Gyokuyoutama

As I play more TF2 and be insufferable on mic by saying "MY ULT IS READY MY ULT "GAS PASS" IS READY" when I have built up my Gas Passer damage, I really think making it recharge like Jarate might just be boring and there's room to make it more fun for the Pyro to use.
 
My three ideas that could be added on to it include:
1. Make those covered in gas take more damage from you specifically.
2. Give you a speed boost while people are on fire from it.
3. Heal you for every afterburn damage tick.
 
I'm not saying all three, but 1 and 3, or just 2, could make it more interesting. It really needs something besides damage if it wants to be different than the flare guns. Right now its only perks are setting pyros on fire as well as 5 seconds of "area denial" (which is why it can't be resupplied).
 
Reminder that Gas Passer is fun on Halloween maps with spells, since it's so easy to charge. Honorable mention to the Huo Long Heater, which is programmed to give you 25% bonus damage whenever it's deployed and someone's on fire (which makes your spells do 25% more damage while it's deployed, granted they're on fire. It's a good thing two spells set them on fire...).

Minnesota is winter to summer, no transition. Sometimes it oscillates for a while, I guess you could call that state of affairs "Spring."  It was in the 40's a few days ago, got to around 90 today and may snow tomorrow night.

I remember years ago someone posted about this album on here, I Iooked it up and thought it was a cute nerdy Megaman thing on the first listen
 
Revisiting it completely by chance last week I can't stop listening to it, it is absolutely fucking stellar

I yearn to be able to slam a pencil hard enough into the back of my eyesocket to forever destroy the neurons that make me aware that Taylor Swift recently broke up with her boyfriend

spring sux it's just allergy central

winter rules theres no bugs and relatively no allergies

Tales of a New PC: Part 3.
 
Noticed that my headset was only getting detected after two tries or if I start the PC with them connected.
 
Looked at the configs to see if the popups were being blocked, but no. Disabled and reenabled them, activated notifications. Didn't work.
Checked the Realtek drivers, nothing seemed to be wrong.
Checked the four difference audio apps, nothing.
Uninstalled the drivers and let Windows reinstall them. Worked, but because of some kind of black magic, it would reinstall the other drivers after 20 seconds, even after I marked to delete the old drivers.
Went on device manager and made the audio change to the windows audio drivers, worked but if there was no sound for a few seconds, the headset would make a "click" and then do a REALLY LOUD noise the second some sound played, as if the headset was being connected in the port.
Uninstalled every app and driver, disabled their services, blocked their tasks on the scheduler. Still reinstalling itself.
Decided that is my life now, reinstalled everything and returned everything like it was. Now it stopped detecting my headset, even if I click on the popup. Sometimes just closing the popup was making it detect the headset, so what the fuck?
Reinstalled drivers, AGAIN. Still weird.
Went into the audio app and marked to not ask or show the popup. THAT fixed it, even after I restarted the pc, it still detects the headset automatically.

When you think about it, foxgirls are kind of an unsettling and disgusting concept, aren't they?

When you think about it, foxgirls are kind of an unsettling and disgusting concept, aren't they?

None of those are kurisu, non-canon

At this size it's a very EGA DOS aesthetic.

Tiny tree doodle:

 
Well, it WOULD be tiny if I didn't have to upscale it so it didn't look like blurry vomit. Why does no website respect the pixel? Anything made pixel-perfectly just gets turned into mush, very lame.

Well... it happened. All the traitorous eight are dead now.
 
I'm honestly sadder about this than almost any celebrity death in the past year or so.

Got a new PC, came with Windows 11.
Looks like shit. Runs like shit. Doesn't lets me disable "features" I will never use.
 
"Look at all these cool apps and features that came pre-installed! Pretty neat huh?"
No, uninstall them all.
"O-oh, ok."
This start menu sucks ass, give me the classic one.
"No."
What do you mean, "no"?
"No! Too many people liked the classic start menu without ads and usability, so we disabled it with an update. Now you are forced to use the worse menu!"
....
 
I go around looking if I can just install Win 10.
Paraphrased conversation I found:
 
Some dude with the same problems as I'm having: "Hey, Win 11 sucks major dick, can I just downgrade?"
Microsoft Janitor: "WHAAAT? NO YOU CAN'T!! WHY WOULD YOU DO SUCH A THING?? THATS A TERRIBLE IDEA! WIN 11 IS BETTER AND SAFER AND EVERYTHING WORKS BETTER ON IT!!"
Actual helpful dude: "Just go to Microsoft's page and download the Win 10 installer, it uses the same license so you can use "upgrade it" to Win 10."
 
