• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Bed last won the day on May 9

Bed had the most liked content!

About Bed

  • Rank
    Advanced Surf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Donator
    Sparkbomb Supporter

Recent Profile Visitors

2,791 profile views
  1. New Prez

    Coal and oil has done wonders for everyone overall. I think the use of these resources were integral to advance our civilization and enable us our present quality of life and capabilities like better health and control of disease. I think we've reached a transitional point that many of the negative issues tied to fossil fuel can be forgoed.
  2. New Prez

    1st core issue - guilt-tripping arguments: Agreed to end guilt tripping arguments. Identifying the root cause is a great way in finding the right mitigation measures. But lets just say it is natural. The U.S. shouldn't be blamed. People shouldn't be blamed. This doesn't change the predicted consequences if it is natural or man-made. The point is, this agreement acknowledges this outcome and its a call that action is needed. 2nd core issue - The significance of delaying the effects of climate change is to reduce predicted loss and allow time for technology to advance. No doubt that any amount of reduction will delay some effects- I believe the goals set by the agreement is significant enough to offset time and provide demand to help transition out of coal and oil dependence. Would it be significant enough to affect our lives though? Probably not. Climate change won't affect us directly in our lifetime. It will affect other parts of the world, that I assume is 'inevitable,' so I guess the logic is that the economic loss is not worth the 'inevitable' to many people. And the hubris from the left constantly making foolish arguments as if they know everything about this issue, but the reality is that nobody knows the future and the severity of the impact. We can make predictions based on the past and what's happening right now. If there is anyone who can accurately predict the future, I'd like to know. I prefer the cautious and proactive route, but some people would like to run the experiment. And then there are people that completely deny the issue, which is absurd, but money is money. I understand that you hold the U.S. Economy as the utmost priority, so I don't think I can convince you that priority is a mixed bag. If Trump thinks we are paying too much money, he can reduce the spending money in his 4 years in office. There isn't enforcement to uphold the requirements. Leaving the agreement entirely is just a big slap in the face by coal and the GOP. A 1000 years from now, is intriguing. In the context of nuclear war, environmental changes, exhausting resources, solar flares, epidemics, maybe even being hit by a meteor, it is difficult to imagine what technologies would exist then. In Starcraft, once you exhaust your resources, you would have to expand. But I think the idea that relying on the development of future technology is bleak. Technology doesn't just happen, it requires a lot of work and time. Technology can even downgrade if not stimulated... see the fall of past empires and how their ingenuity just started to free fall. An example I like is our space program. It was once great. Now we rely on Russian rocketry. Speaking strictly to just resources, the potential that technology can be forgotten is probable. I think it's a good idea that we transition into a new way of sourcing energy early rather than later. I personally believe that certain types of technology will continue to grow exponentially and accurate simulations would be the saving grace for machines to produce physical means for us to adapt in limited resource environments. But again, I suggest we don't rely on the future, considering potential technological walls. There's just too many probable scenarios that can end terribly. Continually steering and monitoring these probabilities is the safest path in my opinion. The Paris agreement has its parts in this.
  3. New Prez

    When you say support, do you mean if nations signed the agreement or not? The lack of penalty might be a reason why the agreement isn't as effective as you might wish, but it is the only agreement of its kind. Without penalty or enforcement, what might be the reason to exit the agreement? I really don't see a path to enforcing other nations unless we actively go to trade wars or maybe actively sell cheap energy products... Also, I would like to point out the strain on other nations might be greater than the U.S. because of the difference in industrialization. I believe the specific issue surrounds China's commitment vs U.S. is what Trump is looking at. 4 Parties entitled to sign, have not done so: Holy See, Nicaragua, Syria. And now the United States. As you said, this is without enforcement. This agreement is merely an acknowledgement of the risks involved, and clearly there is worldwide efforts to mitigate these risks and monitor progress by having such discussions via this agreement. I highly doubt 4 years is enough time to re-negotiate given the amount of coordination needed. How it is a burden to the U.S? Does Trump mean our Economy will be in shambles or be lesser of China if we continue? Who predicts these things and who are they sponsored by? I see that the U.S. will greatly benefit from being energy independent. I guess Trump did say he wants to save the coal mining jobs. Wants to keep gas prices as low as possible. With the expense of... intensified emissions. The alternative is we don't have to pay for gas, and reduce emissions, and the U.S. will lead in manufacturing this, not China. It's apparent that Trump is focused on short term goals, which I think slows us down. I don't know the degree, but the demand for new energy is apparent at this moment, because virtually everyone acknowledges the issue, even including big oil. This might not be the case in the future, I don't know. The only people I see that are pushing the counter arguments are tied to coal, and of course the GOP, which has resonated with many Americans that voted trump. It's true that this issue is used, misrepresented, and exploited for political reasons but I think it is unfair if we should disregard the issue because a few people are exploiting it for personal gains. The only issue it should represent is the potential catastrophic harm to humans worldwide. You don't need to even account if it is man made or not, the idea is that in order to mitigate potential catastrophic events identified by... scientific data, we need to mitigate these risks in case this happens. In engineering, this is principle for any system you are designing, especially for the public. Otherwise you end up killing the public, receive bad public image, and having to spend much more money to go out and redesign, install, test. If you take global warming out of the picture altogether, we are still left with the issue of running out of natural resources. Though not sure how long this will take, instead of transitioning smoothly, we intend to leave it to future generations to figure out.
  4. New Prez

