In the Lord of the Rings fandom there’s a persistent debate whether balrogs, or Durin’s Bane specifically, have wings. The text in Fellowship is ambiguous whether what it is describing are literal wings or something else wing-like.
I’m a planetary scientist so technically this is a field, you can also be into meteorites as a hobby.
Chondrule formation. These are spherical balls of formerly molten rock that solidified and clumped together to form chondrites, some of the oldest rocks in the Solar System that predate planet formation. Essentially these are nebular dust grains that formed when the Solar System was still an accretionary disk.
Except, do chondrules predate planet formation? What causes them to melt while they’re floating around? How do they overcome the kinetic barriers to agglomeration? Are the terrestrial planets, whose bulk composition is thought to be chondritic, actually composed of chondrites?
If you want to see one of the most simultaneously esoteric and bitter scientific debates, attend a chondrule formation session at a meteorite or planetary science conference. MetSoc is a great one in August, and officially I go to present my work but actually I just love the fireworks. As an achondrite person, I don’t touch this topic with a ten foot pole, but I love to watch when someone introduces a new wacky idea (space lightning? Shine from a molten Io? Extrasolar?) and you see 15 eminent greybeards rush the mic to yell their objections.
Some would argue it misses the topic, but I’ll offer the Unix text editor wars. Vi vs. Emacs is pretty much the epitome of a pointless religious war in people’s favourite activity, though for some that’s obviously their job.
Why do I mention it? Because most would just look at it and say: obviously none of the above, what are you even talking about? But those in the know have been heatedly debating the topic since at least the 80s… (I’m team vi for what it’s worth)
-Guitar picks/strings
-Warhammer editions (Or competitive vs narrative play)
-using linux and the many reasons why
Star Trek (Voyager): Was it murder to split Tuvix back into Tuvok and Neelix?
I’ve got a long and complex possible solution to offer regarding this ethical clusterfuck, and I’m willing to elaborate if someone’s interested to hear it.
Edit (possible solution): Voyager’s database should include the Enterprise D’s information regarding Riker’s duplication incident. While Voyager’s crew already found a way to separate Tuvix, they could’ve searched for a possibility to repeat that process and then split back the copy Tuvix a few milliseconds into the original Tuvok and Neelix before said copy became self-aware.
So I was under the assumption that every time they beamed someone up or down they murdered them and an exact copy appeared elsewhere.
That’s what makes it a good story though - an ethical dilemma with no clear “right” answer.
The longest and most complex solutions are usually right (yes, please share).
The trench from my bed to my toilet is three meters but I can whizz without getting up anymore
Im curious, please share
Two characters got merged into one completely new character the had traits of both, but was their own person. Decision was made to forcibly (against the new character’s wishes) undo the accident and restore the two people. In so doing the new character no longer existed.
deleted by creator
Yes ive seen Voyager lol, I meant their solution
Thanks for trying tho
Lol should have remembered this was Lemmy.
Sir this is a Wendy’s.
No, this is Patrick
I’ll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large diet coke (I’m watching my figure).
I’ll meet you out behind the dumpster in three minutes, sir.
Too bad, new organism, we want our selves back- what? Deal w/i
They should have just kept replicating Tuvix with the transporter and using him as fuel.
The Riker split depended on a plant on that one particular planet. Maybe it cannot be replicated.
Fully embracing that technology would have loads of chaotic outcomes…maybe they forbade it or something? Ripe for abuse…the ability to make infinite free clones or people…
Boimler would like a word
They used a transporter, so yes.
Every use of a transporter where someone is disassembled is murder, or possibly suicide.
It’s clonicide!
Alternatively we’re just data (as muteable as a save file) so neither of them died at any point as Tuvix was a valid continuation of both their continuities, similary when Tuvix was split again Tuvok and Nelix also constituted valid continuations of Tuvix’s continuity.
Yes, they could have just printed out a new copy of Tuvok and Neelix, and left Tuvix alone. The restriction that you can’t just make copies never made sense. Are there souls in Star Trek? Is the soul the thing that is actually being “transported” into a new body substrate?
they did it again LTD. anyways, janeway practically groomed 7 of 9, not in a sexual way but trying to mold her into a daughter she never had.
Yes and she was right to do it. Except maybe she should have made a backup so she could have done it again
Are tabs worth two spaces or four?
That’s the beauty of tabs, it can be whatever you want.
But the correct answer is 4
I’m a spaces guy, but agree on the 4. A coder told me decades ago that 4 is better than 2 because if your code starts wrapping due to too many indents you should be refactoring it into functions anyway.
