Did you read what he said? No wait, did you read what YOU just said?
Leaking radiation is obviously not a part of background radiation. Therefore there is absolutely no conflict with that statement - leaking radiation can be less than background radiation.
Actually we know that it has no consequences, because we observe people, today, living in envirnments far more radioactive than those around Fukushima in amounts of millions. Take Mexico City for example. It's background radiation is far greater because it's situated so high. Yet there are no visible spikes in things normally associated with radiation, such as cancer.
Let me repeat that: we KNOW that small increases in radiation exposure has no effect on health because we have millions upon millions living in such environments. Anyone arguing against this would be arguing against reality. Which is why no one except idiots talks about linear no threshold model.
His point stands. Tsunami was the single biggest disaster to hit Japan in a long time. We're looking at millions displaced, over 30.000 dead, hundreds of thousands wounded, massive economic and infrastructure damage.
Fukushima gets a lot of publicity because "nuclear is scary" for average people, but the amount of fear in comparison to actual threat is incredibly inflated. And on the other hand, amount of fear for natural disasters, that are several orders of magnitude more dangerous is "meh, not so scary, don't care".
Tsunami got a whole lot less publicity than Fukushima did. Compare the damage those two events did. Fukushima is going to have to do something pretty damn huge in comparison to what it's doing now to become more than a small slice in the huge chart when comparing it to tsunami that caused it.
We just had another disaster in the Philippines. It crippled most of the country. I'll bet you 100:1 that no one will remember it in just a few months. Yet we'll still be talking about Fukushima. At the same time, consequences of that disaster, just like (other) consequences of the tsunami in Japan are still huge.
That's the big problem. Media blows things completely out of proportions because scaring people with word "nuclear" and "radiation" sells. Scaring people with word "tsunami" or "storm", not so much. It's a matter of proportionality, and it's completely out of whack in modern society. We are taught to fear largely inconsequential things, while largely ignoring huge threats.
It makes sense because it's part of basic infrastructure, that enables other services and businesses to function more efficiently.
You don't need to pull profits from basic infrastructure, if you can instead collect taxes from companies attracted by superior infrastructure that enables them to do business much more efficiently, and often do business where it would be otherwise impossible to do. It's called "synergy" - infrastructure enables more business, and pays for itself with taxes collected from them.
I was trying to say that it is in fact possible to match a decaying orbit to rotation speed of upper levels of atmosphere so that upon contact the object will not have a significant speed differential and will survive re-entry intact. Such an orbit is quite possible. Such an orbit would have to be near-geostationary at the point of entry, meaning it would have to be slower at higher height.
Geosynchronous, and especially geostationary orbit exists. So while you're correct, there's nothing to stop us from putting an object into decaying orbit where atmospheric impact will not cause significant enough friction to burn it out.
No, unless you significantly alter its speed. ISS orbit slowly decays, but if it were to ever really hit the atmosphere at the speed it's traveling, it would burn out fast. This is intentional to ensure that most stuff we launch into orbit never makes it back as a kinetic projectile.
I like how in almost every post you seem to: 1. Admit to something. 2. Deny you admitted to something else in your previous post. 3. Argue that claiming "production does not equal profit" is anything from "illogical" to "nitpicking". 4. Make a personal attack against me, ranging from calling me a troll to asking what's wrong with me. 5. Promise to "stop feeding the troll".
To answer your question: I'm just tired of apologists who like to pretend that all taxes are bad because they believe in it. And they will use any doublethink necessary to argue so. So I like to shove their faces into the absurdity of their doublethink in hopes of eventually getting their own bullshit meters to tilt enough to see through their own doublethink. I call it a good deed of the day.
WvW was never a competitive environment. It was a place to zerg for gold, karma and EXP. I was a part of a guild that had very active WvW group for a while, and we did manage to turn quite a few battles around with surgical strikes at certain sites in game, in the end, the mode was mostly about zerging and it was the zerg, not us determining the victory. If our zerg sucked or was too small, it didn't matter if we were awesome or sucked.
