This [bleep]ing thread sometimes....

Alkan should be done by the end of double xp weekend. Gunnar should also be close to finishing by then as well with a day or two if he plays 64/72 hours like he says.

 

 

You'd be surprised how unproductive you are in real life when you're afking on rs

It really depends on your job or the work you do. It's easy to do HITS on Mturk while AFK scaping. Some jobs you just need to be there, like security jobs, or have lots of downtime.

 

I agree which is why I said REAL work.

 

For example, writing a research paper for instance which requires your 100% undivided attention.

 

There are lots of work that are not REAL work.

 

For example, cramming an exam is not REAL work. You can probably afk runescape doing that. I agree.

 

Filling forms, taking care of babies for instance, is not REAL work. Listening to lectures in school is NOT real work. You can afk doing that too.

 

Security is definitely not real work. You can probably do security, afk runescape, afk 2 more games, cram for exam and take care of babies all at the same time.

 

In fact most CEOs of the world can afk runescape cos they do not do REAL work.

 

EDIT: Sleeping for instance is REAL work. Eating, bathing is not REAL work. You can afk runescape. 

 

Sorry, but your stance is a stupid and illogical one which you shouldn't hold, because your definition of "real" work is arbitrary and subjective, based on your personal beliefs and *feelings*. Not logic. Not an objective look at value or time or merit or anything else. What you "think" is real.

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

 

Not at all. A strong subjective opinion is often of debatable value. An asinine one is simply useless. You can have a subjective stance on many issues, or definitions. If it isn't one supported by logic, good reasons, or otherwise backed up it's a poor stance to hold. Like this one.

 

 

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

 

Not at all. A strong subjective opinion is often of debatable value. An asinine one is simply useless. You can have a subjective stance on many issues, or definitions. If it isn't one supported by logic, good reasons, or otherwise backed up it's a poor stance to hold. Like this one.

 

 

let A be the set of all activities that are not multitaskable let B be the set of things that are "real work"

 

A = {∅,construction,sleeping,...}

 

His logic is:

∀x(x ∈ A ↔ x ∈ B)

 

Anyways I think the distinction is useful personally. I also think your just a bit bootyhurt about him using the term "real work". Though you could be trying to make this argument:

 

∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B) ∧ ∃x(x ∈ B ∧ x 6∈ A)

6∈ = not an element of

 

and if this is what your saying tell me what you think needs to be added

 

 

I'd write out what this means but since you've used the word logic a bunch of times now I'm sure you can figure it out for yourself :lol:

 

Set B isnt definable since the definition is not clear, hence your full argument falls apart

 

 

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

 

Not at all. A strong subjective opinion is often of debatable value. An asinine one is simply useless. You can have a subjective stance on many issues, or definitions. If it isn't one supported by logic, good reasons, or otherwise backed up it's a poor stance to hold. Like this one.

 

 

let A be the set of all activities that are not multitaskable let B be the set of things that are "real work"

 

A = {∅,construction,sleeping,...}

 

His logic is:

∀x(x ∈ A ↔ x ∈ B)

 

Anyways I think the distinction is useful personally. I also think your just a bit bootyhurt about him using the term "real work". Though you could be trying to make this argument:

 

∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B) ∧ ∃x(x ∈ B ∧ x 6∈ A)

6∈ = not an element of

 

and if this is what your saying tell me what you think needs to be added

 

 

I'd write out what this means but since you've used the word logic a bunch of times now I'm sure you can figure it out for yourself :lol:

 

Please explain :P I understand logic, but I never had lessons in it, so I don't understand the symbols :P

 

 

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

 

Not at all. A strong subjective opinion is often of debatable value. An asinine one is simply useless. You can have a subjective stance on many issues, or definitions. If it isn't one supported by logic, good reasons, or otherwise backed up it's a poor stance to hold. Like this one.

 

 

let A be the set of all activities that are not multitaskable let B be the set of things that are "real work"

 

A = {∅,construction,sleeping,...}

 

His logic is:

∀x(x ∈ A ↔ x ∈ B)

 

Anyways I think the distinction is useful personally. I also think your just a bit bootyhurt about him using the term "real work". Though you could be trying to make this argument:

 

∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B) ∧ ∃x(x ∈ B ∧ x 6∈ A)

6∈ = not an element of

 

and if this is what your saying tell me what you think needs to be added

 

 

I'd write out what this means but since you've used the word logic a bunch of times now I'm sure you can figure it out for yourself :lol:

 

 

And now in non-mathmatical english or in simple english please o.O

I sincerely hope it was poorly disguised flamebait.

 

I sincerely hope it was poorly disguised flamebait.