Spaces, in 2026? Why?
In part, because it forces 2-space tab users to confront the indentation issue above
Also there are no drawbacks… I still hit the tab key to indent (and shift tab to dedent). My editor does the rest.
The drawback to spaces is that people with vision issues or dyslexia lose the ability to make the code more readable in their IDE by adjusting tab size.
I can’t speak to dyslexia (but in would guess that 4 spaces is easier than 2?).
At my last job we had a default linter policy of 4 spaces across all languages (python, JS, rust, mostly). We also had a blind coder. He never mentioned it. I’d guess screen readers are capable of dealing with it these days?
You can do the same thing with a linter rule, without forcing everyone to see the code in your preferred way.
Also there are no drawbacks
That’s just not true.
Enlighten me?
You might want to read this: https://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/c8drjo/nobody_talks_about_the_real_reason_to_use_tabs/
(There are more downsides of spaces, but I do not care to list everything. It should be obvious that “there are no drawbacks” is a far too general statement. :P)
Tabs are one space *quickly runs away*
I use a single space to indent when writing Python in a SecureCRT command window that gets sent to an interactive Python shell on the server.
Tabs are one space *quickly runs away*
Run all you want, but we will find you!!! 😉
:set tabwidth=4I might have the solution: Elastic Tabs. They di what tabs were always meant to do from the start, whilst also fixing the shortcomings that spaces are currently used to fill.
When you display a TSV file using elastic tabs, they finally display nicely.
Wtf is this witchcraft and how can I use it in VS Code?
I’m not on my PC right now but I think this is the plugin I use
https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=isral.elastic-tabstops-mono
You are my spirit animal! ❤️
❤️✌️
I’ve heard of 8, 4, and even 3 which is pretty crazy… how could it possibly be 2!?
2 spaces is pretty common in JavaScript… And I think I remember it being pretty standard in HTML way back when. Screens used to be smaller, with low resolution. 4 spaces was a luxury.
Isn’t 2 spaces the standard in Ruby? I don’t use it, but I’ve heard such things.
Two spaces sure, but that’s for people who don’t use tabs.
Yes, I mean tab stops set to two spaces.
This is my experience as well. These days, fewer than 4 spaces is downright unreadable to my aging eyes.
3 is just downright evil.
3 is a tab width compromise. It is wider than 2 but not as wide as 4. No one is happy but not as unhappy as they would be at their less preferred extreme.
Enlightened centrism at its finest.
Three.
4 for code 2 for yaml
That depends; are oranges worth 9 feathers or 12?
However many I feel like that day. Sometimes depends on the language and use case - if it tends to be deeply indented, I’d gravitate towards 2.
If using actual tabs, you can change how they appear just for yourself without touching the actual code; the same can’t be said about spaces.
I was trying to stay out of the fray but this one I feel I have to respond to:
tabs, you can change how they appear just for yourself without touching the actual code; the same can’t be said about spaces.
This is why I use spaces. A space is a space everywhere, a tab depends too strongly on the editor. I’ve had too many times where I had to edit on a different machine and it transmogrified my tabs into a different non-character entity in a way that didn’t reveal itself until later.
I can kind of see your point if you’re speaking from a devops/sysadmin’s point of view (i.e. something that would require you to use default editors on the go on systems that you don’t necessarily have control over).
Other than that, a tab’s principal purpose is indentation. One tab is one level of indentation regardless of how it appears. If a tab gets transformed into something else, it sounds like a text encoding problem and indentation would then be just one of (and possibly the smallest of) several possible issues.
I’m speaking from a web dev’s point of view - I’m assuming that I’ll always have my own configured editor on hand and I’ll be able to tell it that one tab is N spaces, sometimes even differently for different file types in the same project. Worst that could happen is that I don’t have a specific configuration and the editor just falls back to the default until I set otherwise. Since I’m working in a team, using spaces for a source controlled project would mean that everyone has to use the same. Having tabs means that everyone can configure it for themselves (assuming editor configs don’t go in the repo).
Four, but I’m a spaces fella.
Live a little and do a mix of both
This way people from both sides of the argument can hate you. Win-win!
I collect coins, and there’s always debates about what a coin is.
For those who don’t know, a coin is usually defined as an object with legal tender status somewhere; as opposed to a token that has a face value but is issued by a non-state actor; and a medal, which is anything that looks like a coin but doesn’t have any face value.
