No more couch historians!

[Cronos Impera]

I have started this thread as a response to all those threads started here in the Backroom and in the Monastery and everywhere on the Org and beyond.
See, we here at the Org have two psychological disturbances intertwined.

a) Self Insert in every aspect

Furries draw Starfox for self-insert purposes imagining having those characteristics (six-pack wolf-fox with huge breasts). Like we did in our childhood playing with toys (Rawr, I'm a druid paladin from Caledonia fighting the Roman Arcani who try to kill my elder). Self inserts still stay in their couches and play those fantasies online, playing Rome Total War like they played when they ware children with some cowboys and Indians).
These self-inserts project their couch experience on the event in such a way their whole imagination gets F up. A time portal opens between the past and present, still sitting in a couch the couch general moves troops across the battlefields.
A couch general needs not make decisions like that of his real counterpart. For him the pixelated toys and the real bloodshed intertwine in a grotesque fashion. See, every moral issue faced by men back then is taken from a positive experience (the friendly fuzzy couch). The big boy wants to play with varied toys (He starts asking why aren't there more women in the army?). In his deluded mind the carnage he inflicts in the virtual world is mere fun.

Atheist gamers ask why a benevolent God would drown the world, yet you choose exterminate when facing a rebellion in Rome playing as Arche Seleukeia. The pixelated civitate are probably atheistic at your existence, writing about you as insane figments of the imagination.

You judge the murders done by the forefathers, yet are ungrateful for the land by which fed your tummies. That land was grabbed through brutal acts of murder, slavery and rape. That land grab is the reason you are alive and playing RTW instead of a rotten aborted sack of flesh. Ungrateful for the sack of bones which allow you to reach for the sky.You're concerned about saving the rare Loch Ness monster from poaching yet accept the ruthless slaughter of farm animals. You complain about vegetarian diets not making an impact yet ignore the mammals and birds which die as a result of a pesticide infested farm. You than complain about pesticides in your food, and the food not being healthy enough, yet won't rise from your couch to work in the damn field.
You build Universities in every town you conquer. You argue about building churches, being anti-religious spiritual type. You than forget that during the Roman empire books ware F expensive and the few books which ware available had to be read in a large crowd.

b) God-complex arrogance

Complain about the backwardness of the elders during the Plague, saying that they ware superstitious and intolerant of homosexual practices, yet forget the lack of hygiene which still spreads hepatitis among oral sex practitioners. You complain about their stupidity, yet you are the one who uses a calculator to determine 79/39. They wrote their thesis on paper, not in MS Word. Books couldn't be purchased from Amazon, data had to be collected on field. You do reenacting for a few hours than return to your heated homes and leave the shack in the dirt and think you could do better.

[Sarmatian]

For starters, it is Brenus, not Brennus. Brennus is another guy on the org.

For main course, it was a light-hearted and humorous thread dealing with stereotypes about women, usually held by males of the species.

For dessert, Brenus was a professional soldier (you aren't active anymore, right?) and served in various capacities in quite a few hotspots.

The rest I couldn't discern of whom it is about. I knew GC would start a trend with his rant

[Cronos Impera]

I didn't rant about that post. I just used that Username as random. Really, from the sound of the topic I thought he was complaining about the lack of Asian-American Amazons in the latest RTW title. I only saw it at the top of the discussion list. Face it Sarmatian, we here at the Org have a weird way of masturbating. That rant was about everyone, including me and you.
Admit that killing in-game pixelated people while abstaining from using F is weird at least. Admit that when browsing the internet you are not conducting authentic research but merely building your pipe-dream.Admit that when here in this forum we are masturbating our ego's, we are here for the bondage trample no-nudity (except Gaestatae) porn.

And for the Celtic paladin, here is one big lollypop. You may enter the sexology department where a division of RTW Amazons from Aristeia mod awaits you.
@Sarmatian And you think Emir Kusturica's Underground was insane. Well, we are all in the internet version of it and it is worse.

[Papewaio]

It is a video game.

A sign of intelligence in other species is that they play games. From dolphins to dogs, from parrots to primates. Game playing is ways of stretching the mind. It is like doing weights for the mind.

Rome with its war dogs and other weirdness is more game then simulation. I also would choose an easier game if I wanted to achieve a god complex. Being thrashed by a grouping of sprites and script is hardly ego enhancing.

Also games are played for escapism. The ability to enter something different from your day to day existence.

The ability to see an argument from several sides, to think outside the box, to try alternative scenarios. These are all good stretching for the brain. How you then apply that to your daily life is up to you.