 

Well not exactly flame bait, but it was supposed to be a bit of a joke to poke fun at his insistence on logic in a meaning of words argument. :lol:

 

Anyways.

 

∀x(x ∈ A ↔ x ∈ B)

for all values of x, x is an element of A if and only if x is an element of B. This was backwards, oops. 

 

∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B) ∧ ∃x(x ∈ B ∧ x 6∈ A)

there exists for all values of x an x is an element of A if x is an element of B and there exists some values of x such that x is an element of B and x is not an element of A. Several mistakes in this one as well. Rush job, id edit but its already been quoted.

 

Plus other mistakes that were already mentioned, oops.

 

My comment was refering to the post that began this JOBS REAL JOBS WORKING FAMILY JOBS post 

 

 

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

 

Not at all. A strong subjective opinion is often of debatable value. An asinine one is simply useless. You can have a subjective stance on many issues, or definitions. If it isn't one supported by logic, good reasons, or otherwise backed up it's a poor stance to hold. Like this one.

 

 

let A be the set of all activities that are not multitaskable let B be the set of things that are "real work"

 

A = {∅,construction,sleeping,...}

 

His logic is:

∀x(x ∈ A ↔ x ∈ B)

 

Anyways I think the distinction is useful personally. I also think your just a bit bootyhurt about him using the term "real work". Though you could be trying to make this argument:

 

∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B) ∧ ∃x(x ∈ B ∧ x 6∈ A)

6∈ = not an element of

 

and if this is what your saying tell me what you think needs to be added

 

 

I'd write out what this means but since you've used the word logic a bunch of times now I'm sure you can figure it out for yourself :lol:

 

 

Actually, its nothing personal at all. I take online classes, and work two jobs, ~34 and ~14 hours a week each. The first is what he'd call "real" work. A small business doing anything from sales to cleaning to delivering and setting up our product. The second is what he would call "not real work." It's monitoring and keeping the location legal, and being on hand to fix things if they go wrong. It requires very little overall attention, but a high amount of knowledge to fix issues that crop up quickly, as well as to prevent them from happening in the first place. I can read/etc at that job.

 

But that doesn't mean one is "real" and the other isn't. If anything the later tends to be more highly skilled than the former, it's simply that it isn't always in constant need.

 

As before, an arbitrary definition of work which is based on "needing 100% concentration all the time" or w/e is stupid.

Well one other issue is that "real" could be a valid subjective definition, but the issue is also that it is used denigrate and disparage. Regardless it should be easily assumed that OP was a troll or clueless about work in the "real" world anyway.

 

 

 

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

 

Not at all. A strong subjective opinion is often of debatable value. An asinine one is simply useless. You can have a subjective stance on many issues, or definitions. If it isn't one supported by logic, good reasons, or otherwise backed up it's a poor stance to hold. Like this one.

 

 

let A be the set of all activities that are not multitaskable let B be the set of things that are "real work"

 

A = {∅,construction,sleeping,...}

 

His logic is:

∀x(x ∈ A ↔ x ∈ B)

 

Anyways I think the distinction is useful personally. I also think your just a bit bootyhurt about him using the term "real work". Though you could be trying to make this argument:

 

∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B) ∧ ∃x(x ∈ B ∧ x 6∈ A)

6∈ = not an element of

 

and if this is what your saying tell me what you think needs to be added

 

 

I'd write out what this means but since you've used the word logic a bunch of times now I'm sure you can figure it out for yourself :lol:

 

 

Actually, its nothing personal at all. I take online classes, and work two jobs, ~34 and ~14 hours a week each. The first is what he'd call "real" work. A small business doing anything from sales to cleaning to delivering and setting up our product. The second is what he would call "not real work." It's monitoring and keeping the location legal, and being on hand to fix things if they go wrong. It requires very little overall attention, but a high amount of knowledge to fix issues that crop up quickly, as well as to prevent them from happening in the first place. I can read/etc at that job.

 

But that doesn't mean one is "real" and the other isn't. If anything the later tends to be more highly skilled than the former, it's simply that it isn't always in constant need.

 

As before, an arbitrary definition of work which is based on "needing 100% concentration all the time" or w/e is stupid.

 

 

You get it. Let me explain futher.  The oft quote is "oh he plays runescape 18 hours a day, cos he doesnt have a real job"

 

& the whole point of the argument is to get prove that you can have a job and still play runescape 18 hours a day. In that case, if the quote is to be taken as gospel, your job is "not a real job" then.

 

So what is a real job? The only way to get round that is to argue that a "real" job is one that requires maximum concentration. So there are only a few "real" jobs in this world, if any.