Now, aside from the expected debate over what is and isn’t a state, there’s also the issue of NIFC (not intended for circulation) coins. Many mints sell coins that are legal tender, but are never put into circulation, some people (often those that could be characterised as “old school”) take the position that as these aren’t intended to be used as legal tender, they aren’t really coins.
It doesn’t help that there are tiny island nations like Niue and Samoa that will basically let companies make anything legal tender if they pay them. This leads to the rather silly situation where a batarang, and a literal statue of hogwarts, are technically “coins”. (I’ve been told this is done as a import tariff dodge as the USA doesn’t charge import taxes on coins)
Imagine being a Samoan shopkeeper and some tourist showing up and trying to pay with a friggin statue of Hogwarts.
It’s 5ozt of pure silver, so I wouldn’t say no…
id accept it as payment, record a video of myself melting it down and making it into a small blahaj figurine, and make the video public to spite and annoy jk rowling and the harry potter fanbase
Ladies and gentlemen, a coin:
What the fuck is wrong with Samoa? Like, I can speculate but my speculations are unkind. I don’t want to go there.
It has the same size population as Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Weird stuff happens on islands.
Weird stuff happens on islands.
my dude, that’s a thought stopping phrase. weird shit happens everywhere. there’s this toilet in boston
Ok, it’s probably your racist thing then. Happy?
racist thing?
What were the “unkind speculations” you wanted to hint at but not articulate?
you’re doing the antisemite thing again starik.
I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say “racist,” but I can see how someone might think you sound xenophobic. If I didn’t enjoy interacting with your posts so often, I could see how someone would see your tone as trying to “other” and shame an entire culture. But I know that’s usually not where you’re coming from.
Cooking:
Aioli is made with oil and no egg. If it includes egg, it is a mayonnaise.
Many people just call everything “aioli” these days, even if it’s technically a mayonnaise.
In my experience, people will put garlic in mayo and call it aioli.
It is absolutely an aioli. You just have to de-emulsify it, separate out the egg, and then emulsify the non-mayonnaise ingredients. It’s not like it’s chemistry or entropy or whatever.
I don’t think that’s an internal debate, I think everyone who understands about the topic knows the difference between aioli and garlic mayo. It’s people from outside that use the wrong term, so not really an internal debate.
That’s not been my experience. I think a lot of people feel like it’s lesser to call their dip a mayonnaise, so they call it an aioli. Especially at restaurants.
That’s fucked up, man. Mayo can be fancy af. This is mayo erasure.
I’m pretty sure you’re being sarcastic, but I’d passionately back this stance. Emulsions are a goddamn art, and need to be respected for their insane range and joy.
Sure, but that’s just the restaurant trying to sound fancier than they are, they know it’s not aioli. It’s like when they say they have wasabi but bring you a paste, there’s no debate that wasabi is a root but that most restaurants will serve you a green paste that has 0% wasabi in it. Which is why places that serve real wasabi or aioli usually have it listed as “real wasabi” or “real aioli”, both to clarify they’re using the correct term and not the popular one and to warn people as both aioli and wasabi taste different from the mass produced garlic mayo and mustard paste restaurants usually serve.
Oh cool, did not know this thanks.
Now I can properly judge hipsters who call their overpriced mayo aioli lol
How does one get the emulsion started without egg or mustard ?
Emulsion between oil and garlic.
Yep, this.
Anyone who hasn’t should give it a try. Takes a bit of mixing to get it emulsified (you could probably do it in a food processor), but aoili is so delicious and underappreciated, at least here in the US. Add some salt and a touch of lemon. Dip some roasted veggies in there. Yum.
Garlic is an emulsifier, less potent than egg, but still an emulsifier. Which means true aioli is EXTREMELY garlicky (as it is almost 50% garlic), it loses some potency over time like most garlic things, but freshly made aioli is something you don’t put a lot of (and may be part of the reason most restaurants don’t serve it)
I think I use about 1:3 ratio of garlic to oil. It is quite garlicky.
Should the hobby continue to be about both the act of printing and tinkering with printers, or is there a reasonable place for people who want “3D printing” as a hobby but not “3D printers” as a hobby. As part of this, is it okay for a company to lock down its firmware and prevent people from using their printer over a network without going through their software first?
Bambu Lab has made remarkable progress in “mainstreaming” 3D printing but they’ve done so at the expense of a lot of the “soul” of the space. Unlike many of their consumer-facing predecessors and competitors, they are closed-source and proprietary. They make a good product, but you don’t get to have control over it the same way you do with other brands. And that just means other brands are likely to follow suit, now that Bambu Lab has shown it to be an effective strategy.
