With regards to your observation of your children, I'd say this fits nicely with the way I perceive things. Females seem better at learning things, thus their general, relative supremacy in subjects such as history, literature and language (at least the basics, as in school) where one needs to learn things. Males do better with things that can be systemized and understood. I was never good at history as this required pure memorization but in physics, chemistry and biology I was a straight A student, because as I gathered info, pieces of the puzzle came together and my understanding, from which I could extrapolate more info, grew.
Aaah, if only I had mod-points! Insightful indeed, good Sir*!
*Assuming you are a Sir. If you are a Mrs or a Miss, congratulations. Your sense of self insight and irony just blew my mind.
Are you seriously claiming that a logical mindset nurtures more violence than emotion-based reasoning? As to bringing peace between individuals.. me and my male friends have disagreements form time to time. You know what happens? We discuss it, look up sources if it's a factual topic, and come to a friendly agreement with no anger, embarrassment or resentment involved. Every girl/woman I know though routinely has emotional blowouts with their friends, even close friends. A simple argument sparks emotion, which escalates the argument, which fans the spark into a flame, until the spark becomes a raging fire of insults and vows to never speak to each other again.
Of course there are exceptions. There are males who are completely and irrevocably illogical in their behavior, and I must believe there are sensible women who see tings objectively rather than through a thick veil of emotion lest I give up and stay single for the remainder of my life. Exceptions to a rule doesn't invalidate the rule though, so it's irrelevant.
Also, I'm not saying that emotional intelligence isn't useful, but that having a high level of empathy doesn't make you smart. Like ILongForDarkness said:
Since when is emotional a type of intelligence? The way I've seen the term used it has been to mean being able to correctly identify what you or others are feeling. Well good for you. It is similar to awarding points for being able to identify smells. "Sure your son is as dumb as a brick but his aroma intelligence is off the charts."
What are we discussing..? There is no doubt that men are physically stronger than women. There is also no doubt that in general, men and women use different parts of our brains, and as such men tend to have better spacial awareness and (lacking the correct term) "logic comprehension". Women tend to have better memories and a stronger creative streak. There are many more differences, but I don't remember them at the moment and I'm too lazy to look them all up.
It isn't just weird "group knowledge" or cliques, men are actually better at parallel parking. Women (as I'm sure many of you have noticed) tend to remember things like arguments, what you had for dinner, which movies you've seen and who did the dishes in excruciating detail, even months after it happened. As you said, "the plural of anecdote is not data", but these differences are facts supported by tons of research.
Of course I think women and men are of equal value, that's not what's in question! We are different. Forcing everyone to comply with some equality standard isn't good for anyone. How can equal rights activists justify forcing people to hire a certain percentage of any given gender, even if it means the employer and the best candidate might end up getting the short end of the stick because of some imposed "equality" quota?
Discrimination isn't good at all, but the solution can hardly be said to be forced "anti-discrimination"-discrimination.
Not that I don't agree, but wouldn't you say that it's stupid to remain ignorant? The vast majority of people are, and have probably always been, "sheeple". They can't all be unintelligent, can they..? Scary concept! *shudders*
Still, the choice to remain ignorant is something I find completely incomprehensible. I'm not saying I'm the smartest guy out there (though the official online Mensa short-test I took rated me at ~142 IQ, so I'm no chimp), but to willfully ignore facts and believe moronic hearsay (like heartily arguing that distilling brew made from raw material not containing pectins will invariably produce methanol in lethal doses, or that Megan Fox is in reality a man), instead of at the very least looking something up on Wikipedia before one opens ones mouth.. that is my definition of stupid.
That doesn't change the fact that it's simply wrong to cut of a part of an infants body. If a grown-up wants to do it to his own body, be my guest. I'm not going to care any more than if you feel like cutting off your finger, except to thing it's a completely dumb thing to do.
It really boils down to this: Get snipped when you're an infant and you never have a choice. Go natural, and you actually have a choice to make when you get mature enough to think for yourself.
Also, it is no secret that the foreskin is the most sensitive area of the body, and that the head is meant to be kept protected. It's quite logical that cutting off a part of the penis that contains thousands of nerve endings decreases sensitivity. The fact that pro-circumcision folk claim the opposite just makes me doubt their entire argument even more.
But like I said, if you're an adult who chooses to do this, I'm not going to stop you. If you come near my kids with cutting implements though, I will apply said implements on your person rather than allow you to amputate part of my child's anatomy!
