|
bobjr posted:I'd say this is inaccurate for me just because I've seen people treat kids differently depending on if it's their own or otherwise. If someone treats kids like poo poo then they're probably not good people in other ways but if someone avoids or ignores a kid I don't see it as a bad thing, when I've seen people who dote on kids act horribly otherwise. How they treat service/retail members or animals works better for me. Yeah; in public areas there are often very good reason for a parent to ignore a child who is throwing a fit or acting inappropriately. Giving young children attention when they behave like that just teaches them that behaving that way is effective. But yeah, there's never an excuse for a parent to either hit or insult their child, much less in public. It's just that I've seen people comment on parents being bad because they see them ignoring their children in public.
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
grittyreboot posted:-4k/Ultra HD is a scam. The HD TVs we've had for the last 10 years pretty much hit the limit on what the human eye is capable of perceiving. This depends entirely upon how big the screen is and how far someone is from it. I think it could be argued that the most recent smartphones have hit the limit on what human eyes can perceive, but there's absolutely a visual difference between 1080p smartphones and 1440p ones, so there's definitely going to be a visual difference between 1080p and 4k when blown up to the size of a television. Maybe you were watching video that wasn't actually encoded in 4k on a 4k television?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
hard counter posted:I think that's two separate things; there are legitimate issues with some animus but then some people also resort to slurs or My feeling about anime as a medium is that it has some genuine serious problems, but they have nothing to do with Japanese culture being wild and crazy or whatever. Sometimes you'll hear people say "anime is a medium just like live-action TV or movies" but this isn't really accurate, because there are specific elements to the industry that compromise it. A very good comparison would be American comic books. Some are good (and not all comics are super-hero stuff), but the general nature of the American comics and anime markets and their primary audience(s) result in a disproportionate amount of terrible stuff. That being said, I believe that manga actually is comparable to any other medium. Because it doesn't have the same production barriers as anime (primarily cost), it doesn't have the same need to pander to specific demographics and there's a lot more room for different genres and styles. Kind of following from that, I would also argue that manga, generally speaking, has more to offer than American comics (this is probably where the "unpopular opinion" part of this post comes in). While there are obviously good American comics and bad manga, there's a greater variety to manga and the skill involved in drawing it is often higher (which is probably just the result of manga having a far bigger role in Japanese society/culture than comics do in America). So while there's some truth to the idea that anime is mostly bad, people who say the same thing about manga really are just being racist and dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 09:34
|
|
to express their opinion in way that engages with the ethnicity of the creator rather than with the relevant aspects of the creation.
|
Wheat Loaf posted:My other opinion is that prog rock, nine times out of ten, isn't really rock music at all. It's just people wanking and noodling and squawking about elves and half-baked philosophy. I think the only worthwhile variety of prog rock is the really early stuff from the late 1960s and very early 1970s when it was still identifiable as jazz or R&B. My music related opinion (that I may have posted in this thread in the past but can't remember) is that post-rock is really, really boring. It is like super lame classical music that includes rock instruments. When I hear people complimenting it, it's always stuff like "man it's so amazing and deep how there's a crescendo during the first half of the song." It's the sort of music that sounds profound and deep if you really try to get yourself into the mindset of "I bet this music is gonna be profound/deep" (or smoke weed). I don't really mind what other people listen to, but it just rubs me the wrong way when people act like music is all deep/complex when it's the complete opposite (especially when these same people often condemn pop music for being simplistic, despite the fact that the pop music they condemn is often objectively more complex than most post-rock pieces). Solice Kirsk posted:Bullying has a place in society and if there was more of it there would be way less clueless people. Eh, not really. I think that making fun of behaviors can be useful, but not directly targeting the person him/herself (though in practice it's probably impossible to divorce the two). In practice bullying just makes people retreat into shells (and/or the internet) instead of making them change, at least with younger children. Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 00:07 on Dec 13, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