    I saw this and still have no idea what it is. Saw some pics of coffee... okay? I just know a lot of people were making fun of Trump because of the typo or something? It was very weird. A typo, is that it? I'm thinking, could he be doing this on purpose? He probably didn't, but the reaction to it was bewildering. Kinda tired of seeing all these people talk about his little perks, like his hands, his hair, his skin color. I think he is listening to /his/ people but ignoring everything else. With a global agreement like this, I guess he is ignoring U.S. allies as well. Also much more safe than coal mining and transferring oil.
  5. New Prez

    The Paris agreement was probably one of the only things I thought would stay... Because it's a big global agreement, like NATO. Don't mess with these things... I don't know... this will definitely slow things down in terms of progress on alternative energy. Sounds like it will have an effect on how the U.S. looks at war too. The U.S. will eventually reduce oil consumption, as it is a limited resource. It's too bad... Demand and the technologies/infrastructure needed for the next new economy might go to China. Though I think the U.S. will always be leading in energy - I feel this decision kinda puts a dent in things... Trump says he will re-negotiate... I doubt it, seems like something an advisor told him to say to reduce backlash. It's voluntary right? Some points people on the internet have been making who supports this decision: It hurts the Economy. America First, globalism Bad. Kept his promise. Global Warming not a big deal. Hypocritical technologies because of oil infrastructure. The environment is a liberal thing, so anything liberal is bad. Religion. Even 1 person I talked actually cited Christians to be purveyors of the truth behind the conspiracy of global warming. Is this just another science vs religion biology class controversy again? I was mostly interested in the stimulating effects on technology and energy independence. Oh well, keep inventing I suppose.
  6. Fashion

    I think Goku is still pretty cool though. I too wanted to be like Goku long ago. I think in the new series, they tried to make him a bit more lean, but I'm use to seeing the bulky muscles. To compare, since I think girls have similar perspective as most guys in terms of opposite sex body types, I would say the muscular men that work to bulk up specific muscle groups are like female supermodels to men. When artificially enhanced, it looks kinda suspicious and even gross. But this ideal seems to be unrealistic... Because I don't think I will ever end up with a supermodel. So settle for a step down. The next best thing is sizeable man meat that you can use as a pillow. From a guy's perspective, a sizeable busts on girls seems to be the equivalent. Then there are more user-friendly body types who like average, not so much muscular, but shows hints/outlines of toned muscle. Overall, in general, culture depicts women less muscular and fit than men, but interestingly I noticed a comparable system or hierarchy for preferred body types in both men and women. When you say well-roundness, do you mean more flab or meat? When I think of Well-Roundedness, I think someone that has an ideal layer of fat around their body and more meat to produce a softness to touch. From what I remember, the way to do this is eating a lot, but not so intense exercise. You can always build muscles quickly by doing both, with some protein powder, and once you achieve desired weight and muscle, stop exercising and continue eating to make your body a bit softer I think people will eventually get fat overtime as their metabolism slows down, it's just some people slow way down much later I guess. Yes, a good physical health trumps all, and my rationale is by no means the best way to go out. There is a return that I was hoping for... And it is a bit out there. probably 1% possible outcome... It's something like, Maybe I can get pass that hurtle when a significant scientific breakthrough happens? Maybe if I can make it out a little longer to get there. I am not too concerned about my own mortality, and the reason I wish to see the future, and continue to see the future beyond the current limit cap is because I am curious at how things will turn out. Naturally, I like to observe what happens. If it becomes a sort of heaven, I would certainly wish to be selected to enter that realm. I think if someone was there with me, that isn't too spectacular, that would be great. I've poured money into various projects and experienced complete failure... But I've found a new motivation: back pains.
  7. Fashion

