• 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

2,543 profile views
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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?
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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...
  11. I'm not sure what it means by "better." Games have improved graphics, cut-scenes, emotions, more capability in general... As far as nostalgia goes, I feel like this experience is something I would only feel about games I played when I was growing up, probably from early age to age 20s? Games after that, I don't think I would feel nostalgic, maybe because A) they are recent, or they just less memorable because of more things in life at older age, or C) first experience is more memorable than the repeated ones? I wouldn't be compelled to play these games again at age 40 or something, but maybe check out or revisit the music or something for that nostalgia effect. I think the games with great good feeling music is most nostalgic to me, there might be other things. list: Donkey Kong Country I, II, III, Final Fantasy 8, Chrono Trigger.
  12. I never intended to say that you will automatically get gud once you got the proper controller. It takes practice with whatever controller you choose to use. I tried to elaborate on why I didn't like the console controller - because of thumb soreness and lack of flexibility. An Arcade stick has buttons, and the setup is similar to what you see in the old school arcades. The stick itself doesn't really add any value, it's just the placement of the buttons and stick with your hand. Even on an xbox controller, you have a small stick. That's just, if not better than the one you see on the arcade. The button spread is what really helps. It's a simple controller compared to an xbox controller, but for some reason it costs an upward of $200. There are cheap ones about $60 as well I suppose. Depending on the game itself, you may not even be using your controller to the point where you need an arcade stick or pad. Street Fighter is more refined in that it's has short combos and a different tempo. More than half the game, you're not even pressing that many buttons, unless you have an aggressive play style. That's how I played when I was a kid. I spam. Killer instinct however, the game I was talking about, has long combos, fast sequencing, high tempo, probably twice or more the input frequency of a street fighter match. Although, that's great so many top players have been able to win with a console controller, the PS1 controller win was a surprise. I'm sure that guy really worked hard. I'm not a hard worker, not to that extent. I wonder if he was holding the controller like an arcade? And yeah, modified controllers for fighting games, that's great. Maybe I should be getting that then if they're cheaper. It looks just like an arcade setup, just miniaturized.
  13. I think it will feel like a console if there was a TV or monitor that it can hook up to. The small split screen on such a small screen looks like you have to squint to actually see whats going on. It's good for those simple games that was in the first reveal though, but I don't see those types of games as fun. I use to, now its out in a living room used for a theater set up. I think some of the contributing factor that I tend to play is the socializing elements to the games. Some people go out and have a social life and such. I imagine you have a better balance of this. I usually get to meet and talk to people online, still. Thinking about it, it reminds me of how I use to go to chat rooms, neopets, create online content/art when MMOs were non-existent. So it's not really about the game, but maybe the community created by the game? Well, the game is what gets me into the community, and I stay for the community. If I didn't have an interest to socialize online through games, I don't think I would be playing games at all at this point. By socialize, I mean interacting through game mechanics(killing people, etc) and chat / voice chat. These are all components of couch gaming if you think about it. I am playing Overwatch, and I would say I suck at shooter games in general, and sometimes its not fun getting pummeled and people calling me out for sucking. The interesting thing about this game I found out so far is... not to be sexist or anything, but I observed there is a surprising number of females playing this game. And they're way better than me. I like this. The sad part is that I'm in my upper 20s. I found that a lot of girls are very accurate and specific when it comes to point and shoot. I was invited by a few girls to play Osu when MMOs were a thing and I think a lot of that translates into shooter games. Compared to a game like starcraft, I think it's less about accuracy / puzzle type of thing, and more... of something else, maybe decision making? Though I think girls are probably as good as boys if the culture was balanced, I think there are minor advantages and disadvantages in terms of neurological differences. Anyways, my multiplayer experience came from fighting games, chatrooms, to Korean online games, to MOBAs, and now multiplayer shooter games. I think the next big thing is a virtual world combining all these things. Are you saying top fighting game pro players are using the controllers? I find that unbelievable. Unless when you say "pad" you mean a keyboard device or something. I've played a ton of combo mashers and this is why controllers are terrible: your thumbs get sore. Imagine playing guitar hero, with just your thumbs controlling 12 inputs, and your index fingers controlling 2. That's hell. The main reason why an arcade stick pad thing is desirable is because of this. It's ergonomically made for fighting games so that you can utilize most of your fingers and not concentrate on just your thumbs. Overall it improves not just your in game performance but eliminates thumb soreness. I remember full well how I got blisters from playing street fighter alpha 3 on the super Nintendo. It almost got to that point when I was playing on the xbox controller.