NonzeroCircle posted:Post-rock is pretty fun to play/jam with others but as far as listening goes I'll normally put it on as background rather than for 'serious listening'. Yeah, I actually think that the music is pretty decent as sort of background music meant to create a certain atmosphere or something; my issue is mostly with the way people interpret it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
My opinion that is both popular and unpopular depending on who you talk to is that Stargate SG-1 is a really, really bad show to the point where I've questioned my own sanity when I hear other people praise it. I kept trying to watch it with my friend and was like "what is this...this is one of the most amateur television shows I've ever seen" while my friend gushed over how awesome it was. It's like I can sense the disappointment emanating from all the actors that they have been relegated to such a show.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Junkiebev posted:I admire Stalin b/c was a pretty impressive guy and without him the Russians lose the second world war which then causes the allies to lose. Also his guidance took a nation of illiterate peasants into space in a very short period of time. Additionally, the famines which killed many were unavoidable in the post-civil war environment however I will grant that the collectivization efforts made the death toll higher. Eh, the improvements were largely the result of how poo poo Russia was beforehand; just because someone improves something doesn't mean that they're actually good, just that they're less bad than an even worse alternative. That being said, I do think that people focus on Stalin disproportionately, but that doesn't concern me that much given that he was still a terrible person regardless. An analogy might be a person who donates millions of dollars to charity but also personally murdered 100 children. You could make the argument that they have been a net positive due to all the lives saved/improved from their philanthropy, but they're still a terrible person because they murder children.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:If a game has unskippable dialogue or cutscenes then it had better be the best, most fun game ever to make up for making me sit through that dumb, pointless bullshit. My unpopular opinion is that I enjoy dumb game plots/cut-scenes while fully understanding that they are dumb and written poorly. A good example is the game Final Fantasy X. The plot is pretty dumb and has a ton of melodrama, but I love melodrama (as long as it's not too ridiculous) and dumb plots that keep escalating until the entire world is at stake. WampaLord posted:Outside of crackling or other obvious distortions, I have never been able to tell audio quality apart. Either audio is playing or it's being played incorrectly, I honestly can't tell what "better" audio is. With regard to headphones/earphones specifically, I find that I can definitely tell a difference between, say, $30 and $150 earphones, but can't tell the difference with anything above that (assuming that all the earphones in question are considered good for their price range). This guy I knew in college had some $500 earphones that looked like little drills and I couldn't tell the difference between them than my $150 ones. Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 01:06 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:You paid a lot for earphones to be honest. 50€ (so I imagine a lot less $ because they're a Mexican brand [ Yeah, that was back in college (I'm 31 now) and I haven't ever spent that much since. My $150 ones were actually Shures. Before them I hadn't ever had anything better than cheap supermarket headphones, so that's partly why I noticed such a huge difference. Tiggum posted:If it's dumb and knows it that's usually fine. If it's something like the Deus Ex series where it's really dumb but takes itself so, so seriously, I'm definitely skipping that. Well, to use the example in my previous post, FFX definitely takes itself relatively seriously. I just enjoy really melodramatic situations, like the whole thing with (to use the same example) "Yuna is going on a journey to her death! Tidus is gonna disappear if he beats the Big Bad!" Unless a movie/game/whatever crosses a line and gets too hammy with it, that sort of thing is like junk food media for me.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2017 21:43
|
|
]) Shures are basically as good as it gets sound-wise. I'm sure they could sell them at a profit for 30$.
