>> ^Jinx:

End of the day, doesn't matter much whether you play it with friends or not since the gameplay is so fucking boring. Not that I don't ever play dungeon crawlers, sometimes I quite fancy mindless button pressing where the only real incentive is the next level or the better item, but I don't kid myself into thinking its a good game. Sometimes I watch truely terrible movies just for the fun (which also happen to share the characteristic of only being really enjoyable when watched/played with friends) but again, lets not pretend they are good movies.
Anyway, I'd like to see Blizzard develop a new game rather than these sequels. Diablo3 must be the safest money they've ever made, even SC2 had more innovation, how about taking some risks?


Blizzard was NEVER about innovation. They have always been about taking existing gaming mechanics and polishing them to a level of quality that no other company can match. They do an excellent job of NOT reinventing the wheel and retaining the qualities that makes their games so successful in the first place.

To expect Blizzard to change a formula that brought them millions of fans over the years, to alienate their core audience just so they can appease someone like you, who never loved dungeon crawlers in the first place, is ridiculous.

And while I'm not a big fan of Diablo, I don't pretend that they are terrible games just because I find them repetitive and boring.

Don't get the hype tbh. Haven't really followed Diablo lore, so the story doesn't really interest me, and the other incentives to keep play, loot and levels, just seems kind of shallow when the combat is so dull and repetitive. Blizzard were sort of put in an impossible position, any innovation would have received flak from Diablo purists but I am still disappointed they didn't really do much new with it.

Oh, and its miserable to play on your own, which always leads me to believe that your enjoyment of it has more to do with the company you keep than with the game itself.

It's a bit repetitive at times, but I enjoy the show and moments like this are part of the reason why.

>> ^westy:

what's interesting with this is that the drawing is a 2D description / recording of the secular rotation of specific disk radii.
I wonder if you used specific multiple joints and arms and disks you could have the end result be a face or some recognisable specific drawing.
in some ways this seems like you could store allot of data in a physically smaller space , it seems analogousness to fractal math with the arms acting as an execution / multiplier on the initial maths of the disks , though it gets to a point of repetition reasonably fast so maybe its just a magnification. Maybe fractals are simply a magnification and get to a point a of repetition its just the case that that point is so large we don't see it ( though the way I understand it fractals are infinite)


Most compression works on the type of concept you mention; trying to fine or make a rough formula to represent a string of data instead of the data itself.

what's interesting with this is that the drawing is a 2D description / recording of the secular rotation of specific disk radii.

I wonder if you used specific multiple joints and arms and disks you could have the end result be a face or some recognisable specific drawing.

in some ways this seems like you could store allot of data in a physically smaller space , it seems analogousness to fractal math with the arms acting as an execution / multiplier on the initial maths of the disks , though it gets to a point of repetition reasonably fast so maybe its just a magnification. Maybe fractals are simply a magnification and get to a point a of repetition its just the case that that point is so large we don't see it ( though the way I understand it fractals are infinite)

This idea of "a wall of seperation" of church and state came from a letter that Jefferson wrote to a baptist association while he was in France. It has been misinterpreted in recent times as a principle of exclusion of religion from government, but is this really what Jefferson intended? If he did, you might want to ask yourself why Jefferson attended church every sunday..in the house of representitives. You might want to ask why Jefferson closed presidential documents with "In the year of our Lord Jesus Christ", or why he negotiated treaties that used federal funding to pay for Christian missionaries to evangelize the indians. You also might want to ask why public education was teaching the scripture in schools, and why nearly every state had its own church..and why many states wouldn't allow non-christians to be elected to public office.

This idea of "freedom from religion" has no basis in history, or in the intentions of our founders. The secular community apparently feels that they can move in to this house that Christianity built and evict the ones who built it. It would be a bit like you inviting me to stay at your house and then I tell you that I am going to redecorate it the way I please and would you please stay in your room and never come out again.

Consider the words of William Rehnquist in a supreme court ruling about this issue:

It is impossible to build sound constitutional doctrine upon a mistaken understanding of constitutional history, but unfortunately the Establishment Clause has been expressly freighted with Jefferson's misleading metaphor for nearly 40 years. Thomas Jefferson was of course in France at the time the constitutional Amendments known as the Bill of Rights were passed by Congress and ratified by the States. His letter to the Danbury Baptist Association was a short note of courtesy, written 14 years after the Amendments were passed by Congress. He would seem to any detached observer as a less than ideal source of contemporary history as to the meaning of the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment.

