Off Topic

[Itooh]

Well, the game is a Sokoban-like, a puzzle where the player has to navigate in a maze and push blocks. You can find a lot of those kind made with Puzzlescript! So there's nothing really new here.
However, I didn't plan to make a sokoban-like right at the beginning! I departed with absolutely no idea, just a theme and Superpowers installed on my laptop. Then I thought about protecting robots from falling into traps, then having robots with programmed movements, and then letting players program these movements, and finally I decided it would be best to give players full control of the bots, but all at the same time.

Thanks for the music by the way!^^ It was the very last thing I did for the game, and it has been composed in quite a rush.

[Hunchman801]

Yeah, the music is nice and catchy. Just finished the game with Gunch by the way, really enjoyed it.

Just one thing, the text is really hard to read in some places, if not unreadable. Not sure if it's a matter of device though!

[Keane]

Alright meme man won. I'm deeply disappointed by the final results and I think the US is making a spectacularly retarded choice here but, I would've said the same if it were Clinton. She's not important anymore now, but having Trump around for four years is hard to take in.

I could grit my teeth and look past all his views on Guantanamo or abortion or whatever, but this election is really playing with the biggest set pieces: Nationwide trickle down economics, deregulating the little restriction we have on polluting our climate even further with carbon emissions - more offshore drilling, more fracking, etc. He's going to throw people off their healthcare and continue a system where you've got people picking between healthcare and their rent, it's already a shit system that kills now. Tax breaks for the rich, more NSA spying, no justice for people like Snowden & Manning, "target the women and children of ISIS", the list goes on and on. What a fucking clown.

And even better - the senate and house are going to the conservatives too! So any "he can't do much" argument goes right out the door. We might as well have taken Bush back in for another round. On the brighter side, many states today voted for legal weed, higher wages and some even for progressive policies regarding our climate.

But seriously, this is by no means the fault of the American people and I think unfortunately many people today voted in protest and desperation, and it's Clinton's fault for these results. Emails, scandals, corruption, rigging, leaks - her, the media and the DNC worked so hard to try and play us and now it bit them in the ass. Clinton continuously failed to address the important issues, failed to lay out good policies, and every time ostracised and criticised people from her OWN base because we didn't want to just fall in line. So of course, now it's OUR fault that this happened, not her shortcomings on virtually every issue. I understand and agree Clinton would've been the better choice here, but you can't expect to win a nation wide election and just fucking everything wrong. And it would've been so easy to win from Trump if we'd had just the slightest more competent candidate against him.

Instead of trying to go "look kids, im playing the pokemons! hey it's me and your favourite rapper!! let's shoot some hoops kiddos!" she should've actually given us a reason to vote for her, and not talk down on us like we're too braindead to see through her bullshit. She insults her own base, refuses to be a true liberal, cheats and lies the whole way, and now we have an authoritarian con man in office.

Bernie Sanders polled higher against Trump than Clinton did the whole race. We could've had a real, progressive president who would fight for preserving our climate, get money out of politics, and return our right to privacy. So to my boi Bernie here, one final meme to end the election.

[Hunchman801]

As much as I'm aware of the stupidity of many of Trump's comments, I'm almost relieved that he was elected president.

As a non-American, what matters the most to me is American foreign policy. And God knows how destructive it has been to the world since the Soviet–Afghan War (and possibly much earlier). And in that regard, while Clinton seems to be the continuation of this policy, Trump wants an easing of tensions with Russia, acknowledges that they should never have been to Iraq and that they have destabilized the whole Middle East, and is realistic about al-Assad being bad while not stupidly trying to get rid of him as he knows well that jihadists would take over.

Trump is a big mouth. He's not gonna do half the things he said. Hell, he can't even do half the things he said (he's not almighty, neither is the senate, and they don't have to agree with him because they're from the same party). He's a populist, he said things to please, to get elected, but now he's in the office, he will realize (if he hasn't already) that most of the stuff is not doable.

I'm not too worried, really (except for his positions on climate change, I really hope he doesn't fuck this one up).

[Adsolution]

I agree completely, I never understood exactly what people were so afraid of Trump doing. Banning abortion? Firstly, that is a con far preferable to any of Hillary's wild plotting against the East, and secondly, that's probably far less-likely to happen than Hillary following through with her wild plotting against the East if she were president.