|
Jastiger posted:It does hurt the rioters sure. But even if it isnt literally burning it down. Holding up production or stopping production does more than angry letters ans rallys. What about Warren Buffet? Lots of liberals who hate the Kochs/Waltons seem to fawn over him because he's willing to accept some very modest tax increases. Sentient Data posted:ACA is bullshit; free medicare for all paid by taxes with the option for people to opt out to use their own private coverage is the only sensible option While this is true, I can honestly kinda sympathize with politicians for being afraid to seriously push for this. The health insurance industry is big and powerful enough that I would be very worried about my personal well-being if I was at the forefront of a movement that would cripple it (relative to how it is currently, at least). Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 22:51 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Its like youre intentionally missing the implication. Obviously thatd get you fired. Why? Because it actually threatens the owner. A nasty letter doesnt. Thats why protests often accomplish nothing unless they hit a serious critical mass. Otherwise they are just ignored. But if those protests actually threatened the economic well being of folk in charge, uh uh now this has meaning. The difference? The right kind of violence. While I agree with the general idea that non-violent protest accomplishes jack poo poo 95% of the time (though on rare occasions it can accomplish something if it's creating enough negative press for the company/politician in question), I think it's also questionable whether violence can accomplish things in the modern day like it used to be able to 100 years ago. 100 years ago it was a threat to a company if workers striked or threatened to destroy company assets because the company didn't have much of an other choice. But in our modern world, corporations often have the option of simply relocating if workers cause problems. It might cost them money to do so, but it still gives them an option other than acquiescing to the demands of the workers (which effectively limits the workers' negotiating power). The same thing applies politically, in the sense that "a bunch of people with guns" used to be able to pose a reasonable threat to a nation, but now the different in power between a country's military and its people is so great (in the US at least) that this isn't much of an option. Though I think that such violence might still be useful in the sense that it applies pressure on those in power (even if they know the rebels can't take over government, politicians might still have reason to be worried about being assassinated or something).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Disproportionate representation of rural areas is already dealt with through the Senate (and to a lesser degree the House), so I don't quite buy the "but rural places won't have a voice anymore!" argument. edit: Oh, potenrially unpopular opinion of mine is that people who use the phrase "fourth estate" to refer to the media are almost always insufferable and trying to make some "profound" statement about the importance of journalism and how it has been corrupted or something. It's not so much that they're even wrong (a lot of the time they aren't), but just an association with the use of the term with an obnoxious and pithy sort of tone. Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 12:24 on Jan 23, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:I've never heard that particular term but I feel similarly about other superfluous descriptive phrases that seem to be designed to make people ask "what is that?" and they get to talk down to you about it and show off how knowledgeable they are. Like you said, it doesn't matter if the term is accurate and it usually is, but it's just annoying. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Estate Basically it's a legitimate term, but people often use it when trying to make some profound statement about the state of society/journalism.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Grandmother of Five posted:Most of us need some degree of faith in order to board an airplane or make use of medicine. Faith is absolutely necessary, and a good and useful tool in a society with any degree of specialization. I don't know if that would be considered faith. At least in my case it's more a matter of "this is an acceptably low risk relative to the benefit." I realize a plane might crash or a medicine might not work, but I consider that an acceptable risk since planes are convenient and medicine is often necessary/helpful. Assuming that something is likely based upon factors like "experts in the field agree about it" or something is a perfectly rational thing to do, and it only really crosses the line into faith if you truly believe 100% that something is true.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
I feel like oldpainless is a much better version of whatever sort of gimmick/trolling FAROOQ is going for.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Das Boo posted:Is Pence better? Seriously asking. Initially I thought he would be the same or worse, but Trump is doing a lot of really bizarre stuff that "normal" Republican presidents probably wouldn't do*. Normal Republicans are constrained by the fact that they have to at least maintain the veneer of responsibility and sanity, but Trump seems a lot more...active than I was expecting him to be. * For example the fact that he seems like he's going to continue trying to build the wall, or the literally insane voter fraud investigation stuff. Or the thing with freezing EPA grants/contracts. Or the fact he's still talking about cutting US funding to the UN. There's a lot of stuff I was hoping was just campaign talk, but it seems he's actually trying to follow through with it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2017 07:09
