Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/8/14 04:34 PM, Splats wrote: Tisk, the only flaw in this forum is the people in it

BOY OH BOY I'M AT IT AGAIN

You can't pin the blame solely on one aspect of a site or another. It's the collusion of several forces that drives growth and decay online. While the forum would be better if people would stop making waste posts, a lot of people who keep the forum active would then leave. The main reason there aren't many people on this forum is that this place has a few terrible reviews on Yelp because of all those times regulars were served microwaved spaghetti with frozen meatballs just because they were familiar customers.

At 2/8/14 09:34 AM, Ericho wrote: A pity this managed to get out in the real world before people realized how dangerous it was.
A pity this managed to get out in the real world before people realized how dangerous it was.
A pity this managed to get out in the real world before people realized how dangerous it was.

Wow. You retarded motherfucker.

At 2/6/14 09:40 PM, Slint wrote: Christianity IS observation science, the facts are in the bible stupid, just look at it, they're written there like in your "magic science" books except in your magic science books it all began with an explosion like a fucking Michael Bay movie which all magic science adepts like because it requires zero thought.

Please, let the professionals handle this.

Where my boy @Rahmemhotep at?

At 2/6/14 05:44 PM, Tankdown wrote:

At 2/6/14 05:39 PM, Profanity wrote: Yikes, ha ha! It might be genetic! You need to slow down and read every word.

I did after I typed it. I blame newgrounds lack of an edit button. :p

Nice recovery. Yeah, we could really use one of those.

At 2/6/14 05:29 PM, Tankdown wrote:

At 2/6/14 05:13 PM, Profanity wrote: It's just about being smart.

I love my younger brother, but he is not brightest.

Being an atheist doesn't make you smart.

Yikes, ha ha! It might be genetic! You need to slow down and read every word.

Reminds me of this.

No, ha ha! Of course not!

Atheism, (a + theos & ism), is the belief that there is no god. People (even ones who are religiously indoctrinated) reach that point of belief for many different reasons. Most of the atheists I know came to the realization that there is no god through studying science, history, and religion. They tend to build friendships with people who share their intellectual vigor, but not necessarily the same interests. So: it's not about feeling smarter than other people. It's just about being smart.

I hope this helps you!

Despite NG's niche being subsumed by larger competitors with professionals and VC backing, the community has managed to soften its decline by purchasing supporter badges.

The brand is still alive though. So Tom's got that goin' for 'im.

At 2/5/14 06:01 PM, dx5231 wrote:

At 2/5/14 05:34 PM, Profanity wrote: Of course it's incredibly difficult, but only because everything is incredibly difficult. Neuroscientists already understand what causes emotions and what the biological basis for feelings is. Saying it's "incredibly difficult" will lead these guys to the wrong conclusions (mysticiscm, spirituality, bullshit philosophy, etc), you should be more careful with your words.

If we wanted to build machines which feel, we could build machines which feel. It just isn't necessary.

I'm not really sure how you came to the conclusion that when something is "incredibly difficult" people will start saying it's god or some shit like that. Difficult =/= impossible

Also, neuroscientists understand how we have emotions, and what triggers them, but I think they don't yet understand why we have them. Not sure if I was very clear here. For instance, they know that if there's activity in a certain area of the brain, that means a certain emotion, and another area means something else. We haven't"reverse engineered" a brain yet to know why it works the way it does.

Years of being a part of these discussions has taught me that whenever it's brought up, there will always be a few people who stop in to say that consciousness/sentience/self-awareness is a mystical property of the mind that cannot be built into machines.

At 2/5/14 05:30 PM, dx5231 wrote:

At 2/5/14 03:15 PM, Clamstuffer wrote:

At 2/5/14 05:21 AM, Profanity wrote:

That's a bunch of running programs and storing data. That's not thinking. I'm typing on something that runs programs and stores data. These things could store a bazillion kajillion ultramegazetabytes and run every program ever invented simultaneously and it's still just a fancy piece of hardware.

What, do you want bots to actually FEEL? That's not happening anytime soon. Basically, all they do is just analyze data and respond to it accordingly. That can still be improved, but creating self-aware machines is actually incredibly difficult. We're a very long way from creating true AI.

Of course it's incredibly difficult, but only because everything is incredibly difficult. Neuroscientists already understand what causes emotions and what the biological basis for feelings is. Saying it's "incredibly difficult" will lead these guys to the wrong conclusions (mysticiscm, spirituality, bullshit philosophy, etc), you should be more careful with your words.

