petrol_sniff_king
@petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- Comment on ugh 1 week ago:
Mobile phones, as well. Thing is, though, I wouldn’t describe a mobile phone as “the next step in evolution”—it would seem downright silly to, even.
- Comment on ugh 1 week ago:
*Glass shatters*
“Hand Grip™ is unavailable right now; system updating…” - Comment on ugh 1 week ago:
Oh, I’m aware. It’s just, uh… that evolution statement taken as a given is something I would expect to hear from someone who’s maybe a bit too in love with the cyberpunk genre.
- Comment on ugh 1 week ago:
Transhumanism is the next step in evolution
Wat
- Comment on Arc Raiders is testing a PvE mode because "a large and growing group" refuse to hunt each other 1 week ago:
You feel adding an optional extra mode
If it doesn’t have a separate progression system, it’s not really optional—not in the way that you imply. It changes the incentive structures of the game as a whole, which means the whole game must be played differently.
As a basic excercise, let’s think about a game with a dark hallway that has scary monsters. Most players don’t want to walk down a dark hallway with scary monsters, so how do you get them to?
- Comment on Bang! 2 weeks ago:
Well, it does depend on which particular Batman comic run and author we’re talking about, but I have heard that this is sometimes the reason.
I probably consume even less Punisher, but my understanding is that he’s sort of like if Batman did kill people. They’re operating under the same moral framework. One that views The Law as civilizing and a world of Punishers as barbaric. Animalistic. A world of selfish kings fighting over the same throne.
This is different from what’s being expressed in the OP. The OP rejects the idea that this act is barbaric at all and instead focuses on the outcomes. They and the villain can’t be the same because they and the villain never do anything for the same reasons.
The villain in the OP has made billions suffer, and probably for money. But the hero is stopping the suffering, and because they like joy. The fact that they both kill, maybe, is immaterial. It doesn’t actually matter.
- Comment on Bang! 2 weeks ago:
If I understand correctly, yes. The idea is that the “just hand of the law” is a better executor of justice, even if it’s the same justice, than “some guy” with “some guy’s opinions” on things.
And to be clear, I don’t think that view is without it’s merrits, of course, I just think a lot of goodguy / badguy media really under explores it. Certainly they often ignore the view that good outcomes may sometimes be worth more than the process.
Also, I don’t actually watch / read much Batman. I think there are times when his refusal to use guns is more about his personal adjacency to the crime of his city, and how he feels that if he indulges too much in the call to violence, that he would just become another mafia kingpin. In a literal sense, like as if he were an addict refusing a drug.
- Comment on Bang! 2 weeks ago:
The logic is about a battle of ideologies. When the villain, or the hero sometimes, says they’d be just as bad as what they’re fighting, what they mean is that they’re succumbing to their baser instincts, allowing “might makes right” to win out against the spirit of democracy. “Democracy” in their view, the author’s I mean, is mostly about letting people coexist, and using only official channels to punish the most obscene offenders. The hero is rejecting “an eye for an eye,” essentially, in favor of the perceived fairness of the law.
This framing kind of doesn’t work because we all know who the villains are. We all know the world would be better off without The Joker in it. And worse, letting him go through the prison system to get the outcome we all want for him anyway isn’t really different from just shooting him yourself. It’s marginally different, maybe; probably better than enabling a bunch of vigilantes. But even so, it is an action that merely defers the pulling of the trigger to the state. Someone will be pulling it regardless, because as we all know, the world would be better off without The Joker.
- Comment on SBA #242 Sins and Virtues 3 weeks ago:
That’s why I ask for one I can’t for nearly into that category of “brain does this to ease itself of discomfort”
Right, but what I’m trying to say is that it’s not possible to give you one. You have built for yourself a theory that is not falsifiable; every example you might be given will be reinterpreted through the lens of pain, and so it will reaffirm your ideas—because you have designed it to.
Imagine someone wearing purple-tinted glasses while asking people to show them something that wasn’t purple-colored. It can’t be done.
This is more or less why I was asking about what value this idea has for you, what it teaches you about the world. If this idea, that literally all comedy is about processing pain, means something, it leads to some conclusion, then it becomes falsifiable. Right now you’re just offering it as a kind of truism.
- Comment on SBA #242 Sins and Virtues 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, but… I wouldn’t describe a roller coaster as “painful.”
Like, I understand the connection you’re making, but I really have to stretch my words to get there.
I just, I think you’ve found a frame to better understand the world through, and you’re applying it to everything, even when it might not really make sense to. You’re using the concept of “pain” as if it were a fundamental atom of the universe.
It would sort of be like describing an orange as “painful” because the flavor of an orange includes acids.
To be clear im not saying “all jokes therefore are fine […]
I’m not accusing you of anything, don’t worry.
- Comment on SBA #242 Sins and Virtues 3 weeks ago:
Everything is greater commentary on the world. Every bit of knowledge you gain is a puzzle piece that fits into a broader picture.
I can understand your pain idea, but only if I stretch it out to mean a particular kind of expectation and subversion—which is how I actually understand comedy. That is, surprise is an important element of how jokes work. But I imagine that you’re interpreting the unexpected to be some form of pain: that there is some connection between the expected and normalcy, and the unexpected and discomfort.