|
|
|
Ramagamma posted:The most loving miserable people i know are the ones who have a good education and a professional career and are either borderline alcoholics or are obsessing over diet and fitness as they rapidly sink into their 30s and see their youth slipping away. I dunno man, everyone I know who works in finance (like, equity research, risk management, etc) has a totally great life where they take awesome vacations and are always eating at fancy restaurants and don't work particularly bad hours. While there's a subset of high paying jobs that destroy your soul (like the first few years working as an investment banker), there's also a whole bunch that still pay a lot but require fairly normal hours. I think the best work to pay ratio is this girl I know who is an accountant at a hedge fund and makes like 200-300k despite keeping to a 40hr/week schedule. I understand the appeal of wanting to think that people making a lot of money are all depressed and overworked, but in reality most of them seem to have lives that are objectively vastly superior to regular people. edit: I agree with the post that said "Life is unfulfilling without work" is a privileged viewpoint that only applies to certain jobs. I would be tempted to agree that statement initially, but then I remember that my job (a programmer in academia) is exceptionally pleasant and low stress compared to the jobs most people work. If my job consisted of working retail or something I doubt I'd feel the same way. Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 22:06 on Jan 30, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
I live in Memphis TN and you can get nicer houses than those for less money in the suburbs here. The ironic thing about Jastiger's hate of the South is that most southern cities are probably remarkably similar to Des Moines, only with a much larger portion of black people. Wait a second...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:I was only partially serious. I would argue that hard drug (i.e. heroin, meth) addicts or alcoholics shouldn't be allowed to have important jobs like doctors or anything else where you're responsible for other peoples' safety/health, no matter how well you hide it and how good you are at the job. Like that Flight movie with Denzel Washington - it didn't matter that he saved a lot of people, the fact that he was drunk and high was a betrayal of the public trust and he deserved to go to jail/be fired. The same should happen if your doctor took some heroin before work even if nothing bad happens. Not all drugs make you "hosed up". Opiate addicts (and there's no effective difference between heroin and oxycodone in this regard) do not become "high" from the drug; it just staves off physical withdrawal. Functional opiate addicts are quite common - you just rarely notice them because the drug doesn't influence their behavior. (Granted, I don't think this is really true of stimulants like meth or whatever marijuana is, though I could be wrong about the former since I don't really understand how stimulant dependence works.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:"The truth is in the middle" isn't always wrong. Sure, there are times when it isn't, but still. I mean, it's trivially true in the sense that for most issues with opinions falling along some continuum, there exist opinions to the dramatic extreme of either side which are bad. But in terms of the way it's actually used (since the aforementioned meaning is pointless), it is virtually never an appropriate sentiment. Even if the best opinion does lie between two other stated opinions, that's just a coincidence and has nothing to do with "the truth is the middle" being some accurate guiding principle.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:4K is really cool. 1080p is still really good but 4K is objectively better. It depends upon stuff like how far you are from the screen and how big the screen is too. Though given that I can notice the difference between 1080p and 2k on a smart phone screen, I imagine it's even more noticeable on larger screens (though I feel like 2k is getting close to the limit of what eyes can notice on smart phones). You can really tell the difference between 1080p and 2k on a smart phone if you actually play a video in those resolutions on Youtube or something. The 2k on such a small screen is absolutely incredible and feels like you're seeing things in real life.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:If people can afford to donate to charity they can afford to pay more taxes so that the need for that charity doesn't even exist. Thanks rich guy for donating 10 million to this hospital and putting your name on it. How about instead of that we just tax you and your buddies more so we can reliably fund all this poo poo without having to come begging cap in hand with promises of fancy plaques and naming rights? I think that poorer people giving to charity is praise-worthy, but I think there is nothing praise-worthy about a rich person giving to charity (unless they're literally giving away everything to the point where they're no longer rich). I understand why someone would do the praising (since you want to massage the rich person's ego enough that they'll donate more in the future), but it's still absolutely disgusting, especially if the rich person in question is the one who requested their name to be on buildings or whatever. Like, if I was rich I'd donate a bunch of money partly because it would be an easy way to effectively buy social good will. I'd still be rich, but people would praise me a bunch because I gave away a small portion of my vast wealth. Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 20:25 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