 

That or otherwise, the quote does not hold.

http://puu.sh/cwyGy.jpg

 

Who's hyped!??!?!?@?@?@??!?!?!

Not me, even though I saw Segers last week at Trahaern Area getting 200m Thief.

Done

Omg how exciting!!! /s couldn't care less 

The butthurt from le mods are real omfg.

 

 

Cue all the discussions about how his dice money got him there, how others deserve it more blahblah morals in rs are dead blah eehash1 blah dseance gonna beat alkan no he doesn't care bleh

 

Next weeks topics summed up boys

I dont get why we celebrating this, its obviously unhealthy

 

 

Xp doesnt mean anything lol

 

Lol so proud :)

 

Who cares

 

i wish i could nolife

 

now we dont need to talk for a week

So now it's cool to not care about achievement, dammit i can never keep up with the xp trends  :(

So now it's cool to not care about achievement, dammit i can never keep up with the xp trends  :(

Rs community are messed up. One week they'll root for and support the people putting their lives on hold for achievements, the next they just talk sht

If only rs was still about making the most out of the few hrs you played like zarfot did, and less about who could chug energy drinks and coffee and stay up for 100 hrs sleep for 5

 

So now it's cool to not care about achievement, dammit i can never keep up with the xp trends  :(

Rs community are messed up. One week they'll root for and support the people putting their lives on hold for achievements, the next they just talk sht

If only rs was still about making the most out of the few hrs you played like zarfot did, and less about who could chug energy drinks and coffee and stay up for 100 hrs sleep for 5

 

Your mistake is in assuming that the people in this topic, or in forums in general, are all of Runescape. There's way more than just the folks who talk here. Runescape is about plenty more than folks chugging energy drinks, heh.

I know. Some of us enjoy a strong, black coffee instead.

 

 

 

 

Semantics vs Semantics... What one person sees as one thing can be taken completely different from a different individual.

 

Not at all. A strong subjective opinion is often of debatable value. An asinine one is simply useless. You can have a subjective stance on many issues, or definitions. If it isn't one supported by logic, good reasons, or otherwise backed up it's a poor stance to hold. Like this one.

 

 

let A be the set of all activities that are not multitaskable let B be the set of things that are "real work"

 

A = {∅,construction,sleeping,...}

 

His logic is:

∀x(x ∈ A ↔ x ∈ B)

 

Anyways I think the distinction is useful personally. I also think your just a bit bootyhurt about him using the term "real work". Though you could be trying to make this argument:

 

∀x(x ∈ A → x ∈ B) ∧ ∃x(x ∈ B ∧ x 6∈ A)

6∈ = not an element of

 

and if this is what your saying tell me what you think needs to be added

 

 

I'd write out what this means but since you've used the word logic a bunch of times now I'm sure you can figure it out for yourself :lol:

 

 

Actually, its nothing personal at all. I take online classes, and work two jobs, ~34 and ~14 hours a week each. The first is what he'd call "real" work. A small business doing anything from sales to cleaning to delivering and setting up our product. The second is what he would call "not real work." It's monitoring and keeping the location legal, and being on hand to fix things if they go wrong. It requires very little overall attention, but a high amount of knowledge to fix issues that crop up quickly, as well as to prevent them from happening in the first place. I can read/etc at that job.

 

But that doesn't mean one is "real" and the other isn't. If anything the later tends to be more highly skilled than the former, it's simply that it isn't always in constant need.

 

As before, an arbitrary definition of work which is based on "needing 100% concentration all the time" or w/e is stupid.

 

 

You get it. Let me explain futher.  The oft quote is "oh he plays runescape 18 hours a day, cos he doesnt have a real job"

 

& the whole point of the argument is to get prove that you can have a job and still play runescape 18 hours a day. In that case, if the quote is to be taken as gospel, your job is "not a real job" then.

 

So what is a real job? The only way to get round that is to argue that a "real" job is one that requires maximum concentration. So there are only a few "real" jobs in this world, if any.

 

That or otherwise, the quote does not hold.

 

I think he's just mad that he called it "real work" because it might sound derogatory to other work.

 

His idea is sound, there are some jobs you can do that allow you to multitask and play runescape, and there are other jobs where multitasking runescape just isn't viable. The term "real work" and not real work might offend people, but regardless of what you name them the idea is sound.

 

Would it make you guys happier if he called it "work you can scape at" and "work you can't scape at"?

Well, Alkan is basically at 10m woodcutting and 8m smithing xp from 200m all. 

 

http://gyazo.com/288e4d28e320942e7cb01c58ab72de09