There is deflation of real money currency and inflation of in game currency, because there are less and less players willing to pay for the real money currency, and more and more botters grinding in game currency.
And really, no. Unless by relaxing you mean botting the game. Because a lot of people ended up doing just that. Put their character up with an AoE macro on a known event boss spawn spot with many others and just leave the game farming your exp, gold and karma. There was a lot of that within days of release, which says a lot about the monotony of the gameplay.
Interesting. I was playing since the start, and I remember seeing first half assed AoE event botters when I hit level 10 just a couple of days after release. And there was a LOT of them withing just days after that. Because leveling in PvE, once you got your basic "priority order" was incredibly boring. Hell I played an elementalist just to make it at least challenging. With warrior, it was literally charge in, activate hundred blades, run to the next mob, charge in, activate hundred blades... So people just botted everything. I still remember coming back to the undead 80 zone on my second character, only to see that a good half of the zone was event AoE botters.
I did appreciate the art, and it kept me playing long enough to get two characters to lvl80 just because I loved the views. I leveled by going in opposite directions (first character to the south, second to the north). The rest of the game was incredibly grindy and mediocre, except for combat system which was just bad because everything was about AoE and spamming hundred blades.
Unfortunately they didn't see it that way in GW2. Hence the entire problem with massive grind and pay to win selling in game currency that can buy essentially everything including the legendaries for real money.
They chose to monetize all of the progression, which brought in game currency inflation to hilarious heights as everyone and their grandmother has to bot for gold if they're not grinding materials required for legendary.
I have bad news for you. All commercial games' main point is to get as much money as possible.
It's just that GW2 goes it in exceptionally user-hostile way of pure pay to win by selling you in game money for real money, and allowing in game money to buy the best, most rare gear in the game (legendaries).
Oh, you can grind it perfectly fine. All you need to do is find the zerg, pretend they're NPCs and sit next to them occasionally throwing in AoE to tag necessary stuff. Congratulations, you now know why botting is rampant in GW2 WvW. It makes no sense not to bot it. It's good income of gold and karma and actions of individual players and most squads are largely pointless in the large scheme of things. So just relax, turn on your favorite botting software and go do something fun while it grinds karma and gold for you for months.
In fact, that describes the entire game very well. The best way to get value out of GW2 is to simply treat everyone in the game as NPCs, including other players. The game is built on the assumption that you will do so by making communication all but pointless. The appropriate solution to most problems is to just zerg objectives with "N"PC zerg.
And of course, there's the whole pay to win aspect of the game, as you can effectively everything including the legendaries in the game by simply paying money to arenanet.
He's talking about GW2 world vs world mode. He's also either ignorant or lying about its mechanics, as scaling in that game only scales your level and base health, and in that game vast majority of stats at maximum level come from gear that requires maximum level and is massively more powerful than even gear that requires one level less than max, much less the crappy starter gear.
A decent player in exotic lvl80 gear can easily take many low level scaled up people and never break a sweat.
GW2 grind is souldcrushingly long and tedious, as the game not only has far more grind than WoW ever it, it does the grind in a massively boring way, just like GW1 did. You just repeat the same small subset of actions in the same place all over and over and over and over again. I absolutely love their art, which is by far the best in the industry, but gameplay was remarkably boring after a few hours with very little depth and grind was just soul crushing. And I say this as someone who played GW1 for years, where best form of farm was running two instances with a solo build that could be (and widely was) botted.
WoW felt like a game of LoL in terms of speed of character progression in comparison to GW2.
As for WvW, you either don't understand how it works and bought arenanet's lie about scaling, or are intentionally misrepresenting the facts. Sure, you get boosted to maximum level but without gear, you're a useless dead weight. It gives you levels but without all the stats that come from level-specific gear, meaning one properly geared lvl80 can easily drop 5-7 scaled up low level guys and not break a sweat in the process. Done that myself several times on a warrior and elementalist before quitting the game.