So now I am with Windows 10 again.
 
Hey I don't want internet searches and recommendations on my LOCAL search bar when I'm just trying to find a file, remove that.
"I am afraid I can't do that."
Why?
"That feature is only available for Pro and Ultimate licenses and you only have a Home license."
........
 
 
Welp, I'll wait a few months then install a pirated license, eat my ass.

A tragic scene showing the effects of emotional abuse in a relationship. Lil' Fox Dude is going to the cinema with his girlfriend, Other Dog Lady. He's looking forward to seeing the latest installment of his favorite franchise, "Foxes In Space IV: The Space Strikes Back!", but Other Dog Lady starts putting him down for being a weird nerd. She keeps reminding him that she didn't want to see this stupid movie. He tries in vain to defend himself, but he doesn't see much point in arguing with her. He knows how she gets when she's angry.
 
Then ODL tells LFD to buy them some snacks. They used to split food and drinks 50/50, but somehow over the past couple years, she had gradually convinced him that it was his job to pay for almost everything. Surprisingly, she gives him a coupon she found. At first, LFD is surprised and elated - but then he realizes that she's probably only doing it to gain some leverage over him.
 
Sure enough, not even a minute later, she's saying he "owes her one" for the coupon, and starts asking if they can watch "The Canine Cardiologist", a quirky romcom that came out last week. LFD tries to reason with her, saying that he's been looking forward to Foxes in Space for months, and with how busy work has been, he might not get another chance to see it on the big screen. This pushes ODL over the edge, and she starts screaming foul-mouthed insults and threats at him. Hoping to avoid making a scene, and scared of what she'll do if she gets really angry, LFD relents, and agrees to go see the other movie. All the while she keeps yelling at him about what a terrible boyfriend he is.

Human music.

the title is correct, this is indeed music

During the whole "freedom fries" debacle I was at a restaurant in Wyoming that offered "Freedom Dip."  It took me a good five minutes to figure out what the hell they meant by that.  I was familiar with the "Freedom Fries" replacement but using "freedom" as a general replacement for "French" in all contexts was still weird.
 
As for the Kiev thing; note how few people say "Paree" in English, despite obsessing over that.  I mean you can get into how we should be saying Wien for Vienna, Muenchen for Munich, Varsawa for Warsaw, etc.  But I think that most English speakers are familiar with the term "Paree" (I mean, it's always "Gay Paree" not "Gay Paris," right?) But no one says it that way even when trying to be sophisticated.
 
I'm also a bit annoyed too by the fact that the media consistently mangles American city names, despite these having real "correct" English pronunciations.  I'm talking about stuff like "Eelai Minnesota" (for Ely, should be pronounced "Eelee"), "Pee-air South Dakota" (for Pierre, should be pronounced Peer), etc.  The Midwest and Rockies regions are loaded with cities which are routinely mispronounced.
 
 We've also had the ridiculous "Beizhing" pronunciation which sounds nothing like the Chinese pronunciation of 北京 but was the "correct" pronunciation during the Olympics anyway.  (But really, you should be saying "Peiking."  And I'm not just saying that since I'm a weeb (as that's the Japanese prounciation.))

I've always maintained that it's a planet, but I've never really looked into it - I just never saw why I should stop calling it a planet other than "because we said so."
 
There's also things like everyone suddenly calling Kiev Kyiv. Kiev was always the English name for the city, but because Russia did a bad (and I'm not arguing that they didn't) suddenly it became in vogue to call it Kyiv. Exonyms being changed to endonyms is usually based on politics or social brownie points as exonyms are usually much more comfortable for their speakers to pronounce and write - we don't call Vienna "Wien" because quite frankly Wien sounds stupid in English.
 
It's also the same sort of thinking as calling French fries "Freedom fries". Basically, I'm pissed off at you for some reason, so I'm going to damnatio memoriae your name from things you're barely related to. It's not a new thing of course, but it's still baffling to see people try to pretend that these linguistic changes are purely agnostic. If you want to say Kyiv because you hate Russia and think they're evil, just say so. You don't need to try to justify it.
 
Side note: I once saw a guy refer to the Red Army as the PKKA (he was a native English speaker making a post in English) and that pissed me off because it was so unnecessary I had to Google it despite being fairly well-versed in WWII.

