sees_all1

Could you please rephrase what you've said? I'm not clear on the main point you're wanting to make, and I'm a little confused by the contradiction (maybe its just me). I'll go back to lurking now :thumbup: .

Happened three times to me yesterday. I keep my EXP counter open and reset after every fight to determine how much damage I've done to someone. I've found the maximum absolute experience I can get out of someone is about 2500, or ~90 hp and 27 swordfish. At that point, they're usually dead or running to the nearest safe spot. Worst I ever had was 2200 experience from damage dealt, and I still didn't get the kill. I've even made conscious decisions when PKing to NOT go for a KO when I haven't taken enough health from them. How ridiculous is that? I've got an opportunity to kill my opponent (and in all probability will kill them), but I'm worried enough that some incompetent punk will get the drop because they drew their last fight out enough. The system is great when someone else decides to jump in and finish your fight - they don't get the benefit of your effort. The system is horrible when you get a kill and you have no idea where they were downed, and its also horrible when you kill someone but don't get credit. This seems to happen more times in Bounty Hunter than PvP worlds, but that might just be me.

I looked at using a bezier curve to mimic human input. It was a fun exercise in programming, actually. What's nice about the bezier curve is how smooth it is, and the first point and the last point in the series are the start and end points. The difficult part is mimicking the speed of parts in the curve. But its easy to generate 2-4 points along the path from A to B and it generates a smooth line. Actually, here's an applet demonstrating it (better than I can explain in text). http://www.netgraphics.sk/bezier-curve-3

Battle axe if you only want to train strength.

You'll find that everything is much slower than members. You can use your time to play GOP, save up tokens to buy water tallies to train summoning later. Woodcutting and fishing are semi-afkable, do these while you watch television?

But that doesn't fully explain the rest of the Middle East, and concluding that "we have ourselves to blame" doesn't help the situation; even after we apologize for whatever wrongs we may have committed, terrorists will still be terrorists. Yes, Roeder is a terrorist. I have no problem saying that, which is why I brought him up. Even with everything Bill O'Reilly has said, never has he called for a vigilante, which is in direct contrast to Al Gore: I know enough about Tiller's history (questionable activity, boorish manners, and seemingly complete disregard for the law) that merits Bill O'Reilly bringing him up on the show. I would quote some of the things Tiller said during his career, but I don't think this is the appropriate thread to do it in. We're already pretty far off topic :wink:

I agree; it was a jab at Bloomberg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3srghy2IFBg&feature=related If I had a nickel for every time the media in the US referred to Islam as the religion of peace, I'd probably be looking at retiring by now. Also the "we have to understand what's upsetting them" mentality that most liberals (or media) will take (and not just on Islam). "We can't blame the individual, they were a product of society," blah blah blah. It's funny, because they'll go on and on about "Islam is the victim", or blame the west for upsetting them, but they'll refuse to call terrorism for what it is. A good example would be the Fort Hood shooting - this happened Nov. 6th last year, and the first time the White House publicly called it an act of terrorism was Jan 15th this year, but the person that did it asked to remain anonymous. It isn't exclusive to Islam though, its the mainstream media against "right-wing nut jobs." When Scott Roeder murdered George Tiller, members of the media made a frenzy about it and wanted to know if Billy O'Reilly had incited the violence because of a few comments he'd made previously. When James Lee took the Discovery Channel Headquarters hostage, I don't remember any in the mainstream media asking if Al Gore incited the violence due to his comments about civil unrest.

You must have missed a few days in macroeconomics 101. Let me fill you in. Banks are required to have cash on hand to back their deposits. They cannot lend more money when their reserves are too low. The United State's required reserve ratio is 10%. That means for every dollar someone deposits in a bank, that bank is allowed to lend $.90 from it. If that person takes that loan and deposits it into a bank, the next bank is able to lend $.81 from the left-over, and so-on. A dollar saved is up to ten dollars lent. If no one saves their money, no one can essentially borrow money from banks. Savings finance the world being built. If the marginal propensity to save decreases, that spells looming disaster for the economy. Read this so you can catch up. The United States has 4.5% of the world's population, yet produces 23.9% of the world's GDP. If free market capitalism is a failure, would you care to explain how the United States became so prosperous? Maybe, contrast it with China, which has 19.4% of the world's population, but only produces 4.33% of the world's GDP. Or India, which has 17% of the world's population, but only produces 1.9% of the world's GDP? And don't talk to me about Luxembourg or any country with a population of less than 30 million people. We need to discuss things that have the same order of magnitude. Communism or Super-Socialism in practice has failed quite a few times. Humans are capitalists by nature, so letting them profit from the sweat of their own brow is better motivation than the state taking their effort, and rationing them the same amount as the bum next door.

I too enjoy jumping to conclusions. Come out and say it already hahah, you just want everyone to agree with you that muslims are savages, right? Pretty sure it was a tea-partier that was pissed off about health care. No, but I do enjoy lefties trying to make up excuses for everything Radical Islam does. On an *unrelated note*, there was a stat about how many "right wingers" committed terrorist acts in the past year, how many "left wingers", etc. for quite a few categories. Turns out that the person in that last year that was most likely to commit terrorism was the radical left; although I think the number was higher because of Greece.

subtitle says "Cuba to eliminate state jobs." Maybe I need to add the word "again" to the title to make it absolutely clear to you that refuse to read the article posted in the OP?