  14. My answer is No. I got an Xbox one, got killer instinct, just dance, and life is strange. The only upside to the xbox one is that it serves as a multimedia device for the living room, and is inexpensive compared to a PC. You can surf the net, play youtube videos, play blu-ray, things like that. Killer instinct cost me about 40 bucks. It is a fighting game similar to street fighter. I wanted to get good at it, and probably the reason I got the xbox one because of the nostalgia from the super nintendo games RARE made back in the day. To play the game effectively, you needed a arcade stick, and an online subscription. The stick costs $200, and the xbox subscription the regular $60 for some months or something, I forget. Not worth. As much as I was excited for this game, I didn't like the added gambling mechanics that they're calling the old C-C-COMBO BREAKERS. Plus the character design is from textbook art class, which has no class and taste to it. I did appreciate the fast paceness of it. I didn't really play this game. Just dance lasted for proabably 2 days. I might come back to it. Oddly, this is the game I would play out of the three I got. I did not have patience for Life is Strange. I stopped maybe 30 minutes in. Cool time mechanic, but that's it. I found most of the storytelling titles that I would play is already the PC. So there wasn't much of reason to play it on the xbox. I play my games in my room most of the times too, so that is a big factor in why I think the xbox is useless to me. The games I would want to get on the Xbox are multiplayer titles, which costs per month. I don't like doing that at all. I don't play games consistantly, usually it is on and off. And if I'm paying per month, that is just stupid. If I play a game for maybe 5 days online, why do I have to pay for the rest of the month? As far as my gaming interest, I actually still play a lot I think. Some days I don't play, but I usually play to take my mind of things. I would say every other day, 1-3 hours per day probably. My interest in story games have declined though, because I usually just watch a movie version on youtube, or just read a synopsis. There hasn't been any interesting new games lately. I thought Gravity Rush was really interesting, but it lacked substance. If it had more than just the interesting gravity mechanic, then I would look into it more. Overall, I'm less excited about games as I get older. Part of it is that I played so many games and don't have the patience. I know the experience, and it's going to be repeated. And something about single player games makes me feel lonely sometimes, so I just watch other people if there was the chance. The best experience I remember were games like pokemon, donkey kong country series, street fighter, killer instinct, mortal kombat, some of those old school racing games. I liked these games because it was imaginative, and there were some role playing aspect to it, and then theres the social aspect of watching others play, others watching you play. As a kid, I was restrained and disciplined in what I can do, and these games were in contrast to a world I really hated. I do feel as an adult, the constraint is different, and the games have become less of an outlet. It's evolved to be less of a couch event. The excitement is gone, there's less curiosity, and I'm not exactly sure what would get me excited. I have high hopes for VR multiplayer games.
  15. Didn't the admin clarify that green card holders were exempt? The % impacted is just a blanket statement, as I do not know what the criteria is to determine irreparable harm or the extent of immediate damage. It appears arbitrary and an outlet for exploit. What is this criteria if temporary nature of the order appears to be difficult to undo? Is there a reason there is a preference, not including bias. I know courts doesn't compensate for failed lawsuits, they can pretty much hold someone and not compensate for major damage to a person after the person is found in the right. My only gripe is that, in my opinion, I think the court is abusing this out of political bias. How lawful the order isn't dependent on its performance. And it looks like a bunch of people are trying to figure out if it is lawful when it seems it is mostly if the order is religious discrimination. If you don't like a law, you need to go through congress to get it changed. These judges are reaching and if it wasn't Trump, they'd lose all credibility.