I mourn the loss of common purpose the hobby once had, but at the same time I do think it’s a natural progression for something new and complex to eventually become consumer-grade. Look at how computers have evolved into rectangles we keep in our pockets.
I want the printing to be the hobby, not the printer, but I also don’t want the consumer-hostile stuff that Bambu is doing to spread.
I’m stuck with an A1 mini and don’t know where to go from here. I’m not an engineer and haven’t had much luck designing anything more complex than a single static part, and I think you really have to be good at making your own stuff for a printer to be a good purchase. But at the same time I’d really like more than a 7x7x7 inch build volume.
and I think you really have to be good at making your own stuff for a printer to be a good purchase.
It really depends on what you want to use it for. I have the skills to make decently complicated parts to print, but 9 times out of 10 I’ll just see if someone has already made something similar and use that instead. If you know you’re gonna be prototyping a bunch of things or testing weird shit out then yeah you should probably know how to operate a CAD program, but if your use case is, “this plastic thing on my very common appliance broke, I wonder if I can print a replacement?” or “these little flexible dragon things are cute” then you just need to know how to use a search bar and your slicer.
if your use case is, “this plastic thing on my very common appliance broke, I wonder if I can print a replacement?” or “these little flexible dragon things are cute” then you just need to know how to use a search bar and your slicer.
I’ve designed a few things, like these pill bottle holders.
I’ve also “reverse engineered” (It’s literally just a wedge) a doorstop that works surprisingly well. I keep misplacing ours at work.
Those simple designs are the foundation of the more complex ones you will create in the future. If you have need and determination, you can design anything!
I keep falling out of the hobby because I don’t want a printer to be my hobby - I want printing to be my hobby. But no matter how many times I try to pick it back up, my printer never produces a good print.
I’m on the other end of the swing again - looking for tuning tutorials to help get my cr10 printing well. I am very open to suggestions.
I do like tinkering with the printer, and I do want that control, but eventually it gets to a point where I just want it to work
Come join us in the resin printing world!
I think it’s like cars for car guys vs cars for people who just want to get from place to place. I started with Elegoo and got really sick of all the fiddling it took to get a decent print. I got a Bambu and it just works. I know it’s a “walled garden” but in the end I can print whatever model I want and it comes out great most of the time.
I have it deliniated into 3d printing hobbieiests and 3d printer hobbieiests. Printing people are about what the printer makes Printer people are about building and making the printer do more and more.
Programming and Linux. Oh boy, what to pick…
Terminal text editors: VIM vs Emacs is the main debate there. (There are others but these are ones people argue the most about)
Linux Distros: Arch, Debian, Mint, CachyOS, …
Init Systems: Systemd vs OpenRC. Honestly, probably the most toxic debate on this list.
Programming Languages: Python, Shell, but the heated one is C vs Rust
A non-exhaustive list of ones I couldn’t think of a category for:
- Tiling vs Floating Window Managers
- Chromium vs Gecko-based browsers
- Bash vs Zsh vs Fish
I love computers and Linux, but man, the amount of toxic in-fighting and gatekeeping is a real turnoff. Just use what you want. At the end of the day, we are all nerds doing what we love.
I am team…
-
Nano
-
Arch
-
Systemd, I don’t see what the fuss is about that TBH
-
I don’t wanna even touch that one lol
-
I like the carousel kind of things like Karousel or Niri
-
Gecko (Librewolf, Floorp etc.)
-
Zsh
But yeah I agree, everyone should just do what they want. Having lots of options is one of my favourite things about Linux.
heretic! the only dogmatically correct setup is
- helix
- fedora
- systemd
- rust
- whatever fits your workflow
- gecko
- nushell
-
And heaven forbid you actually prefer Windows
actually prefer Windows
I don’t understand. I recognize the words, but in that order, they make no sense.
Microsoft’s helping our case by blasting their own foot all the time, fortunately.
Nobody prefers Windows. Some people used to prefer the software suites exclusive to Windows.
Nobodymost people on Lemmy don’t prefers Windows. FTFYLinux users need to stop assuming everyone is wrong for needing things that Linux can’t do at all or doesn’t do well. I need accessibility. Linux doesn’t do it well. Over a decade and a half of trying to make it work has proven that. Some people need Adobe or MS Office (even though many may not like it), and Linux doesn’t do that at all. They’re not wrong, their needs differ from yours.
