Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - H

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 177
General Misc. / Re: Quotes
« on: October 18, 2019, 03:27:48 pm »
We are now in a position to draw out the implications of Dasein's special way of being, which is existence. Cultures and cultural institutions have existence as their way of being, and so does each of us. To exist is to take a stand on what is essential about one's being and to be defined by that stand. Thus Dasein is what, in its social activity, it interprets itself to be. Human beings do not already have some specific nature. It makes no sense to ask whether we are essentially rational animals, creatures of God, organisms with built-in needs, sexual beings, or complex computers. Human beings can interpret themselves in any of these ways and many more, and they can, in varying degrees, become any of these things, but to be human is not to be essentially any of them. Human being is essentially simply self-interpreting.

Hubert Dreyfus - Being-in-the-world: A Commentary of Heidegger's Being And Time

General Misc. / Re: Board Games and Miniatures
« on: October 16, 2019, 01:00:29 pm »
Twilight Imperium would be awesome, but I don't have anyone that would want to play a game like that with me. Too much time investment for the others I guess. Games that size (gloomhaven, descent, etc.) just aren't on the docket.

It is definitely the sort of game I want to play, just that I don't have the time or anyone to play it with, haha.

My most recent purchase was Ex Libris - you play as the curator of a town library. You compete with other players for the best/rarest books, trying to impress the city inspector who assigns points based on size, stability, variety, rarity, and theme. Basically you collect cards in various ways, arrange them in alphabetical order as best you can. Its pretty fun, a worker replacement game, and the book titles (of where there are some 600+) are pretty witty and brilliant making it fun to read them.

Sounds like fun.  I think I've recommended them to you before, but you might like Stanislaw Lem's A Perfect Vacuum and Imaginary Magnitudes, one is a book of reviews for books that don't exist and the other is introductions to books that don't exist.

Literature / Re: Yearly Targets 2019
« on: October 14, 2019, 12:57:55 pm »
Could be that the first one is so short you can't get a solid feeling for it. But also, in generally I find people don't like books that are confusing and throw you into the middle of a story that already happening. This is definitely what happens in Gunslinger, so I'm not surprised it is not fondly remembered by many.

I might also just be remembering parts from other books and figuring they were in that first one.  But I do recall liking it for how vaguely it sketched the past.  Of course, I read it probably 15 years ago, maybe even more...

Literature / Re: Yearly Targets 2019
« on: October 14, 2019, 12:44:12 pm »
I've heard this is bar far the worst in the series, so I was worried about this book and had low expectations. Maybe that colored my opinion about it, but if this is the worst the series has to offer then there's nothing to worry about. Hard to give it a strong recommendations, but there was also nothing in there to turn me away.

Weird.  I read the first three a long, long time ago and I recall taking forever to get through the second one, seemed way "worse" (but not actually bad) than the first one.  Might just be a selective recalling on my part though, but I remember the first as pretty good.

I probably should finish that series one day...

General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: October 09, 2019, 06:33:47 pm »
Thanks for the heads up, I missed first episode and it ain't on In Demand, so I missed it.

H - be a sweetie and provide a Spoiler response here with a quick run down of episode 1 so I can just jump into the 2nd this Sunday? Pretty please :) :) :)

Wait you want me to spoil it?  Haha, well, ok.  It's a really good episode though, so I'd highly suggest watching it, if you somehow can.  But, if it's not possible, well, then here you go:

(click to show/hide)

If you bothered to read all that:

(click to show/hide)

General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: October 08, 2019, 06:33:26 pm »
On-topic: swamp thing episode 1 was good albeit with some plotholes / stupid character decisions but that's part of the charm. Torn between continuing that and starting Carnival Row..

Carnival Row was decent, worth watching at least.  Not sure how it compares with Swamp Thing, but at least it provides the promise of a second season eventually.

General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: October 08, 2019, 06:06:44 pm »
True haha, I think I am now conditioned to pour all my patience into very specific works. The rest I need immediately :)

I almost prefer episodic, not because I don't mind the wait, but because it's portion control.  In other words, I am not at pains to jam the episodes, because it's not really an option.

That pace also aligns with my general lottment of "free time" since it's hard to even get an apportioned time set aside to watch anything, let alone multiple episodes of anything.  In the end though, I think both forms have some merits, so it generally doesn't bother me when it is one or the other.

General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: October 08, 2019, 05:44:29 pm »
Still excited but tempted to wait until there's a few episodes I can watch at once.
My fragile psyche can't do waiting anymore

A fan of Bakker and incapable of waiting seem like a textbook case of antithesis, haha.

