Posts by Jacob Cooper5

Looks like Grafulja finally kicked the bucket. Try swapping in your buddy's GPU just to see if that’s actually where the glitch is hiding...

swiftridge12 said:I’d honestly suggest everyone give this movie a watch. It’s just one of those films where the ending really sticks with you and makes you feel like we should all try to be a little kinder to one another. Those "aliens" you see at the very end? They’re actually robots that have evolved over the two thousand years following the main story.

There was some discussion here regarding the Spielbergian and Kubrickian elements of the film, and I think the text and video provided below might help clear things up for you:

"People pretend to think they know Stanley Kubrick, and think they know me, when most of them don't know either of us," Spielberg told film critic Joe Leydon in 2002. "And what's really funny about that is, all the parts of A.I. that people assume were Stanley's were mine. And all the parts of A.I. that people accuse me of sweetening and softening and sentimentalizing were all Stanley's. The teddy bear was Stanley's. The whole last 20 minutes of the movie was completely Stanley's. The whole first 35, 40 minutes of the film – all the stuff in the house – was word for word, from Stanley's screenplay. This was Stanley's Vision."

"Eighty percent of the critics got it all mixed up. But I could see why. Because, obviously, I've done a lot of movies where people have cried and have been sentimental. And I've been accused of sentimentalizing hard-core material. But in fact it was Stanley who did the sweetest parts of A.I., not me. I'm The Guy Who did The dark center of The movie , with The Flesh fair and everything Elsa. That's why He wanted me to make The movie in The First Place. He said, 'This is much closer to your sensibilities than my own."

http://www.movingpictureshow.com/dia...ergCruise.html

Video: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/markkermode/posts/AI-Apology

Man, you completely missed the entire point of the story.

Andrew Peterson2 said:Can anyone recommend a straightforward firewall? I just want a simple way to block certain apps from hitting the internet.

Windows firewall Control.

It basically takes the built-in Windows firewall and makes it actually usable—not that it isn't powerful, it’s just... clunky. It pings you whenever something tries to jump online, making it easy to set up rules, export them, or import them later if you move machines. Plus, since it's riding on top of the existing Windows firewall, it won't tank your system performance at all... which is more than I can say for some of those bloated third-party suites out there. Honestly, the native Windows firewall is plenty for what you're trying to do, you just need this to make it user-friendly. 🙂

Honestly, the only big-name actor who consistently nails those raw, emotional roles for me is Nicolas Cage.
I really need to touch on what people say about acting, though. You can't just judge someone's craft based on whether you personally enjoyed the movie or not. Real acting is about how deeply they inhabit a character and truly live within the circumstances of the story...

The previous poster brought up Uma Thurman. Look, her talent isn't measured by whether a specific flick hits the mark for us—movies are complicated things, there are a million moving parts involved.
Just put Uma in a solid production with the right setup, and you’ll see her talent absolutely shine.

In the real world, if you actually want to make it in Hollywood, you have to convince an audience over and over again that your character is real. It’s not like us regular folks—unless we go to a local theater and walk out genuinely blown away, we aren't exactly setting the industry on fire. I'm not saying Hollywood is the ultimate gold standard for quality, but it’s a pretty damn reliable barometer for what actually resonates with the public.

There isn't a single massive blockbuster out there that doesn't feature top-tier actors. At this point, all you're left with is judging them by whether they stare intensely into the camera, if they have dark or blue eyes, or if they just got stuck in a role that doesn't fit—which happens to Cage all too often, predictably.

Matthew Anderson4 said:Yeah, calling animals "beasts" just means they’re hostile to us and have the power to hurt us. But you're only really a beast if you tear a person apart. We basically narrowed down "brutality" to something only humans can do, then projected it onto animals. Kind of ironic. Meanwhile, we're the only species that's actively hostile toward every other living thing while having the power to wipe them all out. History and current events show we're doing a great job of using that power. And still, we have the nerve to act superior by dragging everything else down with us.

I get where you're coming from—partially, anyway. It's a decent take, but I guess my own perspective leans a bit differently.
The thing is, trying to draw such a sharp line between us and the rest of the animal kingdom isn't exactly realistic... because in doing that, you're the one creating the divide.
If you accept that humans belong to the category of animal species, then it’s perfectly natural for a human—just like any other animal—to exploit every single resource at their disposal for their own benefit.
In nature, the rule is simple: whoever has the most powerful "weapon" wins. Whoever is the most capable takes charge.
If Pomeranians had human-level intelligence, or if humans had the raw instinct of a lion, we’d all be subservient to them—and honestly, we'd be facing the exact same moral dilemmas.

See, this whole concept of human "spirituality" is basically an affront to nature. Humans try so hard to set themselves apart from animals, acting as if the natural laws of power and dominance don't apply to them just because they believe they have the power to manipulate the environment.
The real question is what metrics we choose to live by. If our metric is simply "whatever benefits our immediate surroundings," then our actions will naturally shift toward eliminating anything that poses a threat—and that includes any living thing that mass-kills us.
By the way, bacteria are living beings too, but nobody starts questioning their right to exist when your body gets hit by a nasty flu.

Matthew Anderson4 said:Pretty sure you just said the exact thing you're denying.