And it doesn’t matter whose “fault” it is. Apple fanboys do this, too. If an OS doesn’t offer something you need, that’s where the conversation ends. They don’t care what internal politics at the vendor or lack of community interest by Linux devs or whatever lead to the thing they need not working. All they care about is that it doesn’t work.
And no, they’re not going to take night classes to get a comp-sci degree so they can code the drivers that their peripheral needs.
“What’s that, you need a claw hammer but I gave you a ball peen hammer? Pfffft, just become a blacksmith and forge your own hammerhead, it’s not THAT hard.” --Every Linux user
I prefer Windows. Every experience I’ve had with Linux has been a nightmare.
neovim, opensuse tumbleweed, idk, idk, floating, gecko, bash
my experience is limited tho, and im not strongly opinionated
i like the vi/vim/neovim editor control scheme, not tried much else, nano seems ok too from my occasional use of it
i use opensuse tumbleweed because its rolling release but still pretty stable and installation is easy but allows a lot of customizing, many other distros are good for many other things too, fedora popos and mint are great easy desktops, debian and nixos are great for servers, arch gentoo void nixos and artix are great desktops for nerds, etc. the bad ones are ubuntu (canonical is weird and corporate and makes bad decisions), manjaro (the devs are incompetent), and omarchy (it preinstalls nonfree software (including nordvpn (ew)), ai, and more nonfree software (including chatgpt (even more ai ew) and twitter))(as you might be able to tell i really hate it, its just an installer for some moron’s desktop setup, thats what nixos is for you fucking twat, and its crappily opinionated with crappy opinions)
ive only used systemd distros (opensuse, ubuntu, fedora, debian, raspbian) so idk whether systemd alternatives are better, i just know that systemd is pretty bad in many ways
and im not that much of a programmer, but pretty much all languages are good and useful (except that javascript is useful but not good)
i like floating wms (i use kde plasma) because tiling is a bit annoying (sometimes i want a window to be a particular shape) and because tiling is usually in wms that are not des, ive tried sway and hyprland and the mostly keyboard based control was nice but it not being a de that provides all of that useful stuff was annoying
gecko is better because its more libre, the corporation behind it is dedicated to libre rather than being one of the world’s biggest and evilest megacorps, and it incorporates more pro privacy design. i use librewolf. gecko is poorly separated from firefox tho so im quite hopeful for servo engine now that ladybird is vibe coded slop being rewritten in rust by the cult
i like bash because its the typical well known linux shell that many online resources are about
Mycology is full of them which are mostly the result of genetic sequencing and the good old “where do you draw the line between species” question but a recent and high visibility one is the Collybia shift.
Before genetic testing, Collybia was a genus characterized by smallish pale-spored mushrooms with convex caps, no ring, and gills which are broadly attached to the stem (the simplest shape the average person would imagine for a mushroom), this became one of the classic “statures” of mushrooms “Collybioid”. As we sequenced Collybia species, they were slowly moved into other Collybioid genera like Collybiopsis and Gymnopus. Eventually this resulted in most of the Collybioid mushrooms being moved out of Collybia, leaving only the earliest-discovered mushrooms in the genus which were tiny parasitic mushrooms that weren’t really Collybioid at all.
Here’s an average “Collybioid” mushroom Gymnopus sp.
Then things got worse, a recent paper did a study on genus Clitocybe which is another genus which has a classic stature named after it, “Clitocyboid” which refers to smallish pale-spored, funnel-shaped, mushrooms with gills that run down the stem. This paper discovered that nearly everything we had been calling “Clitocybe” actually belonged in Collybia meaning that most mushrooms in Collybia are now Clitocyboid instead of Collybioid. This has resulted utter chaos which has some mycologists considering invoking the “common usage” rules in taxonomy to put the new Collybias back into Clitocybe to make things less confusing. This chaos has been compounded by the fact that iNaturalist has already accepted this name change, but only for the mushrooms explicitly studied in the paper and not their known relatives which has resulted in the Blewits being split between Collybia and Lepista (which itself was a recent name change from Clitocybe that everyone was still adjusting too).