This really could have gone in "what grinds your gears" or something like that, but I'm putting this as a new thread because I'm sick of trying to fit an observation into an existing thread only for it to go nowhere.  If you want to continue this thread you can either respond to the immediate topic, or put whatever other random thoughts you have about how society reacts to things in here.  Honestly any discussion of anything would be good for the boards at this point.
 
With that out of the way, I am one of those people who will say "Pluto is a planet" when asked about it.  Of course, I'm also liable to say that the Sun and Moon are planets, since that's how the ancients viewed things.
 
UNNECESSASRY WEEB TANGENT:
 
 
Anyway, back to Pluto.  Why do I feel strongly about this?  Because how a person reacts to Pluto is a good way of gauging that person's ability to actually think abstractly.  If a person insists "NO, Pluto cannot be a planet!" without elaboration, it usually indicates that he's pretty dull when it comes to other matters too.
 
Now to be clear, there are good reasons for not classifying Pluto as one of the "major" planets.  The main reason being so that we can more easily classify how many "major planets" there are and understand their broad properties.  Once you include Pluto as a planet it becomes very difficult to not also include things like the asteroid Ceres as a planet, or the similarly distant objects Orcus and Eris.  Now for me, I just say "okay, those things are planets too."  The only way to avoid this is to use the ancient astronomical definition (i.e. a consistent visible object in the sky that doesn't follow the path of the fixed stars, but this would not only force the Sun and Moon to be planets, but would disqualify things like Neptune as being planets since it isn't visible to the naked eye.)  There's nothing that says we can't have tons of planets, so the more the merrier.  But I understand why astronomers may see alternate definitions that let them talk about the planets with more certainty, since the truth is that once you include things like Orcus as a "planet" then it's unclear how many undiscovered "planets" there may be.
 
And that's essentially at the heart of why astronomers were hesitant to continue calling Pluto a planet.  And they decided it shouldn't be, so case closed right?
 
Well no, for several reasons.
 
First, what gives scientist authority over the whole human language in this way?  It reminds me of people who object to phrases like "it's in my blood" saying that you should instead say "it's in my DNA" to be more scientific, and really spazzing over things like "hearing that makes my blood boil."  Or to go outside of science, it really pisses me off when I hear someone say something like "the chance of that happening was more than 5%, so you can't call it 'significant.'"  That's a huge abuse of statistical lingo, obviously many things in English are "significant" which have nothing to do with chance, and certainly nothing to do with a specific threshold of probability.  The ways that words are used in normal English are obviously different from their scientific definitions.  Regardless of what astronomers say, Pluto meets the intuitive sense of "planet", so why not keep calling it that?
 
Second, the official term for Pluto is a "Dwarf Planet."  So the technical statement is "Pluto is not a planet because it is a dwarf planet."  In standard English this statement is pretty dumb.  It makes clear that the motivation was primarily one of convenience; that is, it's not that astronomers thought that it was completely unreasonable to call Pluto a planet.  Certainly it acted like a planet in other ways.  But for technical reasons to make their lives workable they needed it to be in a separate category, hence "dwarf planet."  Note that you can just as easily distinguish the situation by putting the "normal" planets in a special category, such as saying "Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are the major planets of the solar system. Other objects may be planets, but they aren't major planets."  And indeed some sources do exactly this. (Though I understand why this term wasn't adopted by the scientific community; "Major Planet" has also been used to refer to the gas giants only, i.e. Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.)  So if we are just talking about modifications of the word "planet" were some count as "scientifically planets" and others do not, then that is all the more reason to call Pluto a "planet" in daily speech.
 
Third, and by the biggest, is that the actual definition change was not universally accepted even among scientists, and only came into existence due to procedural shenanigans.  In the votes leading up to the decisive one, the majority of astronomers present actually voted for Pluto remaining a planet.  The decisive vote happened when 500 astronomers remained at the conference, out of 2,400 total who had attended previously and participated in votes.  The final vote didn't have a count since it was viewed as "overwhelming" but has been estimated as about 400 out of the remaining 500, meaning that the issue was decided by one sixth of the astronomers from the conference, which of course is only a subset of astronomers across the world.  I've heard claims that the anti-Pluto faction arranged to stay as long as possible and then do a vote after everyone thought the matter was settled.  I don't have proof for this, but I've seen basically identical stunts pulled in academia, so I 100% believe that this what happened.  Then immediately after the vote, they sent out press releases making "Pluto is not a planet" the top story across the world.  At that point it was too awkward for the pro-Pluto faction to press the issue; it would have just made the astronomy community look petty and the definition was always a bit arbitrary anyway, so it became accepted.  But if the anti-Pluto faction had not conspired to vote when their opponents were largely absent, or had not announced their triumph to the press, probably Pluto would still be called a planet (without the "dwarf" qualification) even by astronomers.
 