What I find to be a complete joke is that people who were well-aware of the fact they're both absolutely terrible candidates have become so utterly devastated over Trump winning - and yes, this goes for a number of people from RPC as well, especially when all they can think of at this point are "the rights of women, Muslims, LGBT people and so on", but I'll get back to that - get your shit straight you agonisingly self-absorbed retards. I have sympathy for those directly affected by any of the negative policies he'll actually end up enforcing, but the alternative is living in fear for the safety of the world itself. The last thing the country needs right now is a corrupt, slimy, war-bent politician in office. Just like with Brexit, all I hear people complaining about is how the this will affect them in the most immediate, trivial fashion ("My college/studies funding is going to be dropped, higher shipping taxes, my religion is looked down upon!!"); I'm not American or British, but if I were, I would not have the gall to lie to myself like that.

Now, what I was going to get back to: Whose rights is he threatening exactly? According to a lot of people, he's threatening the rights of women, minorities, LGBT people, and Muslims.


- Women: The only one I can think of here is abortion, which, sure, is a legitimate concern to some degree. I find it ridiculous that people consider this solely a women's rights issue though, because I think it concerns both parents almost equally, and in reality, pro-life takes an entirely humanitarian/religious stance on the issue, and a pretty equal number of pro-life people are women.

- Minorities: What are people even going on about here? Minorities make up a large portion of his support group, because they do end up in the lower class at a higher rate than non-minorities, and he's advertised himself as fighting for the lower class. Illegal Mexican immigrants? That's not a minorities issue, it's completely unrelated.

- LGBT+: Trump is against gay marriage, but congress has overruled this, so it's a non-issue. Other than that, he has openly embraced trans peoples' rights, even when it comes to using the restoom of their choice.

- Muslims: Islam is not a race, it's a belief system. Trump's ideas are brash, but to be perfectly honest, I don't really find much morally reprehensible about not allowing people who identify (emphasis on "identify") with a religion that has a tendency to produce radicals from entering the country. It's like closing the borders for the KKK: Why the fuck would you even identify with something founded on violence, bigotry, intolerance and racism if you're neither violent, bigoted, intolerant nor racist?


Sure, if this were Trump winning over Sanders, then I would see the need for an uproar, but it isn't. This is a dorky asshole winning over an evil turd in our system. If anything, this will pave the way for future candidates like Sanders, someone betrayed by the system, by showing the country that the system can be defeated.

[Itooh]

I guess we can indeed put some perspective on how much power Trump will actually have. Even if this is still way too much for an idiot of his kind.

Still, it is a huge loss for democracy, and practically everything our societies have built. Trump has proven that it is possible to be elected president without any competence or knowledge, just money, a big mouth, and populist ideas.
Just like Brexit, this is giving victory to ignorance and violence. Worse than Trump, it's the extremist electors that voted for him who won today. KKK, white supremacists, conservative… The message publicly sent to them is “You still has a place in society. Actually, you are on the right side. You are the voice of people.”
Remember how hate crimes increased in UK after Brexit? Yup, that's what I'm worrying about.

You're right though, this is nothing new. The problem was already here when Trump appeared in this election. This is just the concretion of a long lasting processus. I had hope that it wasn't to late to go back and change thing, but it's again too late: idiots win. They are now the voice to listen to. It has been made official. Hurray for climate skeptics, and all other brainless.
Now I know some will worry about "freedom of opinions", and don't worry, I'm all in favor of that. But there are opinions, and ignorance. Would you allow teachers to explain to children how the Earth is flat, was created 12 centuries ago by God, and masturbating makes you go to Hell? Those are not opinions, they are just obscurantism believes. For years we have fought against ignorance, it is not something to defend. There is no debate to have about wether or not black people have soul, it would just be a waste of time and too much attention given to nonsense. Same thing applies to all kind of hate speech and regressive garbage that goes against what science and history has proven wrong.
Also, it's still a shame history is given so little importance in school. Here is exactly why.

In conclusion, Trump is not the issue on his own. It's a cultural issue. Giving attention to somebody like Trump and those who support him will only make thing worse.
And that's why I'm so much worried about it even while non being american (well, on top of worrying for all the nice people I know from US). This will definitively have an impact elsewhere. In fact, it has already did, seeing how France treats its immigration issue, and the global political atmosphere we have right now…
Those results are not a big change, yes. It's just the confirmation that we are digging down, down, down, down…

[Ambidextroid]

- Muslims: Islam is not a race, it's a belief system. Trump's ideas are brash, but to be perfectly honest, I don't really find much morally reprehensible about not allowing people who identify (emphasis on "identify") with a religion that has a tendency to produce radicals from entering the country. It's like closing the borders for the KKK: Why the fuck would you even identify with something founded on violence, bigotry, intolerance and racism if you're neither violent, bigoted, intolerant nor racist?