Average nondescript Clitocyboid (no ID because these are nearly impossible):
A Blewit, AKA Clitocybe/Lepista/Collybia nuda:
This is honestly fascinating.
alot of plants phylogeny is like this, they looked similar enough they are the same species, after doing enough testing, mostly mitochondria, choloroplast they actually are combined into one genus or move into another one. my favorite is mycoheterotrophs(plants that are entirely dependant fungi rather than photosynthesis), thismiaciae was originally though to have evolved in burmannia family,and then thier own family and then back again.
finally in the 2020s they realized even thismiacae is polyphyletic. so now south americans thismia’s are likely belonged to another genus entirely(they havnt done significant phylogenetic studies in the SA ones)(seperate from the ones in south east asia, australia, and 1 extinct one in usa which makes it very unusual for it to appear in america), thismiacae is now a full family, and afrothismia was originally included in thismia, until they genetic testing, its entirely “new family” interdependently evolved but related to the ancestors of thismia. trying to trace lineage of mycoheterotrophic plants is difficult because they lose thier cholorplast genes quite easily.
its only because they all looked very similar to each other, they were all combined into one family.
My friend is a palaeobotanist and recently tried to see if I (a microbiologist) could understand her presentation on taxonomy for ancient plants. I found it very weird to find out that the different parts of the plant retain the names they were described as even when integrated into the plant as a whole.
Like if you find a dino skull and call it ‘skullosaurus’ then somebody finds a femur and calls it ‘femurdon’ then later finds both in the same fossil, ‘femurdon’ gets retired and the whole thing is ‘skullosaurus’.
But with plants you can separately describe a female organ as ‘femonia’, a male organ as ‘maleonanthus’ and a leaf as ‘leafopteris’. Then somebody finds they belong to the same plant and not only do you just get to pick what to call the plant somewhat arbitrarily based on the organ prevelance, age, leaf or even an entirely new name but the original parts still keep their old names as separate taxa. I still can’t get my head around this ‘whole plant hypothesis’ thing…
oh yea i noticed the nomenclature/naming is very wierd for some plants. like in thismia, they have 5 different lineages, so they name it "section thismia, or another name based on thier morphology and later phylogenetic data. eventhough they have an established genus name,SECT geomitra, labiothismia,etc, which isnt a genus but it was originally named because thats the first specimen they found of a specific species. they call alot species phyllocladus, because the “leaf” is actually the stem, but its also the genus name. im guessing plants are complicated/ or look similar enough to each other you cant tell the difference until you do genetic testing, which they dont do on alot of plant lineages, like the mycoheterotrophs i mentioned, they are tricky to resolve.
and the genus is sometimes generic named like phyllocladus, xerophyta(an actual genus). oh yea paleontology is probably easier to resolve, if you can find extant or extinct animals that are similar, and just name it in the same genus.
orchids are also a fun family of plants , especially if you notice they are all mycoheterotrophs to begin with, its just the ones we see switch to full photosynthesis, but some are mixotrophs, and some loss thier chlorophyll entirely.
Its so confusing. My friend gave me permission to share her slides on it, its just a few but I think it helped me understand.
it is confusing, so it seems the name is based off the researchers description of the first and the last one who finds the new species, and feminize/masculinize the name too. it also seems theres not consensus as a standard for it, and can change at any time with new research. like with some plants like dracaena and sansierva, the latter absorbed into the former it gets more confusing.
In the Sonic fandom, there’s a debate over which is the “authentic” Sonic: the Western version or the Japanese one. It’s not about design, but rather personality, values, and attitude.
The thing is, the differences between the two are very subtle. Unless you’ve been in the fandom for years and have seen enough material on the subject, they’ll seem exactly the same to you.
My opinion is that “It doesn’t matter”~♪. At this point, there are countless versions of Sonic (the classic, the modern, Sonic SatAm, Sonic X, Archie Sonic, IDW Sonic, Fleetway Sonic, Sonic Boom, Sonic Prime, Movie Sonic…), all with their differences, but in general they share the, let’s say, “essence”* of the hedgehog, and that’s what matters.
*(If you’re not from Latin America, you won’t know how funny it is that I used that particular word)
with Sonic, it would be faster to list what isn’t a big internal debate
Sonic the hedgehog actually existing in fiction might not be a big debate
sonic is real and he is my friend
The one true Sonic:
frantically coloring in Sonic’s arms at a GameStop, armed with pepper spray
I always hated sonic.
*Average Sonic Fan opinion*
Sonic has one of the most divisive fandoms I’ve ever seen.
On the one hand, you have some very talented individuals like LakeFeperd, Stealth and Christian Whitehead who have created fan projects and original games that best Sega’s own efforts. But then you get the unhinged parts of the fandom, and then Chris Chan.
I don’t like how the r/sonic, r/sonicthehedgehog and r/moonpissing subreddits have been getting littered with a mix of borderline softcore furry porn and comics focusing around cringe character ships lately.
