Due to a security update, you may have to reset your password. Don’t panic, nothing has gone wrong and your password is safe. If you don’t have access to that email, send Tube a message at [email protected] More info here: https://status.vanillaforums.com/incidents/2zdqxf3bt7mj
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

[Chat] you, George Lucas!

1424345474857

Posts

  • NerdgasmicNerdgasmic __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2010
    I think you would be okay, preacher

    I like your idea of temp banning people who reply to joke threads

    Nerdgasmic on
    @nealcm @faynor
    nerdgasmic.gif1420 6068 6113 - XBL Atomoclassic
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited September 2010
    Will, nobody here is claiming that groups don't tend to have genetic trends. The problem is that there are plenty of other, greater influences on what makes a person who they are, and automatically judging someone based on the color of their skin without taking into account any other factor is, in fact racist.

    If you meet a black person who is not exceptionally bright, you would be racist to assume it's because of a genetic marker present in all black people. Maybe their family wasn't involved in their education! Maybe school just didn't catch their interest! Maybe it was a crappy school! WHO KNOWS.

    well, i absolutely agree with this.

    in fact, this was my position from page 1.

    my position has always been that consideration of the possibility of cross-race genetic differences was not, in of itself, racist.

    whereas feral's position was that this was racist in the context of black people and IQ tests.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • AegisAegis Not Quite TorontoRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Nerdgasmic wrote: »
    I think you would be okay, preacher

    I like your idea of temp banning people who reply to joke threads

    Temp bans? Man, Preacher's growing soft!

    Aegis on
    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
  • GimGim a quietly erotic life Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'd make such a horrible mod.

    I wouldn't, not that anyone would believe me.

    Would you or would you not build a D&D basement of ultimate despair for the jailed?

    Gim on
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    No. Even dumber.
    Be careful about reading this.
    Last chance.
    Here we go...
    Bill's Spirit is brought to a tram by Gman. He's been observing Missster Overbeck and concluded he could be a great asset. Could be is the word, because he wasn't "cultivated" properly and, obviously, he's dead. A man with connections like Gman does not let potential simply pass, so he gives Bill a second chance for life. Not his own life, for that ship has sailed, but to be reborn in a new universe, where Gman can keep an eye on him and help his potential develop. Bill accepts.

    In a hospital in an alternate 1971, a boy is born to proud parents.
    They call the child Gordon.

    I'm so sorry.

    scanners.jpg

    Is that from the stupid or the awesome?
    It's probably the stupid

    Stupid awesome

    Good enough. Hi5!

    RMS Oceanic on
  • YamiNoSenshiYamiNoSenshi A point called Z In the complex planeRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Aegis wrote: »
    Aegis wrote: »
    Wait what? Jacobkosh is a mod now? How do I miss these things!

    You missed the election?

    There was an election?

    Did you not get your Democratic Republic Of Penny Arcade citizenship card in the mail?

    YamiNoSenshi on
    Damn it, it's fucking noon. I demand to know if Yami shit on a desk yet.

    Watch me sometimes stream games.
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Nerdgasmic wrote: »
    I think you would be okay, preacher

    I like your idea of temp banning people who reply to joke threads

    Thank you Nerd. I think my biggest issue would be having to mod threads I really wouldn't ever want to read. I mean I guess I could just lock them and pretend that they don't exist, but people like the NBA and Fringe.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Fartacus wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    what i was taking issue with in PIH's post was this old canard about the in-group variance being higher than the cross-group difference somehow trivializing the cross-group difference. it doesn't.

    I agree with you here, but it can be useful for a little perspective, especially if people are saying stuff like "broads shouldn't work construction."
    more to your point, though, what i was taking issue with was feral's contention that acknowledgment or even the consideration of a genetic cross-group difference (in the case of IQ test performance) was necessarily racist.

    I don't think that's the point he was making. I think he was making that point specifically when talking about black/white differences of IQ. Because in that instance, it is racist, because there's no reason to believe, conceptually or empirically, that such differences are genetic.

    IQ absolutely is hereditary to some extent. I think the average number given for that is somewhere around 60%?