General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: October 08, 2019, 04:54:13 pm »
Yay, excited about this!
Is it gonna be released episodic or can I binge it?

Episodic, one episode a week, airs Sunday nights here in the US, not sure about elsewhere.

General Misc. / Re: What are you watching?
« on: October 08, 2019, 04:00:07 pm »
Just a note that Mr. Robot season 4 started on Sunday.

Episode 1 was pretty good.

The Unholy Consult / Re: (TUC Spoilers) Thoughts on TUC
« on: October 07, 2019, 12:20:45 pm »
Isn't it Mimara that says She is what kellhus pretends to be?

Ah, yeah, not sure how or why I reversed that in my mind...

The Unholy Consult / Re: (TUC Spoilers) Thoughts on TUC
« on: October 04, 2019, 07:21:57 pm »
For all we know, finding Mommy might have been all that Nau was doing as the NG as well :P .

Haha, well, we don't know about Nau mommy...

Jokes aside, as a pseudo-random thought, we don't actually know what "powers" the No-God.  As in, I doubt it has batteries.  Perhaps what actually fuels it, what makes the whole thing work, is the soul in questions need, or seeking, or demanding, toward something.  That yearning, that unquenchable desire, or need, might well be what separates a potential insertant from what ends up being just another dead body they stuffed in there.

So, while it might not have been Nau's mommy issues, it might not have been far off...

The Unholy Consult / Re: (TUC Spoilers) Thoughts on TUC
« on: October 03, 2019, 04:08:55 pm »
Well, I don't think anyone really knows how the No-God works, except maybe the Progenitors themselves.  Or, much like some of our neural-networks now, we actually don't know exactly what they do, only that it gets done.  So, the Sarcophagus might just be a literal block-box, that just does what it does.  It might even not have been made by the Progenitors themselves.  If it was the case that Ark was an AI or something like that, it might have devised the Sarcophagus itself with little to no understanding of any deeper meaning.  So, indeed, almost anything is likely potentially "on the table" because there is so much undefined.

As for what happens when the No-God is destroyed, well, we don't know.  However, since the Consult didn't just suicide themselves when the No-God came to be the first time means, either, the souls get set to the Outside, or stuck in a transitory state, or something "worse."  In any case, part of the Consult plan is to specifically "close the world" and then enjoy corporeal life.  So, it could be that souls under the No-God just cease to be but the Consult is averse to this outcome.  They are after life, eternal, not an existence of damnation or simple non-existence.

Not only that, but part of the scheme is to end the system.  That is, to close of damnation altogether.  In this sense, they do have a "noble" aim, even though it's actually terrible, just in a different way than the Cubit's demands are.

The Unholy Consult / Re: (TUC Spoilers) Thoughts on TUC
« on: October 03, 2019, 02:55:06 pm »
The nature of TNG could get thick - they jump started it, so it may not behave much as it did in the past. Even if not conscious, it may have Consult unintended consequences, like including them in the population reduction, it may well kill them off first and then who controls/influences it ... Esmi?. The thing cruises around, killing everyone, looking for it's mother. Anyways, just daydreaming, hope we get to find out.

Well, it certainly would be a major question as to if Kelmomas can even recognize Emenet at this point, or, well anything for that matter.  The fact that it both iterations of the No-God seem intent on, at least, attempting self-discovery, that is, appealing to self-consciousness, means there might be something left of the Insertant.

But that could well be delusion, if Bakker wants to take it that direction.  I'd say it likely is a bit more interesting if there is some "personality" left of Kel in the No-God, but that might be incompatible with the thematic notion Bakker has in the hypothetical "union of subject and object" sense.

I think modern economic theory diverges from previous theory by realizing that humans do not act either rationally nor in their best interest. SO I think that supports your thought there.

I would think stability is, or at least should be, a viable measure of economic value. Things tend to not be great when people don't feel safe. Probably because our economies are built on spending money, when people feel unsafe they hoard it, which makes things even more unstable - downward spiral ensues.

Right.  In my line of thinking, the most "efficient" system is likely not the most stable.  It would tend to alienate far too many people, which, likely further alienates more people, for example through empathy, sympathy and other manner of consciousnesses considering other consciousnesses (and itself).

I think people do tend to act in their own best interest, but the key there is that this would be their perceived best interests, which, depending on numerous factors, might actually be the best interest as a fact, or only seemingly the best.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 177