    I'm not sure if I would call it a fluctuation. Maybe if +/- 10 pounds. I think I can gain 5 pounds if I keep a steady meal intake for a month. Like you, I can lose it easily if I don't continue, and that's really been my struggle. Half of me really wants to gain weight, for aesthetics. The other half, I'm thinking it's probably more healthy to stay lean. Maybe I can be a bit more fit though because I sit around too much. I think the reality is that many "ideal" bodies are not really natural, and require continued preservation. I checked out how to body build, and it requires extraneous amounts of food intake. It takes a lot of dedication to build up for a person that has a hard time gaining weight. It is very possible, but it becomes something in the forefront of your life rather than working side by side with your other priorities. The time I dedicated to gaining weight, I felt it was taking too much time thinking about food and exercise. Also, the "Growth" factor is somewhat of a paranoia to me. Basically, gaining weight is tantamount to growing muscles. It's far more healthy than obtaining fat and you won't lose muscle as fast as fat, but the thing about growth is that you are basically aging faster, cycling through your body processes much faster, and your life span will probably be less than if you continued a state of slow growth. I think growth can be slowed down by eating and drinking certain things, though I can't say for sure - so don't take my word for it. But I think if you're constantly eating protein and exercising, there is some kind of strain to it that I worry may lead to bad things including aging, more wrinkles later, more body maintenance and other faster physiological processes. I would find out if this is a myth, but too lazy. Seems obvious to me. It's just the downside is that you might encounter really bad health issues if you're too skinny, so I think I should just exercise enough to ride that edge. I have been trying to get more fit for the past year or so as well. Some things sticked with me, somethings don't. I've been only eating home cooked food for a long time, by cooking once a week and splitting it into many days. I always have a meal ready, and I try to get at least 2 meals in a day. Each meal is quite hefty as well. I usually eat a third prepared meal or get something from the store to eat that day to mix things up. I've tried beef base meat, but I didn't feel good after eating beef with all the oil and stuff. So my protein source is mostly chicken, fish, potatoes, eggs. That usually accounts for half my meal, the other half is cooked vegetables, and some fruit smoothie. I've been able to keep this routine for a while now, and gained some 5 pounds even without exercising much. I'm looking to put some time into a gym membership and go there every day. I tried weight lifting at home, but I usually get lazy - so hopefully this will work for me. I think if you're dancing for an hour everyday, that's probably enough. I think dancing takes a lot of physical effort, so I would probably say just continue to eat healthy. I'm not too worried about body aesthetics, though I feel too far self conscious of my form than I should care for... it's a struggle of image and what's important to me I suppose.
  8. Fashion

    That guy looks nice, but this guy... I mean. I have this fear of things poking into me, including piercing, metals, hard stuff on my body. That's why I was looking for a Velcro belt. You know when you undress and find a crater or lines on your body? That was always weird to see. Plus, piercings look like they hurt too. And there's always gold poisoning, and something seems unclean when you see smears of skin or face oil on someone's metal accessories. I think there's something wrong with me... You're right, my shoes are always bigger rather than tighter. I think I'm in-between sizes. Thanks for the recommendation. Got a black version of the belt for work. I usually wear the light tan one outside of work. I am running pretty slim. I don't think an additional 5 pounds changes much. I always thought vests were weird to be honest. I haven't grown up much... but I've always seen vests to be an adult classy stylish thing, and less of functionality. I also stereotyped people wearing them too, thinking people that wear them are rich. I don't think I can imagine myself wearing one... I usually just wear regular sweaters, but I get it - makes me appear preppy when worn with a dress shirt. I was told specifically, that this isn't college, it's a professional work place while wearing such sweaters. But... So nowadays, I wear a sweater on the inside, and dress shirt on the outside, for warmth purposes. I found out more about 'thermal' wear after that.
  9. Fashion