And thanks to conscientious tai chi and xing yi practice, I actually have more energy that I did twenty years ago (and the sense to use that energy responsibly).
Why are we all of a sudden talking about game graphics here? I'd imagine $50/hour is a lot for a 3D-designer. $90/$50 = 1.800.000 hours. I think I work about 1900-2000 hours a year, so that means $90 million buys you 900 work years of 3D design.
Wait.. what was your argument again..?
Did I miss out on something vital here..? From the quoted "SPECIAL REPORT":
As a result, the police have ceased taking Internet enforcement actions given the legal uncertainties, and the Attorney General has requested dismissal of current criminal cases against illegal portal and link sites.
If these sites aren't illegal in Spain, then who are these international idiots accusing Spain of allowing illegal activities (so to speak)? I might just be confused here, but the day an American cop arrests me and confiscates all my computer gear for doing something that is perfectly legal in Norway where I live but not in America is the day I loose all hope in humanity.
Unless my thinking is completely screwed up, I'd think the chance of finding a collision across say 5-6 completely different hash algorithms would be quite slim.
And yes, I know this isn't a practical way of storing files, and it probably never will be. It's possible in theory though, if you have a few different hash algorithms and the length of the original file and as such it will probably be done eventually.:P
Also, one pretty significant difference between the two is the cost of production. Terminator 2 cost about $90 million and is 137 minutes long. That's $647.482 per minute. A typical album might contain an hour of music or so and can (despite what the MPAA wants you to believe) be produced for next-to-nothing*.
Of course, I am not taking into account all the last millennium issues with distribution and publicity. I'm talking about the costs of actually making a movie or album
*By "next-to-nothing" I mean that cost of time in a studio and a good mixer/sound technician is low enough that even unknown, new bands can pool their money and pay to have an album recorded quite easily.
Finally! I thought I was the only one thinking about this! With enormous amounts of computing power (as quantum computing promises) one could easily store, say, a blu-ray movie by calculating and storing a few different hashes (MD5, SHA1, SHA2, etc.), then brute-force them until you have the original file back. Imagine that.. transmitting a 20GB HD movie in a single SMS. o.O
The problem is (as I explained one post further down) what the Telenor customers were paying for and how the ISP suddenly changed that. Imagine this scenario:
You lease a car and the contract says the car is completely at your disposal as long as it is returned in the same condition as when you got it, and anything law/insurance related is your problem.
Then, you get a letter from the company that leased you the car, saying your driving is logged and that you are only allowed to drive X miles a month. Anything in excess of that is automatically billed.
Now, that covers the semi-criminal stunt that lost Telenor so many customers. The main issue though is where I choose to put my hard earned money. If I can choose (as I could) between an Internet connection that is mine to use as I want at the speed I pay for, or one that is limited both in speed and data transfer (at pain of automatic billing and near-termination of service).. well.. all else being roughly equal there is not a shadow of doubt as to who would get my money. Hence this being a completely idiotic move for a company.
So you would agree to a suggestion that buss fare should be calculated by weight and girth? Because, after all, a buss full of 150kg people will use more gas and experience more general wear on the vehicle than one with 60-80kg folk.
My point -should it be unclear- is that when I enter an agreement with my ISP I make damn sure that I am paying for the speed and uptime, not for a monthly allowance of data transfer! Same thing with the buss analogy. I pay for transportation from point A to point B at the legal speed limits (no matter how fat or skinny I might be), not for a given amount of kg transported.
Ok, so it might not be the worst idea ever, but if to use the buss you had the choice between buying:
Company A: A one-month season ticket
Company B: Rights to 500kg transport of human flesh, with automatic billing for any excess
Worst. Idea. Ever.
The Norwegian ISP Telenor tried this some years back (around 2003 me thinks). I lived at home at the time and thus did not have any say in the choice of ISP. Each month we were limited to 1GB of total data transferred at which point the speed was reduced to 64k, unless we chose to pay ~$20 for 5GB "packs" of data. My parents, who were paying the bills, refused to see the need to change ISP. Luckily, my mother was an avid surfer as was my sister, so within about two weeks my math was proved correct and the 1GB limit was reached through surfing alone.
Believe it or not, this business move was rotten enough that even the average non-techie users fled Telenor in droves. Prior to this, Telenor was the biggest ISP by far as they (and all the phone lines) were government owned until they were privatized in 1995.