But the greatest injury of the "wall" notion is its mischievous diversion of judges from the actual intentions of the drafters of the Bill of Rights. The "crucible of litigation," ante, at 2487, is well adapted to adjudicating factual disputes on the basis of testimony presented in court, but no amount of repetition of historical errors in judicial opinions can make the errors true. The "wall of separation between church and State" is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/971381/posts


>> ^jonny:
>> ^quantumushroom:
There is no legal anything found anywhere guaranteeing "freedom from religion". The State is not allowed to establish a religion or promote one religion above others. That's it.
The statements are plainly contradictory. The 1st amendment guarantees freedom from a government religion or any promotion of religion by the government. Also, as Boise_Lib notes above, it's impossible to have true freedom of religion without also having freedom from any other religion being imposed upon you. Intelligent people may disagree over whether certains actions constitute imposition of religious principles or doctrine, but the idea that the Constitution does not guarantee a level of freedom from religion is patently false.

Pretty much what I thought too. A citizen may choose to use their rights or cede them at their leisure. It's just like how I choose not to exercise my right to keep and bear arms, but the right still exists for everyone else, or in case one day I change my mind. I don't think the driver was an asshole either, as the cops are already there all night and spending an extra 1.5 minutes on a single driver makes no difference to them either way, other than slowing the cars per minute that travel through that checkpoint (perhaps preventing them from nabbing an actual drunk driver).

The police officers know the rights of citizens better than most citizens do themselves (one of the unfortunate consequences of eliminating civics classes from school curricula, a la budget cuts), which I presume is why their initial persistence and robotic repetition of the carefully-worded phrase "Have you had anything to drink tonight?" is eventually ended when they realize the driver knows his rights as well as they do.

>> ^L0cky:

So a guy calmly exercises his right to not incriminate himself; and the police allow him to do so courteously.
...and there's 50 comments arguing about this?

And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

And what have you been doing lately with your right hand, eh shiny(Or are you a lefty)?

You sure get a "bone" preaching to us "fallen" folk it'd seem... God sees ALL, including your repetitive sins of Onan.

>> ^acidSpine:

"after this you'll never have to listen to another indie song in your life" Thats funny, I thought the same thing about dubstep after the first 4 seconds of this video.
Oh yeah and he really showed his bias when he called indie the most ceaselessly repetitive un-innovative genre of music: Punk anyone? Of course not, punk's been shit since the 90's.


I love the way people take this sort of performance as a serious representation of the artist's views. Sit him down and have a serious chat and I'll draw a conclusion then.

"after this you'll never have to listen to another indie song in your life" Thats funny, I thought the same thing about dubstep after the first 4 seconds of this video.

Oh yeah and he really showed his bias when he called indie the most ceaselessly repetitive un-innovative genre of music: Punk anyone? Of course not, punk's been shit since the 90's.

>> ^bmacs27:

>> ^alien_concept:
>> ^bmacs27:
Wait... I up voted before the cancer part.
:-( I want my up vote back.

Haha, so you upvoted a kid repetitively bouncing a tennis ball up against the wall and rapping about it? Please take a look at my pqueue, you seem to be very easily pleased

You've gotten enough charity from me!


Hehe, touche. If it helps, you didn't just upvote a video making fun of childhood cancer

>> ^alien_concept:

>> ^bmacs27:
Wait... I up voted before the cancer part.
:-( I want my up vote back.

Haha, so you upvoted a kid repetitively bouncing a tennis ball up against the wall and rapping about it? Please take a look at my pqueue, you seem to be very easily pleased


You've gotten enough charity from me!

>> ^bmacs27:

Wait... I up voted before the cancer part.
:-( I want my up vote back.


Haha, so you upvoted a kid repetitively bouncing a tennis ball up against the wall and rapping about it? Please take a look at my pqueue, you seem to be very easily pleased

She must be rubbing off on me..
>> ^rottenseed:

Oh Nicki...you sound like my mother.>> ^gwiz665:
Suck my dick, fuckface.
>> ^therealblankman:
>> ^gwiz665:
I can't agree with him on the last one, but otherwise fine fine.

That's because, no offense intended, like everyone else who keeps buying these games you're a sycophantic idiot who happily swallows whatever tiresome, un-original, unimaginative, over-rated swollen appendage the major publishers choose to repetitively cram down your open throat year after year.
All the best.

Oh Nicki...you sound like my mother.>> ^gwiz665:

Suck my dick, fuckface.
>> ^therealblankman:
>> ^gwiz665:
I can't agree with him on the last one, but otherwise fine fine.

That's because, no offense intended, like everyone else who keeps buying these games you're a sycophantic idiot who happily swallows whatever tiresome, un-original, unimaginative, over-rated swollen appendage the major publishers choose to repetitively cram down your open throat year after year.
All the best.