    This is the shoe I am wearing. Had them for almost 3 years so far and still good. The colors are a bit more faded than before, but I like the faded look as well: Made of washable suede, I think lightweight, flat, laceless, with good ventilation is the best. I've had bad experience with other shoes, ones that cover your ankles give you bad ventilation, and you end up sweating or stinking. This type of shoe is not great if you happen to need to run. It can slip out if you're going too fast. What is expected are oxfords: These range from point to round to square. I'm not particularly against pointy tip shoes, it was just something I thought of when I was trying to describe oxfords at the time. The front area of the shoe goes to a tip, making it triangle shape, so it goes to the point. Even if it is round tip, I think the cone shape of these kind of shoes are uncomfortable. Compared to the loafer I have up there, it is more pill shape, comfortable overall. Also, the sole of the shoes are very hard, and I am not fond of the block of plastic for the heel. Not very flexible. I prefer shoes with sole that are flexible enough to curl up. For dress socks, I think men are able to be more creative here. I've seen a lot of professionals, the ones with executive vests and ties and stuff wear wild designs for socks. They are only noticeable while sitting though - when the pants lift up a bit. I would not go extreme colors, I have yet to see that. The sock just has more room for designs, and they should be a bit elegant designs. Usually they are angular designs. I got striped socks, and I like them, but I don't think its great as for as "elegance." They look a bit kiddy, but I don't really care. The bad part is that your socks are more important if you have low cut shoes, like the loafers above - so you probably want dark colored socks to not draw too much attention to your feet. not what I have, but been eyeing these: I buy all my clothes online so I happen to have pictures: Perry Ellis Men's Portfolio Modern Fit Flat Front Bengaline Pant - 77% polyester 23% rayon. This is mostly for comfort, but the fashion is more toward slimmed down version of these pants. I don't wear slim clothes and pants because I'm already skinny as-is, so I don't like to show my body lines. If I get more shaped up, I'd go for a more slimmer version. For now, modern fit seems to be it. This is the belt I got: This isn't fashionable, typically you go for some brown leather. I didn't intend for the braided look, I was just looking for something that is not hard leather but flexible/stretchable. If the braid was smaller that it wasn't noticeable, that would be great. I'm looking for a belt like this, but instead of the metal buckle, I'm looking for a Velcro version. I don't think these exists. For dress shirts, I tend to go lightweight fabric, soft collar (kinda hard to find these), subtle square patterns. Should I try to compromise to look more fashionable? My boss seems to think so. It's been 3 years and suddenly I get comments that it's not good enough. I would step up my game, but I have some sort of mental blockage for showing off my ###### curves and stuff.
  10. Fashion

    I think what is expected depends on the company and age/type of occupation. I know some people working for google who can basically wear sweatpants everyday. I work as a consultant in an engineering firm, so no ties needed, but dress shirt/pants/shoes are required. It us more strict for guys here, because style is limited to a certain look that makes you look knowledgeable. For some reason, girls can wear whatever fancy look they like. Maybe a stylish cute coat. Or a nice dress sweater, whatever that is called. I've been wearing loafers, and I'm told that's not good enough because they look like boat shoes. Clearly they are not, but it looks like leather and a dress shoe in my opinion. For girls, loafer like shoes is no problem for them. It seems the only kind of shoes acceptable for men are those uncomfortable pointy toe shoes. the first few weeks, I was riding a plain red dress shirt and some faded work pants with some of the most comfortable boat shoes. then my boss took me to the side and said some bad things about the way I dressed. now I wear the same thing each day. I upgraded to business like brown loafers - that's as far as I would like to go. I don't know why I don't like pointy shoes that much. I combo those loafers with some black pants. I also upgraded the pants to a smooth fabric I can't recall right now. But it was more comfortable than my regular cotton work pants so it was nice. Then a light patterned dress shirt. The patterns give you more of a sophistication, while plain color ones are more for marketing or something. Admins, receptionists, marketing, everyone in the front look a bit more clean.
  11. Site Cacheing Issue

    One time I was R.A. Another, I was Shattered Rift. I even tried to update the forum software like the site told me and log into the ACP.
  12. Ascetic Living