    But there's no reason to believe, conceptually, that there would be a population-wide genetic basis for lower intelligence among blacks than whites, given that those categories are not genetically sound -- i.e. there's tremendous genetic variability within both of those groupings, because both of those groupings are based on some really vague ideas that have nothing to do with shared environments (be they social, ecological, climatological, or otherwise), genetics, or anything else. They're mostly defined by national ancestry, really; they're not really even based on phenotypic markers, as plenty of people are considered "Black" who are of majority European heritage.

    The point is, there's no conceptual framework by which it would even be plausible that such genetic differences between blacks and whites in IQ would arise, and there is no empirical evidence to believe otherwise, so raising the question is sort of racist. It's one of those "teach the controversy" moments where there really isn't any controversy
    .

    Fucking nailed it

    Arch on
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Points to 'off' Points to 'on'Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    japan wrote: »
    I need to get a cordless drill driver that isn't shit.

    One of the big 18V Hitachis would be nice.
    Corded are cheaper, and honestly, unless you're jumping around a roof or outside buildings without plugs, cordless really don't offer any pluses over corded. Plus they burn out quicker and don't offer the same power as corded.

    matt has a problem on
    nibXTE7.png
  • Samir Duran DuranSamir Duran Duran Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Zampanov wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    Well, I guess we won't chat for the next 70 mins or so...

    Nah. Just because I think that George Lucas sucks for fucking with his old movies and for making shitty new ones doesn't mean I want to watch some nerd agree with me for an hour.

    Those videos are actually pretty funny, and I haven't cared about the star wars movies in a while now.

    Samir Duran Duran on
    Ani121OD.pngSpr_3e_121.gifAni121OD.png
  • ElldrenElldren Is a woman dammit I'm a good person yes it's trueRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Also daxon, here you go!

    high-fiber diets showed a decrease in estrogen!

    So there is a specific extragenic compound that affects estrogen production.

    didn't he say that women on average produce proportionally higher levels of estrogen than men?

    what do second-order causes for induced estrogen throttling have to do with what he said?

    He did say that but nobody is contending that.

    He also said that non-genetic factors are magic and that is in contention.

    Elldren on
    fuck gendered marketing
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Gim wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'd make such a horrible mod.

    I wouldn't, not that anyone would believe me.

    Would you or would you not build a D&D basement of ultimate despair for the jailed?

    I don't even... I don't even know what this means.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Will, nobody here is claiming that groups don't tend to have genetic trends. The problem is that there are plenty of other, greater influences on what makes a person who they are, and automatically judging someone based on the color of their skin without taking into account any other factor is, in fact racist.

    If you meet a black person who is not exceptionally bright, you would be racist to assume it's because of a genetic marker present in all black people. Maybe their family wasn't involved in their education! Maybe school just didn't catch their interest! Maybe it was a crappy school! WHO KNOWS.

    well, i absolutely agree with this.

    in fact, this was my position from page 1.

    my position has always been that consideration of the possibility of cross-race genetic differences was not, in of itself, racist.

    whereas feral's position was that this was racist in the context of black people and IQ tests.

    Actually, it kind of is. Because then you have to scramble to explain those differences.

    I dare you to find a way to explain them that isn't A) racist and B) doesn't invoke social factors, which invalidates the first point.

    Arch on
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Thank you Farticus, for so eloquently saying what Feral and I have been trying to get at.

    See, this is why I think you're a good poster. You post smart things.

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • Silas BrownSilas Brown Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    I don't really like Pink Floyd.

    Silas Brown on
  • GimGim a quietly erotic life Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Preacher wrote: »
    Gim wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'd make such a horrible mod.

    I wouldn't, not that anyone would believe me.

    Would you or would you not build a D&D basement of ultimate despair for the jailed?

    I don't even... I don't even know what this means.

    If granted modhood, would you build such a thing?
    I was hoping no one would have responded to that post. I don't even really know what it means.

    Gim on
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    You're just saying that because I exploded your brain. :P

    RMS Oceanic on
  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    I don't really like Pink Floyd.

    well

    all in all

    you're just another brick in the wall

    Ludious on
  • ElldrenElldren Is a woman dammit I'm a good person yes it's trueRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Daxon wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Daxon wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Daxon, cigarette smoking (from perusing the literature) can decrease estrogen production in women. There are numerous studies on this easily accessible.

