venomai

I like it a lot. It caught my eye in the off-topic when I first saw it. Great work. =D>

Same with me. If it's a topic I enjoy discussing and researching (such as religion, gun violence and drug use) then I'll be more than happy to spend a lot of time in research and writing. Otherwise, I don't put much effort into the post. :P

In my experience, most public school art classes are crap. They don't focus enough on perception and learning. That's why so many kids drop out of art in their senior years. Everyone is saying "practice is key". I disagree. The real key is learning how to draw first... Only then should you start to practice regularly. Practicing bad techniques will only make matters worse. If you truly want to learn to draw you need to be taught. Either take a proper course (specific to life drawing and perception) or read a book. The book I suggested, Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain by Betty Edwards, is extremely helpful and very easy to follow.

What kind of communist? Are you a Stalinist(like Lenin) or a Socialist(like me)..? A socialist democrat, like you. I simply say communist because so much of my influences are based on its ideals (rather than capatalism).

I'm a pacifist, a drug user, an atheist, a communist, a gay supporter and a media critic. I'm all the things the government tells you to stay away from. :P I don't think America would ever let me into politics. (it's a good thing I live in Canada) Like you were saying on the Iraq War, it wouldn't be an overnight process. Decriminalization would take some time before it can work well. If marijuana was taxed and sold at a decent price, especially if the potency was high, the black market for weed would slowly fade out. One interesting article claims that the pot prohibition in America costs taxpayers more than $40 billion dollars every year. More than $10 billion of that sum is spent on enforcing the prohibition.

Frankly put, the mass media doesn't give a [cabbage] about us unless it affects their profit. Not quite. If a commercial isn't truthful they may end up in legal troubles, so most commercials tend to only tell truthful things. For example, "leaves dishes spotless" may not always be true. To save themselvse possible legal issues, it should be "leaves dishes almost spotless". Of course, saying that wouldn't be very effective. That's why you see so many "weasel words" like virtually, fights, helps, etc. Even though it's truthful, it doesn't tell you anything about the product's effectiveness. Rubbing a dish with your fingers can leave it virtually spotless. Drinking water helps fight bad breath. etc.. I recommend taking a media studies course if your school offers it. Very interesting stuff. It's changed the way I think about the media. To the OP: Certain companies care. Alternative media, especially. It's hard to avoid some of the mass media crap we see every day but there are some decent companies out there that have good intentions.

It's a decent start. You've got potential, you just need to learn to draw. I really suggest you read Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain by Betty Edwards. It works wonders and can really help you see and draw like an artist. Practice won't get you very far. You need to start seeing differently before you can start drawing well.

You get a buzz off weed, too. A single joint, depending on its potency (and a number of other factors) might not necessarily get you high in the sense that you're hugely intoxicated, but it can often give you a 'buzz' of sorts. Usually this 'weed buzz' simply puts you in a relaxing and happy mood. I often get the munchies after a joint, and everything starts tasting great.

I'm glad we're getting somewhere. :D Alcohol is a good comparison. It's a very addicting and toxic substance yet it is used responsibly by many adults and youth alike. A lot of adults drink beer or wine at dinner, but that doesn't mean they are addicted to alcohol. My marijuana use is about as casual and responsible as my alcohol consumption. There are occasional nights where I might go overboard, but I generally don't abuse it too often. Nothing is 100%, as you've said yourself. This is why I use words like "most" and "some". There are always exceptions in life.

"Losing control" is an overstatement. Moderate and responsible weed smokers are generally in control when they are high. In my opinion, it's irresponsible to smoke so much weed that you lose total control of yourself. (trust me, though, most people will fall asleep well before that can happen) Nevertheless, no responsible drug user should ever drive while intoxicated (or do any operating of dangerous machinery). Again, this is a question of responsibility. It would be irresponsible to take drugs if you suffer from a serious pre-existing condition. Anyways, to say that marijuana can cause heart attacks in predisposed persons is irrelevant. Why? Because so can painkillers, rollercoasters, coffee and a million other "dangerous" things in our world. You've said it yourself. Everything has the potential to kill you. It really comes down to weighing your options (risk vs. reward). I wouldn't do crack, heroin, etc because the risk is too great. But, as for soft drugs, how is this any more risky than various other recreational activities? (assuming it's done responsibly) The authorities aren't very interested in arresting addicts who are trying to clean themselves up. And, obviously, this is something that could be fixed with decriminalization.

