sudo459

Well, I would like a midi version of that song used for my level, but good luck finding a good one, and I can't make one. If that's not possible, the default works for me tbh.

Eh, my links are down? Damn, I don't have the originals anymore.

I decided to post this here, since chocolate-doom and many other source ports use SDL, and I don't see the same problem after I quit them. So I'm trying to write a simple game to teach myself "low" level programming. I'm using arch Linux, and I'm not using a window manager. My simple SDL program creates a fullscreen window, blits a blue rectangle to the window surface, updates, cleans everything up and quits. Unforntunately, after the program exits, my xterm no longer reads keyboard input. I can still copy and paste with the mouse, but that's about it. I can't even write anything in vim after (starting it with a copy and paste, of course). Did chocolate-doom face the same problem in development, and how does it get around this issue? Code: #include <SDL2/SDL.h> int main(int argc, char **argv) { SDL_Init(SDL_INIT_EVERYTHING); SDL_Window *win; SDL_Surface *win_surf; SDL_Rect screen_dim; screen_dim.x = 0; screen_dim.y = 0; screen_dim.w = 1280; screen_dim.h = 720; win = SDL_CreateWindow("", 0, 0, 1280, 720, SDL_WINDOW_SHOWN); win_surf = SDL_GetWindowSurface(win); SDL_FillRect(win_surf, &screen_dim, (unsigned)0xFFF0F0FF0); SDL_UpdateWindowSurface(win); SDL_Delay(2000); SDL_DestroyWindow(win); SDL_Quit(); return 0; }

I'm guessing this project is about to be at the final stages? If there is anything technically wrong with my map, anyone here can feel free to fix it. I won't be online for the next couple of months, so I can't do it myself. I think my map is fine though.

I don't see the problem with this line of thinking, yet you are acting like it's a bad thing. Why should you believe something without any reason to do so? I feel like this is a strawman. No one is saying that thing that haven't been proven yet definitely don't exist.

I sort of take offence to the word "Darwinism", no one but creationists trying to discredit evolution call it Darwinism. Also, there are non-Materialists who don't think in the terms of ID. Its not a dichotomy. Anyway, to answer this list, 1. Well of course there are "missing links", we don't and won't find every fossil of every species that's ever existed, which would be the only way to get rid of all the "missing links". 2. I don't know how, not being an evolutionary biologist, but I see this more as a "why"? Why does there have to be a why? There's no reason, at all, to assume a why here. Purpose implies an entity desires. The only way we'd know the why is by asking it. What reason to we have to believe that such an entity exists in the first place? 3. Again, no why involved, as far as we know. Also, I'm sure an evolutionary biologist could answer the how. 4. From what I've read, this is a hard question to answer. I'm sure a cosmologist could point you in the right direction, but again with the 'why'. Maybe there is no why. 5. These are only wonders to you, as a human. There is nothing inherent about dolphins, humans, etc. that makes them "wonders", and there can't be, because it's subject to a mind. And in this case, human minds. 6. Why do you think it's unlikely? Do you have evidence that it is unlikely? What does these relationships being unlikely even mean? 7. Evolution is a process, and processes follow "rules" (or more accurately, follow predicable patterns). It's not "blind", well maybe in the sense that it has no purpose. Also, horror and beauty are human constructs. They exist solely in the minds of humans. So, therefore, nothing has inherent beauty or horror. We as humans just see it that way. Nothing special really about it, so why assume that there is. 8. I'll give my best shot here and just say, well that's how it is. There is no "significance" to it. Your list is very loaded and filled with bias. It makes assumptions about how the universe "should be" and asks why it's not like that, then assumes a reason, ie Creator(s). I guess what I'm getting at here, is that starting a discussion off with a list like this isn't going to garner a lot of thought-provoking insights.

Calling it a delusion implies that words have no meaning. Or course, words do have meaning. Why? Humans say they do. Just because its not objective meaning doesn't mean its not there. In fact, objective meaning doesn't exist.

I personally oppose it because the concept it not a coherent concept, or at least I've never seen it be defined as such. It's vague, and the definition is usually tailored specifically to push the narrative of the speaker. I'm going to use the definition of racism as: discrimination based on race. Then they are failing miserably because it's never explained how this works. Let's say I accept the concept of white privilege. Then what? Admit that it helps me? How exactly is that going to make me less racist, when I already wish all of humanity to be treated equally? I don't even like the concept of race in the first place. Also, this sounds pretty racist to me. It insinuates that all the racism in America is white people's fault. You can claim that it's not an accusation all you want to.

To be "scientific", you must first define unjust homicide by the police, then the definition must be agreed upon. Nothing you listed here is, imo, justified. If you are being intimidating, it's the officer's duty to deescalate the situation, as it is in all situations. Only when presented with a deadly threat should the homicide be considered justified. It's not self-centered or insecure, there are voices in the movement who act like it doesn't affect non-blacks and also think whites should stay away. Do I really need to post quotes? They are right here in this very thread! Futhermore, the solutions presented by the BLM aren't even combating racism, but police brutality in general. So, focusing on race is divisive. People (here) aren't wanting them to change it to "Black lives matter, too" but "All lives matter" or something like that. Something that doesn't distract people from the issue and feels inclusive, because people of all races face police brutality.

TBH I was kinda hoping foodles would opt for a different sort of architecture to accompany the change of locale, but meh I guess.

@mrthejoshmon Fallout 2

After your scathing review of this map, I decided to try a pistol start, since I'm doing continuous. I didn't remember too much of the map as a I played, and I didn't end up getting the RL. All I have to say is, I agree, it was tedious slogging through all those monsters. I feel like adding the SSG isn't the only route Foodles could have gone. If there were more instances to setup infighting between the beefier monsters, I could see the dominance of the shotgun and chaingun, but really there weren't. The beginning has you plinking at two arachnotrons, one at a time, and a good few pinkies with the just the shotgun, and it doesn't get much better from there.

I think this is the problem right here. First of all, I don't think it's entirely a racial issue and I'm not alone, yet I would still agree with everything the BLM wants to achieve, policy-wise. The problem is, that such a name is almost certainly going to generate comments like you've seen from people like Membrain, who insist white people are not affected at all. I feel like you could make the same argument for the civil rights movement of the 60's. I'm sure you could find some technicalities in both movements to have a reason. But ultimately its harmful. Certainly you should call out specific instances of racism in the movement, as you should everywhere, but calling BLM racist as a whole is just driving an even bigger wedge between us. We share common ground. Like Tarnsman said, let's focus on that.

Ha! I totally just guessed lol!

Oh man.... uh, Mario is Missing?