Imho if you want to get into GW2, stick to PvE, go through the storyline once and quit. Because once you have done so, you enjoyed all the enjoyable content that game has to offer. Rest is simply about monetizing the wealthy min-maxers who can't be bothered to grind for months of redoing same easy instances for gear tokens, AoE bot the events for karma or botting gold.
I love you how spin and spin, and it still ends up at the starting line - that your logic is utterly absurd. You're simply incapable of understanding that taxation is not a bad thing, and that profit does not equal production, any more that profit does not equal "economic production" (listing a specific subset isn't going to change the whole).
Sorry, but pointing out your obvious doublethink that you're trying to pass as logic is not trolling. It's stating a fact. It's a shame you're apparently utterly incapable of seeing it.
I'll just restate the facts one more time:
Taxation on profit does not equal taxation on production.
Excellent. Let's continue to apply your logic to both statements to see if we can find a sizable difference: Not "all human action" results in death. In fact the vast majority of human action does not result in death. Not all production results in profit - correct. In fact the vast majority of production does not result in profit - also correct.
I'm sorry, you'll have to continue trying to twist the logic to break the obvious similarity. So far, your every attempt appears to match up perfectly between the two, because both are equally illogical and absurd.
Hmm. I was under impression that the issue was that modders had no access to some drivers, causing loss of functionality as they basically had to code a substitute that wouldn't perform as well as the original.
And death is the result of human actions. Above comparison applies directly, showing the absurdity of claiming that something being result of something else is the same as something being something else.
Slashdot Mirror
So it's better if police spray and pray in the streets?
Did you read what he said? No wait, did you read what YOU just said?
Leaking radiation is obviously not a part of background radiation. Therefore there is absolutely no conflict with that statement - leaking radiation can be less than background radiation.
Actually we know that it has no consequences, because we observe people, today, living in envirnments far more radioactive than those around Fukushima in amounts of millions. Take Mexico City for example. It's background radiation is far greater because it's situated so high. Yet there are no visible spikes in things normally associated with radiation, such as cancer.
Let me repeat that: we KNOW that small increases in radiation exposure has no effect on health because we have millions upon millions living in such environments. Anyone arguing against this would be arguing against reality. Which is why no one except idiots talks about linear no threshold model.
His point stands. Tsunami was the single biggest disaster to hit Japan in a long time. We're looking at millions displaced, over 30.000 dead, hundreds of thousands wounded, massive economic and infrastructure damage.
Fukushima gets a lot of publicity because "nuclear is scary" for average people, but the amount of fear in comparison to actual threat is incredibly inflated. And on the other hand, amount of fear for natural disasters, that are several orders of magnitude more dangerous is "meh, not so scary, don't care".
Tsunami got a whole lot less publicity than Fukushima did. Compare the damage those two events did. Fukushima is going to have to do something pretty damn huge in comparison to what it's doing now to become more than a small slice in the huge chart when comparing it to tsunami that caused it.
We just had another disaster in the Philippines. It crippled most of the country. I'll bet you 100:1 that no one will remember it in just a few months. Yet we'll still be talking about Fukushima. At the same time, consequences of that disaster, just like (other) consequences of the tsunami in Japan are still huge.
That's the big problem. Media blows things completely out of proportions because scaring people with word "nuclear" and "radiation" sells. Scaring people with word "tsunami" or "storm", not so much. It's a matter of proportionality, and it's completely out of whack in modern society. We are taught to fear largely inconsequential things, while largely ignoring huge threats.
It makes sense because it's part of basic infrastructure, that enables other services and businesses to function more efficiently.
You don't need to pull profits from basic infrastructure, if you can instead collect taxes from companies attracted by superior infrastructure that enables them to do business much more efficiently, and often do business where it would be otherwise impossible to do. It's called "synergy" - infrastructure enables more business, and pays for itself with taxes collected from them.