I don't think this is very fair, considering the fact that following a religion does not mean you identify with all of it's historical rules and teachings. As far as I'm concerned it's impossible to follow any religion word for word because of the many contradictions in their teachings. Islamic extremists follow a certain set of teachings in Islam and kind, charitable, ordinary Muslims follow another set of teachings, and yet they're both just as "Muslim" as each other.
Your example of barring the KKK isn't fair in this regard, it's more fair in my opinion to compare it to Christianity as a whole. The KKK is a large group of racist protestant extremists who share and are based on Christian beliefs/teachings yet not all people who identify with Christianity fall under this category.

[Adsolution]

following a religion does not mean you identify with all of it's historical rules and teachings.

I know, and I just said that:

Why the fuck would you even identify with something founded on violence, bigotry, intolerance and racism if you're neither violent, bigoted, intolerant nor racist?

I'm asking why they would identify with something that doesn't line up with their beliefs. Sentimental connection is the obvious answer, but it's a horrible reason.

As far as I'm concerned it's impossible to follow any religion word for word because of the many contradictions in their teachings. Islamic extremists follow a certain set of teachings in Islam and kind, charitable, ordinary Muslims follow another set of teachings, and yet they're both just as "Muslim" as each other.

Islam is rooted in the Quran, which you're free to go and read. Most of it is pretty gross, and doesn't really make a lot of sense. I'd equate it to the ramblings of a braindead, xenophobic caveman with OCD.

Your example of barring the KKK isn't fair in this regard, it's more fair in my opinion to compare it to Christianity as a whole. The KKK is a large group of racist protestant extremists who share and are based on Christian beliefs/teachings yet not all Christians fall under this category.

A lot of what the KKK stands for isn't even rooted in Christianity though, it's stuff people just made up. Islamic extremists are, on a technical level, the most traditional kind of Muslim you can get.

[Adsolution]

Still, it is a huge loss for democracy, and practically everything our societies have built.

How? Trump played far more democratically in this election than Hillary did.

Just like Brexit, this is giving victory to ignorance and violence.

And if Brexit didn't pass, you could just as well say it was giving victory to corruption and greed. The difference is that corruption and greed have far more power over us than acts of hate instigated by a few crummy individuals.

As for the rest of your post, it only emphasises my question as to why neither you, nor most people are thankful that Hillary didn't get elected. They're acting like she never even existed now, and they're acting like Trump is somehow a bigger danger than she is. To me, they both come off as soft conservatives; he's definitely less conservative than someone like Bush, so crying about us being pushed back to the stone age here to me comes off as nothing more than an emotional reaction towards the idea that a "democratic nominee" didn't become president.

[Ambidextroid]

A lot of what the KKK stands for isn't even rooted in Christianity though, it's stuff people just made up. Islamic extremists are, on a technical level, the most traditional kind of Muslim you can get.

Yes but my point is it shouldn't matter how traditional or faithful different groups are to the original text of their religion and base who is allowed in your country or not on that. If you believe in the god of a certain religion and you follow practices based on traditions of that religion, you are a follower of that religion, even if you don't follow the exact words of the Qur'an. And in the case of American Muslims, the majority are ordinary decent people. Barring all Muslims and using the excuse that "if you want to disassociate yourself with your disgusting evil religion then feel free and come on in" is judgemental and based on an unrepresentative fraction of Muslims.

[Adsolution]

And in the case of American Muslims, the majority are ordinary decent people.

Hence why he's not deporting them.

[incognito]

He wouldn't have the right to do so anyway.

[Ambidextroid]

Hence why he's not deporting them.

What I really meant to say was all Muslims, but especially those interested in migrating to or visiting America for work or family or any other number of reasons. But I still find it reprehensible to discriminate against an entire religion of which the vast majority are not radical and are ordinary people, no matter what the original text of their old crusty book says.

[Adsolution]

If your goal is to reduce terrorism in America, you can't deny that it's a mildly effective solution. However, I think the terrorism of the past few years has been blown far out of proportion. ISIS is far more of an issue in their home countries than they are in the Western world: you're twice as likely to die from a plane crash as you are from a terrorist attack. Given how much of a non-issue it is here relatively speaking, I think it is a stupid idea, but at the same time, given the motivation behind such a policy, I don't have any sympathy or respect for "belief systems" such as religion. I feel bad for the people whom it affects, but I can't help but blame them partially for their situation because they chose to follow Arbitrarily Passive Branch #137 of a hate cult in the first place.