    I too went without computer and internet for a long period of time, in the past though. It wasn't hard for me to drop everything you are working on and start something new. I think its the same feeling as "giving up," which I hear is the easy road to things. Withdrawal comes from perhaps an addiction of some sort. I was a bit addicted to playing games, and when I stopped my gaming upkeep, the feeling of giving up was greater than a feeling of hanging on (withdrawal). I've had numerous times prior to experience failure and giving up, so I think this helped me rid myself of effects of chronic withdrawal. It's not like this sort of addiction is a drug-addiction too. I've often been told from people around me that the cause of everything that is bad is my computer, games, and technology in general. I took this advice and let myself not touch technology for maybe half a year. I found that when I stopped indulging in my computer time, I had a lesser indulgence in something else. I went out and hanged out with friends. Went outdoorsy, went to bars, went to house game parties, etc I was thinking, why is one form of indulgence better than the other? What makes it acceptable? Obviously one is culturally acceptable. But I felt that factor muddies the real verdict. So I broke down the fundamental benefits of each form of indulgence. The computer is a portal to greater knowledge. It is infinitely growing in complexity. You can create anything you want and learn whatever you want. The drawback is that it is changing too fast and is viewed as this "other world." People who do not use it find it strange and not human. I was on a plane the other night, and a drunk lady that sat next to me yelled at me for reading an article on my phone. She educated me the difference between speaking to another human through a device and in person. One was more real, personable, human. The other was machine. The social life, often defined as "having a life" itself is culturally acceptable. It offers a traditional and even more effective means of social networking. Often leads to a partner in life I think. Speech is an ability that you don't often practice on the computer (even though you can). Eye contact and body language seems to be important to people. I don't care for that stuff. You get a lot of health benefits than sitting around too. I think the drawback, from my own personal experience anyways, is that you are not exposed to new ideas as much as you can be; tunnel vision. Gossip, word of mouth, can lead to a disaster, AKA drama. I don't know if it was the drama that ensued at the climax of relationships, but it felt like the people around me were emulating the drama they see in shows or something. They were non-issues, but they do a lot of damage. It's like the bigger picture didn't matter, and this incredibly minor issue turns out to be the nuclear bomb of a happy community. Such forms of hysteria exists on the internet and in real life, but more-so damaging in real life. I chose mostly option 1 later on, as it relates to my life goals. This option also helped me with a "less materialized" way of living. The computer and cell phones are devices that compact multiple devices into one. It's less material overall. Also, it can simulate many things. If you want to snowboard, you can play a snowboarding game. I know it's not the same thing, but take it as a trial before doing the real thing. You don't need a snowboard, you don't need a board game, a basketball, a frisbee. Forget camping. If the goal is less material, a computer life is the best package. Forget having a variety of clothes to dress up nicely (I wear the same thing everyday to work... haha), a car, outdoorsy equipment. You just need a bed(optional, but good for your back nonetheless), a computer, a toothbrush, a couple sets of clothing, some toilet paper, soap, a notebook, whatever you need for your job, and that should be good. Lastly, Ascetic living is defined as a form of living without typical or worldly indulgence and more time spent on the spirit. If you find satisfaction in spending time on your spirit, isn't that an indulgence? What is the criteria for an acceptable indulgence in terms of going ascetic?
  13. Ascetic Living

    I've experienced this twice... I believe it has influenced my material approach to life. The first time, I didn't have a computer. Slept on the floor pretty much. I was very bare. I bought a $100 computer later on. I bought maybe 2 new sweaters. I didn't have much because I was living in a corner of a room. So getting material was not an option for me. The 2nd time was because of a job offer. I came up with my computer, clothing and some documents. I accumulated a lot of stuff I think. Got a shelf, drawer, got a free desk. I think these are essentials though. Some things that are not essential are some cooking tools that I wanted and ended up not using. Got a small sandwich grill and a pressure cooker I'm not using. Brought my bike but ended up not using it much. I have 2 bikes now, looking to sell one of them. Because I have some spending money, I've been buying stuff off Amazon only. Like new shoes, clothes, containers. I think I went overboard with some things. I think a number of other things affected my material approach. When I didn't have money, I save things up in case I need it another time. I wanted a lot of stuff. When I got a job, and was able to spend on things, I did not start to hoard or collect thing. But I tried many things that can help my life a little. Like running, jogging clothes. Some terry cloth towels for cleaning, an air filter, bicycle equipment, a fan, etc. I do grow some plants, and currently at 6 potted plants in my room. I often get the urge to get more, but due to space and more work needed for care, I stayed firm at 6 for a while now. The other material thing that's probably bad is my computer. I got two good computer. I rpobably don't need a $500 SSD, $800 graphics card, $800 CPU+motherboard... Maybe went overboard... I think I got an Xboxone at $500 when it first came out. I learned to not buy consoles ever again. I guess another thing that helped me on not hoarding is... I think I might move around a lot. It sucks having a lot of furniture. Room size, storage space accounts for how much material I accumulate. Also, I live in a shared house - so I try not to have too many value things. If they steal my bed, OK. Steal my clothes? OK I got ugly clothing. Steal my plants? I'd be sad. Wait, I have a pretty nice jacket I wouldn't want anyone to steal actually. Some valuebles I left at my parents place are some magic/yugioh cards. Got a Diablo 3 collector's edition box. I secured these things so they don't get thrown out. If I ever get a house of my own, I'd store these things in it of course.
  14. What Are You Watching? (TV version)

