Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Well, not to discount you in any way, Brian, but... You've also never had several diseases you [b]haven't[/b] been vaccinated for either. I know for a fact I'm not vaccinated against every virus, bacteria, et cetera that I've encountered, yet I'm rarely ever ill.
Personally, I get very tired of the near-propaganda levels of modern companies. Still, not every product can be said to make claims that it can't back. There's always toilet paper, which does exactly what it says it does if you use enough of it. :P

At 8/8/09 03:35 PM, hansari wrote:

Good luck in College! I mean it ;)

The bar this country sets for itself is ridiculously low...

Only because parents complain when the teachers fail students for limboing under the higher bars. If we just gave up political correctness and called stupid kids stupid, then maybe the smart ones could actually learn something. As long as we give a flying rat's tail end whether a student's parents are happy with their kid's grade, then we are always going to make the possibility of failure nonexistant.

By real numbers, possibly. But if I score one point higher than you on a test where I score 2 and you score 1, then I'm twice as smart. If I score 100 and you score 99, the gap is the same but we aren't that much different. ^^

And if it's not that tests are getting easier, but rather that teaching methods are indeed getting better, resulting in everyone making a higher score?

I think UHC would be a great improvement over letting people die from things they can't afford to fix. I don't really see how they plan to do it though. Personally, I think the government should just pay for all medical expenses (cosmetic surgury/viagra/other stuff that has no effect on quality or length of life excluded) by skipping the whole billing process altogether. Don't give free insurance, just give that same money directly to the hospitals and doctors.
We walk into a hospital with a broken leg, they put a cast on it, and write ''Broken leg. $15.00 cast materials, $20 twenty minutes labor, $10 fifteen minutes explanation. Total : $45 dollars"
The doctor gives this to a manager, the manager staples all the bills from that doctor together for the day, puts them in a folder for the week, and then sends them all in on Friday to the government, who reads the coversheet and says 'We owe this doctor, at this hospital, $3000 dollars for this week. He fixed four broken legs, three common colds, twelve cases of pnemonia, and a rabies shot. Time to go sign a check.'
The patient, who came in, got a cast, and listened to the doctors instructions on how to take care of his leg, went home and never saw another piece of paper from that hospital or the government asking for anything more from them.
This, I think, would be far more efficient than sending bills to the patient, then the patient asking the government to cover it... It's just a better system all around.
As for how to pay for that kind of system, it would be cheaper than a true insurance type plan, and could easily be payed for by dropping porkbarrel projects. Granted that the same could be said of any other great programs we have yet to implement... Like alternative fuels, more efficient road repair, plans for a better economy... Of course, we can always tap the WAY bloated military funds. We just have to leave Iraq first. Now that I think of it, I didn't really answer your question about UHC in it's current form... Well, I suppose that's because it's such an inefficient system that I never bothered to learn it. I just built a better version, and ignored the original.

At 7/29/09 09:07 AM, Mariousz wrote: They started first.These terrorists are completly mad.I think they are necessary an enemy.Just think of BIn Landen.

Gratz for my 100 post.

Many people believe that we started this whole mess, for several reasons. One of these reasons, I believe, was that we refused to vacate our military bases in the middle east. We stayed in their country long after we were no longer welcome. I'm not saying what they did was rational, but I am saying you need to do some research before immediately assuming they are bad people.

At 6/17/09 08:59 AM, Xmanne wrote: lol dis darknessdweller guy givs u all a bad name!

Actually he sounded very mature and sincere in his last post. You on the other hand sound like someone who only reads and comprehends half of what is written, and that only half the time. Try using real, correctly spelled words next time.

I can't believe I'm the first to bring this up!!! I'm actually in time for a good joke!!!
So, just to be clear,
std::cout<<"End Thread"<<std::endl
Is most certainly off limits? Or since it isn't so stale and overused does it get a free pass for a while?
In other words, is this MORE about the backseat modding, the one-line-post, or the pathetic attempt at unoriginal humor?
Of course I only ask for personal curiosity, and fully intend to follow the rule anyway.... But I'm nosy and I like to know why people make decisions.

www.learncpp.com

It starts simple, moves on to object oriented programing, and above all else it caters specifically to those who HAVE NEVER USED ANY OTHER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE. So it's perfect for an absolute begginer, teaching good habits for commenting and writing legible code as well as the actual functions.
In only a few days I had a 300 line program functioning, and C++ is my first programming language.