This is not my day in expressing what I mean.
I was trying to say that it is in fact possible to match a decaying orbit to rotation speed of upper levels of atmosphere so that upon contact the object will not have a significant speed differential and will survive re-entry intact. Such an orbit is quite possible. Such an orbit would have to be near-geostationary at the point of entry, meaning it would have to be slower at higher height.
I was talking about orbits in general, not ISS in particular. Hence "most stuff we launch into orbit".
Geosynchronous, and especially geostationary orbit exists. So while you're correct, there's nothing to stop us from putting an object into decaying orbit where atmospheric impact will not cause significant enough friction to burn it out.
We just choose not to.
No, unless you significantly alter its speed. ISS orbit slowly decays, but if it were to ever really hit the atmosphere at the speed it's traveling, it would burn out fast. This is intentional to ensure that most stuff we launch into orbit never makes it back as a kinetic projectile.
Consider the symbolism. From Ancient Greece to the orbit, we've come a long way as species.
I like how in almost every post you seem to:
1. Admit to something.
2. Deny you admitted to something else in your previous post.
3. Argue that claiming "production does not equal profit" is anything from "illogical" to "nitpicking".
4. Make a personal attack against me, ranging from calling me a troll to asking what's wrong with me.
5. Promise to "stop feeding the troll".
To answer your question: I'm just tired of apologists who like to pretend that all taxes are bad because they believe in it. And they will use any doublethink necessary to argue so. So I like to shove their faces into the absurdity of their doublethink in hopes of eventually getting their own bullshit meters to tilt enough to see through their own doublethink. I call it a good deed of the day.
WvW was never a competitive environment. It was a place to zerg for gold, karma and EXP. I was a part of a guild that had very active WvW group for a while, and we did manage to turn quite a few battles around with surgical strikes at certain sites in game, in the end, the mode was mostly about zerging and it was the zerg, not us determining the victory. If our zerg sucked or was too small, it didn't matter if we were awesome or sucked.
There is deflation of real money currency and inflation of in game currency, because there are less and less players willing to pay for the real money currency, and more and more botters grinding in game currency.
And really, no. Unless by relaxing you mean botting the game. Because a lot of people ended up doing just that. Put their character up with an AoE macro on a known event boss spawn spot with many others and just leave the game farming your exp, gold and karma. There was a lot of that within days of release, which says a lot about the monotony of the gameplay.
Interesting. I was playing since the start, and I remember seeing first half assed AoE event botters when I hit level 10 just a couple of days after release. And there was a LOT of them withing just days after that. Because leveling in PvE, once you got your basic "priority order" was incredibly boring. Hell I played an elementalist just to make it at least challenging. With warrior, it was literally charge in, activate hundred blades, run to the next mob, charge in, activate hundred blades...
So people just botted everything. I still remember coming back to the undead 80 zone on my second character, only to see that a good half of the zone was event AoE botters.
I did appreciate the art, and it kept me playing long enough to get two characters to lvl80 just because I loved the views. I leveled by going in opposite directions (first character to the south, second to the north). The rest of the game was incredibly grindy and mediocre, except for combat system which was just bad because everything was about AoE and spamming hundred blades.
Unfortunately they didn't see it that way in GW2. Hence the entire problem with massive grind and pay to win selling in game currency that can buy essentially everything including the legendaries for real money.
They chose to monetize all of the progression, which brought in game currency inflation to hilarious heights as everyone and their grandmother has to bot for gold if they're not grinding materials required for legendary.
I have bad news for you. All commercial games' main point is to get as much money as possible.
It's just that GW2 goes it in exceptionally user-hostile way of pure pay to win by selling you in game money for real money, and allowing in game money to buy the best, most rare gear in the game (legendaries).
Should be "effectively buy everything" in the end. I'm sleepy...