So, getting back to the original point, when people blindly say "Pluto is not a planet!" without giving reasons beyond "that is what science says!" what they are easily manipulatable merely by hearing something in an "official" source.  Let's say tomorrow that 50 or so scientists came together and put together a press statement saying that the sky is green.  That is, the actual visible color is green, and that if you think it is blue, then this is because your eyes are defective.  These people would immediately start saying "yes, the sky is green" and would even go so far as to select green paints to color the sky in their drawings.  They would not sit back and say "but it looks to me like the sky is blue..." instead they would just accept what is told to them.  Of course, there is nothing new in this phenomenon, since what I am describing is essentially the same behavior parodied in Hans Christian Andersen's "The Emperor's New Clothes."
 
Now at the end of the day it doesn't really matter if we call Pluto a "planet" or a "dwarf planet."  It's not like it's a moral failing to call it a "dwarf planet," especially if you are doing so to make astronomical classification easier (and are consistent with your definitions.)  But it does serve as a good shibboleth to see where else someone might be misled.  I leave it as an exercise for the reader to imagine other fads that the public has bought into in the last ten years, in the same way that they bought into Pluto not being a planet.

This really could have gone in "what grinds your gears" or something like that, but I'm putting this as a new thread because I'm sick of trying to fit an observation into an existing thread only for it to go nowhere.  If you want to continue this thread you can either respond to the immediate topic, or put whatever other random thoughts you have about how society reacts to things in here.  Honestly any discussion of anything would be good for the boards at this point.
 
With that out of the way, I am one of those people who will say "Pluto is a planet" when asked about it.  Of course, I'm also liable to say that the Sun and Moon are planets, since that's how the ancients viewed things.
 
UNNECESSASRY WEEB TANGENT:
 
 
Anyway, back to Pluto.  Why do I feel strongly about this?  Because how a person reacts to Pluto is a good way of gauging that person's ability to actually think abstractly.  If a person insists "NO, Pluto cannot be a planet!" without elaboration, it usually indicates that he's pretty dull when it comes to other matters too.
 
Now to be clear, there are good reasons for not classifying Pluto as one of the "major" planets.  The main reason being so that we can more easily classify how many "major planets" there are and understand their broad properties.  Once you include Pluto as a planet it becomes very difficult to not also include things like the asteroid Ceres as a planet, or the similarly distant objects Orcus and Eris.  Now for me, I just say "okay, those things are planets too."  The only way to avoid this is to use the ancient astronomical definition (i.e. a consistent visible object in the sky that doesn't follow the path of the fixed stars, but this would not only force the Sun and Moon to be planets, but would disqualify things like Neptune as being planets since it isn't visible to the naked eye.)  There's nothing that says we can't have tons of planets, so the more the merrier.  But I understand why astronomers may see alternate definitions that let them talk about the planets with more certainty, since the truth is that once you include things like Orcus as a "planet" then it's unclear how many undiscovered "planets" there may be.
 
And that's essentially at the heart of why astronomers were hesitant to continue calling Pluto a planet.  And they decided it shouldn't be, so case closed right?
 
Well no, for several reasons.
 
First, what gives scientist authority over the whole human language in this way?  It reminds me of people who object to phrases like "it's in my blood" saying that you should instead say "it's in my DNA" to be more scientific, and really spazzing over things like "hearing that makes my blood boil."  Or to go outside of science, it really pisses me off when I hear someone say something like "the chance of that happening was more than 5%, so you can't call it 'significant.'"  That's a huge abuse of statistical lingo, obviously many things in English are "significant" which have nothing to do with chance, and certainly nothing to do with a specific threshold of probability.  The ways that words are used in normal English are obviously different from their scientific definitions.  Regardless of what astronomers say, Pluto meets the intuitive sense of "planet", so why not keep calling it that?
 