    I'm not familiar with the smallville comics... I figured the direction into a team oriented show follows superman's story in the comics, so it was natural. I did like the green arrow here and how they teamed up. It's kind of hard to pinpoint what is lacking, but maybe if I think about some of the things I enjoyed or kept me watching... I generally like shows where it doesn't feel like things are being dragged on. I think every episode should have a key moment, or should be somewhat purposeful to drive the story. And these moments should be interesting and not always predictable, as long as it fits the character of course. Also, for some reason I feel like I can detect a set-up, or a plot device... which makes things predictable and when I keep seeing these things, its less exciting. I don't mean to say being able to predict things is bad, but there should be a good balance between 1) knowing something turned out as you hoped and 2) finding out its not always turning out as you thought. Basically, it's sometimes fun being on edge because the show is telling you, anything can happen. That's something Games of Throne does well, because the character that you like, might be gone anytime. There's something in the struggle that makes me more invested into not missing a scene or episode. I enjoy good character interactions. I think people call it chemistry? Sometimes it's chemistry, and sometimes it's just very different kind of characters, interacting with each other in the most interesting ways. Strong characters are characters that you can understand and predict their behaviors the more you watch. Putting them against an unknown or another strong character that makes for a very unpredictable outcome or conversation is fun. Chemistry however... there's some sort of attraction between characters that it doesn't matter if it's predictable or not, you just like seeing them interact like that. I tend to keep watching if I like certain characters. Kind of embarrassing, but I tend to lean toward some romantic aspects of shows that have strong chemistry and strong characters. Respecting the characters... I think it is something that was a turn-off on Smallville. I think some of these characters were great, but things dragged on, and the characters got used too much in too many different ways. I think characters can degrade if you use them in awkward ways. This is sometimes shown as changing a character so much for the sake of an episode, then fixing them at the end. Anyways, this is just rambling about quality-- I would probably watch a more philosophical show I guess. Maybe a horror/mystery show that's not too much gore? I sometimes watch ghost shows so that I can actually feel scared. I watched too much drama in the past, so that won't work. Something that breaks the mold, or something that is not too politically correct could be interesting. Something with careful dialogue, -- It's hard to describe, maybe I just want to watch a masterpiece of a show, that has a strong message, intent, idea, philosophy, behind it. I tend to like sci-fi because I always find situations I never thought about, and it's a fun idea. Stranger Things had something familiar, but it was good at how it was told. Maybe I just watched too many things and just got desensitized... I remember I got so bored that I watched Gordon Ramsey a lot since I liked the shock factor when talked down people. I guess I do like comedy a lot too. Are you watching these shows and analyzing them? Does analyzing shows make it any less enjoyable... I feel in some way I'm thinking too much into things.
  15. What Are You Watching? (TV version)

    I recently watched some survivor some months ago... it was something like smart people vs physically good people. And then after that it was like millennials vs baby boomers or something like that. Without evidence, I have high suspicion that the Survivor series takes an impromptu approach into faking scenarios and game-play, or at least a good part of it to appeal to viewers. I know there's always some amount of meddling for a game show to put the show on a path that's interesting and rake in the ratings. At some point during these seasons, I was a little doubtful of how entertaining these people appear to be. Then I sort dropped off the millennials season since I felt the portrayal of millennials and the adults was kind of sad. I wasn't able to get into any CW shows... the last show I watched on there was Smallville, and that was mostly out seeing how things end and not enjoyment. I sort of lost faith in these kind of shows after that. I really liked some of the characters in smallville, but everything fell apart when Lex went away and ideas were reaching for almost 10 years. I heard Game of Thrones was good, but I couldn't even latch onto that. I watched Stranger Things since I kind of liked the dark and mysterious tone that I haven't seen much. I thought it was Okay. Watched it in a day though...