FrameRelay posted:I work at an IT company which is shipping jobs overseas. But isn't American objectively one of the hardest working developed nations on the planet? Like, don't Americans work longer hours than workers in other first world/developed nations (aside from maybe Japan or South Korea)?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:You can at least express a difference in opinion with out catching a ban/probation in GBS. D&D and all its subforums are just echo chambers where any conflicting opinion gets shouted down with in seconds. I agree with a lot of the popular opinions over there, but gently caress posting in that cesspit. I can only think of several times (if that) that people have gotten probated/banned for posting opinions that weren't super obviously terrible. I generally like D&D's moderation, because if dumb, dishonest arguments weren't cracked down on to some extent it would end up the exact same as almost every other political discussion on the internet. If you let some dumb right winger post stuff everyone else will reply to them trying to explain why they're wrong, and this derails threads. And even then, people don't get probated/banned just for having bad opinions; that only happens if they 1. try to argue those opinions and are repeatedly dishonest/disingenuous while doing so or 2. have opinions that are so bad they cross over into explicit bigotry. There is some mild bias, but it only manifests in the sense that some dumb left-wing people aren't probated when dumb right-wing people would be for the same level of posting, and the problem there is that the former aren't also being probated, not that the latter are. A good example is this poster asdf-something. He is clearly to the right of most posters in D&D economically, but he doesn't get probated/banned because his arguments aren't transparently stupid or dishonest. There was also this kinda dumb guy "just asking questions" about feminism in some other thread, but he didn't get probated because he wasn't being transparently bigoted. If you really feel the need to express your right-wing views, there are a million other places on the internet you can do so (or even in this forum, I think; aren't TFR and GiP comparatively right-wing?). I think it's a good thing to have a discussion forum where threads don't constantly get derailed by idiots talking about how All Lives Matter or whatever. D&D certainly has problems, but being over-moderated is not one of those problems. So I guess my unpopular forums-related opinion is that D&D is pretty good, and that the problems it has have nothing to do with being over-moderated or "too PC" or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:Where does your excess sweat go then? Piss? If you go too long without sweating all of your body's sweat glands will rupture, causing a visual effect not unlike thousands of tiny red flowers blossoming beneath your skin. The pain is said to be excruciating.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:I'm not a cat owner but outdoor cats seem infinitely happier and cooler and if it gets run over by a truck at least it probably died having fun. Just make sure it's balls are gone and who cares. Indoor cats are miserable blobs owned by dweebs. Outdoor cats suck because they kill every small animal in the neighborhood. At least several times my house has had a chipmunk nest in my backyard, but the lovely cat next door would always end up killing them. Nasty animals. ToxicSlurpee posted:Seriously, if they can drive here at all it won't be that long before nobody has to drive anymore. It might take decades for them to completely displace human drivers but trust me; they're already here. Once they become common enough there will be more autonomous cars than human-driven ones which will make it far, far easier for autonomous cars to drive. Eh, it's important to realize that self-driving cars may be the sort of problem where 5% of the problem takes 95% of the time. We can deal with all the low-hanging fruit, but this doesn't mean the remaining problems necessary in order to remove drivers from the equation (since you basically need to ensure the cars will work well in virtually all situations in order to do this) can be solved nearly as easily. edit: I think they'll find use for things that involve mostly highway driving or following set routes, but think it will be an indefinite amount of time until normal people use them while reading a book and not needing to pay attention to the driving at all (which is the sort of end-game hypothetical people talk about). starkebn posted:there are evidence based, secular addiction help groups out there. AA is poo poo and has no proof their methods work even after all this time They can be difficult to access in certain cities. I live in Memphis, TN and the nearest secular addiction group (SMART Recovery IIRC) is an hour drive away in Mississippi. One lovely thing (in addition to all the other lovely things) about most NA/AA group is they don't allow suboxone users (or make you hide you suboxone use). I'm pretty convinced that whatever minor benefit exists to AA/NA is entirely just due to having a support group and has absolutely nothing to do with the steps themselves. Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 19:16 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:My unpopular opinion: There is no such thing as "overthinking" a movie. There is such a thing as going on and on about something no one else cares about, so if you're in a group of people who just want to talk about which dinosaur was coolest or whatever then maybe save your feminist analysis for some more appropriate forum, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with thinking critically about even the shallowest of movies. Nah - I think the main situation where someone overthinking a movie could be bad is if overthinking it caused them to miss some of the main themes/qualities of the movie. Like, imagine a situation where someone tried to attach some meaning to a bunch of random poo poo using schizophrenic-ish logic and, in the process, missed the major themes of the work (that is, missing the forest for the trees).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2017 08:48