I don’t find the unexpected to be discomforting, which I think may be the root as to why we disagree.
- Comment on SBA #242 Sins and Virtues 3 weeks ago:
I don’t like “bad puns” at all because I think they’re lazy.
I’ve heard good ones, though. Clever ones.
Also, tangentially and as an art appreciator, the feeling of disgust is plenty enjoyable in the same way that horror is. By feeling something, and then looking inward to understand those feelings, you learn something about yourself and about the world. I pulled myself out of transphobia—the “but could I date one, though” kind—by trying really hard to understand where that disgust was coming from. Turns out I didn’t need it. :p
- Comment on SBA #242 Sins and Virtues 3 weeks ago:
Have you ever audible laughed at the talent of a pun
…Yes.
I didn’t say this in my other comment because I wasn’t sure how to explain it, but you know that “bad puns” are just one particular genre of pun, right?
I mean, I think you’re likely to describe them all as painful regardless. “It is painful that two definitions of a word are not easily reconciled,” or something.
Can I ask you something? I mean sincerely, like I’m trying to understand you as a person. Why do you think this pain model of comedy is useful? You’re describing pain that is so miniscule and modest, but pointing at it nevertheless, insisting that it is pain and thus justifies what you’re saying—what is this revealing to you about the world?
- Comment on SBA #242 Sins and Virtues 3 weeks ago:
pain is the vulgarity of the joke teller and the feeling of disgust it causes.
I feel like you’re really fitting this horse to a suit you’ve made.
- Comment on Weekly “What are you playing” Thread || Week of September 16 3 weeks ago:
Aww :)
- Comment on [deleted] 1 month ago:
I want to be dominated by a ghost! She would be translucent—and—can possess your prostate to squeeze and release at high frequencies! Her favorite music is “Scooby Doo-style,” and her favorite activity is rotating furniture when people aren’t looking!
- Comment on Here comes some more holes in the drywall 1 month ago:
This post is so unhinged xD I love it
- Comment on Fogey-assed old dude says 1 month ago:
I upvoted yours :p
- Comment on Get in my cup! 1 month ago:
I don’t want to be a Hi-C Sprite mix :(
- Comment on culture 1 month ago:
Uh… Do you have aphantasia, perhaps?
- Comment on Painful to recover from 1 month ago:
It would not be.
“Success in life” is like knowing how to cook, or being able to get along well with other people.
- Comment on 2 months ago:
What gets me so often in retro gaming is the desire of some to “repair” the past.
This would indicate the ‘hate’ is on ideological grounds.
I tend to agree, if I’m being honest. I sometimes see the retro modding community excited about improvements they’ve made: new models swapped in for characters, upscaled backgrounds with 10x the detail that was ever put into them, 4k textures stretched over low-poly objects like an animal wearing a skin suit. And these are called ‘better’. This is how new people are told to play these old games: we have added 4 cups of sugar to make the horrible taste easier to swallow.
I see this and I think… why? Why be this way?
Can you imagine if we raised new generations to treat paintings the same way? The Mona Lisa is not worth seeing because it is too old and ugly, but it can be made tolerable to one’s senses with the new power of AI?
This image is profane. It can only be produced by a sick people.
I worry that people’s desire for this kind of thing indicates a lack of curiosity in life. An unwillingness to do anything not already familiar to them. I would consider this attitude a character flaw in most people, if I met them.
- Comment on rules 2 months ago:
- Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
I can smell jealousy from a mile away, man. If you want to wear a skimpy outfit, by all means.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
I do admit that it’s feasible.
But, considering it has very little to do with the matter at hand, why bring it up? Why bring it up in this way? Why suggest that we and them are in league with each other?
Also, “do you condemn hamas?”
“Do you condemn hamas?”
“Do you condemn hamas?”
“Do you condemn hamas?”
“Do you condemn hamas?”
“Do you condemn hamas?”
“Do you condemn hamas?”
“Do you condemn hamas?” - Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
If I recall, it’s actually tit-for-tat with occasional forgiveness. Two tit-for-tats can get stuck in an endless back-and-forth.
Regardless, I love that you brought that up; it’s one of my favorite game theory lessons.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
I’d say (different person) it’s just not relevant. It’s cry-bullying.
If he wants to show evidence, he can. But even then, he ought to be showing it to mods or something—what are we supposed to do about it? Are we suddenly not upset about the secret ban list?
Anyone with a touch of fame, caught in a scandal, loooves talking about the alleged violence of their opponents. Do you remember when BLM was happening and Fox was pretending that the entirety of Portland was on fire? Or literally anything Isreal has said about Gaza?
I don’t actually know that he hasn’t received one, single death threat, but since what he wants is sympathy for his crimes, I’m inclined not to give him any.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
Oh yeah, I don’t hide them. Votes even on reddit can be a useful temperature check for audience engagement.
I do think it’s funny when people whine about getting downvotes, though; it betrays just a little bit of discomfort with whatever else they’re saying.
- Comment on Keep puffin, dork. 2 months ago:
You could try asking onahole for that. Or Realbotix. Evidently, it would give bored teachers something to do during class.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 months ago:
Ahhh, I see. Thanks for that.
