Durakken

Knowing that it might be an issue and knowing that there are ways to help with I think you could create IDs that incorporate magic and tech to prevent most people from learning a hero's ID. Not 100% but pretty close to it and the FBSA would issue them as one of the concession law makers made to get hero support for the laws.

So you know Madonna's or Prince's real names? I would argue even well known people aren't all that well known by real names... For example Triple H is called Triple H which is a reference to his ring name Hunter Hurst Helmsley, but his real name is Paul Levesque, but a majority of people don't recognize that name... The same can be said even more so for Hulk Hogan who if you said Terry Bolgea (or however you spell his last name) people would be utterly confused because people think that is his real name.

I'm calling you a liar because you are a liar. If you had described a problem that I wouldn't consider obvious then I would have said as much, but you didn't Neither the "obfuscated" one nor the "real" one is non-obvious so why would I? The fact you're claiming you didn't lie when one has to differentiate between the obfuscated version and real version shows that you lied.

I can' tell if you're leaving out something else or not, because you've shown yourself to be liar, but if that's what happened then again I say that seems like it'd something fairly obvious to me. Maybe a little less so than just the recharge part, but over all that would probably something that I'd be able to find fairly easily.

Also it's not really good form to try to exaggerate how hard something is by people being ignorant of the checks and such that need to happen when programming a game. It's not like they find a problem and implement a solution instantly. It does take time to figure it out, propose a fix, test it, get feed back, and get approval and such for all that which takes up time. Someone who is working more independently would be able to fix it far faster in that case most likely.

Awww you lie, admit it, and now you want to insult me. So cute.

That's not the only reason. But it's also a matter of origin to origin reboot rather than just ending to beginning. It's been 10 years since the beginning of Spider-Man as a movie... Batman was 16 years and i still consider that too soon, but meh.

No. I asked for an example so I could see what you mean by not obvious as everyone views what is and isn't obvious as different. You decided to not give an example but rather to flat out lie, so that when I said what the solution was obvious you could come back and say "That wasn't the solution so it's not obvious" which entirely missed the point of what was being asked and thus showing why there is no point in even attempting to prove the ability to deduce things around here with people like you.

Either you don't follow that and you are truly incompetent, or you are a liar, and not just any liar but a malicious liar. I find the former to be unlikely while the latter is ever more likely considering this is the 3rd or 4th time you've lied to try to make me look bad. I have to hand it to you in a way, because you've succeeded in making me look bad to those who don't get it, but that's hardly a feet because they already think negatively towards me.

Oh and just to point out, even if you were telling the truth, which you weren't, you're trying to argue that since you couldn't figure out what was wrong with the data that you collected which you didn't present I couldn't figure it out and that I couldn't have or that I wouldn't have collected different data which is part of the reason that I said I'd need to play around with the program, which you did to get that data.

So even though everything supports me in what I say I'm the wrong one. And even though you know that you lied you are still somehow claiming you told the truth. But hey whatever, Live in your fantasy world, I'll be over in reality waiting to see if anyone ever joins me ^.^

it's been done for a while.

She blatantly says she lied, noone including herself seems to realize she said she lied, and I'm the bad guy. Awesome ^.^

You know that the actor who played Darth Vader was not told what was happening and was given a completely different script than what you see n screen right?



As far as the trailer... looks better, but the original is going to haunt it in my book along with the fact it is a reboot so close to the release of the previous spidey trilogy and I'm going to say that I'm still not looking forward to it... There are still some glaring problems that one can pick up in the trailer and it feels a bit too much like Batman in some places... so while it's a massive step forward it also isn't a must see movie from just that.

While conflict does define character, those conflicts are meaningless without defined characters... if that makes any sense. You gotta know what they are fighting for and why and who they are as a person to really get it. When I watch the film I get what Matt and Steve were doing before the movie starts because there is a definition there... Andrew on the other hand we are left to assume that he did nothing pre-camera.

You mentioned he was trying to escape with the camera... well that could work if he were younger... like 10-15, but he was 17 or 18 and by that time he would have picked up something to keep from going home. There is also very little development in his character as we see. He doesn't grow in crime or scale. He is just presented with a different situation which causes him to react in a different way but from a character stand point he is acting the same. The only real change is that at the end of the movie he understand that his powers can be used to purposely hurt people, where as before he did on accident but showed no remorse nor did he care.

Oh gee, now I'm really embarrassed... Arcanaville lies and thinks she's proving her point but really just shows exactly what I'm talking about the accuracy of confirming or deconfirming the ability to deduce things. Yup fine job you did ther Arcana. You just keep those lies a rolling and eventually someone other than me will call you on it.

Wrong wrong wrong...

The reason men and women look like that in comics today is because of 2 reasons. Carnival attire and Bad artists. Nothing more nothing less. You also assume that men would want to look "rippling" when most people have looked at that and agree it looks disgusting. Of course then we're not talking about rippling muscles as hyperbole likes to creep up on you we're talking about looking healthy and what people who don't sit around all day call normal... and yes, even if you exercise all day, by the standards that our species grew up in we sit around all day.