|
|
|
sassassin posted:That's underthinking. If people are genuinely missing an obvious point, accuse them of thinking badly, not of thinking too much. Not necessarily. Someone could assume that the actual theme of a film is actually just a red herring and (what they imagine to be) the real theme is something super complex based entirely off of a ton of subjective interpretations of various elements of the film. Like, it's possible for a movie to actually be straight-forward and for someone to wrongly assume there's deeper layers to it. Obviously someone thinking this doesn't hurt anyone, but I would still say it's a dumb thing to think in certain situations (and sometimes people will insult those who accept the more mainstream interpretation of a film for not ~truly understanding~ it). edit: Actually, this only really bothers me when someone tries to argue that their bizarre interpretation is correct and people who don't accept it are dumb. I don't really mind if someone just has some alternative interpretation, even if it's dumb; it's only annoying if they act like other people are stupid for not sharing their interpretation. Ytlaya has a new favorite as of 21:32 on Mar 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
I took a course in college called "astrobiology" that was about the possibility of life outside of Earth. Basically it seemed to more or less say that it would be super weird if, at the very least, simple life didn't exist elsewhere. Some of the stuff we read did imply that it's tough for complex life to develop. Which kind of makes sense when you think about it; given how long it took complex (much less intelligent) life to develop on Earth, the universe as a whole is actually pretty young, and I think that only solar systems with relatively younger, metal rich stars might be capable of hosting complex life (since earlier stars wouldn't have some of the elements needed for complex life as we know it).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
lemon-lyme disease posted:I loved McNuggets when I was a kid. Not so fond of them now. Somewhere in between, I was told that "way back when" they used to be part fish nugget. I have no idea whether or not that's true, but some part of me believes the story. Years ago McNuggets could have pretty much any chicken meat in them and the interior had a darker appearance. They then changed to a guarantee that all nuggets used 100% white meat. So you should be able to rest easy that McNuggets don't contain random chicken byproducts.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Das Boo posted:That's all fine and dandy, but as you say it's pop music. It has all the flaws and limitations of pop music. I appreciate their historical significance, but I don't think it makes their music great. There are plenty of historically significant musicians that I can enjoy the music of without context. I find that most people who criticize pop music for being too simple do not actually have the musical background to understand what constitutes musical complexity. I would actually go as far as claiming that pop music is, on average, more musically complex than most non-pop genres. I might make an exception to this lyrically, but I can't count the number of times I've seen someone comment on how complex a song was despite it actually not being remotely more complicated than even simple pop music. Among the worst examples of this are people confusing "being in a minor key" or "involving acoustic guitar" as being inherently more complex than upbeat pop tunes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Grandmother of Five posted:Isn't pop like a cross-genre thing that doesn't really describe anything about form or content? Like, genres can be broad and all, but something being labeled pop doesn't say anything about themes, style, commonly used instruments, or anything else. If something is popular or mainstream enough, people will start to consider it pop no matter what it is. Yeah, a huge variety of music falls under the heading of "pop." It's pretty much the word used to describe any music that has popular appeal and doesn't fall into some existing genre. I wouldn't say that becoming popular makes something pop on its own though; there has to be the combination of "is popular" and "isn't some other genre."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I don't like concerts. Vaguely related to this, but I think that bands that "sound worse live" are just bad. A good band with skilled musicians/singer(s) will sound almost as good live as they do in the studio. Bands sounding bad live is usually because they're kinda poo poo with their instruments/singing. Blue Star posted:Other things that are science fiction bullshit: virtual reality, bioprinted organs, stem cell medicine, nanomachines, space exploration, "personalized medicine", clean energy, automation, artificial intelligence, designer babies, cyborg prosthetics that you can control with your brain, "regenerative medicine" Personalized medicine is an actual thing we're making big progress towards, but a lot of the claims people make are heavily exaggerated and won't be possible for a very long time. So it's not so much that it won't happen, but that it won't be quite as amazing as advertised.