Hm, authentic? in which sense? to some source material? how the character I’d integrated in the world? in regards to which one was first and how the other deviates? or is it a “quality” change of character thing?
this is somehow interesting to me now. never really had contact with sonic
It is interesting by itself.
It’s not so much about the source material, cuz in that case there would be no debate: the first Sonic was the Japanese one, period. The issue is more of an almost philosophical nature.
Sonic loves freedom, but what is freedom? What would a completely free person do? Would a free person even have a moral code? If Sonic is free, is he a hero? Would a free person crack little Spider-Man-style jokes? If Sonic hates oppression, why would he work for the monarchy or the government?
One could argue that the Japanese Sonic was the starting point and the Western version his evolution. When does something become or cease to be “authentic”? Is it authentic only at the beginning? Does it remain so until the end?
Things get absurd and annoying when idiots come along to invalidate other people’s opinions and tastes by saying things like, “Your Sonic isn’t the real Sonic. The only legitimate Sonic is [insert favorite Sonic].” You know, the usual gatekeeping.
Punk/metal/goth/hardcore subcultures and the nature of gatekeeping, poseurs, “selling out”, politics, social causes, and scenes that started out as youth culture now approaching 50yrs of development and have oldheads who never left as well as their grandkids joining up. For the most part the 90s “sell-out” idea that finding mainstream success is betrayal is gone so long as the band continues to be who they always were, some bands are naturally talented and will breakthrough into broader appeal. Gatekeeping can keep a community safe from predators trying to gain access to spaces where youth and intoxicated adults are just trying to have a fun time without having to fear exploitation. Sometimes youth come in trying way too hard and miss the point, sometimes the oldheads forget they were try-hard kids at one point too and are missing the point. In the past year I’ve run into a 65yo in the pit next to sweaty teens and watched a Millennial mom take her 5yo daughter to the edge of the stage and gently lower her into a crowd of tattooed, mohawked, crusty strangers who came together and made sure she floated safely to her dad. Also seen some boneheads get their shit rocked, so for all the debates and bickering we’ve never forgotten what’s really important. Best time I’ve had in the scene in nearly 20yrs.
Yeah, I sometimes get annoyed about the gatekeeping in the hardcore scene (hardcore as in gabber, not punk)
But whenever my friends take me to techno events and I see what happened to the European techno scene after covid, I start to think they might have a point
I can’t believe people still argue over whether or not Balrogs have wings when the text unambiguously says they do. You can have wings and also have a shadow that looks like wings.
His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out like two vast wings. ...suddenly it drew itself up to a great height, and its wings were spread from wall to wall...Like two vast wings but then he explicitly says its wings were spread, clearly stating it has wings. To be the most generous you could try to say the wings are made of shadows, but based on the text they’re clearly still wings.
Yes, Balrogs have wings.
he establishes a simile in one sentence and reuses it further on. common writing trick.
Exactly. Writing the entirety of “shadows like two vast wings” twice would have been awkward for no reason. (Or it should be no reason, but apparently some people are incapable of understanding metaphor.)
Balrogs - and I shouldn’t even have to say this - don’t have wings.
Everything about the creature is shadow, fire, and ash. So if his shadow extends like wings, then they’re wings, as shadow is literally part of a Balrog’s body.
It would not have been awkward, it would have been describing what heeamt had he meant that. Seems some people are incapable of understanding that these are magical beings who’s bodies may not be entirely made of material that we would expect.
Balrogs - and I shouldn’t even have to say this - dohave wings.
He says they have wings. As I said, if you want to take that they are made of shadows you can, but they have wings.
not in the passage you quoted, no. i know he was meticulous about translation notes, is there anything in those?
Did you read it? Explicitly says they have wings.
are you still talking about the quote? because tolkien does that all throughout the books. he establishes that a thing is “like” something else, then refers to it by that other thing as shorthand for the sake of tone. or are you suggesting that “from wall to wall” is literal as well?
In that same passage we also get “Gandalf flew down the stairs”. Explicit, unambiguous evidence that Gandalfs have wings.
I don’t have an opinion on the matter. I’m much more into the worldbuilding and languages than the books themselves, though I’ve of course read and enjoyed them.
Yes you do. Your opinion is the right one, that you don’t like getting attacked by panthers.
deleted by creator
the Jackson adaptations also explicitly said that Arwen carried Frodo across the ford of Bruinen, that Eowyn was at Helm’s Deep, that Saruman died at Isengard, that Faramir took Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath as prisoners, that Pippin was the one who lit the beacon of Amon Dîn, that the hobbits returned to the Shire and it was more or less the same as they left it, and many other things that explicitly do not happen in the books. should we take all those as canonical too?