A company that pulls this sort of moronic, money-grabbing stunt deserves to die horribly.
Part of me want to agree with you since you seem like a level-headed guy who just wants the right to believe whatever you want without being disrespected.
However, I feel this intense urge to understand, so I have to ask "Why?". I'm sorry, if you feel like believing in a spirit/soul/whatever there is nothing I can do to stop you, but.. why? It blows my mind! I can't possibly comprehend any reason for any sort of faith-based religious beliefs other than inability to face oblivion and the fact that life in itself doesn't have any "higher meaning".
If you reply, you will probably say something like "Why not?". As I said, I can't refuse you your delusions, but why do you insist on believing in something for which there is no need? 2000 years ago people needed a deity or two. Where does the Sun go at night and how do we know it will come back? Why are we here? Where do our loved ones go when they die? What is disease? Why did the crops fail this year? All these questions were answered by making up the best possible explanations the people back then could come up with.
Today, we have science. We know where the Sun goes at night, what germs and viruses are, how we got here and that apart from producing offspring and living a good life, there is no need for any mythical Reason for our existence. Are we still clinging to millennia old "explanations" instead of embracing science simply because it's a much more cushy pillow to lay our heads on at night?
I acknowledge that an unfailing belief in divine forgiveness and eternal afterlife in paradise with all your loved ones must be comforting. But again I must ask, Why? I enjoy life and treat the ones I care about well, all while knowing that when I die I will cease to exist and that my contribution to existence is so infinitely small and insignificant as to not matter at all (except to those who I share my life with). Why do you need your fairies and unicorns to be happy?
A few years back (found some old forum posts) I was in the same state of mind as you. I thought I could "live and let live" and ignore or even respect religious people as long as they didn't try to force their self-righteous, arrogant crap down my throat. Now.. not so much.
Religion is at best a waste of time, effort and brainpower. At worst, a horrible justification for murder en masse and the bane of proper education.
If I insist that your car is red when in fact it is blue, sure, I'm not hurting anyone. Am I being an idiot? Yeah, but a harmless one. One comes to a point, however, where one just gets fed up with the millions of people running around flailing their pallid "arguments" for why their fairytale is the Right One.
There is quite simply no reason for belief and faith and despite the genius setup that "The existence of %diety% cannot be proven or disproven", there are a myriad of reasons not to. Self contradictions, tons of 'em. The fact that any religious believer will vehemently and fervently argue that their brand of faith is the only one. Why? Because they know, the setup that "Gods existence can't be proven" kind of eliminates the possibility of any other "proof" (though this rarely stops anyone from claiming they communicate with, have seen or have been "touched by" God).
That last part should put why I now despise the very concept of religion even more into perspective. If I start acting strange and blame it on a voice in my head I will be admitted, treated and medicated as the lunatic I am. Unless, of course, the childhood brainwashing had taken hold and I claimed the voice was God, or Jesus, or any of His working staff. Something is seriously wrong with the world when 2000++ year old beliefs - created by Man to give life meaning and explain where the Sun goes at night - are allowed to make the distinction between "religious devout" and "stark raving mad"!
Of course organisms can "dial up or dial down their mutation rate". Rate of mutation, like any other property of the organism, has to be decided by the genetic makeup of the organism. At least it seems very illogical that some outside "rule" should decide something like mutation rate.
If a member of an organism is subject to a mutation that makes mutations in its offspring more likely (assuming a species where any fit individual has a lot of offspring), this might provide a huge benefit in, say, a rapidly changing environment.
Oh god, you made me want to play that game again! I think it was the first proper game I ever played, and I absolutely loved it! The shooting, the access cards, the keys, the grappling hook, robohand and super jump boots, the conveyor belts... I'm almost overdosing on nostalgia looking at some screenshots here. Now I know what I'll do when I get home, thanks! =D
That sure sounds like one hell of a skill! Imagine.. a warrior comes at you in a battleground, stuns you, rips your balls of and wields them as a weapon. The weapon, of course, does insane damage to you because of the physical and emotional trauma involved, but mostly just grosses anyone else out. x)
Slashdot Mirror
With regards to your observation of your children, I'd say this fits nicely with the way I perceive things. Females seem better at learning things, thus their general, relative supremacy in subjects such as history, literature and language (at least the basics, as in school) where one needs to learn things. Males do better with things that can be systemized and understood. I was never good at history as this required pure memorization but in physics, chemistry and biology I was a straight A student, because as I gathered info, pieces of the puzzle came together and my understanding, from which I could extrapolate more info, grew.