[Ambidextroid]

I feel bad for the people whom it affects, but I can't help but blame them partially for their situation because they chose to follow Arbitrarily Passive Branch #137 of a hate cult in the first place.

I have a similar attitude towards religion itself and do not support it, though many of the people who follow a religion do not do it by choice. Many are fed religious beliefs when they are children and they have no choice but to accept it as truth as is the way of a developing mind, and then it gets incredibly difficult to reject those beliefs when you're older - this is probably my biggest issue with religion, aside from the violence and wars caused by it. And even if you choose to follow a religion it is a personal choice and more often than not doesn't cause people to become extremists. If it's only "mildly effective" and causes discrimination against a vast majority of good natured ordinary people who have made an arbitrary personal choice, then in my opinion it isn't justified at all.

[LoveMetal]

This is just the concretion of a long lasting processus. I had hope that it wasn't to late to go back and change thing, but it's again too late: idiots win. They are now the voice to listen to. It has been made official. Hurray for climate skeptics, and all other brainless.
Now I know some will worry about "freedom of opinions", and don't worry, I'm all in favor of that. But there are opinions, and ignorance.

Sorry dude, but as with the debate we had concerning feminism, it seems that people who don't think like you are idiots and/or ignorants.

I also think that a huge part of Trump's presidential program is inconsistent. But I would never take the liberty to say that such a man is only a populist liar, and that 48% of the US population isn't educated enough and can't think by himself. By intellectual integrity, if barely 200M of people don't think like you, you should try to think like them to see what you may have missed.

About the foreign policy, he has a coherent and quite ideological point of view, which I don't agree with but whatever. Protectionnism and expansion by cultural independance seems to be what the people want. It's much more the neighbour states (and european) which much react accordingly and deal with the obvious anti-globalization climate which will come sooner or later.

Concerning moral policy, I totally agree with Adsolution.

And last, with economic policies, even though I am pretty much of a right-wing liberal on this point, one must admit that a $1000B yearly expense cut will need to be filled somehow. With the national debt maybe? But the foreign investors will never agree with such an important amount. And I also hardly imaginate him trying to renegociate the debt, seeing how protectionnist he is the investors will never allow him to set a single condition.

[Hunchman801]

Sure, if this were Trump winning over Sanders, then I would see the need for an uproar, but it isn't. This is a dorky asshole winning over an evil turd in our system. If anything, this will pave the way for future candidates like Sanders, someone betrayed by the system, by showing the country that the system can be defeated.

Can't agree on that Sanders bit, but we've been through that already.

I guess we can indeed put some perspective on how much power Trump will actually have. Even if this is still way too much for an idiot of his kind.

I think he's far from an idiot.

Still, it is a huge loss for democracy, and practically everything our societies have built. Trump has proven that it is possible to be elected president without any competence or knowledge, just money, a big mouth, and populist ideas.

Money-wise, it appears that Clinton paid two or three times more per vote than Trump, and therefore raised a lot more money. Not sure this is the issue here.

Just like Brexit, this is giving victory to ignorance and violence. Worse than Trump, it's the extremist electors that voted for him who won today. KKK, white supremacists, conservative… The message publicly sent to them is “You still has a place in society. Actually, you are on the right side. You are the voice of people.”

Had Clinton won, would the worst of their supporters have won too, more than the others? Don't quite see how this relates to Trump alone.

Now I know some will worry about "freedom of opinions", and don't worry, I'm all in favor of that. But there are opinions, and ignorance. Would you allow teachers to explain to children how the Earth is flat, was created 12 centuries ago by God, and masturbating makes you go to Hell? Those are not opinions, they are just obscurantism believes. For years we have fought against ignorance, it is not something to defend. There is no debate to have about wether or not black people have soul, it would just be a waste of time and too much attention given to nonsense. Same thing applies to all kind of hate speech and regressive garbage that goes against what science and history has proven wrong.
Also, it's still a shame history is given so little importance in school. Here is exactly why.

Which of Trump's beliefs are you comparing to the flat Earth and creationism? While his stance on climate change sounds very unscientific indeed, I'm not sure what else you're referring to.

Islam is rooted in the Quran, which you're free to go and read. Most of it is pretty gross, and doesn't really make a lot of sense. I'd equate it to the ramblings of a braindead, xenophobic caveman with OCD.

