Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

If everybody's so stupid and they think you're so smart, which is it?

At 10/26/13 06:55 PM, Insanctuary wrote: Do beautiful things poop like ugly things, or break like ugly things or appear ugly to others? Then what is ugly? The same argument applies to in the sense that it contradicts itself in theory.

What the fuck are you talking about? I'll go ahead and assume that your third sentence refers to your first, which isn't really an argument but a realization that beauty is not intransigent.

Feelings are not real in the sense our computer is real, or the planet is real, they are values or distinctions that use a dispositional law of "positive" and "negative" in the same manner as the planet as electrons, neutrons and protons. So when we see "beauty" and "ugly", this is the result created by a relationship between our physiological system of electro-magnetic impulses, aggregated information being stored into us under pseudo-identity and pseudo-ownership (we do not own our ideas, don't be a fool, but nonetheless we are individuals because of it), and finally the intrinsic properties of nature in all of its dualistic glory.

Beauty as a result of the intrinsic properties of nature in all of its (presumably nature and not beauty or psuedo-identity or psuedo-ownership or aggregated information or any of the other nouns your 'its' can refer to) dualistic [sic] glory? So you're saying that there is inherently beauty provided the observer has self-identity, there is a duplicity to that beauty (eg: sometimes that thing is beautiful and sometimes it isn't) and somehow planets, electrons, neutrons, and protons are involved? This is a bizarre explanation for something people probably could agree with otherwise. Your main analogy is completely glossed over by the fact that protons, neutrons, and electrons don't work the way that you imply (that they are merely a state that can be changed back and forth). There is a complex system at work, loosely built on chaos, but very difficult to break or change without tremendous effort or energy. Beauty isn't really the same as that: it can take subjective amounts of energy to change the beauty of a thing, because as a concept rooted in subjectivity it is much easier to make the change. With sub-atomic particles, that is an order arisen from chaos, but with beauty, that is a chaos arisen from order (beauty/not --> perception vs. particle soup --> atoms).

This is why when you are blind, you still can "see" beauty. This is why when you are a vegetable, your mind still can take you on a nightmarish ride beneath the consciousness. The consciousness is the cherry ontop, all the action is underneath it all. Therefore distinctions like "beauty" and "ugly" do not exist as a thing, but as a result caused by things that do exist.

Well... weird way to come around to this conclusion, but I guess if I'm being Machiavellian about it: yea I think you're right.

Yea, but society's even cooler. Hunting's almost the same, except it's been repaced by a series of bureaucracies you need to navigate and subtle social cues you must conquer to come out on top with the most paper.

Eat something actually spicy. Most tastes like that are so-called 'acquired' tastes, which is to say, the more you have of something, the easier it is to continue having it and the more appealing you find the flavor.

The best thing to start with is probably wasabi. I say that because the pain of wasabi is fleeting, and years of exposure is probably what began me on my spicy journey. Although what really kicked it into high-gear is having a Mexican (ex) girlfriend followed by an Indian (current) girlfriend.

So yea, it's basically like training for anything else. Start small and work your way up.

Do you offer competitive benefits? I'm very happy with my current position, so I'll need some significant bonuses to know that you're serious about attracting my top-level talent. A perusal of my resume and contacting my references will confirm any questions you have, although at this point my name should be pretty well-known in the industry.

Go to Start > All Programs > Accessories > Ease of Access > On-Screen Keyboard (Windows 7). Then press the caps-lock button on the keyboard. Broken keyboards are cheap to replace though, you should probably also buy a new one.

Just dropping in to point out that women aren't objects with expiration dates. They don't even keep the skin lining their uterine walls longer than 4 weeks at a time, much less remnants of prior sexual interactions. And if you truly believe that they do, it isn't much of a stretch to call you a disgusting freak for the way your entire body protruded from your mother's vaginal orifice at birth.

^List of noobs.

Keepin' Captain Bob's tradition alive

At 9/16/13 11:09 PM, angrybirds2000 wrote: My system restore isn't working, it goes through normally but when my PC starts back up it gives me an error that it can't find a file or something like that with a weird combination of numbers and letters. I've already tried doing it in safe mode. Help? Is this normal especially if you didn't have internet access for a couple of days?

You're trying to restore to what point on your system? Do you have a backup disk available or are you talking about the repair utilities that you can run when your machine won't boot?

In any case, without the error code that your machine is giving you and the other specifics of your situation (OS, hardware, etc.) it's difficult to make a diagnosis. If you can find that you can post it here or google it and take those troubleshooting steps.

DDR2 RAM is comparitively expensive to replace vs. DDR3. I wouldn't do it if you need reliable uptime with zero resources, but if you're just fucking around and wanna toss VMs, different OSes, etc. on it then by all means.

What generation of PowerEdge? II, III?

I guess I'd have to go by my first name, although I would rather just my last, which is five letters. Which would be the only thing I would ever consider changing my name here too. We'll see.

(Evan)

Here's a real Pro-tip: it's just that one girl that did not want that one compliment you gave her. She probably thought you came off weird, or she misheard you, or she was just in a bad mood because she's a thinking, feeling person and it doesn't have to make sense to you why she does the things she does.