Aaah, if only I had mod-points! Insightful indeed, good Sir*! *Assuming you are a Sir. If you are a Mrs or a Miss, congratulations. Your sense of self insight and irony just blew my mind.
Are you seriously claiming that a logical mindset nurtures more violence than emotion-based reasoning? As to bringing peace between individuals.. me and my male friends have disagreements form time to time. You know what happens? We discuss it, look up sources if it's a factual topic, and come to a friendly agreement with no anger, embarrassment or resentment involved. Every girl/woman I know though routinely has emotional blowouts with their friends, even close friends. A simple argument sparks emotion, which escalates the argument, which fans the spark into a flame, until the spark becomes a raging fire of insults and vows to never speak to each other again.
Of course there are exceptions. There are males who are completely and irrevocably illogical in their behavior, and I must believe there are sensible women who see tings objectively rather than through a thick veil of emotion lest I give up and stay single for the remainder of my life. Exceptions to a rule doesn't invalidate the rule though, so it's irrelevant.
Also, I'm not saying that emotional intelligence isn't useful, but that having a high level of empathy doesn't make you smart. Like ILongForDarkness said:
Since when is emotional a type of intelligence? The way I've seen the term used it has been to mean being able to correctly identify what you or others are feeling. Well good for you. It is similar to awarding points for being able to identify smells. "Sure your son is as dumb as a brick but his aroma intelligence is off the charts."
What are we discussing..? There is no doubt that men are physically stronger than women. There is also no doubt that in general, men and women use different parts of our brains, and as such men tend to have better spacial awareness and (lacking the correct term) "logic comprehension". Women tend to have better memories and a stronger creative streak. There are many more differences, but I don't remember them at the moment and I'm too lazy to look them all up.
It isn't just weird "group knowledge" or cliques, men are actually better at parallel parking. Women (as I'm sure many of you have noticed) tend to remember things like arguments, what you had for dinner, which movies you've seen and who did the dishes in excruciating detail, even months after it happened. As you said, "the plural of anecdote is not data", but these differences are facts supported by tons of research.
Of course I think women and men are of equal value, that's not what's in question! We are different. Forcing everyone to comply with some equality standard isn't good for anyone. How can equal rights activists justify forcing people to hire a certain percentage of any given gender, even if it means the employer and the best candidate might end up getting the short end of the stick because of some imposed "equality" quota?
Discrimination isn't good at all, but the solution can hardly be said to be forced "anti-discrimination"-discrimination.
Not that I don't agree, but wouldn't you say that it's stupid to remain ignorant? The vast majority of people are, and have probably always been, "sheeple". They can't all be unintelligent, can they..? Scary concept! *shudders*
Still, the choice to remain ignorant is something I find completely incomprehensible. I'm not saying I'm the smartest guy out there (though the official online Mensa short-test I took rated me at ~142 IQ, so I'm no chimp), but to willfully ignore facts and believe moronic hearsay (like heartily arguing that distilling brew made from raw material not containing pectins will invariably produce methanol in lethal doses, or that Megan Fox is in reality a man), instead of at the very least looking something up on Wikipedia before one opens ones mouth.. that is my definition of stupid.
That doesn't change the fact that it's simply wrong to cut of a part of an infants body. If a grown-up wants to do it to his own body, be my guest. I'm not going to care any more than if you feel like cutting off your finger, except to thing it's a completely dumb thing to do.
It really boils down to this: Get snipped when you're an infant and you never have a choice. Go natural, and you actually have a choice to make when you get mature enough to think for yourself.
Also, it is no secret that the foreskin is the most sensitive area of the body, and that the head is meant to be kept protected. It's quite logical that cutting off a part of the penis that contains thousands of nerve endings decreases sensitivity. The fact that pro-circumcision folk claim the opposite just makes me doubt their entire argument even more.
But like I said, if you're an adult who chooses to do this, I'm not going to stop you. If you come near my kids with cutting implements though, I will apply said implements on your person rather than allow you to amputate part of my child's anatomy!
..look at Margaret Thatcher.
I did, and one thing's for sure. With roughly half the population being male, she sure didn't get elected because she is a woman!