If we wanted to build machines which feel, we could build machines which feel. It just isn't necessary.

At 2/5/14 03:15 PM, Clamstuffer wrote:

At 2/5/14 05:21 AM, Profanity wrote:

That's a bunch of running programs and storing data. That's not thinking. I'm typing on something that runs programs and stores data. These things could store a bazillion kajillion ultramegazetabytes and run every program ever invented simultaneously and it's still just a fancy piece of hardware.

I just don't see it. I don't see it at all. At this rate the self-aware robot apocalypse is never going to happen.

Do you know how the brain computes? It's a complex system of self-rewiring parallel circuits, memory circuits, resistors, memristors, simple switches, synaptic logic loops, and chemical relays. Atop that, it adapts to function in particular ways based on its environment, the body, feedback loops from sensory input, and biological states. It's so complex that people convinced that it behaves in mystical ways which defy the laws of physics. But it doesn't.

If you measure the amount of complexity of the human mind statistically, build a computer system to exceed that complexity which uses the basic components in a more manageable circuit: parallel processors, memory, parallel GPUs simulating new connections, and algorithms which enable the machine to learn and predict inputs; the machine will exhibit thought which exceeds that of a human mind. The timing might be a little bit wonky, but that will all wash out.

Also, today the United Kingdom tested a new autonomous drone with the capability to choose targets and kill them on its own.

Microsoft has computer systems which can translate your speech from any language to another language with extremely high success rates, and then synthesize the speech in the new language using your own voice.

IBM has computer systems which can learn massive amounts of contextual information in minutes, tearibgbthrough millions of pages per second, and has passed medical exams. It's employed as a consultant in finance and medicine.

Google has computer systems which simulate neural networks to learn from massive amounts of data. It has computer systems which evolve new learning patterns to yield new associative patterns.

Sun Yat-sen University has a computing system which performs at 33.86 petaFLOPS.

The United States has dozens of supercomputers which perform on the petaFLOPS scale.

The US Military has computers which can drive cars, control heavy lifting robots, and pilot airplanes.

There are literally millions of machine learning algorithms being used industrially.

And you're bothered that some free AI Chatbot isn't guessing your emotions accurately and behaving creatively?

The commercial itself.

This commercial also features an interracial gay couple at a roller disco with their daughter (42 seconds on). It was a deliberate attempt by Coca Cola at representing every demographic they could fit into a 60 second spot after 5 seconds baiting the conservative Midwest with a short clip of some cowboy riding horseback. They showed a smiling old cowboy just a few seconds after the shock wore off.

Shit, this thing is a psychological work of art. They must have hired some brilliant consultants. The more I watch it and break it down, the more it seems like they want the conservative core to launch a boycott.

At 2/3/14 11:24 AM, Earfetish wrote: Although this thread managed to get >100 replies, I still got banned for making it

I don't know why you would expect anything else with the way those twits behave.

At 1/31/14 08:07 PM, Zachary wrote: The moderators are already really lenient if you are not a complete jackass.

You should post with that 2001 account you "have" (or made when you were 7 years old) sometime.

At 2/1/14 04:07 PM, Evark wrote: a post

+25 points for clever
-3 points for typos

Bumping this to remind myself and a few others that despite my insistence on coming back here to inject a bit of common sense into this forum, the community is not fun and the [incredibly large pool of] mods are overzealous which leads to a less democratic mode of discussion which rarely deviates from the interests of the mods

Weird. It'S almost as though there's a fundamental flaw in the way forum mechanics work that results in jaded people who are online all the time because they're depressed, antisocial, or severely limited being given responsibilities that they misuse resulting in them being maligned with the community that they had previously used to construct their ego. Almost like every forum on the internet witnesses this phenomenon and very few websites have found solutions.

At 1/30/14 07:09 PM, Ejit wrote:

At 1/30/14 07:05 PM, Zachary wrote: In context, it is. He is implying that the moderators get something out of locking a thread or banning a user. We are doing it for the community, not for personal gratification.

What do we get out of it? They're our threads! What is the benefit to the community of locking this thread's precursor, for e.g.?

Easy! You get the benefit of a smaller community! What kind of moron wants a thousand minds sharing condensed versions of their opinions coming from all walks of life when you can read a dozen thoroughly researched opinions from people who have all been vetted by the same narrow group of individuals??!!