#sharkey-was-just-a-fever-dream
Balrogs have wings because how can you expect to go caving without fried chicken? And what’s the best part of the fried chicken? The skin. And what has the most chicken skin? The wings. Not fake boneless chicken nublet basket shit restaurant wings, real wings. So smart ol Balrog goes around trading drumsticks for wings. Of course he’s got wings. Quid. Pro. Quo.
deleted by creator
Sims 4 is a good game (though not as good as 2 or 3) but it’s a bad experience due to shitty monetization practices like microtransactions.
And personally I was very disappointed that “we’re getting rid of sliders” just meant getting rid of them visually, not the actual slider mechanics.
The original is my fav simply for the vibes. The music is great, the graphics are charming and the gameplay is simple and fun. Great expansion pack content too. I still have all the original CD copies from when I was a kid.
Pretty sure I still have 10GB of custom content for Sims 2 on my backup drive. I used to play it so much it took 15 minutes to load due to the sheer amount of mods lol.
Sims 2. 4 It’s a bit too complex and realistic for me. I like the very simple models and ideas behind the older games.
Did you know Sims 4 has certain low-tier items be less performant to ensure players buy more DLCs? Alsp I think early paychecks are smaller too, but that maybe art imitating life.
That said, theoretically it was harder to survive in 2.
I’ve only played Sims 3 and 4. 4 has way better mods, while 3 has better gameplay.
I preferred Sims2, but 1 had a lot of charm. It was charming.
I was a massive SIMS2 player. When Sims3 came out and my dude walked away from the wall with the phone and sat on the couch I flipped my shit. Finally can increase social workout comfort going to hell. Haha
Synthesizers: digital vs analog.
Common opinion holds that analog (specifically oscillators, but also filters and even VCAs [voltage controlled amplifiers]) are warmer and more natural sounding while digital are cold and harsh.
The thing is, digital emulation of analog hardware has become virtually indistinguishable from the real thing, but there is a certain segment that refuses to believe their $5000 Minimoog can be so easily replicated by software (realistically I doubt Bob Moog could tell the difference anymore).
Of course some also choose to argue which is better, which is just ridiculous because they both have their uses depending on what kinds of music you’re composing or just what sounds you’re trying to make.
Well yeah, they can’t afford to buy music. They spent all their money on the high density crystal core gold connector 1 meter headphone cable.
Of course some also choose to argue which is better, which is just ridiculous because they both have their uses depending on what kinds of music you’re composing or just what sounds you’re trying to make.
See, the point you’re missing is that my kind of music is just better. If you prefer <option I dislike>, it’s just because your taste sucks. Try making good music, like <whatever music fits>. Then you’ll see that <option I prefer> is clearly superior.
(I have no idea about synthesisers, but I heard similar discussions among e-guitar / amp enthusiasts. I’m just guessing the above parody fits your case too.)
It fits quite well.
Yeah by the time you add effects, throw that synth into a full mix with other instruments, THEIR effects, and all the compression and EQing in a finished track, the only thing that matters is whether that single instrument adds what it needs to add to the whole.
Objectively, digital oscillators are better - they don’t drift unless you want them to, they stay in tune, and they can always be run through analogue filters to add imperfections (sorry, “warmth”).
But it still boils down to my first point: it’s a single part of a multi-part song. As long as it gets the job done, who cares whether it’s fluctuating voltage or zeroes & ones. It’ll be analogue on its way into the listener’s ear canal either way.
Absolutely. So much nuance is lost in a mix. Not that it’s a bad thing, it’s just dumb to think a $3000 synthesizer is going to sound better than a $10 plugin when you’ve got it buried amongst guitar, bass, drums, and vocals.
You can extend that further to the cranks in the DAW community who swear that their rebranded standard compressor algorithm is somehow different and worth spending hundreds of dollars on. Generally you‘re paying for a different UI and maybe a hardcoded EQ.
Ugh, compression is a nightmare in general. One person will tell you unless you’re using some fancy multi-band compressor on every single track, you’re doing it wrong, and another will tell you you should do your best to not use any at all. Add to that many, many people don’t even know what it does, and more can’t even hear what it does.
Send them this guide
And here’s a secret they don’t tell you - at the end of the day it’s art. There’s a bazillion “right” ways to do the same thing and if the result is enjoyed be someone, mission accomplished.
Haha! I want to criticize this picture so much.