At 6/12/09 07:06 PM, darknessdweller wrote:

At 6/12/09 11:46 AM, Sawdust wrote:

At 6/12/09 02:00 AM, Zyphonee wrote: cases all over the world of autist kids that have a higher IQ than most kids.

Ah yes, I've heard about those cases. And I was able to tell time at age 2, and do addition at age 3,
which I hear is above normal, AND it could've been caused by autism.

Because of darknessdweller.

Fuck you, you trolling little creep. I hate you so much, that I'm gonna come over to your house,
and shoot you in your face!! GET THE HELL OUTTA THIS CLUB!! QUEER!!!

Wow. Impressive. Hate, swearing, death threats and homophobic comments all in one post with too many caps and exclamation points. Way to show your IQ there, dude. He was saying that people often confuse you with a stupid person, and now I know why.
Don't get me wrong, he shouldn't be pointing fingers like that, but you really have to step back and look at your post. Now, think calmly, and tell me if you don't sound just a little immature?

I personally can't wait for your dog to get irritated with you and turn. You actually think it's a good thing for your dog to attack random animals? And think the other dog is weak because it doesn't kill for no reason? Wait until it goes after someones toddler and you go to jail for life.
Fucking cavemen.

I would recommend setting time aside to create a page of political issues:
Abortion
Gay Marriage
Bigger/Smaller Government
More/Less taxes

Think of as many as you can, then look more up. Decide your stance on each of them. Decide which ones are popular opinions that you can publicise to gain support, and which ones you need to spend as little time on as possible to minimize damage.
Decide which ones you might be willing to sacrifice if absolutely necessary.

Next look at spending.
Observe the position you would be in, and determine what that position has control over.
How much money will you allot to schools? To roads? To buildings? To homeless shelters? To creating jobs?

Next up look at charitable organizations.
Which ones do you think you could get to sponser you? You will need money, even if only to put up signs.

Go big and go bold.
Do something HUGE to get on the news. I've played a game called farkle for many years, and one of the fun things about it is that you have to get a certain number of points on your first scoring role to even get your name on the board. No matter how well you conduct yourself, you wont get credit for it unless the world is watching.

Be sure you have all of this down pat. Know who you are, what your doing, and who your doing it for.
With all that advice given, I have one more parting word. Good luck.

At 6/12/09 12:33 AM, Dawnslayer wrote:

At 6/11/09 12:13 PM, JeremieCompNerd wrote: I think the OP had a great idea for promoting autism awareness, and I thank everyone who has shown support for this thread. :)

Anyone else notice he hasn't been here in a while? I'm starting to think he got himself banned for life.

Nah, I just got busy with another hobby. Magnets. Now I'm back on computers.

At 6/11/09 06:31 PM, henke37 wrote: Let's just stick to the question. It's a matter of replacing data. You just need to know what to replace, where it is stored and how it is stored. All of these may and does vary depending on each game and the data in question. If you have to ask, you will not be able to do it. You need serious reverse engineering skills for this.

Well, thank you for sticking to the question. :)
I know this is not an easy task, I was just hoping to have an idea of what tools I would need to learn those skills.... Well, I guess I'll start with a hex editor and a sprite ripper and move on from there then. See ya!

And I would laugh. Sorry, I just don't think I'm hurting anybody except the poor garage sale guy who wants a nickel for his crapped-out copy of Donkey Kong Country 2.

I follow the truth, whether such knowledge is at all convenient or not.
Nobody should have an opinion so strong that it outweighs reality.
Naturally, however, it is very difficult to prove or disprove anything, so there is still some room to believe something that has evidence against it, or to not believe in something with evidence for it, so long as you have some form of evidence to support your views or discredit the opposing thoughts.

At 6/11/09 01:37 PM, Super-Yombario wrote: There's no such thing as legal ROMs, so you know...

While I respect your adherence to the letter of the law, I personally choose to uphold the spirit of the law, which is to say that I:
A: Own at least one legal copy of the game
B: Own at least one legal copy of the system
C: Download no ROMS that the company can still profit from in original form
D: Don't have both games running at the same time
E: Don't share ROMS with anyone without proof they own the original
F: Don't make any profit from the ROMS
G: Am more than willing to pay the cost of the original game if the company cares to protest my download

While I understand that it is still considered illegal, I believe that I am morally clear.
One of the main points of contention regarding ROMS on the page you displayed that I did not cover is that the owner of the copywrite has the right to make newer versions of the game; this is very true, and I have bought several of these newer versions simply because they have made them. For example Mario64 was re-released for DS with new characters, better graphics, and several other additions. I now own Mario64 DS, dispite also owning Mario64 and a Mario64 ROM.