You could probably say the same about the Old Testament, yet Christian terrorism in nonexistent nowadays. Those books are so full of contradictions they cannot be taken literally as a whole, so it's down to interpretation or cherry-picking.

This is why there is not one Islam, but over 1.7 billion. Some are peaceful, some are violent, and that violence is fueled by socioeconomic conditions probably just as much as ideology. In any case, it makes little sense to call Islam a violent religion or a religion of peace, and to dismiss other interpretations as non-Islamic (the classic “terrorists are not true Muslims”). And while, from a pragmatic point of view, barring all Muslims from entering the country would be a very efficient way of preventing terrorism, expelling them or killing them would be even better. But we're not doing that because those people have rights, and shouldn't be discriminated against unless highly suspicious.

Also, good news already!

[Adsolution]

Can't agree on that Sanders bit, but we've been through that already.

We have? I don't remember talking about him, but maybe I forgot.

You could probably say the same about the Old Testament, yet Christian terrorism in nonexistent nowadays. Those books are so full of contradictions they cannot be taken literally as a whole, so it's down to interpretation or cherry-picking.

There is an important difference though: Christianity has the New Testament, which is meant to be a revelation, essentially encouraging people not to do the things in the Old Testament and leave judgement up to God. Islam doesn't have this, they just have their Old Testament which straight-up tells you to take matters into your own hands (for the most part - there are some contradictory passages saying not to do that, but not most of them).

This is why there is not one Islam, but over 1.7 billion. Some are peaceful, some are violent, and that violence is fueled by socioeconomic conditions probably just as much as ideology.

Indeed.

In any case, it makes little sense to call Islam a violent religion or a religion of peace, and to dismiss other interpretations as non-Islamic (the classic “terrorists are not true Muslims”). And while, from a pragmatic point of view, barring all Muslims from entering the country would be a very efficient way of preventing terrorism, expelling them or killing them would be even better. But we're not doing that because those people have rights, and shouldn't be discriminated against unless highly suspicious.

No one ever said barring them from entering was an angelic thing to do, but compromises sometimes have to be made in a time of crisis (not that this is a time of crisis). Additionally, I don't think the right to enter a country simply resides lower down on the thread of basic needs than the right to live, I think they're different in principle. One employs discrimination within one's own country, and the other doesn't. When a country allows someone in, they are allowing that person to live by the rules laid out in their society, but if they aren't allowed in in the first place, they are not living in said society, so the rule isn't relevant.

Now that's not how I'd personally run a country, because it is quite apathetic, but I don't think it's a breach of rights or stomping on any democratic principles.

Also, good news already!

Holy shit! OCG's gonna love this.

[Ambidextroid]

There is an important difference though: Christianity has the New Testament, which is meant to be a revelation, essentially encouraging people not to do the things in the Old Testament and leave judgement up to God. Islam doesn't have this, they just have their Old Testament which straight-up tells you to take matters into your own hands (for the most part - there are some contradictory passages saying not to do that, but not most of them).

This isn't an important difference because not all Muslims follow the same rules. The New Testament is just another Christian scripture, there's nothing inherently special about it. Christians can decide whether to follow their scripture or not, and I have never met anybody who has followed the New Testament let alone any scripture word for word. The New Testament is hardly any different to a new Muslim philosophy or branch that changes around some rules but keeps the same gods, and there are many different branches of all religions; the scripture of a religion is not a good way of judging the followers of the religion.

[Adsolution]

This isn't an important difference because not all Muslims follow the same rules. The New Testament is just another Christian scripture, there's nothing inherently special about it. Christians can decide whether to follow their scripture or not, and I have never met anybody who has followed the New Testament let alone any scripture word for word. The New Testament is hardly any different to a new Muslim philosophy or branch that changes around some rules but keeps the same gods, and there are many different branches of all religions; the scripture of a religion is not a good way of judging the followers of the religion.

There aren't (really) multiple Christian/Islamic scriptures, there is one holy book for each religion, one that is distributed almost everywhere any branch of that religion is practiced, and owned and read by many who practice any branch of that religion. The lives these people lead and the thoughts going through their head can tell us how closely they're following what parts of their scripture, and they aren't required to follow it at all, but that doesn't change the fact that these people are living their lives based partially off of what is in their respective holy books. Virtually no Christian will deny the existence and validity of the New Testament, as it's arguably the most quintessential component of the religion, a component which Islam does not have.