• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

526 Good

About templewulf

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Obama Next President of the United States

    Quote:Original post by tstrimp Quote:Original post by templewulf How can you believe that the government is inherently bad unless you believe that people are inherently bad? Power corrupts. You're stretching a bit. The government is the people. Unless you believe that every position in government is powerful enough to corrupt every person, I'd say it trends closer toward whatever the average level of corruption/purity is in America. That's not to say legislators like Jefferson, Stevens, DeLay, etc. aren't up to their eyeballs in kickbacks, but I get the feeling they would be cheating at whatever they did.
  2. Obama Next President of the United States

    Quote:Original post by Silvermyst Quote:Original post by Zahlman Government is how we take care of our own. I fear that too many people agree with that statement. There's nothing inherently bad about government unless you believe it's being run by Reptoid Aliens. </Icke> How can you believe that the government is inherently bad unless you believe that people are inherently bad?
  3. Palin 2012?

    Quote:Original post by SiCrane I can imagine her getting just enough support to justify in her own mind running as a third party candidate and splitting the party. That sounds unlikely. Do you remember 8-10 months ago when Evangelicals were very upset about the prospect of McCain winning? Dobson et al said they planned to launch a Christian third party if McCain won, because he wouldn't be representing their interests. It was a bluff, and Evangelicals within the party know that they can't afford to be separated from the money and military wings of the party.
  4. Obama Next President of the United States

    Quote:Original post by Dreddnafious Maelstrom No matter who was elected abortion would have remained legal. Federal monetary policy wouldn't change in any important way. Both of which I think are good in the general sense. At least, I don't think we need change to our monetary policy on the LP-level of crazy like abolishing fiat currency. Quote:Our interventionist stance wouldn't have changed in any important way.I disagree. I think we'll still be interventionist in humanitarian crises, but I suspect that we'll go on fewer adventure wars. I think that is an important way in which it would change. Quote:Israel will remain the 51st state.I hate, hate, hate our unconditional support for Israel. High five? [grin] Quote:Social Security will remain bankrupt.Actually, Obama has floated the idea of uncapping the tax, or at least raising it from $102,000 where it is now. I think a good compromise would be switching to a 4% tax with no upper limit, while retaining the current tax below the limit.
  5. Palin 2012?

    Quote:Original post by LessBread Will Alaska hold a special election to replace him or will Governor Palin appoint his replacement? Setting aside talk that she'll step down and let her replacement appoint her to the seat, Alaska Republicans may have voted for Stevens to keep the seat in GOP hands which is only possible if he wins. I don't think that's legal in Alaska anymore. After Murkowski appointed his own daughter, I thought they passed legislation that it had to be a special election.
  6. Obama or McCain?

    Quote:Original post by smr Quote:Original post by CrimsonSun And is anyone else irritated by Palin's excessive use of passive voice? It wasn't noticed by me, but I was really annoyed by the sound of her voice. Every time she opens her mouth, I want to throw my TV out the window. Her voice and the excessively wordy passive voice she uses grate on my nerves. Plus, the "shucks howdy" act is not my cup of tea. Also, she is not hot. Tina Fey is hot. Governor Palin is more M than ILF. Edit: I'm going Obama, obviously. There wasn't a single person in the Republican primary who wasn't defective in some major way. Huackabee was the only marginally likeable person, but his policies are crazy.
  7. Quote:Original post by lexs http://brh.numbera.com/software/xblist/faq/#howitworks I appreciate the suggestion, but I already mentioned that XBList is closed-source, and that "how it works" FAQ doesn't mention what technologies he uses, what queries the server responds to or how to parse the response. I guess what I'm specifically looking for is how to query the XBox.com server to get a friends list. I'm using AJAX, but anything that helps me understand it better would be a great boon. Unless I missed something, he doesn't really discuss anything of the sort on his site.
  8. I hate to reply to myself, but I'm still stumped. Does anyone know of a method to retrive an XBox Live friends list and/or online status? I'm thinking I might see what I can glean from the XBox.com website's friend list, since that format might be more palateable to AJAX. Any ideas?
  9. All right guys, I'm absolutely failing at finding the information I'm looking for. I want to find a way to query the XBox Live friends list so that I can develop an XBox Live friends list viewer. I saw XBList, but what's-his-name isn't going to go open source. Can anyone with better google fu point me in the right direction? Double extra bonus points if your solution can be used with Google Gadgets Thanks, everybody! Edit: I'm probably going to bed pretty soon here, so please don't be offended if I'm too asleep to reply to you! [smile]
  10. Why is pot illegal?