The other option in your free time it to passively watch the idiot box.

Also don't you see the humour in arguing for a God complex in atheist gamers?

[Sarmatian]

So, what's your point?

We should refrain from posting because we play strategy games? Or think real deep, take a step back, count to ten in Latin and then post?

[Cronos Impera]

@Sarmatian No sir. Admit you're here to play like a baby and and stop infusing "serious and profound" themes with play. Whenever I play RTW, my grandmother says playing is for babies and gives me a lollypop. Admit when playing RTW that you become a baby again. Come on, it takes courage.
@Papewaio Please admit that playing in the wild is done by babies of the species. Therapy session: Hug a teddy bear every time you consider upgrading your computer specs for playing higher end games. You can even watch Big Bird.

[The Lurker Below]

my first lover (damn - 27 years ago? shut up.) was fond of saying "If you don't like it, don't look." Apparently after about four months she didn't like my appearance, because she wouldn't see me anymore.

wait, what was this about?

[Lemur]

[Kralizec]

Welcome back.

I don't see what the point is of this thread, beyond that you want to belittle everyone here for engaging in mundane pleasures while reaffirming your own sense of superiority by displaying your great insight. If there's some other point, please share.

I'm going to thank GC's post. I can't be bothered to write something longer myself.

[Papewaio]

It isn't our opposable thumbs that set us apart, it is our imagination.

[Cronos Impera]

The reason you and I can play like babies Custer's last stand is that some people worked their asses to obtain that. No, the problem is that they think that reading something means knowing. What I see in the Monastery is total lack of respect for the sacrifices made by the forefathers. People use them as pawns to advocate for something they like in the modern age. Admit that without thinking about the calculus when doing math, your memory rusts like iron in the field. We are stupider than our fathers and mothers and our sons and daughters will be worse still. We rely on machines to do our calculus, our logic, we rely on Google translate instead of learning another language.
People (including I in some posts I admit) use History as a whore for advocacy purposes. The debate being "accept your forefather tortured my grand-grandmother" with no other proof than the official collective history. You could use RTW as a platform for understanding the hardships of the forefathers and their bleak world, but from behind a computer screen you just can't.
Isn't it stupid that you Americans know so much about your presidents but so little of your grand-grandmother. How many times have you layed flowers at their graves? You move to the next town looking for work, abandon the old town and the cemetery. They are lost and rusty.
I talked in "we" not you, so I'm not affirming superiority. @Papewaio, my neighbor's cat also has imagination.

[Caratacus]

I don't understand your point. I don't use Rome total war as a 'platform of understanding hardships'. My friends and I don't debate the ethical issues behind destroying each other on a game. I don't understand the point you are trying to make there, suggesting that everyone that is on the forum, or spends time playing and discussing the game actually believes that Rome total war will help to understand how awful it was for peasants and serfs in ancient times. Do you really believe it would even occur to them. Rome total war was not designed to do such a thing. If people are interested in such a topic, they research it, or find out information about it. If I wanted to learn more about the hardships of Russian citizens during World War 2, I wouldn't play World of Tanks. I don't understand why you associate these ideas with a game, when almost no-one else here does. No one but you at least.

I find it more insulting that you then presume that every American that uses this forum in turn would no less about their great-grandmother than they do of the presidents. Who are you to pass such a claim with little to no basis. We move towns looking for work, abandoning the cemetery. Oh no! What do you suggest we do? Carry our ancestors and relatives graves wherever we go? I'm sorry to disappoint, but If I move town, I'll visit the grave if I so choose next time I visit. I have no clue what that point of yours has to do with this strange psychological dilemma you have come out with in the first place.

[HoreTore]

I only play Football Manager so I'm free to rant, right?

Also, less knowledge than our forefathers? Hah. Two semester studying natural science at uni, and you know everything Newton ever knew and more. Fact. We know more now than we have ever done before. We will know more still in 50 years.

Total thread failure. Our forefathers didn't sacrifice themselves, they butchered each other. Long may they rot.

[Kralizec]

The reason you and I can play like babies Custer's last stand is that some people worked their asses to obtain that.

Game developers get paid. By spending my money to play their products, I indirectly pay them. I don't see why I should feel any gratitude, let alone veneration beyond that.

No, the problem is that they think that reading something means knowing. What I see in the Monastery is total lack of respect for the sacrifices made by the forefathers. People use them as pawns to advocate for something they like in the modern age. Admit that without thinking about the calculus when doing math, your memory rusts like iron in the field. We are stupider than our fathers and mothers and our sons and daughters will be worse still. We rely on machines to do our calculus, our logic, we rely on Google translate instead of learning another language.