Anyway. Man is an animal, just like any other mammal. But nobody asking if humans are animals is talking about biological taxonomy. What people mean—those judgmental types who don't get life and use "animal" as a lazy, biased synonym because they're scared to admit what they actually feel—is that we're a beast. Is man a beast? The mistake is treating animals and beasts as the same thing. Animals are innocent, except for one. The one that knows innocence. That animal, man, does things he shouldn't, even when he knows better, even when he knows why. In this context, ignoring biology, man isn't an animal. He's a beast.

I’m just not following—what exactly are you getting at when you talk about the beast...
That term usually refers to those animals that are just flat-out hostile toward people—the kind of creatures that actually have the power to put you in real danger. I'm talking about tigers, lions, crocodiles, grizzlies... the whole predatory lineup...
You don't go calling a poodle a beast...

People have gone out of their way to label certain creatures as animals—which implies that man himself can't possibly be one of them.
But honestly, who cares? Even if we cling to that distinction, everything we know about biology tells us we’re just another branch on that same messy tree. Genetics doesn't lie, no matter how much we try to pretend otherwise...

I mean, really, what else is a human if not just another type of mammal living on this planet?

Yeah, I’m talking about her. Honestly, I have no clue why she just vanished from my active subscriptions... it makes zero sense.

Thanks. 🙂

My system just did a random reboot, and right before it happened, I was looking at my active subscriptions. Then, out of nowhere, everything just vanished from the list. It’s gone. Completely wiped.
Where the hell did it go? 🙂

rustydrifter10, you really think you can back that up? I mean, are you actually willing to put your money where your mouth is—and if you're wrong, you're basically mine... totally at my mercy...

Alright, I get where you're coming from there.
Is it actually technically possible for an admin to bypass the automated system—you know, just manually disabling the ability to post while leaving every other feature intact? 🙂

When I find myself locked out from replying to a moderator's response—on the very same night the thread or appeal was opened—it starts feeling like a lot more than just some weird glitch in the system...
Everything seems to work perfectly fine when I'm actually typing up my questions, but then suddenly, everything freezes up right after a mod weighs in.

Look, I get that there are rare coincidences here and there.
But let's be real: some moderators are just victims of their own biases. They’d much rather just click a button to hand out penalty points than actually put in the bare minimum effort to understand what someone is saying within context. It’s because they lump everyone into one big bucket—as long as the color looks similar enough, it's all the same to them.
It's a shame, really. This kind of thing just creates this echo chamber of communication where there's zero tolerance for anyone thinking differently...

Nah. I wanted to hit him back right then and there—same night, actually—but every single time I tried to post, I just got slapped with a message saying my posting privileges on that thread had been revoked. 🙂

Look, I appreciate you trying to help me crack this case, but let’s be real here. This is crystal clear. Someone "accidentally" silenced me in the one damn place where a banned user can actually voice their opinion on a moderator's call. I have no idea why anyone would even think to pull a stunt like that... unless we're dealing with some malicious "enemy of the state." 😕

Alright, I didn't realize that unless I was banned, I wouldn't even have access to that specific section of the forum.
Thanks for clearing that up for me. 🙂
But regarding my situation with the link—I was just trying to reply to Cujo's comment and kept getting hit with that same error message I'm seeing now... 🤷

Access to the ban corner is denied. Just tested it out to see if I could get through.

The Ban was handed down because of my objection: Check this out!!!

Judgment matters. We’re talking about actual discernment here.
If you want to survive out there, you have to be able to weigh things up. You need to realize you aren't just walking into a campfire... you need to know you aren't jumping off a fifth-story balcony without a parachute.
That kind of foresight—that ability to judge a situation—is everything.

When you strip away someone's ability to think critically for themselves, you pave the way for cults, "soulmate" delusions, and all kinds of psychological manipulation...

Let’s say we’re talking about an actual instance of harassment—even though there wasn't even any mention of that happening here. I see my status is still stuck in the ban corner. What does that actually imply... am I just stripped of any right to appeal a moderator's decision from here on out?

I’m asking—politely, if you can call it that—for someone in charge to let me know here or via DM why I’ve been tossed into the ban corner... because honestly, what was even the point of that move?

As a side note, does this forum actually have a policy of giving people a heads-up before they start handing out penalty points?
I’m talking specifically about posts that aren't just straight-up insults, but rather some pretty sharp criticism of an ideology. If it’s anything else, we could just call them people who are simply undecided...

Thanks.

shadowlynx102 said:VirtualCloneDrive—it’s easily the best, plus it doesn't cost a dime. I've been using it for years now...😁

I’m right there with you. It’s probably the simplest way to go, and honestly, it handles pretty much any mounting task you throw at it.

William Kern24 said:Personally, I find this whole thing incredibly tired, sugary sweet, and just plain nauseating. Every single track sounds identical—it’s like listening to one giant album that’s just a compilation of love woes stuck in A minor. But hey, maybe that’s exactly why they belong on the mainstream charts. I wish them all the best, I guess.

I honestly can't even find the words. Listening to these songs feels like watching a monkey try to strum a few random notes on a guitar.
A total circus.
Seriously, how can someone be so incredibly thick-headed, hoping that people won't get hurt by this garbage...😢