    Quote:Original post by skjinedmjeet What I meant to say was that, the dialog shouldn't be about mind-altering drugs. It should be about whether or not politicians and law enforcement should have the right to be involved in what I do with my own body in my spare time.Of course they should. The government should be a consumer advocate to protect us from lead-laced candy and melamine-laced petfood. I fully support laws against drunk driving, and I think any substance that could pose significant risks (on the road or otherwise) is deserving of regulation. Quote:It seems to me the power of the politicians and law enforcement spreads too far when it is allowed to dictate my personal choices.I agree, but I think regulation of mind-altering drugs is reasonable. The current regulations on them is not. Quote:If a doctor makes the wrong cut because he smoked a joint before surgery then that's his problem.That's also the problem of the patient who may have life-altering complications. I think it's fair that we ask our medical professionals to restrict their recreational drug use to the weekends so that we can expect competent care. Quote:It's just the view I have in light of actually investigating the history of drug legislation - which boils down to 'For a completely arbitrary reason we are making such and such a substance illegal.'I agree with you again, but I draw a different conclusion. I would say that there are perfectly good reasons to regulate certain substances. I wouldn't want to strip the government of its ability to restrict the handling of strychnine, lead or mercury. There are non-arbitrary reasons to legislate these things. I think what I want to hear is what the actual risks are. I don't have a problem with pot, but I want to see a much larger volume of study before I come to a conclusion on what "responsible use" constitutes. My guess is something along the lines of "do not operate motor vehicles or heavy machinery".
  11. Why is pot illegal?

    Quote:Original post by skjinedmjeet I don't really see the need for dialog. I think we should have a dialog about how we handle mind-altering substances. If a large enough portion of the country is against it, how will we ever get around to honesty in our policies? We need to be able to convince the majority of Americans that it's not the Reefer Madness they've been told it is. Even beyond the need to shift our culture, we need to determine what the negative externalities of the drug policy would be. Will it increase the burden on our hospitals? Should people be allowed to drive while high? Can medical staff perform as well while high? I think your extreme libertarian stance needs to be tempered by a consideration on what responsible pot use should entail.
  12. Why is pot illegal?

    "Why is pot illegal?" Racism, mostly. We banned opium when we wanted to persecute the Chinese, and we banned pot when we wanted to persecute blacks and Hispanics. The cotton textile industry was also afraid of a new hemp industry, so they backed it as well. (Coincidentally, are hemp products really comparable / better than cotton? I honestly don't know, but I'm always looking for superior products.) With government backing, this view of pot as "beneath good, God-fearing white folk" stuck, and now everybody looks down on it without really knowing why. The real trouble is getting an honest dialog about pot, as a culture. Pothead deadbeats wearing pot leaf messenger bags and birkenstock sandals will tell you there's absolutely no risk in mind-altering drugs and anyone who doesn't do it is a fascist pig. Hyperreactive hillbillies still harbor sentiments that it's a brown-person drug, and goddamn if they ain't gonna do nothin' that no darkies are doin'. I don't know if we can reconcile these intractable extremes, but a lot of people in the middle are reasonable enough to discuss it. We need to admit to each other that pot carries non-zero risks, but that it's not as dangerous as we've been making it out to be. I fully support medicinal marijuana, but I'm not so keen on unrestrained recreational use. Like alcohol, there are responsible uses, and that's a dialog that we need to have.
  13. Expelled - Explosive? What do you think?

    Quote:Original post by trzy Would you please stop using this line of reasoning? Seriously, there is no such concept as macro-evolution. How do you define this? At one point does a change become a "macro" change? The mechanisms for evolution include natural selection, genetic drift, and gene flow. Do you have a specific problem with any of these phenomena? If so, which, and why? From what I've gathered from my friend who is an anthropologist, creationists typically use this macro / micro distinction as a circuitous way of saying "there's no such thing as speciation". What baffles me is why they think allelle frequency stops changing before speciation occurs. What is this special barrier?
  14. Miss Dodge Hit Calculation Problem

    If "concentration" is going to replace health, it should probably conform to our usual expectations of HP. Make it DP - defense points - and it should be pretty self-explanatory to any RPG player. My current game is just a text prototype, so my DP is reliant only on level and "burden", which is currently just the weight of worn armor. In this case, a highly-skilled ninja wearing an infiltration costume would have huge DP, but takes full damage from any direct hit. A fully-armored knight has poor DP, but can resist lighter weapons through his armor. However, he is too slow (too low DP) to avoid any attacks, meaning a weapon with high armor penetration (like a warhammer) is bad news for him. The trouble here is that I've already got HP, MP and SP (stamina points), and an additional DP meter sounds like a bit much. You could roll DP and SP into the same meter, but that would make your normally-skilled defenders (like the ninja) incredibly vulnerable if they use SP/DP for anything like running, attacking, etc. If you're fine with four meters, it's a good way to go, but I haven't figured out a way to simplify it.
  15. Gun Building Mechanic

    In Japanese, the word "Satsui" is usually translated as "murderous intent". There was an old Japanese film called Makai Satsui or something like that, but it is more commonly found in discussions of war and martial arts (and the manga of same). It's even the basis for "evil" characters in Street Fighter, like Akuma and Evil Ryu. There, it's called "Satsui no Hadou", which I think is something like "Surge of Murder". If there's an equivalent English word, you might look into it.