And thanks to conscientious tai chi and xing yi practice, I actually have more energy that I did twenty years ago (and the sense to use that energy responsibly).
Yes. With great power comes great responsibility.
Why are we all of a sudden talking about game graphics here? I'd imagine $50/hour is a lot for a 3D-designer. $90/$50 = 1.800.000 hours. I think I work about 1900-2000 hours a year, so that means $90 million buys you 900 work years of 3D design. Wait.. what was your argument again..?
As a result, the police have ceased taking Internet enforcement actions given the legal uncertainties, and the Attorney General has requested dismissal of current criminal cases against illegal portal and link sites.
If these sites aren't illegal in Spain, then who are these international idiots accusing Spain of allowing illegal activities (so to speak)? I might just be confused here, but the day an American cop arrests me and confiscates all my computer gear for doing something that is perfectly legal in Norway where I live but not in America is the day I loose all hope in humanity.
Unless my thinking is completely screwed up, I'd think the chance of finding a collision across say 5-6 completely different hash algorithms would be quite slim.
And yes, I know this isn't a practical way of storing files, and it probably never will be. It's possible in theory though, if you have a few different hash algorithms and the length of the original file and as such it will probably be done eventually. :P
Also, one pretty significant difference between the two is the cost of production. Terminator 2 cost about $90 million and is 137 minutes long. That's $647.482 per minute. A typical album might contain an hour of music or so and can (despite what the MPAA wants you to believe) be produced for next-to-nothing*.
Of course, I am not taking into account all the last millennium issues with distribution and publicity. I'm talking about the costs of actually making a movie or album
*By "next-to-nothing" I mean that cost of time in a studio and a good mixer/sound technician is low enough that even unknown, new bands can pool their money and pay to have an album recorded quite easily.
Finally! I thought I was the only one thinking about this! With enormous amounts of computing power (as quantum computing promises) one could easily store, say, a blu-ray movie by calculating and storing a few different hashes (MD5, SHA1, SHA2, etc.), then brute-force them until you have the original file back. Imagine that.. transmitting a 20GB HD movie in a single SMS. o.O
The problem is (as I explained one post further down) what the Telenor customers were paying for and how the ISP suddenly changed that. Imagine this scenario:
You lease a car and the contract says the car is completely at your disposal as long as it is returned in the same condition as when you got it, and anything law/insurance related is your problem.
Then, you get a letter from the company that leased you the car, saying your driving is logged and that you are only allowed to drive X miles a month. Anything in excess of that is automatically billed.
Now, that covers the semi-criminal stunt that lost Telenor so many customers. The main issue though is where I choose to put my hard earned money. If I can choose (as I could) between an Internet connection that is mine to use as I want at the speed I pay for, or one that is limited both in speed and data transfer (at pain of automatic billing and near-termination of service) .. well.. all else being roughly equal there is not a shadow of doubt as to who would get my money. Hence this being a completely idiotic move for a company.
So you would agree to a suggestion that buss fare should be calculated by weight and girth? Because, after all, a buss full of 150kg people will use more gas and experience more general wear on the vehicle than one with 60-80kg folk.
My point -should it be unclear- is that when I enter an agreement with my ISP I make damn sure that I am paying for the speed and uptime, not for a monthly allowance of data transfer! Same thing with the buss analogy. I pay for transportation from point A to point B at the legal speed limits (no matter how fat or skinny I might be), not for a given amount of kg transported.
Ok, so it might not be the worst idea ever, but if to use the buss you had the choice between buying:
Company A: A one-month season ticket
Company B: Rights to 500kg transport of human flesh, with automatic billing for any excess
Which company would you do your business with?
Worst. Idea. Ever. The Norwegian ISP Telenor tried this some years back (around 2003 me thinks). I lived at home at the time and thus did not have any say in the choice of ISP. Each month we were limited to 1GB of total data transferred at which point the speed was reduced to 64k, unless we chose to pay ~$20 for 5GB "packs" of data. My parents, who were paying the bills, refused to see the need to change ISP. Luckily, my mother was an avid surfer as was my sister, so within about two weeks my math was proved correct and the 1GB limit was reached through surfing alone. Believe it or not, this business move was rotten enough that even the average non-techie users fled Telenor in droves. Prior to this, Telenor was the biggest ISP by far as they (and all the phone lines) were government owned until they were privatized in 1995. A company that pulls this sort of moronic, money-grabbing stunt deserves to die horribly.