Second, the official term for Pluto is a "Dwarf Planet."  So the technical statement is "Pluto is not a planet because it is a dwarf planet."  In standard English this statement is pretty dumb.  It makes clear that the motivation was primarily one of convenience; that is, it's not that astronomers thought that it was completely unreasonable to call Pluto a planet.  Certainly it acted like a planet in other ways.  But for technical reasons to make their lives workable they needed it to be in a separate category, hence "dwarf planet."  Note that you can just as easily distinguish the situation by putting the "normal" planets in a special category, such as saying "Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune are the major planets of the solar system. Other objects may be planets, but they aren't major planets."  And indeed some sources do exactly this. (Though I understand why this term wasn't adopted by the scientific community; "Major Planet" has also been used to refer to the gas giants only, i.e. Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune.)  So if we are just talking about modifications of the word "planet" were some count as "scientifically planets" and others do not, then that is all the more reason to call Pluto a "planet" in daily speech.
 
Third, and by the biggest, is that the actual definition change was not universally accepted even among scientists, and only came into existence due to procedural shenanigans.  In the votes leading up to the decisive one, the majority of astronomers present actually voted for Pluto remaining a planet.  The decisive vote happened when 500 astronomers remained at the conference, out of 2,400 total who had attended previously and participated in votes.  The final vote didn't have a count since it was viewed as "overwhelming" but has been estimated as about 400 out of the remaining 500, meaning that the issue was decided by one sixth of the astronomers from the conference, which of course is only a subset of astronomers across the world.  I've heard claims that the anti-Pluto faction arranged to stay as long as possible and then do a vote after everyone thought the matter was settled.  I don't have proof for this, but I've seen basically identical stunts pulled in academia, so I 100% believe that this what happened.  Then immediately after the vote, they sent out press releases making "Pluto is not a planet" the top story across the world.  At that point it was too awkward for the pro-Pluto faction to press the issue; it would have just made the astronomy community look petty and the definition was always a bit arbitrary anyway, so it became accepted.  But if the anti-Pluto faction had not conspired to vote when their opponents were largely absent, or had not announced their triumph to the press, probably Pluto would still be called a planet (without the "dwarf" qualification) even by astronomers.
 
So, getting back to the original point, when people blindly say "Pluto is not a planet!" without giving reasons beyond "that is what science says!" what they are easily manipulatable merely by hearing something in an "official" source.  Let's say tomorrow that 50 or so scientists came together and put together a press statement saying that the sky is green.  That is, the actual visible color is green, and that if you think it is blue, then this is because your eyes are defective.  These people would immediately start saying "yes, the sky is green" and would even go so far as to select green paints to color the sky in their drawings.  They would not sit back and say "but it looks to me like the sky is blue..." instead they would just accept what is told to them.  Of course, there is nothing new in this phenomenon, since what I am describing is essentially the same behavior parodied in Hans Christian Andersen's "The Emperor's New Clothes."
 
Now at the end of the day it doesn't really matter if we call Pluto a "planet" or a "dwarf planet."  It's not like it's a moral failing to call it a "dwarf planet," especially if you are doing so to make astronomical classification easier (and are consistent with your definitions.)  But it does serve as a good shibboleth to see where else someone might be misled.  I leave it as an exercise for the reader to imagine other fads that the public has bought into in the last ten years, in the same way that they bought into Pluto not being a planet.

Large Dog Lady is impersonating a police officer and intimidating random passerby to steal their groceries. Towards the end, Lil' Fox Dude starts catching on but he's afraid of what she'll do if he calls her out directly. After all, she's about ten times his size, and might have a concealed firearm. So instead he offers to call the police station and turn himself in. LDL panics, knowing that this will blow her cover. She starts screaming about hentai in order to cause a smokescreen of embarassed confusion, and promptly escapes before LFD can get the spaghetti back in his pocket.

"OY YOU GOT A LOICENSE FOR DEM GROWSHREES?"

I actually found a workaround for changing icons on the start menu:
Go to file directory containing program. Make new shortcut for program. Change the icon on the shortcut.  You can change the name, but that won't show up in the start menu. Pin the original program to the start menu. If you try to pin the shortcut nothing will happen. For some reason Windows pins the shortcut to the start menu with your icon.  The name is always "XXXX - Shortcut" though. If you want to change the icon again you have to do this: First unpin the icon from start. Then delete the shortcut. Then make a new shortcut following the above instructions and pin the original program. (If you unpin the program and repin it, then Windows will pin the program and not the shortcut, hence using the original icon.) The fact that this is possible makes me more disgusted in Windows 10 than if it were impossible.  If it was just that icons couldn't change, that would be retarded but at least it could have been a conscious design decision.  The fact that you can do something like this both shows that it would be easy to implement this functionality, and also that the current state of Windows has all sorts of bizarre interactions between partial implementations of code.