As for your assumption it is not my psyche at play here, but rather the origin of the concepts. Superman was not created as a guy that is superpowerful that I wish I was, but a protector to children and Green Lantern is a friggin space cop... the very notion of which is someone there to look out for you. Same thing goes for Batman even though he's the one I would call pretty much pure power fantasy, even he is not really about you seeing yourself as him or having the fantasy of being him, but rather having the fantasy that there is someone out there to protect you and that is looking out for the good rather than some greedy motivation.

Iconic Comic Heroes almost all have their origin in being protectors and servants of the people, not as I wish I was this. There are very few that i can come up with off of the top of my head that I would consider both well known and power fantasies... and of the ones that comes to mind right off the bat are all marvel ones... there is Captain Marvel that is a power fantasy.

That is ridiculous. That's like asking "Would you like a million dollars?" There are no negatives except for the lose of a niche group of women that don't like people in good shape or in the case of money the lose of being poor and some experiences that come along with that.

There are only 2 types of people on earth that they would say no to that. Those who asked well would i be healthier or worse and the person granted the wish would say that they'd be worse... and if the person felt that the purposed change made them look worse. Why? Because no matter who you are you want to be good looking and/or healthy. There are other possible benefits to that but that never comes into it.

So you expect me to come up with a solution to a bug that exists in a non-extant program? I don't think asking that the program exists is all that much of a "restriction". Likewise the asking to be allowed to play it rather than just relying on there is a problem at all is asking for the same conditions as the proposed "You can't guess the problems in this game from playing it" argument.

And the last "restriction" is really the crux of the whole thing. It's guess work of guess work and then trying to rely on someone else to do what your thinking. So you're also guessing on what they're thinking and hoping that their skill level is the same or better than yours in both programming and deduction.

And Why would i ever be naive enough to believe that someone challenging me on this would be honest? It's apparent why I wouldn't and apparent why it can't be discussed by me, but you go right ahead and continue talking as if I don't have a valid reason to believe such a thing. Also I'm not talking about the devs and never have I once said the devs are dishonest in CoH, as far as I know. Unless they are running around on accounts or in other games I've played.

No.

let's say someone actually wanted to test this...

Well first we'd need some code that isn't purposefully obfuscated. Secondly, I'd need to be allowed to play with the program. then I'd make a guess and then they'd have to figure out based on what i would have said in general and use it to locate and fix the problem.

In other words... it requires someone that is honest and competent and the likely hood of someone being that when it comes to "testing" me from this community is about as low as you can possibly get.

You can believe what you want, but you should consider the environment.


Any way to display deductive abilities would require more than what anyone would be willing to do on either side and even if I wanted to show that I do work that way I wouldn't for second care to do it in this community because I don't believe for a second the people that would even remotely want "proof" would be honest and it wouldn't solve anything either way.

Hyperstrike read the entire post. I explain why it isn't realistic for the kid to act like that. The kid literally has no mental escape and that is not realistic. People who are in those situations build mental defenses and escape into something else and because the character is never shown doing that it is not realistic.

I know, which is why I mentioned that no matter which way they went they'd generate some message or cliche.

No. I am preemptively saying that what she or others might think is not what I'm saying as it can come off that way and re-affirming that I'd consider it one of the obvious things to look at. When someone says it isn't obvious I take that they're talking about one of those odd bugs that once you exhaust every possible thing that it could be on the surface, looking at the data and code, you still haven't figured it out and the solution ends up not having to do with any of the parts that you could point to but some part that is several times removed like say the problem isn't in the new code itself, but in some other piece of code that interacts with the same code that your working with that is triggered by a tertiary piece of code within the new code so that when the tertiary call and the secondary call somehow create the bug by way of messing with the same memory space and producing a result that is different than one would expect.

and this is where I point out that this is why you can not come up with something that is not obvious to you, because what I'm describing, the bug becomes obvious as to where it's from. Something is not obvious only when you don't know what is causing it and everything you can think of from the data presented isn't the solution. This is also why "obvious" is subjective...

So basically I'm saying that what Arcana is calling not-obvious, to me, is fairly still within the obvious range, though maybe not the first try.

Din't mean yourself in specific, meant it in general more referring to me...should have used myself but whatever...

That sounds fairly obvious to me... not the first thing you'd think of, but something that if you looked at all the things that are similar between the mobs and whats happening you'd pick up on it almost instantly as to where the problem is coming from...though you might say that i'm just saying it's obvious to piss you off or seeing it as obvious in retrospect, but i'd say given what i know that'd be one of the top 5 or 10 things i'd likely try to check.

No. You're saying the fixes have not been obvious. You expect me to imagine a way for something to be "not obvious" which is nearly impossible to do for yourself but you're asking me to imagine what you find "not obvious" which since I don't know what you find obvious or not is an impossibility given the current situation. The only way to remedy such a situation is to show examples of a solution you think is not obvious which I know you can't do so we're left at going nowhere with that argument.

That's an example of the bug... it's not an example of where the fix is which is the thing in question which is your point.