Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Antioch]

I actually think Rockstar is a nice song, though I have to say a lot of their songs sound alike.

I kinda hate things entire "YOU MUST LOVE OR HATE A BAND" thing. There are boatloads of bands that have just a couple of songs that I like and many others songs that I don't.

[Frumple]

I just pretty close to never remember the band/composer names at all, m'self. There's exceptions (tchaikovsky, caravan palace, etc.), but fairly few relative to the amount of stuff I've listened to. If the music's good I don't much care who made it, heh.

[ein]

i think nickelback just had that sorta perfect combination of at-the-time mainstream popularity and genericness. they're generic enough to be easy to make fun of for sounding generic, but then technically good enough that you don't want to tear your eardrums out listening to them, and even appeal to people who aren't in on the joke or haven't been exposed to more out there music

you see this kinda effect in a lot of media. with video games for instance, everybody loves to hate on your call of duties and assassin's creeds, but who remembers big rigs? ride to hell retribution? in a few years, maybe even months, after steam greenlight is buried and forgotten, who's going to remember all of the buggy, broken, piece of shit games that actually managed to make it onto the steam storefront

[itisnotlogical]

I kinda hate things entire "YOU MUST LOVE OR HATE A BAND" thing. There are boatloads of bands that have a just couple of songs that I like and many others songs that I don't.

Almost all the music I like is like that. I like a few by this band, a few by that band, but never more than a few songs.

There's only three groups in all my listening that I can conclusively say "I like almost everything by these people."

[helmacon]

I kinda hate things entire "YOU MUST LOVE OR HATE A BAND" thing. There are boatloads of bands that have a just couple of songs that I like and many others songs that I don't.

Almost all the music I like is like that. I like a few by this band, a few by that band, but never more than a few songs.

There's only three groups in all my listening that I can conclusively say "I like almost everything by these people."

Ok, i'll bite.
What three groups?

[itisnotlogical]

Iron Savior, Savage Circus and Gloryhammer. The latter two have only had two albums apiece though so "everything" is a pretty small category. Despite the thematic differences their actual sound tends to be pretty similar.

[Max™]

@misko
I've been sick and in bed off and on most of the last day, or two, not sure, much as I am not sure about many things. I didn't like not knowing what things were as early as I can remember, and as I learned how much of what was thought to be fact is closer to an approximation I found myself going back through what I thought was true that was actually just possibly true or even probably true. When I encountered church as a thing and religion as a concept I started reading about that and it bugged the shit out of me that this word "belief" keeps cropping up, and that the definition seems to be "something held to be true" so I started going back through other books and investigating it, trying to find the "under these conditions" extension of that statement. Held to be true if what, or when this, or as long as that, something like that. Later I learned this isn't actually a problem for most people, but when you suggest that it is a problem for you they kinda seem shocked at the whole idea that if I express a belief I am lying to myself and others. No I don't need to take it to that point, but it feels wrong to do so without a viable "under these conditions" qualifier, but that means it isn't really a belief anymore doesn't it? Varying levels of doubt and confidence suffice for me and are far more comfortable than unwarranted certainty.

Now the comfort of my pillow is calling me back, stupendous and unheard of slumbers await me there, and I shall seek them soon.

[ChairmanPoo]

@misko
I've been sick and in bed off and on most of the last day, or two, not sure, much as I am not sure about many things. I didn't like not knowing what things were as early as I can remember, and as I learned how much of what was thought to be fact is closer to an approximation I found myself going back through what I thought was true that was actually just possibly true or even probably true. When I encountered church as a thing and religion as a concept I started reading about that and it bugged the shit out of me that this word "belief" keeps cropping up, and that the definition seems to be "something held to be true" so I started going back through other books and investigating it, trying to find the "under these conditions" extension of that statement. Held to be true if what, or when this, or as long as that, something like that. Later I learned this isn't actually a problem for most people, but when you suggest that it is a problem for you they kinda seem shocked at the whole idea that if I express a belief I am lying to myself and others. No I don't need to take it to that point, but it feels wrong to do so without a viable "under these conditions" qualifier, but that means it isn't really a belief anymore doesn't it? Varying levels of doubt and confidence suffice for me and are far more comfortable than unwarranted certainty.

Now the comfort of my pillow is calling me back, stupendous and unheard of slumbers await me there, and I shall seek them soon.

...quoth the Raven "Nevermore"

[itisnotlogical]

ChairmanPoo, I have to say I've loved every one of your avatars starting with the Kirk one. The newest one takes the cake though.

[IndigoFenix]

So why is preserving the human race a desirable goal anyway? That is - why should we care about the future generations? What's wrong with just using all the resources we can to live the most luxurious life we can, the future be damned?

Evolution will ensure that people with the instinct to preserve their genes or the genes of their species will outcompete those who do not.  And no matter what you consider the ultimate goal to be, failing to accomplish that goal won't achieve it, so all else being equal, why choose a goal that is doomed to fail?

I mean, I guess you can stop the  triumph of self-preservation by exterminating all life.  But that doesn't really help anyone.

[itisnotlogical]

If you complain that a game's "only good with mods" and completely tear out the guts until it doesn't even resemble what you bought, you should probably just spend your money on the game that you would rather be playing in the first place.

[CABL]

The very concept of "truthful" Mass media/Journalism is self-defeating. If mass media stops feeding propaganda and instead starts telling the truth, then the majority of the people will need to have their very own opinions, which will destroy the very concept of "majority" and "masses". As we all know, the masses can't have their opinions form without state/journalist propaganda. They simply don't have enough brains/time to discuss the complexities of our world, so they just turn on TV/read a newspaper/go on The Internet, and trust all the biased bullshit the mass media/journalist spews. For example, if in my country (Russia) the mass media suddenly starts to tell the truth about the pro-Russian terrorists in the Ukraine, and how they hurt, rape and mutilate their own former friends and acquaintances just because they heard that Russia has better paychecks (not really) and that Ukrainians just want to take their rightful territory from the terrorists back, then it will give your typical Russian citizen an existential crisis (if he's not too blinded by nationalism, of course). So yea, if the very essence of mass media is to being biased, then how it can be "truthful"? Hell, the majority of Russian citizens will claim that Western mass media cannot be trusted because they are (OHMYGODOHMYGOD!!11) biased against the Russia. Same will say the majority of Westerners about Pro-Russian mass media, "they cannot be trusted because they are biased against the West". We all love One True Bias/Source™ while dismissing the other biases/sources as "wrong ones".

TL:DR - There cannot be a "truthful" and "unbiased" mass media/source because the very essence of the mass media (and humans as a species) is in being biased. Of course, it's my opinion, you don't have to agree with it. After all, it's "Unpopular/Controversial Ideas Thread"!

@ itisnotlogical - ChairmanPoo's avatar makes me a little bit uncomfortable. I think I'll just AdBlock the avatar to don't see a muscular body with a face for a crotch.

[ChairmanPoo]

If you complain that a game's "only good with mods" and completely tear out the guts until it doesn't even resemble what you bought, you should probably just spend your money on the game that you would rather be playing in the first place.

what if it doesnt exist or you cant get it?

[itisnotlogical]

I'm hard-pressed to think of a game that doesn't exist. And if you can acquire one game, legally or no, surely you have the means or methods to acquire a different one?

[ChairmanPoo]

Maybe it cant run properly in your system.

Case in point I very much prefer DF to Rimworld, but I have terrible performance problems.


Not that Rimworld doesnt have its charm, but without the extra content mods I'd get bored I think