I'm looking for a program that will let me edit the appearance of characters and backgrounds in SNES ROMS for Windows.
I do own the ROMS legally, just in case you were wondering.
I use SNES9X Emulator, just in case it makes a difference.
I intend to edit the graphics in such a way as to make the game remain playable, so I think I need more than a basic sprite ripper....
Does anyone know a good program for this task?

I'm an undiagnosed aspergers.
My aunt happens to know a lot about autism, teaching special needs kids. I spent a lot of time around her one year and she recognised the symptoms.
I've never actually been diagnosed by a professional, but my family has done some research and I fit the bill perfectly.
My primary trouble is an absolute lack of social awareness - clothing is functional, not fashionable, I like what I bloody well enjoy, even if it's not popular, and I tend to exude an aura of callousness because I try to be brief and to-the-point when interacting with people I don't know very well.
I also hyper-focus on individual tasks, such as gaming, for weeks and months on end.... I often get so wrapped up in books I forget to eat and sleep.
I think the OP had a great idea for promoting autism awareness, and I thank everyone who has shown support for this thread. :)

I personally think it has to do with a variety of factors...
1. Gay gene(s).
The gene(s) that control hormones throughout developement, before and after birth, have a chance of being programmed to release to much of one hormone or not enough of another. This would upset the chemical balance and result in varying stages of sexual preference.
2. Starting point.
Since we start in the middle and then move to either a boy or a girl, it's possible for the body to develope one direction and the mind another, resulting in a "trapped in the wrong body" situation, to varying degrees. This could result in simple homosexuality, gender confusion, an operation to correct the situation, or any number of steps inbetween.
3. Choice.
Naturally we all have the right to make any choice at all regarding our preferences, (save non-consent or child abuse (possibly some others...)) and any number of reasons could be given to choose homosexuality. Abuse by the opposite sex, being exposed to and experimenting with it and finding it more enjoyable, etc.

So homosexuality could be caused by any or all of these conditions, and probably several others.

The good news is, the Republican people who think the government can step on whomever they wish are also the religious people who claim to value life. So of course they already are obligated to pretend to care, and use their self appointed power to intervene.
The people who actually DO care about life, of course, are the Democrats. And naturally we tend to ignore all religious beliefs as being seperate from the government and therefor when we go to save the childs life, we don't care that his religion prevents it.
Both sides have justification to save the child. Both sides also have the responsibility to save the child.
(I'm in a foul mood and I'm here to distract myself, so if I sound flamey either ignore it or PM me for a good verbal brawl. Sorry.)

I'd personally like to see a blind race. Don't give out the candidates name. Don't give out his religion, his photo, his birth town, his current state, his party, it's sex....
Give out ONLY the policies of "Candidate A" and "Candidate 1", so that nobody can say that either takes precedence in any way, and let people vote on the issues.

Of course, I would prefer Greek democracy, with the president and a much reduced house/senate used exclusively for emergencies, where one vote on one issue was actually COUNTED.... But of course neither of these policies will actually occur on this planet for a very long time.

At 3/12/09 07:55 PM, Memorize wrote:

I love it when liberals unknowingly support the "No Child Left Behind" Act from Bush.

And I love it when conservative can't tell the difference between liberals genuinely wanting to help solve a problem and a republican farce to bump poll rating that has little to no impact on the actual problem. :-) Not trying to flame, just pointing out the obvious. I want to improve the school system, but the "no child left behind" act just isn't going to get it done.

I'd just as soon replace it with a much simpler law, where you save up for your own retirement, and the better you manage your finances (No purchasing beach houses, or driving Hummers (which should be illegal anyways)), the more money the government will give you when you run out of funds.
If Joe make 100k+ a year, and spends it all without thought to retirement, then when he retires and runs out of money he will make the absolute least amount of money he can survive on.
If John makes 100k+ a year and puts away a nest egg for retirement, but has an accident and has to spend it on a major surgery, then when he runs out the government gives him more leash than they did Joe, because he has proven he isn't spending money on thing he doesn't need.
If Jerry makes 40k a year, and can hardly save anything, but doesn't waste what little money he has on stupid things, then he would live a relatively comfortable retirement because when he runs out of money the government would give him about the same amount as John.