I'm very sorry to hear about your cousin, will. I've said it before; marijuana is not suitable for everyone. It's a very powerful drug. There are people who can get addicted to it. Reactions can vary, sometimes for the worse. You're right, everyone's reaction is different. That's why I'm not saying "everyone go try drugs" -- I'm saying "change your opinion on drugs" and "if you use them, use them responsibly". Drugs are not a 'toy' and I realize that. If you want to take drugs, you have to be mentally and physically prepared. If you are prepared and responsible, then all I can say is good luck and have fun. I'm not sure where you get that idea... :-k I'm the first to tell people of the risks involved in taking drugs. I paid attention. It taught me that LSD, shrooms and marijuana are fatal to take and easy to overdose on. It taught me that these drugs are extremely addictive. It also taught me that alcohol is not considered a "drug" and should not be compared to other drugs because it simply "isn't the same". Since then, I've done my own research. I've realized that there is a fine line between soft drugs and hard drugs, a line they failed to mention in school. I realized that alcohol is a very dangerous drug, one far more physically harmful and addicting than marijuana. I've also realized that overdose is near-impossible on soft drugs. What's more, I've realized that many soft drugs have generally low addiction rates and most users don't have too much trouble quitting. I realized that caffeine is more addicting than marijuana. I realized that maybe drugs, although they do pose certain risks, weren't quite as bad as everyone was saying they were. I think it's time for some sources. If you haven't already read my first post, I suggest you do. ------------------------------------- Marijuana... Most users quit: Yes, there's that word again: "most". This means that there are exceptions. People with addicting personalities, people who abuse the drug, and people who are not prepared to take the drug could very well become addicted to it. However, the majority of the population does not have much trouble quitting. A study in Amsterdam showed that 90% of cannabis users were able to quit.[1] Less addicting than caffeine: Although we wouldn't say marijuana is not addicting, it's shown to be less addicting than other legal commodoties such as alcohol, nicotine or caffeine.[2][3] There are around 170 million caffeine addicts in the US alone. Caffeine can also leave some pretty nasty withdrawal symptoms.[4a] What's more, caffeine-induced psychosis is a very real danger that most people fail to realize.[4b] Caffeine is a drug that's not only legal but also very socially accepted. A lot of people "laugh off" their caffeine addiction, even though it is a serious drug problem. There are a lot of parents who worry about their children becoming addicted to marijuana but at the same time fail to consider the consequences of giving them caffeine. As I've mentioned in the IDoser thread... Numerous studies have shown that marijuana's physical harm is quite low, especially when used responsibly. No reported lung/airway damage: In the article BBC News: Cannabis 'safer than alcohol and tobacco', World Health Organization researchers found: "... marijuana smoke did not lead to blocked airways or emphysema or impact on lung function ..." No solid link to lung cancer: A number of studies have shown that lung cancer isn't linked to smoking marijuana. Even heavy smokers show no immediate rise in cancer risks. [5][6] No damage to the immune system: This claim was introduced when extremely high (near-fatal) doses were seen to impair the immune system in animals. However, studies show that regular or even heavy use of marijuana in humans has no effect on the immune system.[7][8] A 1988 study has shown that marijuana actually slightly contributes to the effectiveness of the immune system.[9] Marijuana death rate is low: There have been zero documented deaths directly due to marijuana consumption. It's nearly impossible to overdose on marijuana. That's not to say marijuana has never killed, though. Between 1997 and 2005 there were around 280 cannabis-related deaths in the U.S.[10] Personally, I feel that many of these injuries can be avoided by legalization and responsible use. With over 25.4 million U.S. marijuana users in 2005 [11] and an average of 35 deaths per year, that's around 0.0001% dying indirectly from cannabis. According to the same study, you are over 8 times more likely to die from Viagra than from marijuana. Note: Many European smokers "patch" their joints with tobacco from cigarettes, which could certainly give rise to some of these negative physical effects. This is done far less often in North America. I avoid smoking patched joints as I know how harmful they can be to my health. Mental Illness Risks: Psychological risks are a completely different matter. Many sources claim that cannabis can trigger psychosis in certain individuals.[12] Also, since oral cannabis tends to give much stronger effects, some users may experience a "bad trip" (short-term psychosis).[13] I don't doubt this, I've seen a few bad trips in my day and I've even experienced some anxiety and paranoia while smoking. I'm sure that a "bad trip" or any similar traumatic experience (drug-induced or not) could easily trigger psychosis in susceptible individuals. Like I've said many times before, those with a history of mental illness should stay well away from mind-altering drugs. However, it's worth noting that many of these findings have been strongly criticized. I'm not totally convinced either way, but here are some contradicting articles worth a read. http://www.illinoisnorml.org/content/view/510/27/ http://www.stats.org/stories/2007/do_sk ... r27_07.htm A couple interesting quotes: "For individuals, the current evidence suggests, at worst, that using cannabis increases lifetime risk of developing schizophrenia by one percent" "increased rates of cannabis use in the last thirty years have not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in the rate of psychosis in the population"

