Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - ThreeOhFour

#1761
Quote from: Andail on Thu 05/11/2009 17:24:06
Homeopathy is inherently unscientific, since the very theory behind it goes against both chemistry and common sense.

Yeah, I can accept that. This Water memory concept seems more like flipping tarot cards to me than fermenting antibiotics.

My line of thought still stands, however: If the placebo effect works (again, I've only quickly skimmed Wikipedia, which I assume is as reliable a source of reference as any) then can it be dismissed as a form of medicine? Seems unlikely to me.

It seems highly trivial to be suggesting that governments should spend their efforts deciding whether or not to make something that might be a form of medicine illegal, instead of focusing on the great many other areas which seem much higher priority in my mind.

Apologies to Snarky for derailing his thread. And of course, Tuomas, please do make sure you don't dig your nose with other people's snot on your fingers. That's just asking for trouble.

Nacho, just read your post, but are you certain? Wikipedia says these WHO chaps published a report (if this holds any consequence or not) stating it as 'effective treatment' (whatever this entails) for a whole bunch of nasty things.

I'll try to stop posting in here now (as I'm clearly asking more questions than I am answering), but am interested to read other people's thoughts :).
#1762
A quick wikipedia search (I am not expert on this subject, of course) suggests that the placebo effect is sometimes effective. Not always effective, but it seems to me (from what I have read, which is little) that all medicines can be labeled as 'sometimes effective'.

It seems to me that the human brain may play an important role in medicine, and if tricking someone into thinking they are taking something that will make them well is what actually makes them well, then it seems to me to be an effective 'medicine'.

As for youtube videos, one can find youtube videos that will tell you anything you want to hear. I am not trying to pass your point off as being irrelevant, naturally. To me it seems that there is not enough conclusive evidence about any of this to go around banning things. I have no personal agenda here - I'm completely without any experience with alternative medicines, but I don't think the term 'fraud' is completely accurate if the placebo effect is known to be an effective treatment.

And if we're going to get people to stop lying to us about the things that they sell us, I'm quite certain that we've got a lot more things that would need to be placed under review besides sugary pills.

Quote
but homeopathy is just a sugar pill or water with an active ingredient so diluted that the chance of there even being 1 molecule of the active ingredient left is on the order of 1 in billions.

Heh, and if we're analyzing, acupuncture is just sticking little pins into your skin. I can do that at home!  ;D
#1763
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Thu 05/11/2009 16:11:56
I have no problem with people taking sugar pills to cure their cancer but it's irresponsible to sell things under the banner of 'medicine' if it has no proven effects.

Yes, but wouldn't things such as acupuncture come under this as well? And 'normal' medicine often has negative side effects to consider. Something as simple as anesthetics can be life threatening - yes, patients are tested and checked but mishaps still occur. Honestly, I'd rather be sold ineffective medicine than medicine that leaves me worse off than before.

If you expect these 'authority' creatures to provide information about your drugs and your alternative medicines (whether or not they are actually 'medicines' or not is hardly for me to comment on) then remember that even the most mainstream medicinal treatments never seem to be 100% proven.

I don't usually enter these long and drawn out debates, as I am generally content to observe. So... yeah. That's my bit.
#1764
Check your junk mail, Snakey :)
#1765
Quote from: Gepard on Thu 05/11/2009 04:38:10
That red thing is the time. However only displayed in seconds and also in a font I created. Nature, Science... They will build depending on which number is the highest. IE: If nature is the highest number, they will build segments with trees and nature, if science is the highest, they build labs etc.

And yes, those people say random things to each other and have random names :f )

Yeah, I thought it would be something like that. Neato!

Also, I did mean to say this before: Nice tune!
#1766
I think he was just trying to support his opinion demonstrated here.

Well, either that or he's a hypocrite  ;)
#1767
Hehe I have a cat now :D!

I have to ask, what are the purposes of the Science, Nature etc figures?

And also, what is the little red thingy thingo up in the top left corner?

It's pretty cool, anyway :)
#1768
General Discussion / Re: StarCraft anyone?
Thu 05/11/2009 01:53:05
Oh crap, sorry dkh :P

I had to drive and get something and when I got back realized that I'd left it all running :-[.
#1769
General Discussion / Re: StarCraft anyone?
Thu 05/11/2009 00:07:50
Yeah, everyone's got free time at what is like 3:00am for me or something  :P ;D

Anyway, I'm up for a match in the next while if someone wants a game now :)
#1770
There are a few different games that were team efforts in the past  ;D
#1771
Not sure if this'll help, but have you tried compressing it up into a .zip or .rar file?

I never bother too much about size as my games are pretty small, but I do know that I get some pretty crazy compression ratios on pretty much everything bar music and sound for my games, so it might not be as bad as you think  :)

(Just did a quick check, and the best I've found so far was 81% compression  :D)
#1772
The Rumpus Room / Re: Happy Birthday Thread!
Wed 04/11/2009 12:58:27
Thanks J and Arjon :)
#1773
General Discussion / Re: StarCraft anyone?
Wed 04/11/2009 11:46:22
I'm up for a game or two in the next for hours.
#1774
The Rumpus Room / Re: Happy Birthday Thread!
Wed 04/11/2009 06:11:23
Thanks guys! :D
#1775
It might be just me (I'm not that good with accurate proportions), but I'd move the eyes and eyebrows down by 1 pixel:

#1776
Quote from: TerranRich on Tue 03/11/2009 01:21:47
Yes, this is a great workaround, and you're right about the file size. But this requires that I have all my animations done before I can even put a walk cycle in the game.

I don't understand why?

Characters are always centered. As long as you make sure his center is always in the bottom middle of each frame, it doesn't matter whether each frame is the same dimension as the others at all. I often have a whole heap of different animations for a single character and each unique animation has a completely different set of dimensions from all the others. As long as you keep him/her in the center of those frames, there's no need to get all your animations all done and make sure they're all the same size.

Apologies if I have misunderstood you.
#1777
AGS Games in Production / Re: The Cat Lady
Tue 03/11/2009 09:34:58
I may not be a horror fan, but I am a Tool fan, so you can't totally pick on me for my tastes in entertainment ;)

BTW, meant to say this before but the photo style actually works surprisingly well!
#1778
Haha yeah, when Dirk first let me play the first build of that I was like

"...this man is crazy"  ;)
#1779
Have you tried setting it to 0 when you want it to revert? This is how the manual suggests doing it:

"The baseline can be from 1 to the height of the room (normally 200), or set it to 0 to go back to using the character's feet as the baseline."

Hope this helps :)
#1780
Oh great, it's always cool to see long term projects come to fruition (and the fact that it is so pretty helps as well of course  ;D)

Best wishes for the final round of polishing, I look forward to playing this!
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk