR, things like facial recognition (an area that machines already outperform us on) will fall by the wayside. Leave the meat to do what it does best - creative problem solving, emotional intelligence, artistic shit. Ditch the stuff we're useless at - counting, memory, data analysis. We're already most of the way there. The stuff our current machines are doing are light years in advance of our capabilities but there's still this mechanical interface that prevents us outsourcing the last vestiges. Checking your change at the counter. Knowing what day it is. That'll pass.

We're becoming vastly more intelligent but it's an aggregate gain - us plus our technology.
A lot of the technologies we are just on the verge of developing will answer some of the most important questions this brings up, even if not many people are asking those questions yet. Taking this cognitive offloading thing to logical extremes, will there be a point where consciousness itself is offloaded to this "exocortex"? Could it be that the distinction between "me" and "you" becomes entirely irrelevant, even in a firsthand subjective sense?

It may be that our social networking reaches a point where what we can accomplish as an intelligent species grows exponentially, while what we can accomplish as individuals atrophies completely, to the point where our physical bodies are vestigial organs of a cybernetic hive mind. I, personally, would not object to that at all.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 252