The main thing is, regardless of income this situation would reward people for saving money for their own retirement, instead of spending it all and then drawing checks from Uncle Sam. This would encourage careful money management and increase the odds that people would put back enough money to ensure that it is much longer before they run out and start draining government funds.
It's a difficult proposal that would never be passed and of course politicians and lawyers would debate "reckless spending" nine ways to sunday, but in an ideal world this would be a simple solution. Eventually something similar to this could be modified for use in the real world, but for now I'll just have to keep thinking.

You mean Obama really plans to push kids to live up to their potential by teaching them more during their formative years and educating them in good work ethic to boot?!?!? How horrible of him! Even Hitler wasn't cruel enough to make the next generation of students smarter and less lazy, much less to limit the so-very-well-deserved summer break during which they forget a great deal of what they learned!
Just face it, if he got to do one thing during his time as President, the best thing he could possibly do is to train the next generation to be equipped to take his place.

18
Male
Texas
Democrat

1 Abortion - I think it should not be necessary, because there are so many easy ways to prevent unwanted pregnancy, but while people are still stupid enough to get prego when they don't want kids, at the moment we could use the stemcells for something more important. Ultimately I wouldn't dream of telling a couple what to do with their benign growths, but I do believe that the father (If known) should have a say in the event.
2 Gay marriage - Everyone has a right to be miserable with the person of their choice.
3 Oil vs. Alternative energy (wind power, water power, etc.) - I would love to see the government pump money into developing more resources, and cleaning the environment up. Sadly, I don't think it will happen until we start to really run out of oil.
4War on Terror (you dont need to be from the US to awnser) - You mean that slaughterhouse we keep shuffleing human beings into for no reason? I'll restrain my answer to a simple "NEVER AGAIN".
5George W. Bush (have fun with this one!) - Has commited treason against the United States of America, and more importantly has acted in his own self interest without regard to the welfare of mankind. There is no suitable punishment for his actions. Just my personal opinion. At least Gov. Bush isn't in office anymore....

I would highly prefer you be mature in your awnsers. I would like to think I did the best I could, hope it helps.

Not to say that I know any more than you do, but it's quite possible that the government needs to choose what charities are tax deductible because some charities are:
A: Frauds. Any charity that recieves money which it then keeps, or gives to people who don't need it should not be tax deductible.
B: Sending money out of the country. While most of the time this is a legitimate attempt to help out our fellow man, America is in a state of financial difficulty at the moment. Sending help to other countries is only going to furthur stretch our economy, so if you are sending money to Zimbabway, then you should not be allowed to skimp on sending money to the government.
C: Polar opposites. If the government gave tax breaks to people who donated money to building parks, and gave tax breaks to people who want to build malls over parks, then no matter who loses or wins the argument, the government is the big loser of the day.
D: Tax evasion. Many wealthy individuals and corperations can use charities to evade taxes, cutting the government out of a great deal of money, by giving to charitable organizations that support something that can benefit the donator, or oppose something that would cost him/her/them more than the donation.
It's quite likely that any, if not all, of these reasons are the justification you are looking for to explain this situation. I recommend keeping an eye on it all the same, just to be sure it's used properly.

I would love to see the idea of structured debates become popular. I would also like to see a separation of the politics thread and the science thread, the latter seems to be buried under the former. :)
I think though, that rather than including formal debates in within the politics forum, that a debate forum entirely independent of any other general topic would improve the efficiency. It is less likely that a troll, or a random emotional poster, would jump into the ring with two hard-core debaters if the ring was not in their usual hangout. I also think that for the sake of reducing the number of topics, debate rules would need to be agreed upon with PM's, and then listed at the top of the debate topic as per your original design. Post-debate chatter could also be held within the topic itself, separated by a small blank post or something to that effect. The idea of an index topic is also most definately a nice touch, since my examination of the politics forum leads to the conclusion that multiple discussions on a single topic would be much more interesting if all of the previous discussions on that topic could be readily accessed, catalogued by subject, and marked with a date of completion and the winning side. I would love to see any of this used, even if it is unlikely to become more than a great concept.