Several things:
- Why do you want to be with a girl who you think has terrible taste in men? It'll just reaffirm your beliefs and be disappointing.
- She's your coworker. If she's REALLY cool about shit, maybe you will be a brief, physical rebound during her single phase and it won't affect your friendship or work relationship.
- Earfetish's advice FTW. Be less attached to the outcome of the situation and it won't come off so weird. Nobody understands the 'I really want you but I'm scared' thing... it's like being presented with a delicious, juicy hamburger that you keep staring at while yelling, "BOY I'M SO HUNGRY I COULD GO FOR A HAMBURGER RIGHT NOW!" But you don't eat the hamburger.

Last night's game was so action-packed. Tukka was just unreal... I don't know how he stopped some of those shots in the third period.

Anyway, I want the Kings to win the west because I want Kings v. Bruins. No more exciting series matchup than the 2011 champs vs. the 2012 champs.

At 4/11/13 08:24 PM, mandog wrote:

At 4/11/13 08:23 PM, EJR wrote:

At 4/11/13 08:20 PM, Timmy wrote:

At 4/11/13 08:04 PM, mandog wrote: Go crazy, ban people for the littlest reasons, until I get demoted.

Pretty much this.

I've been doing that since I got modded and it still isn't working.

Any tips?

Pretend to get hacked by the duck division.

Man, I tried that but they still remodded me a couple months later.

If I buy BattleBlock Theatre on XBL, how will I get Tom to autograph the cover of the game's case next time I see him?

Define 'open'. Like, anybody can attend? Unabashedly gay? Free alcohol? All of the above?

If even one of those is true, I'm in. Past years have been more difficult, but this year is completely doable (provided you've made it a weekend-centric thing).

Technically, mine is an amalgamated collaboration of several things I've pixelized over the years. And it was originally designed for an older version of Newgrounds (actually, that was my userpage banner), so it doesn't look as good as it used to.

So... years?

If you can be really strict/regimented about your workout routine (ie: gym EVERY DAY no exceptions) and still get your rest in... do the 'GOMAD' challenge. GOMAD stands for Gallon of Milk a Day. Pretty self-explanatory. Must be whole milk to get the biggest muscle gains.

http://www.newgrounds.com/dump/item/284dc28209bd382e10089268 597b2dad

It's a picture I took of Boston's skyline from the shore near my parents house (roughly 30 miles distance from Boston). With my iPhone.

At 2/20/13 06:51 PM, naronic wrote: Not really, it's just that you accept it to be true.
You can't know anything to be true for sure.

Not a convincing argument for an unsupported notion that there is 'only my mind' and nothing else.

All your experiences, all you know is second hand, and you don't know where that hand is coming from.

You don't know what my experiences are. Remember, according to this theory you find bulletproof you are only observing my behavior and it isn't even proof that there's a mind behind it. I don't buy it: I've actually experienced things and so have you.

You can accept the link as sufficient evidence but skepticism still stands.

Yea, but thanks to scientific method and citations, if I were so inclined I could actually refer to the original study's method in order to verify the authenticity of their claim independently. That's the point. Whereas, the skeptical argument relies entirely on me buying what it's selling: I don't.

Who?

Basically: if automata are created to imprison you, why couldn't wouldn't the rest of your experience be fake, too? The 'problem of other minds' doesn't persuade me that other minds don't exist, it suggests that 'behavior is not indicative of a mind'. So why does your behavior (including your feelings) make YOU a mind? The thought experiment presupposes the existence of a mind as a means to argue against the existence of a mind. Can't have it both ways.

Sekhem's link pretty much fucked that solipsistic shit up. The solipsism article is all, "no citations here." and embodied cognition is all, "here're decades of studies."

At 2/18/13 06:15 PM, wpsisafag wrote:

At 2/18/13 06:14 PM, Nae wrote:

At 2/18/13 05:45 PM, wpsisafag wrote: jesus christ fucking kill yourself

I dunno... that might ruin his chances more than making this thread did.

doubt it

You'd be surprised at the amount of dead moderators we have keeping this place clean of debris.

I hate burbling as much as the next guy, but when you're in huge lecture halls that booming, deep voice really comes in handy for having people pay attention and hear you from a distance.

Seriously though, now that it's not an available secret any more, I think it's about time we had the discussion about the reward for 30,000 experience points.

My girlfriend in HS said she really liked how I look driving. I was like 'uhh... thanks, I guess. I like driving and I'm glad you're comfortable."

On more than one occasion, women have told me other women would kill for my eyelashes and/or hair.

I think the most recent and hilarious one was this beggar chick (presumably, homeless) who said, "Hey Pretty Boy, how 'bout a buck for a be-ah." I miss Allston.

The Red-Tailed Hawk. They've a widespread habitat, are extremely common and protected by laws, mingle very well with humans, and are all-around badass. They're pretty large as far as birds of prey go, but agile. But all those practical reasons trump the main motivation: flying. And hawks don't fly like boring birds do, they soar and dive. Way cooler.

At 1/6/13 12:00 AM, Sensationalism wrote: Hangout full. What the heck is the max, some ridic low number?
Paltalk was better. You all suck.

I totally just joined after you posted this. : x

Silly NFC, by not letting the Giants into the playoffs, there will be nobody to stop New England in in the Super Bowl. GG, NFL, we win again.