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Most live music sucks Yeah, but I think this is because most people are listening to bands that actually suck. If a band is good, they won't suck live (unless they're unlucky enough to get really bad sound engineers or whatever).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Bands are fun live you just have to be high or drunk and with a group. Bands that sound 100% like they do on album live like fleet foxes or animal collective are technically impressive but I prefer the ones who add little changes or just go for fun instead of concentrating in being rigid song machines Yeah, but you can make changes while still having the instruments/singing be in tune and everyone being in sync. There isn't really any excuse for a band sounding bad live other than the sound engineers loving up.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
walrusman posted:My brother is four years younger than me but he got married right out of college, so he and my sister-in-law have been married for about six years. I consider us all to be pretty close, even though we haven't talked quite as much in the last few months. I went to their house for dinner last week and we ended up talking for about five hours, with one of the big takeaways being that they've decided not to have kids. It was mostly her decision, something she's been mulling for a while. Fine, right? None of my business? I can understand being personally disappointed at their decision, but it's completely absurd to actually think that their decision is wrong just because it's not what you want. It's like asking out a girl, her saying no, and then saying "But this also affects me! I wanted to date that girl, but by rejecting me she is making my life worse! My parents also want me to get married, so her decision to reject me also negatively impacts them!" Like, the above is actually not even an exaggeration, those two situations are almost completely analogous.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
hard counter posted:i don't think an idea this radical for reducing corruption would ultimately produce a better system tbh, largely because these days government systems are so complex that they require significant expertise to successfully navigate Even though I really don't like admitting this, I feel like one of the virtually unavoidable problems with government and other powerful institutions (like financial institutions, etc) is that anyone who gains the expertise necessary to navigate said systems will also almost always gain bias in favor of the interests of the industry/government in question (which also usually coincide with the interests of the upper/upper-middle class). If someone is very knowledgeable about finance, they are likely to have a significant portion of their social life consist of other people of similar status and profession (not to mention the fact that most people with those skills/experience can easily thrive in our current system). But at the same time that knowledge is pretty much necessary and it would be a bad idea to have some random person run a bank. Fortunately there are a non-zero number of people who gain this kind of expertise and also realize the problems inherent to the industry/organization in question, but I think those people will always be a tiny minority.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:People who grow up in deep car-centric suburbia or anywhere you are totally dependant on your parents for transportation until you hit 16 come out socially stunted and weird like an indoor cat. Generally helpless after 16+ years of their parents having to arrange their entire lives and ferry them everywhere and unable to handle people or ideas outside of what ever narrow little class/race segregated suburbia they grew up in. You can gently caress a kid up just as bad even if you live somewhere "walkable" but you're a paranoid helicopter parent. I kind of noticed this first hand after growing up in TN and moving to NYC to go to college. It took me a full year to get to the point where I could do stuff as basic as navigate through the city using the subway (though admittedly this was partly due to me not forcing myself to try for a long time). A bunch of people I knew who came from less urban areas ended up dropping out. I had this one roommate freshman year who literally went insane and starting photo-shopping bomb explosions over an image of Washington Square Park...in retrospect I probably should have reported that. He ended up transferring to a more "normal" campus college and quickly recovered in the more comfortable environment. edit: All this being said, it kind of goes both ways in a sense; a lot of the kids I knew who grew up in NYC were very ignorant about what the rest of the country was like and seemed to view stuff like "having a driver license as a teenager" as this crazy unusual thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
Jastiger posted:Its more to get full citizenship. Able to sue the government, represent government, vote, own property, access to fdic stuff. I dont really know. I just wish there was more stock in citizenship somehow. Anything along the lines of what you want would disproportionately affect the poor (and thus ironically result in more Republican votes).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:Neither are Japanese words for any meaningful definition of "Japanese". They're not pronounced the same as the Japanese words of the same meaning they are derived from. But tsunami is pretty much pronounced the same?
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 21:17
|
|