Math problems in school exams are generally tailored for calculator use, as otherwise they would be impossible to solve except for people like Stephen Hawkings. Calculators are a prime example of expanding what a person could possibly do. Granted, some people use them even for simple addition/substraction in daily life situations because they don't want to spend the mental effort to do it in their heads.

Google translate is little more than an online dictionary, it's simply awful for translating entire sentences. Learning a new language is seriously hard, especially for adults, and not worth the effort unless it's vital for social interaction or your profession. Without google translate (and/or dictionaries) people would simply not bother to read anything in a language they didn't already know.

People (including I in some posts I admit) use History as a whore for advocacy purposes. The debate being "accept your forefather tortured my grand-grandmother" with no other proof than the official collective history. You could use RTW as a platform for understanding the hardships of the forefathers and their bleak world, but from behind a computer screen you just can't.
Isn't it stupid that you Americans know so much about your presidents but so little of your grand-grandmother. How many times have you layed flowers at their graves? You move to the next town looking for work, abandon the old town and the cemetery. They are lost and rusty.

For the experience of actually living through an event there quite simply is no substitute. The only way to come close would be to read literature about it and, if you're serious, visit some sites, etc. Playing a video game is an awful way to go about it, but it did inspire me to read actual history books that I otherwise wouldn't have bothered with.

The only thing I know of my grand-grandparents was that they were peasants and minor craftsment, and quite poor. I've never met them, and I don't see why their memory should be important to me personally. Likewise I don't expect that I'll do anything sufficiently monumental during my lifetime that I'll be remembered for more than 2 generations after my death. It doesn't bother me.

[Papewaio]

I use RTW to see Romans in pretty formations to remind me of the movie Spartacus. Or play the Greeks so I can be reminded of the old Spartan movies.

I am an atheist who builds temples in the game. I admit my calculus isn't what it used to be. I do not have to do triple integrals of Schrödinger's equation within the magnetic paradigm in my day job, so I've let that ability go.

I speak English and that covers most of my encounters on the net and within Australia. My son speaks Chinese, as the house rule is when speaking to mum, and grandparents he must speak Chinese.

Moving around, exploring, looking for a better life has served American's well. Ancestor worship has served China poorly.

I work hard to look after my children's future. It is a much better way of honouring my forefathers then cutting off some poor plants sexual organs and letting them rot on the graves of my forefathers.

[Strike For The South]

If we had a moment of reverence for every poor sod who died fighting for another mans pocketbook, we'd never leave the chapel.

Next topic please

[HoreTore]

Math problems in school exams are generally tailored for calculator use, as otherwise they would be impossible to solve except for people like Stephen Hawkings. Calculators are a prime example of expanding what a person could possibly do.

You're close, but allow me to expand:

Whether you use calculators or not will decide what kind of mathematics you are able to show. I've given my students tests both without and with calculators. Whether or not I let them use a calculator has nothing to do with "going easy" on them, or whatever. It will determine what ability my test can uncover.

If they do not use a calculator, I must keep the numbers low, or otherwise they'll spend ages on the algorithms instead of the actual maths I intended them to learn. And that's a problem, since your ability to solve problems with high numbers is the difference between "good" understanding and "excellent" understanding. Solve a simple 11x+7y=61 equation, fine. Ramp up the numbers, and the probability increases heavily that you will make a mistake if you do not know the procedure well enough. To do the latter you need calculators, because otherwise you're spending all the time solving problems irrelevant to the problem I wanted to check if you were able to solve.

A test without calculators will be a test to check your understanding of basic algorithms. A test with calculators will check your understanding of mathematical problems of a higher level than simple division/multiplication.


I often hear adults whine about how calculators ruined maths, and how thy got lower grades when they got calculators. They often lament how their grades went down after calculators were introduced, and blame it on the calcs. The reality is that their understanding of maths was low to begin with, and they were kept up only by their ability to perform algorithms, not their understanding of maths.


Finally, a quick question to the OP to check whether he has any knowledge, or is just another hypocrite:

The problem 101 multiplied by 99 should be solved by anyone wit good knowledge of maths in under 3 seconds, without the use on any help outside your mind. Can you do that?

[Papewaio]

A better way to show understanding of maths is solve the sum of 1 to a million in one minute.

I can do it easily, after all I'm just an average in a sum of all parts.

[Zarakas]

I work hard to look after my children's future. It is a much better way of honouring my forefathers then cutting off some poor plants sexual organs and letting them rot on the graves of my forefathers.