    If you believe that you can only downregulate estrogen production, welp I have a friend who needs you to give him his bank account number because he needs someone he can trust to hold some money for him.

    Uh.. I don't, in fact I haven't even said anything about what I believe affects oestrogen production. You're just making things up and saying I said them.

    On the other hand I'm going to hazard a guess it's essentially genetic as to why women have more oestrogen in their body than men.

    yes it is genetic that women have more estrogen because the primary site of estrogen production is the uterus.

    You asked for specific examples of ways that estrogen expression can be altered, I gave them, and while I don't disagree with the statement that women have more estrogen because of genetics is untrue.

    To say that the reason women are taller is solely genetic is completely fucking bogus, and you can't just cite "estrogen" as the sole mediator and determinant of height, as there are plenty of ways for both sexes to increase or decrease estrogen production.

    What I'm saying is this:

    A) Greatest factor affecting your oestrogen levels is sex. Being a woman = high, man = lower.

    B) Oestrogen is one of the (if not the) strongest factor affecting the fusion of the long bones (when they're fused, they no longer grow so early fusion = shorter, later fusion = longer).

    Ergo: women are generally shorter than men.

    How is this disagreeable to anyone?

    Sure there are other factors but being a woman is generally going to make you shorter than a man, given same nutritional status etc.

    that very last bit?

    That's an order of magnitude more important

    Elldren on
    fuck gendered marketing
  • amateurhouramateurhour One day I'll be professionalhour The woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Preach would be a good mod until another abortion/religion thread popped up.

    Then we'd see the dark side

    amateurhour on

    Arch wrote: »

    I never expected this burn from captain bushmeat
  • YamiNoSenshiYamiNoSenshi A point called Z In the complex planeRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Gim wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Gim wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    I'd make such a horrible mod.

    I wouldn't, not that anyone would believe me.

    Would you or would you not build a D&D basement of ultimate despair for the jailed?

    I don't even... I don't even know what this means.

    If granted modhood, would you build such a thing?
    I was hoping no one would have responded to that post. I don't even really know what it means.

    Preacher's Subforum of the Damned and Banned.

    YamiNoSenshi on
    Damn it, it's fucking noon. I demand to know if Yami shit on a desk yet.

    Watch me sometimes stream games.
  • DaxonDaxon Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Elldren wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    Also daxon, here you go!

    high-fiber diets showed a decrease in estrogen!

    So there is a specific extragenic compound that affects estrogen production.

    didn't he say that women on average produce proportionally higher levels of estrogen than men?

    what do second-order causes for induced estrogen throttling have to do with what he said?

    He did say that but nobody is contending that.

    He also said that non-genetic factors are magic and that is in contention.

    No, I said that it was stupid of you people to completely disregard genetics and replace it with your magic.

    That may have been unclear.

    @Arch: it's never racist to ask questions. Asking a question can't be racist, unless it implies a value statement like "why are Jews so terrible?"

    A question like "could it be that darker skinned people have lower/higher [characteristic] in comparison to lighter skinned people?" is not racist.

    edit: hmm, gonna qualify that. Second question is stupid as it doesn't specify a target population and "black" is really far too broad for any useful research so admittedly the second questio is dumb but it's not racist.

    Daxon on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    "We have found statistically significant data that shows that people of middle eastern descent are more inclined to perform successfully at math than people of west asian descent. Additionally, we have identified what we believe to be a genetic explanation for this trait."

    Okay, so now put that into evolutionary context and explain it without invoking social, nutritive, or environmental factors.

    Arch on
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Gim wrote: »
    If granted modhood, would you build such a thing?
    I was hoping no one would have responded to that post. I don't even really know what it means.

    Its ok Gim, I make posts like that all the time. In fact thats the majority of my posts.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • FartacusFartacus __BANNED USERS
    edited September 2010
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I didn't realize people actually still put any stock into IQ tests.

    They're actually pretty good at predicting certain things.

    Those things don't necessarily correlate to what people call "intelligence" in popular usage, nor do they necessarily correlate perfectly to material success or educational attainment (the classic example here being the "Termites").