Whenever a long thread that has seen explosive activity is closed because "it's going to become a flame war" or "it's off-topic"; whenever a thread about religion gets "nipped in the bud" by an oh-so-wisened moderator: you are being saved from having to experience emotion, controversy, and a difference of opinions by the oh-so-logical moderators.

Oh jeez, I didn't mean to hurt any feelings. I'm sorry, I just hate to see Mods who seem to be making the same mistakes I made.

At 1/30/14 06:15 PM, Boomstick wrote:

At 1/30/14 06:14 PM, Profanity wrote: The mods just look for excuses to lock threads. They're not actually putting thought into it. They hate being moderators and locking/banning people is the only benefit to the position. Don't waste your time here.

You snotty little bastard.

The mods just look for excuses to lock threads. They're not actually putting thought into it. They hate being moderators and locking/banning people is the only benefit to the position. Don't waste your time here.

Oh god. NGers talking about the next hundred years of engineering. Can we get a self-proclaimed Philosopher and some Religious nutters in here to make it super hilarious?

At 1/28/14 03:19 AM, HeavenDuff wrote: Stop using the expression "Gay for..." It doesn't make sense. The words homosexual or heterosexual aren't used to describe a relationship. I'm not heterosexual for my girlfriend, I'm always heterosexual.

You have a fundamentally flawed understanding of those words. Being "gay for…" is appropriate because its an accepted phrasing. "Gay" and "heterosexual" are not interchangeable words which denote different sexual attractions, they have complex histories and bulk culture associated to them.

For example: if you are "gay for pay", then that means you can be bribed to have gay sex for money. A queer might refer to himself as "straight for pay", but that would imply that he were trying to act straight to get a job in a situation where his sexual orientation would be otherwise unacceptable.

What would Americans riot over? "Wahh, we have too many freedoms! Wahh, our government goes so far in representing many perspectives regardless of morality that the national discussion is too accessibility driven and all encompassing! Wahh, our lives are too self-deterministic!"

Fucking grow up. Holy shit.

At 1/25/14 09:47 PM, Rahmemhotep wrote:

At 1/25/14 09:37 PM, Profanity wrote: No. But I did just communicate some basic principles of the world's most complex science in language any old moron (you) could understand. If you're able to show me up, then by all means: have at it.

Why?

Because you were talking mad smack about the OP and I shut you up about it. Now you're just making it obvious that you're in over your flat little head.

At 1/25/14 09:08 PM, Rahmemhotep wrote:

At 1/23/14 01:32 AM, Profanity wrote: Dumb shit

Lol, yer a retard.

No. But I did just communicate some basic principles of the world's most complex science in language any old moron (you) could understand. If you're able to show me up, then by all means: have at it.

At 1/25/14 03:01 AM, Xenomit wrote: This is by far the most god damned retarded bullshit I've seen my entire fucking life

Can the world just blow up already, I don't wanna live in a world heavily populated by autistic retards

I could tear you down with a sentence which lists all of your flaws, but I think I'll let the facts speak to the truth of the matter.. You don't know what you're talking about and everyone who used this forum is aware of that.

"Newgrounds, please be my personal army and join a small movement of nonviolent protest against the US Intellectual Property Laws by infringing on a registered trademark despite the NGBBS rules quite clearly stating that the BBS is not here to be your own personal invasion force nor are we allowed to facilitate intellectual property crime."

No, I will not subject myself to a Cease and Decist order from King.com for participating in a small-minded tantrum started by jealous game developers. No, I would not advise anyone else here to do so, either.

At 1/23/14 09:23 PM, Sensationalism wrote:

At 1/23/14 09:13 PM, orpheusftw wrote: weights and low reps = bulky muscular body. (used to tone muscles mostly)
no weights and high reps = slim lean, but still moderately strong body. (used to lose weight mostly)

Moderately strong sounds like code for weak. So they are worthless. Thanks :)

No. More slow twitch full body exercise will build more strength-density and power output with less bulk. More fast twitch exercise will build more bulk and less strength-density. You should be oscillating between several types of workouts to access all of the different parts of your muscles. Rotate through yoga, swimming, rowing, walking, running, and weightlifting throughout the month in whatever ratios fit your needs.

It's basic anatomy. Low weight high reps exercises muscle fibers called Slow Twitch. High weight and few reps exercises your Fast Twitch muscle fibers. There's a lot more to it, but that's as much as you need to know.

At 1/23/14 08:52 PM, Entice wrote: Most women just go to the gym so that they can wear workout clothes and get leered at

This is not true at all. You would know that if you actually went to the gym.