Well said Papewaio, I do the same.

[Husar]

Admit that when here in this forum we are masturbating our ego's, we are here for the bondage trample no-nudity (except Gaestatae) porn.

And what are all the non-gaming men doing when they try to be the best at their job or have sex with as many women as they can without getting a baby?
Your views on playing/gaming are also not very scientific for someone who claims we need more scientific views here. Papewaio is the one who explained the more scientific view.

The reason you and I can play like babies Custer's last stand is that some people worked their asses to obtain that.

And why did they do that? Because they wanted the money that we worked our asses in another job. And why do they want our money? Because it masturbates their ego or they can buy someone who masturbates their little ego if you know what I mean. And none of that they do for scientific or reproduction purposes, they just want to play. So what's your point exactly? That the entire human species is inferior to itself because it plays too much? In that case you should read up on that subject.

Our forefathers didn't sacrifice themselves, they butchered each other. Long may they rot.

While I'm generally against overly worshipping the forefathers, this is incredibly simplified as well. Even in science there is the concept of "standing on the shoulders of giants", which is why one uses proper citation to mark the achievements of others or "forefathers" because a lot of what we can achieve today is only achieved today because they laid the groundwork. Whether it was good or bad groundwork, it shaped the world as we inherited it. To dismiss it all as bad is about as useful as a black and white world view.

[a completely inoffensive name]

"Furries draw Starfox for self-insert purposes imagining having those characteristics (six-pack wolf-fox with huge breasts). Like we did in our childhood playing with toys (Rawr, I'm a druid paladin from Caledonia fighting the Roman Arcani who try to kill my elder)."

This is where I lol'd and started hitting F5 all day on this page.

[Pannonian]

A better way to show understanding of maths is solve the sum of 1 to a million in one minute.

I can do it easily, after all I'm just an average in a sum of all parts.

I didn't quite get Horetore's point until reading this. I can write down the working out, and I can explain the reasoning. But without a calculator, I'll need a pen and paper to get the answer.

[Tellos Athenaios]

You're close, but allow me to expand:

Whether you use calculators or not will decide what kind of mathematics you are able to show. I've given my students tests both without and with calculators. Whether or not I let them use a calculator has nothing to do with "going easy" on them, or whatever. It will determine what ability my test can uncover.

If they do not use a calculator, I must keep the numbers low, or otherwise they'll spend ages on the algorithms instead of the actual maths I intended them to learn. And that's a problem, since your ability to solve problems with high numbers is the difference between "good" understanding and "excellent" understanding. Solve a simple 11x+7y=61 equation, fine. Ramp up the numbers, and the probability increases heavily that you will make a mistake if you do not know the procedure well enough. To do the latter you need calculators, because otherwise you're spending all the time solving problems irrelevant to the problem I wanted to check if you were able to solve.

A test without calculators will be a test to check your understanding of basic algorithms. A test with calculators will check your understanding of mathematical problems of a higher level than simple division/multiplication.

It depends heavily on the type of math but it has little to do with the "size" of the numbers. Three examples, all are equally difficult:

• 4999 * 5001
• 4*6
• -1/ ((x + 1)(1 - x))

Which is why you only get a minimal reward for providing the result and the real points are awarded if you can demonstrate how you solved it without the calculator.

I often hear adults whine about how calculators ruined maths, and how thy got lower grades when they got calculators.

I never heard that one, I heard the reverse (they got lower grades once the calculators were removed). The typical complaint is that because people can use the calculator they do, and because they do they lose out on the practice needed to use the brain thing so they are stuck without a calculator.

Now there are problems which simply cannot be "solved" or computed without the use of the calculator in any reasonable time frame but then generally you'd simply provide the formula as answer and leave entering the formula in a calculator as an exercise for the reader.

[Tellos Athenaios]

I didn't quite get Horetore's point until reading this. I can write down the working out, and I can explain the reasoning. But without a calculator, I'll need a pen and paper to get the answer.

Yes: pen and paper: 5 * 10^5 (10^6 + 1) = 5 * 10^11 + 5^ 10^5. Which is: 5 00 000 500 000 = 500000500000.

[HoreTore]

It depends heavily on the type of math but it has little to do with the "size" of the numbers. Three examples, all are equally difficult:

• 4999 * 5001
• 4*6
• -1/ ((x + 1)(1 - x))

Which is why you only get a minimal reward for providing the result and the real points are awarded if you can demonstrate how you solved it without the calculator.