    Still, it can be useful. Intelligence can't be equated to IQ, but intelligence is a stupidly broad concept, so who cares if you can't quantify it? It's not like it's rigorous or particularly useful anyway. I'd much rather track 6 or 12 or 20 different cognitive abilities that are distinct and quantifiable than jerk off some romantically humanistic notion that just because "intelligence" is a uselessly broad term, human cognitive ability can't be quantified.

    Fartacus on
  • GimGim a quietly erotic life Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Preacher's Subforum of the Damned and Banned.

    Exactly!

    Damn, that's a good name.

    Gim on
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Preach would be a good mod until another abortion/religion thread popped up.

    Then we'd see the dark side

    And by darkside you mean I'd finally get to pick off some annoying flies I've wanted to swat for a long time.

    PODLY!!!!!

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • EchoEcho Moderator mod
    edited September 2010
    If I were to suddenly be the forum admin (you know, five minutes before the Eternal Eclipse and the Return of the Ancient Elder-Gods), I'd rename Tube's Circus to the Echo Chamber.

    Echo on
    Echo wrote: »
    Let they who have not posted about their balls in the wrong thread cast the first stone.
  • Silas BrownSilas Brown Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Ludious wrote: »
    I don't really like Pink Floyd.

    well

    all in all

    you're just another brick in the wall

    That's the exact song that made me have that thought. This music makes me feel like what I imagine Irond Will feels like when he reads posts here.

    Silas Brown on
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Daxon wrote: »

    @Arch: it's never racist to ask questions. Asking a question can't be racist, unless it implies a value statement like "why are Jews so terrible?"

    A question like "could it be that darker skinned people have lower/higher [characteristic] in comparison to lighter skinned people?" is not racist.

    Alright, provide a framework for this trait to have arisen when it is not easily deduced from environmental effects (sickle cell, melanin production) without being racist.

    Arch on
  • amateurhouramateurhour One day I'll be professionalhour The woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    amateurhour on

    Arch wrote: »

    I never expected this burn from captain bushmeat
  • Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator mod
    edited September 2010
    Feral wrote: »
    I didn't make that contention.

    Not that me pointing this out for the umpteenth time is going to stop you from attributing to me ideas that I don't actually espouse.

    this was the post i had contentions with:
    Feral wrote: »
    One of the key notions in feminism, or in power politics in general, is to understand that two statements can both be strictly factually true, but be effectively misogynist in a specific context (even if the speaker doesn't mean it to be).

    Consider the following two statements.
    1) Black people are more likely to suffer from folliculitis (skin irritation from shaving) than white people.
    2) Black people score lower on IQ tests on average than white people.

    Both of these are factually true statements. And in a certain context, (2) may be racist, or it may not be. If we were discussing, for instance, socioeconomic factors that reduce availability of education to black people, or social bias in IQ tests, (2) is not necessarily racist. But if we were discussing genetic differences between black people and white people, and somebody mentioned (2) as evidence of genetic inferiority, then (2) is racist.

    Most of the time, though, it's something in between. Largely because individuals tend to be very bad at analyzing and understanding the sources of their own opinions. I'm not talking about critical thinking - this is different from critical thinking. This is more like introspection. Not "is this idea true," but "where did I first learn this idea, and why does it stick out in my memory, and why does it feel important?"

    If we were talking about affirmative action, for example, then two people could both be stating idea (2) but one be less racist than the other strictly from context and emphasis and implication.

    So most schisms between feminists and non-feminists ends up with both sides stating things that are factually empirically true, but one side who believes that once they've established the truth content of a statement their job is done, versus another side who believes that the truth content of a statement is only half of a discussion - the other half comes from the emphasis you put upon the statement in that particular context.

    your contention, above, was that explanation of cross-race IQ test performance could legitimately revolve around socioeconomic available of education or test bias. but explanations revolving around possible genetic differences as potential causes is racist.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Hmm 23 page pictorial on burlesque video game characters. Tasteful.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Part of me wants to say someone like Bob or Cass would be good mods

    but at the same time maybe they should diminish, go into the west, and remain Galadriel.

    Ludious on
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    I dare you to find a way to explain them that isn't A) racist and B) doesn't invoke social factors, which invalidates the first point.

    Well see I think Will can do that, because he's actually a reasonable guy.

