|
TheMaestroso posted:There seems to be an uncomfortable amount of crossover between being an internet atheist personality and being anti-feminist. It's bizarre to me, though it's probably a natural progression for those who are basically dictionary atheists and deny that it affects the way you perceive the world (as if having a belief about the world somehow diminishes their personae as TRUE RATIONALISTS™). There's still some good ones left, but man has the field diminished over the past few years of eye-opening tirades. I think a lot of it is happenstance. Skeptic communities, often being offshoots of STEM communities, inherit the same gender distribution bias, which inherit a lot of the same debates and criticisms about gender inclusiveness and the like. Some of the earlier Big Feminist Blowups™ happened in skeptic communities (e.g. Rebecca Watson, PZ Myers, Thunderf00t, "elevatorgate" and all that). Especially when PZ Myers kicked Thunderf00t off his site, largely due to feminist/social justice* disagreements, it caused a gigantic rift. The skeptic ones were pretty notable, though, because everyone on every side acted like petulant children by the end. It didn't start that way; in fact, the debates were extremely civil and interesting at the start (unlike subsequent ones). But by the end of the whole bloody mess everyone on every side found a way to sink to some sort of low, and "argument" translated to "petty sniping, snark, and personal attacks", which caused a lot of bad blood and extreme tribalism. Of course, personal bias-wise I still think the "feminist" side was "more right", I can't deny that a lot of the major players were being gigantic assholes about the whole thing by the end. While similar blowups happened in the STEM community and, of course, gaming, it didn't create two extremely distinct organized factions in quite the same way. (There's no real organized "anti-gamergate" movement the same way two distinct, tight-knit, and organized "anti-feminist" and "feminist" skeptic communities formed). There are plenty of "internet atheist" personalities that aren't anti-feminist types, but they tend to stick to their own circle of blogs rather than the wider internet. Regardless, the tribalism became so fierce that to be part of any skeptic community, at least for a while, you pretty much had to either be on board with anti-feminism or the exact brand of feminism the blog/community in question endorsed, or you were The Other and therefore probably evil. Of course, at some point it becomes self-perpetuating, where nascent atheists fall into the anti-feminist communities just because on Reddit/Youtube those are the ones you're likely to find if you're just getting into the whole thing. * I'm using "social justice" in a purely descriptive fashion Linear Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 23:38 on May 12, 2016 |
#
?
May 12, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:44 |
|
|
Absolutely - I was generalizing more than using specific examples. I was there when a lot of that stuff happened, and I remember being excited when Tf00t joined FTB until the almost immediate shitstorm told me that I shouldn't take that guy seriously anymore. "Elevatorgate" was another thing that opened my eyes to the divergence that I had no idea existed in the community before. It was also the beginning of the end of my respect for Dawkins as anything other than a biologist.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Rebecca Watson's case was extremely heartbreaking because early on she was very enthusiastic about skepticism and always talked about it like the community she had been looking for her entire life and then almost month by month her passion drained away as she had to respond to more and more gross misogyny from people she used to be so enthusiastic about. This was years before the elevator thing. Now half her interaction with the internet is defending herself against the internet's gross underbelly.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Rebecca Watson's case was extremely heartbreaking because early on she was very enthusiastic about skepticism and always talked about it like the community she had been looking for her entire life and then almost month by month her passion drained away as she had to respond to more and more gross misogyny from people she used to be so enthusiastic about. This was years before the elevator thing. Now half her interaction with the internet is defending herself against the internet's gross underbelly. Yeah, it's a shame because she's pretty great. At least she uploads videos pretty regularly.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Internet atheism being linked to misogyny is so bizarre to me, because there's nothing inherently misogynistic about atheism. At its core, it's a lack of belief in higher power/s and doesn't have anything to do with one's opinions on women? I'd say a fair few queer folks for instance are atheist (not all of them, but certainly more than a couple) and they don't tend to be involved in the weird MRA atheist movement because...well, they're queer folks. BTW I used to be a really awful atheist back when I was 13 and started to feel really strongly about my lack of belief, because I'd just discovered the icky bits in the bible and also many of the bad policies in the church. But I was just a regular awful and rude little teenage shitstirrer, it wasn't like I was an MRA.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
Infamous Sphere posted:Internet atheism being linked to misogyny is so bizarre to me, because there's nothing inherently misogynistic about atheism. At its core, it's a lack of belief in higher power/s and doesn't have anything to do with one's opinions on women? I think it's just that the really loud internet atheists are incredibly lovely people with lovely opinions on gender.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 11:27
|
|
|