You'll have remembered from macroeconomics that people saving their money is a good thing; it allows banks to lend more. Every dollar saved is ten more banks can lend (see reserve ratio and money multiplier). But this isn't a discussion about the U.S.'s economy/government/laws, its a discussion about Cuba cutting half a million jobs from its public sector workforce.

I'll pray for you. Just curious, which country are you in?

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/09/14/france.burqa.ban/?hpt=T1 Found this to be semi-relevant to the topic. America is so intolerant of Islam that: Oh, also the Eiffel tower has been recently evacuated due to a bomb threat. I wonder who called it in? :rolleyes:

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet? Why is the distinction in name so important? Might as well be the same thing - overbearing government, state controlled everything. Same poo, different flavor. Half a million state workers in a country that has a workforce of five million is very significant. Other government estimates earlier said that Cuba had a million in their government that weren't contributing significantly enough to justify employing them. The government just told everyone that in half a year, their unemployment will be 10%. The awful part about this is that by cutting them loose, they're probably going to take away the jobless' benefits, which includes the "super cheap health-care", food and housing.

I'm going to spend effort getting an awesome bank picture for that forthcoming guide... give myself some credibility? *banks and hoards all loot* I'll probably get around to starting it this weekend. Stay tuned.

Even if its a sliding door? :twss: JavaScript crashing quietly annoys the HELL out of me.

I'm a conservative. I want limited federal government. I vote for the individual that most closely aligns with my views. If the government is limited, there's absolutely no way it can abuse its power. And you still have yet to show me how being a Christian means you need to support big government. Spare us the personal attacks and off-topic posts.

Some Christian you are. Do you even know what you're talking about? You try and get around without a phone in the present day, dude. Let's see how long you last, and I'll even let you live in your current state of luxury (though you can't borrow others' phones). It's so nice that you want to return to the days of the Gilded Age, but those of us who want to move beyond the 19th century are moving forward. You have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And heavily subsidized or free shelter, free health-care, free food, free cell-phone. You have a right to remain in "poverty" for the rest of your life (which is better off than 80-90% of the world's population), and be a perpetual bum. Oh, and magekillr - How does not wanting big government make you less of a Christian? Can you back that up with scripture?

That's right, the free market system hates big government interfering with all its dirty workings. We know that both extremes are bad for a nation. Too much deregulation, and you create a permanent underclass that works itself to death. Too much regulation,and you create a permanent underclass that has no freedom. I'd like to think that the optimal place is somewhere, closer to less government, more freedoms; I see a handful of things a government can do to make its nation/people more prosperous. Simple things like, enforce the established law, protect ones sovereignty, and provide aid and organization to areas that have been devastated. We'll see what happens with Cuba?

Not sure I see the artistic value of it. Sounds to me by that courts argument, all mature internet material of this nature could be banned, to protect the children. Are the ears in the pic provided part of lolicon too, or just some weird fettish?

But everyone includes you as well. Nope. I'm a nobody, so I get everything. It also makes me perfect, etc. GF! In all seriousness, Cuba may have the "best" (floating criteria, but everyone likes to use them as an example) health-care system in the world right now, but given a hint of capitalism and all the bright stars who normally would become doctors instead become whatever is most profitable. That means to attract bright minds to becoming doctors, they'll have to pay more. Prices will rise, and we'll see Cuban's amazing health-care system become trash from the bloat that the government is trying to rid itself of. Unless they put a gun to their head and force them to be doctors, that might work. :thumbdown:

The easiest way to make sure everyone gets an equal share is to make sure everyone gets nothing. :shades:

Used Google to translate it. [hide=translated text] [/hide]

A famous quote from George Orwell's Animal Farm is "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." Similarly, an Austrian analyst, Willi Schlamm said "The trouble with socialism is socialism. The trouble with capitalism is capitalists." I don't think any social structure or method of government can be called "theoretically perfect" when it inherently goes against human nature. To the best of my understanding, all humans are capitalists. They'll seek to gain as much as they can for themselves, in almost any manner they can (be it legally, within the system, or illegally, outside the system). The original Communists were no different - they recognized that they could gain power through a violent overthrow of the status quo. The leaders of the Communist party were capitalists - they kept their power by using the system, while at the same time they enriched themselves with the system. Cuba's communist system of government failing isn't a proof that Communism fails, but instead is evidence that the long term system can't work. One of the things I think is interesting in the article is the part that says: I also find it ironic that Cuba is the shining star for the big government argument, and even they are looking to reduce the size of their government. If anyone can provide the original press release from Cuba, I'd love to read it first hand.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39152912/ns/world_news-americas/ [mock award accepting speech]There's so many people to thank for this honor. First off, I'd like to thank my family, my parents, especially my mom. I'd also like to thank the founders and great thinkers; the Marxs, Lenins, Stalins, and Zedongs of the world. Without you, this would never be possible. I'd also like to thank Castro for being such a good sport about it. A special shout out to Che Guevara, may your face be forever on t-shirts. Finally, and most importantly, I'd like to credit Obama for the beginning of the end of Communism as we know it. May this be the greatest achievement of his Presidency.[/speech] Discuss. EDIT: Used Google to translate it. [hide=translated text] [/hide]