34 omg

Hey wyrm. :) How's CG art treating you? I've almost given up on it.. my interest in programming is taking over. :lol:

Yea, lots of the Developer addons are pretty stupid and buggy. It should be fine if you just stick to the regular Facebook-default applications, though. I prefer Facebook. It's very clean and organized and it's a great way to communicate and setup events, groups, etc.

It was, without a doubt, the most boring movie I've ever watched. And I'm pretty interested in environmental issues, especially for a teenager. I enjoyed some of the statistics in it, though. Even if all the details are very forgettable, it still makes you see how much we are contributing to global warming. My answer? No. Don't show the full movie in schools. Maybe clips of it, if anything. The best choice would be to remake it in a way that appeals to teens and youth. Michael Moore's documentaries are great to be shown in school because they are entertaining and humourous and really get the point across. Just my two cents from personal experience. Nobody in my class payed attention to An Inconvenient Truth, but they loved watching Bowling for Columbine.

You really sound like you're mixing up hard and soft drugs. :-s I'm not very trusting of drugs. I wouldn't try a new substance without thoroughly researching it first and deeming it safe to use. I guess you've never been high. Most people are extremely thoughtful when they're stoned. Even if the entire population was in a permanent state of being high (which is impossible as your body builds a rapid tolerance to the drug) citizens wouldn't let the government do "whatever it wished". You still have control while high. Most people feel very relaxed and peaceful while high. If everyone was perma-high there would be far less wars, abuse and other horrors that come with sobriety. Sounds like a blast. Make sure you're ready for it. Good luck and have a safe trip. ;)

Yep, you've got a point there. Lacing, although it's pretty rare, is a real risk when taking any illicit drug. As you've mentioned, this risk could be avoided with regulation and control. They are both recreational activities that are equally as non-lethal (in the sense that neither is very capable of causing death). I would say they compare just fine. Feel free to contradict me with some reasoning. Yea, a lot of drugs have negative side effects, but it's assumed that these effects are less problematic than the issues you encounter without the help of the drug. Although, I would never consider side effects like headaches, weakness or fatigue "harmful". :-s Thanks for the encouraging words, friend. I'm not addicted to drugs and I won't become addicted any time soon. As I've said, I'm not a heavy user and I feel no reason to be. Nice addition for somebody who has failed to provide any sort of evidence to any of their claims.

kinda neat but the text should stand out a bit more (especially the T which is hardly visible).

Neat style. I like your work. 8-)

In a game like CS, probably a Glock 17 or M4A1-SD. In real life... the finger gun? :)

Oldest one I could find... :| It was back in 2004, and I started with CG in '02 or '03.. I'll try to get an older one from archive.org. My first few sigs were pretty awful. :lol: EDIT: edited to a slightly older one...

Another quick piece... This time a photo manip. Has a lot of pop art influence. The white border doesn't go well on this forum. :| Stocks used: http://www.sxc.hu/photo/866130 http://www.sxc.hu/photo/885657 http://www.sxc.hu/photo/888605

Quick sketch in photoshop with a tablet... Halloween flavoured. :) Comments/crits appreciated.

It was the only Hemingway I've read so far, and it was pretty decent. I also read it in Spain during the running of the bulls, which probably made the book seem a lot better. I'll look into other Hemingway books though, he seems like a good author. I hear lots about clockwork orange... gotta read that one too. :)

If the guy's got his gun out, why wouldn't he shoot as you reach for your own gun? The only way I can see it being helpful is if you pull out your own weapon before the other. And, if that's the case, you're not really self-defending yourself since you're pulling it out before any serious threat is evident. In fact, if you're pointing a gun at the "criminal" -- couldn't he pull out his own in self defense? Either way, if everyone's strapped, it's basically like a western shootout, isn't it? Whoever pulls out their guns first wins. Just how I'm seeing it. Feel free to criticise my opinion. I've never been in a gun fight.