    But this is why Feral and i have such a kneejerk response, because it's pretty much always brought up in the context of "Well I'm just saying....(that black people are stupid)" without any consideration of the hundreds of other historical and societal factors or outliers that lead certain populations to be a certain way. Maybe genetics is a factor, but it is by no means the only one, or even a particularly influential one.

    It's almost like there's a sort of hideous glee under the surface, waiting to finally pop out and scream 'HAH TOLD YOU SO ABOUT ALL THOSE DARKIES."

    Note: I am not saying Will is like this in any way. He is just so intellectually honest he gets caught up it nitpicking other people's opinions.

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    japan wrote: »
    I need to get a cordless drill driver that isn't shit.

    One of the big 18V Hitachis would be nice.
    Corded are cheaper, and honestly, unless you're jumping around a roof or outside buildings without plugs, cordless really don't offer any pluses over corded. Plus they burn out quicker and don't offer the same power as corded.

    I have a great bg corded Bosch power drill for when I really need to put big holes in something difficult.

    It would just be nice to have a decent cordless as well, I've got used to using the one I have but it is really terrible (it's an unbranded catalogue special), it takes ages to charge, spare batteries are unobtainable, and I think I've bent the motor spindle using it with a 25mm holesaw.

    Hitachi for some reason seem compelled to wrap all their power tools in bright green rubber.

    japan on
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Echo wrote: »
    If I were to suddenly be the forum admin (you know, five minutes before the Eternal Eclipse and the Return of the Ancient Elder-Gods), I'd rename Tube's Circus to the Echo Chamber.

    If only you understood humor to know how funny that would be.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    I guess my point is that, as someone who is intensely concerned with evolution, and whose driving question is "how did this trait arise?", I can't seem to come up with any sort of logical reason that, say, a woman, or an asian would do better or worse at something like math without invoking some sort of outside influence that precludes a genetic explanation.

    Arch on
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Ludious wrote: »
    Part of me wants to say someone like Bob or Cass would be good mods

    but at the same time maybe they should diminish, go into the west, and remain Galadriel.

    Female mods don't really work, nothing against the posters, its the people they are moderating that become an issue.

    Like having a guard at a male jail be a chick, its not a good idea.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD along with you if I get drunk well I know I'm gonna be gonna be the man whoRegistered User regular
    edited September 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Feral wrote: »
    I didn't make that contention.

    Not that me pointing this out for the umpteenth time is going to stop you from attributing to me ideas that I don't actually espouse.

    this was the post i had contentions with:
    Feral wrote: »
    One of the key notions in feminism, or in power politics in general, is to understand that two statements can both be strictly factually true, but be effectively misogynist in a specific context (even if the speaker doesn't mean it to be).

    Consider the following two statements.
    1) Black people are more likely to suffer from folliculitis (skin irritation from shaving) than white people.
    2) Black people score lower on IQ tests on average than white people.

    Both of these are factually true statements. And in a certain context, (2) may be racist, or it may not be. If we were discussing, for instance, socioeconomic factors that reduce availability of education to black people, or social bias in IQ tests, (2) is not necessarily racist. But if we were discussing genetic differences between black people and white people, and somebody mentioned (2) as evidence of genetic inferiority, then (2) is racist.

    Most of the time, though, it's something in between. Largely because individuals tend to be very bad at analyzing and understanding the sources of their own opinions. I'm not talking about critical thinking - this is different from critical thinking. This is more like introspection. Not "is this idea true," but "where did I first learn this idea, and why does it stick out in my memory, and why does it feel important?"

    If we were talking about affirmative action, for example, then two people could both be stating idea (2) but one be less racist than the other strictly from context and emphasis and implication.

    So most schisms between feminists and non-feminists ends up with both sides stating things that are factually empirically true, but one side who believes that once they've established the truth content of a statement their job is done, versus another side who believes that the truth content of a statement is only half of a discussion - the other half comes from the emphasis you put upon the statement in that particular context.

    your contention, above, was that explanation of cross-race IQ test performance could legitimately revolve around socioeconomic available of education or test bias. but explanations revolving around possible genetic differences as potential causes is racist.

    Please bold where I used the words "explanation" or "possible" or "potential" in my post.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
This discussion has been closed.