Oh, you can grind it perfectly fine. All you need to do is find the zerg, pretend they're NPCs and sit next to them occasionally throwing in AoE to tag necessary stuff. Congratulations, you now know why botting is rampant in GW2 WvW. It makes no sense not to bot it. It's good income of gold and karma and actions of individual players and most squads are largely pointless in the large scheme of things. So just relax, turn on your favorite botting software and go do something fun while it grinds karma and gold for you for months.
In fact, that describes the entire game very well. The best way to get value out of GW2 is to simply treat everyone in the game as NPCs, including other players. The game is built on the assumption that you will do so by making communication all but pointless. The appropriate solution to most problems is to just zerg objectives with "N"PC zerg.
And of course, there's the whole pay to win aspect of the game, as you can effectively everything including the legendaries in the game by simply paying money to arenanet.
So in other words, you admit you're wrong, but since you don't want to admit you're wrong, you don't actually admit you're wrong.
You doublethinkers are confusing. But nope, we're still talking about the exact same post of yours: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4409259&cid=45331133
He's talking about GW2 world vs world mode. He's also either ignorant or lying about its mechanics, as scaling in that game only scales your level and base health, and in that game vast majority of stats at maximum level come from gear that requires maximum level and is massively more powerful than even gear that requires one level less than max, much less the crappy starter gear.
A decent player in exotic lvl80 gear can easily take many low level scaled up people and never break a sweat.
GW2 grind is souldcrushingly long and tedious, as the game not only has far more grind than WoW ever it, it does the grind in a massively boring way, just like GW1 did. You just repeat the same small subset of actions in the same place all over and over and over and over again. I absolutely love their art, which is by far the best in the industry, but gameplay was remarkably boring after a few hours with very little depth and grind was just soul crushing. And I say this as someone who played GW1 for years, where best form of farm was running two instances with a solo build that could be (and widely was) botted.
WoW felt like a game of LoL in terms of speed of character progression in comparison to GW2.
As for WvW, you either don't understand how it works and bought arenanet's lie about scaling, or are intentionally misrepresenting the facts. Sure, you get boosted to maximum level but without gear, you're a useless dead weight. It gives you levels but without all the stats that come from level-specific gear, meaning one properly geared lvl80 can easily drop 5-7 scaled up low level guys and not break a sweat in the process. Done that myself several times on a warrior and elementalist before quitting the game.
Imho if you want to get into GW2, stick to PvE, go through the storyline once and quit. Because once you have done so, you enjoyed all the enjoyable content that game has to offer. Rest is simply about monetizing the wealthy min-maxers who can't be bothered to grind for months of redoing same easy instances for gear tokens, AoE bot the events for karma or botting gold.
I love you how spin and spin, and it still ends up at the starting line - that your logic is utterly absurd. You're simply incapable of understanding that taxation is not a bad thing, and that profit does not equal production, any more that profit does not equal "economic production" (listing a specific subset isn't going to change the whole).
Sorry, but pointing out your obvious doublethink that you're trying to pass as logic is not trolling. It's stating a fact. It's a shame you're apparently utterly incapable of seeing it.
I'll just restate the facts one more time:
Taxation on profit does not equal taxation on production.
Excellent. Let's continue to apply your logic to both statements to see if we can find a sizable difference:
Not "all human action" results in death. In fact the vast majority of human action does not result in death.
Not all production results in profit - correct. In fact the vast majority of production does not result in profit - also correct.
I'm sorry, you'll have to continue trying to twist the logic to break the obvious similarity. So far, your every attempt appears to match up perfectly between the two, because both are equally illogical and absurd.
Hmm. I was under impression that the issue was that modders had no access to some drivers, causing loss of functionality as they basically had to code a substitute that wouldn't perform as well as the original.
Good to know. I should look at it again.
And death is the result of human actions. Above comparison applies directly, showing the absurdity of claiming that something being result of something else is the same as something being something else.