I personally could not possibly care less what happens in Iraq anymore. We should never have gone, but hindsight is always more clear, so once it became pathetically obvious we had no place there we should have slowly withdrawn years ago. Now, I'm just sick of the whole mess and I firmly believe we should have every military boat, plane, train, and car running 'round the clock to get our troops out. Forget the slow withdrawal, screw the inevitable chaos, get us out within a few months and never, EVER, go back. The middle east is not going to see peace just because we are there. This is entirely useless. We just need to back out, protect our borders, and let them duke it out for a few decades. When the dust settles we can offer supply drops to get them back on their feet. As for the terrorists, they have way better access to our people over seas than they do here. All our trying to bring the war to them is doing is exposing more Americans to people who want to kill them. I realize I'm talking about multiple wars, but frankly I'm sick of the whole bloody thing. We aren't doing anybody any good, including ourselves. (Personal opinions only, basic rant format, please don't flame me)

At 2/17/09 01:45 PM, poxpower wrote:

At 2/17/09 01:14 PM, JeremieCompNerd wrote:

Anyways, just because his helicopter didn't work based on the technology they had availible at the time, didn't mean he wasn't genius for thinking of the idea that a spinning motion of sufficient speed and blades at a specific angle could produce lift.

All I gotta say to you is that you have a really really low bar for "genius" and I think you've been taken in by the whole mystique of this guy. Once you sit back and objectively look at what he did, it's not much.

No, actually I have a very healthy understanding of the potential of any one person to become celebrated for a unique creation. What da Vinci did is look at the technology they had at the time, and put it together in a new way that nobody had thought of. I'm not saying geniuses are these born perfect demi-gods, I just think that one form of genius, creative genius, is a rare ability to look at things from a new point of view that enables you to look at something and see more than just the obvious pile of metal.

It doesn't help us to say "oh some men were just geniuses, so far ahead of the rest, so brilliant, such lights in the darkness of humanity, if only more of these men were alive". It's stupid because I suspect it's baloney.

No, but really it doesn't help to wish for a lot of the things we want, and we could do a lot worse than hoping for more smart people. :)
By the way... How is it stupid just because you suspect it's baloney? Does that make it smart if you suspect it's balogna?

Geniuses are people like you and me who make a different and who history remembers because of that. Just about anyone with enough luck and effort could become a genius one day.
For instance, someone like Edison probably did not know the important of what he was working on and how much it would change the future. And for every person like him, there's many scientists who worked in fields that didn't pan out.

Yes, that first scentence in your paragraph is perfectly true. Taking that into account, if you make a difference wouldn't you like to be remembered for it? Also... If you didn't think that something you were working on was important, would you keep going after 2k+ failures? Myself, I give up on unimportant projects after about the first thousand.

And history doesn't remember them, not because they weren't as brilliant, but simply because they picked the wrong thing to study through no fault of their own.

True enough, but that's part of what the great men and women in history did. They found things that the world needed, either before or during the time the world needed it. You can invent anything, right down to a self-microwaving tv dinner, but if you make something nobody needs then your genius will go unrewarded. That's why some of the most well known people are the ones who invented the most stuff. Make 300 new things work and eventually one of them will be needed.

And on a closing note, don't take this to mean that I think geniuses are just lucky. Most of those people have worked tirelessly to achieve what they did, but you what? Anyone can work hard. It's within all of us to do this.

But you what, what? No, but seriously, I agree. Anybody can work hard and do something to help our species become.... Better equiped...... Better educated...... Better fed, more safe, less dependant on oil, more likely to survive to planetary exploration and colonization, etc. But the idea of not remembering the historic figures who did so is simply not an effective means of inspiring people to do so. In a manner of speaking, you seem to be asking for historic socialism, where either every single person on the planet is remembered even if they did nothing, or nobody is remembered for doing anything. It would lead to about the same place. If the geniuses of the past, whether they were regular people who put in the effort or people born with talent who lived up to their minimum potential, are forgotten, then there is much less incentive for future generations to do so.

And I think that is a much more positive ( and true ) message than to say there's legendary humans who have unmatched and unmatchable natural gifts. Geniuses are made, not born.

Exactly. That is exactly why people like Leonardo da Vinci should be remembered for becoming the kind of person everyone should aspire to be.