Quickly! Mod this comment into oblivion before RIAA/MPAA sees it!
I must say, I was intrigued by your question, but then I realized you were talking about computer mice.. =/
Part of me want to agree with you since you seem like a level-headed guy who just wants the right to believe whatever you want without being disrespected.
However, I feel this intense urge to understand, so I have to ask "Why?". I'm sorry, if you feel like believing in a spirit/soul/whatever there is nothing I can do to stop you, but.. why? It blows my mind! I can't possibly comprehend any reason for any sort of faith-based religious beliefs other than inability to face oblivion and the fact that life in itself doesn't have any "higher meaning".
If you reply, you will probably say something like "Why not?". As I said, I can't refuse you your delusions, but why do you insist on believing in something for which there is no need? 2000 years ago people needed a deity or two. Where does the Sun go at night and how do we know it will come back? Why are we here? Where do our loved ones go when they die? What is disease? Why did the crops fail this year? All these questions were answered by making up the best possible explanations the people back then could come up with.
Today, we have science. We know where the Sun goes at night, what germs and viruses are, how we got here and that apart from producing offspring and living a good life, there is no need for any mythical Reason for our existence. Are we still clinging to millennia old "explanations" instead of embracing science simply because it's a much more cushy pillow to lay our heads on at night?
I acknowledge that an unfailing belief in divine forgiveness and eternal afterlife in paradise with all your loved ones must be comforting. But again I must ask, Why? I enjoy life and treat the ones I care about well, all while knowing that when I die I will cease to exist and that my contribution to existence is so infinitely small and insignificant as to not matter at all (except to those who I share my life with). Why do you need your fairies and unicorns to be happy?
Or as George Carlin said (paraphrased): "Imagine how dumb the Average Joe is.. Now realize that half the world is even dumber!"
A few years back (found some old forum posts) I was in the same state of mind as you. I thought I could "live and let live" and ignore or even respect religious people as long as they didn't try to force their self-righteous, arrogant crap down my throat. Now.. not so much.
Religion is at best a waste of time, effort and brainpower. At worst, a horrible justification for murder en masse and the bane of proper education.
If I insist that your car is red when in fact it is blue, sure, I'm not hurting anyone. Am I being an idiot? Yeah, but a harmless one. One comes to a point, however, where one just gets fed up with the millions of people running around flailing their pallid "arguments" for why their fairytale is the Right One.
There is quite simply no reason for belief and faith and despite the genius setup that "The existence of %diety% cannot be proven or disproven", there are a myriad of reasons not to. Self contradictions, tons of 'em. The fact that any religious believer will vehemently and fervently argue that their brand of faith is the only one. Why? Because they know, the setup that "Gods existence can't be proven" kind of eliminates the possibility of any other "proof" (though this rarely stops anyone from claiming they communicate with, have seen or have been "touched by" God).
That last part should put why I now despise the very concept of religion even more into perspective. If I start acting strange and blame it on a voice in my head I will be admitted, treated and medicated as the lunatic I am. Unless, of course, the childhood brainwashing had taken hold and I claimed the voice was God, or Jesus, or any of His working staff. Something is seriously wrong with the world when 2000++ year old beliefs - created by Man to give life meaning and explain where the Sun goes at night - are allowed to make the distinction between "religious devout" and "stark raving mad"!
Of course organisms can "dial up or dial down their mutation rate". Rate of mutation, like any other property of the organism, has to be decided by the genetic makeup of the organism. At least it seems very illogical that some outside "rule" should decide something like mutation rate.
If a member of an organism is subject to a mutation that makes mutations in its offspring more likely (assuming a species where any fit individual has a lot of offspring), this might provide a huge benefit in, say, a rapidly changing environment.
'Stupidity is an often fatal disease' - R. A. Heinlein
..but by the current state of affairs, not nearly often enough.
Oh god, you made me want to play that game again! I think it was the first proper game I ever played, and I absolutely loved it! The shooting, the access cards, the keys, the grappling hook, robohand and super jump boots, the conveyor belts... I'm almost overdosing on nostalgia looking at some screenshots here. Now I know what I'll do when I get home, thanks! =D
That sure sounds like one hell of a skill! Imagine.. a warrior comes at you in a battleground, stuns you, rips your balls of and wields them as a weapon. The weapon, of course, does insane damage to you because of the physical and emotional trauma involved, but mostly just grosses anyone else out. x)