Wrong.

You need to be more confident in the multiplication algorithm to solve 4999*5001 than to solve 4*6 or 49*51. The procedure is the same, but the evidence clearly states that more people do more mistakes once lower numbers are substituted for higher numbers in the same mathematical problem. That's why a lecturer will scale up thenumbers if he is unsure on whether to give you an A or a B on an oral test, for example.

But please feel free to argue against commonly accepted academic fact. That's always fun to watch.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Wrong.

You need to be more confident in the multiplication algorithm to solve 4999*5001 than to solve 4*6 or 49*51. The procedure is the same, but the evidence clearly states that more people do more mistakes once lower numbers are substituted for higher numbers in the same mathematical problem. That's why a lecturer will scale up thenumbers if he is unsure on whether to give you an A or a B on an oral test, for example.

But please feel free to argue against commonly accepted academic fact. That's always fun to watch.

Has nothing whatsoever to do with math. The algorithm to compute 4999*5001 or 4*6 or 49*51 is exactly the same, but the important insight you can get from math has nothing to do with generic multiplication. It is a special case, and if you recognise that pattern you can do it much easier. It is in fact 5000 * 5000 - 1, 5 *5 -1, 50 * 50 -1. And 5000 * 5000 is easy to do in the decimal system, because it's 5 * 5 * 1000 * 1000 - 1 which reduces to 5 * 5 shifted left by six, minus 1.

That is math. Taking the long route and writing out multiplication as a big sum indicates the victim does not understand the math. Likewise if you spot a kid working out the sum of 1 to 1 million by hand instead of taking the shortcut, the kid doesn't understand the math behind it. There's no shame in not understanding the math as long as we don't pretend that being able to perform computations (algorithms) equates to understanding math.

[HoreTore]

Has nothing whatsoever to do with math. The algorithm to compute 4999*5001 or 4*6 or 49*51 is exactly the same, but the important insight you can get from math has nothing to do with generic multiplication. It is a special case, and if you recognise that pattern you can do it much easier. It is in fact 5000 * 5000 - 1, 5 *5 -1, 50 * 50 -1. And 5000 * 5000 is easy to do in the decimal system, because it's 5 * 5 * 1000 * 1000 - 1 which reduces to 5 * 5 shifted left by six, minus 1.

That is math. Taking the long route and writing out multiplication as a big sum indicates the victim does not understand the math. Likewise if you spot a kid working out the sum of 1 to 1 million by hand instead of taking the shortcut, the kid doesn't understand the math behind it. There's no shame in not understanding the math as long as we don't pretend that being able to perform computations (algorithms) equates to understanding math.

(I already gave an example of the quadrat sentence in an earlier post)

So... You are of the opinion that the difficulty does increase when the numbers used are higher?

[Tellos Athenaios]

(I already gave an example of the quadrat sentence in an earlier post)

So... Your argument isn't that higher numbers does not increase the difficulty level, then? You are of the opinion that the difficulty does increase when the numbers used are higher?

My opinion is that once you take the step from "here's an algorithm which lets you compute this kind of problem" to "here's how you can deduce what algorithm will compute your problem" the numbers switch from being the things that make life difficult to fairly arbitrary constants. In other words when you take the step from computations to math. If you the question is about math the numbers don't matter at all.

[HoreTore]

My opinion is that once you take the step from "here's an algorithm which lets you compute this kind of problem" to "here's how you can deduce what algorithm will compute your problem" the numbers switch from being the things that make life difficult to fairly arbitrary constants. In other words when you take the step from computations to math. If you the question is about math the numbers don't matter at all.

I have no objections to this, other than the remaining problem of how it's still easier to find algorithms hen higher numbers are present. It's not really a talking point, it's a simple fact one must be aware of. Higher numbers are not more difficult because they're harder, they're more difficult because our brains tends to mess up more. For example, adding an extra zero when writing "100000" is a lot easier to do than when writing "10".

Increasing the numbers is a nifty way to test an algorithm(or your ability to produce an algorithm) without actually adding any new problems to the original problem. It's comparable to the satanic practice of adding an irrelevant piece of information to a text problem("calculate the m2 of a room with sides of 2m and 4m" is easier than "calculate the m2 of a room with sides of 2m and 4m and a height of 3m").

[Greyblades]

I miss maths. I never was any good at knowing which algorithm to use, where and where each algorithm applied, etc, but it was easier to understand when there was a definite answer. I swear half of English lit's definitions and answers are pulled completely out of someone's backside, a passage presented in verse is not automatically poem, dangit!