Infamous Sphere posted:Internet atheism being linked to misogyny is so bizarre to me, because there's nothing inherently misogynistic about atheism. At its core, it's a lack of belief in higher power/s and doesn't have anything to do with one's opinions on women? Here how it goes: rationalist/objective scientific atheist worldview goes hand in hand with the highly abstract view of social issues. What if we just don't see gender and race, recognize that we are all stardust and live in peace? We should build more space stations, they are going to solve everything! In that view, both hardcore misoginists (mostly religion practioners, because religion is the root of all evil, yes sir) and feminists, who campaign for more rights (to achieve equality) are perceived as the divisers who want preferential treatment. Silly meatbags! Add to that the ironclad belief in the power of STEM and the casual dismissal of any social and philosophical thought. Add to that falling into the trap of evospych or HBD - it sounds scientific, then it must be right! The conflicts between various feminist and atheist communities ensured that it is basically a self-sustaining branch of modern atheist thought: religious right in the West is losing ground, "top 10 creationist owns" don't not bring as much clicks as smug takedowns of "emotional" and "non-rational" feminists. fatherboxx fucked around with this message at 12:01 on May 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 11:55
|
|
|
Jsor posted:I think a lot of it is happenstance. Skeptic communities, often being offshoots of STEM communities, inherit the same gender distribution bias, which inherit a lot of the same debates and criticisms about gender inclusiveness and the like. Some of the earlier Big Feminist Blowups™ happened in skeptic communities (e.g. Rebecca Watson, PZ Myers, Thunderf00t, "elevatorgate" and all that). Especially when PZ Myers kicked Thunderf00t off his site, largely due to feminist/social justice* disagreements, it caused a gigantic rift. I have read (I believe it was an article on the Rational Wiki, which I read for a time until the concentrated  started to put me off) that it crops up when it does in the "STEM community" (such as it is) in the  form you sometimes see because it's an example of people with, say, biology backgrounds, that kind of thing, trying to come to groups with what's more of a social science and not quite managing it (for example, the idea of gender being as socially constructed rather than sexually intrinsic). Perhaps there's also some sort of academic rivalry in that sense.I don't have an especially strong background in either (I was a law graduate  ) so I don't know if that's an altogether fair assessment or not.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
Jsor posted:I think a lot of it is happenstance. Skeptic communities, often being offshoots of STEM communities, inherit the same gender distribution bias, which inherit a lot of the same debates and criticisms about gender inclusiveness and the like. Some of the earlier Big Feminist Blowups™ happened in skeptic communities (e.g. Rebecca Watson, PZ Myers, Thunderf00t, "elevatorgate" and all that). Especially when PZ Myers kicked Thunderf00t off his site, largely due to feminist/social justice* disagreements, it caused a gigantic rift. It's sad that Thunderf00t is actually fairly learned. He has some really neat science videos but these days 9 out of 10 things he makes are somehow taking down feminists or whatever. Funniest thing he's done recently is in the video debunking a portable rebreather he somehow manages to bring up Anita because of course and he also begs for money to get himself a proper thermal camera. It's the living embodiment if irony.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:I have read (I believe it was an article on the Rational Wiki, which I read for a time until the concentrated Nah, actual biologists don't tend to subscribe to because it's bad biology to make assumptions with no real evidence. That stuff comes almost entirely from people without a strong bio background trying to interpret studies, or just making up stories without doing any kind of actual research. It's a general problem in rationalist circles: people get really high on being smarter than the unwashed masses and forget that this doesn't shield them from making stupid errors, especially in cases where they're not formally educated. Kind of the problem of being book smart but not street smart. Or more "not making idiotic beginner errors" smart. ETA: As a sort of parallel, Ben Carson: you don't get to be a neurosurgeon by being really dumb, but the dude has some really asinine beliefs outside his sphere of education. Nobody is smart in every sphere. Puppy Time fucked around with this message at 14:35 on May 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:Nah, actual biologists don't tend to subscribe to You can really just sum that up with "evolutionary psychology", it's much more succinct.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:Nah, actual biologists don't tend to subscribe to Righto. Not the sort of thing I know about.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
Tracula posted:It's sad that Thunderf00t is actually fairly learned. He has some really neat science videos but these days 9 out of 10 things he makes are somehow taking down feminists or whatever. Funniest thing he's done recently is in the video debunking a portable rebreather he somehow manages to bring up Anita because of course and he also begs for money to get himself a proper thermal camera. It's the living embodiment if irony. Even Thunderf00t's videos where he's right are infuriating and way way too long. That man needs an editor, both to keep him from saying stupid stuff and to take the sheers to his video length. Take the video where he talks about solar roadways being dumb is so long and so poorly edited that it makes me want to disagree with him even though I know he's right.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
hbomberguy made a new video about video games that I haven't watched yet because I'm in the library and I'm supposed to be doing work or something but am posting for the benefit of this thread having something to talk about besides sad people and their sad beliefs about ethics in gaming journalism, you're welcome thread. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLJ1gyIzg78 Oh wow, that's a long one.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
This should be interesting, considering that I've disagreed with hbomb on basically everything he's ever said about entertainment media. I mean that in the least negative way I possibly can.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
Augus posted:hbomberguy made a new video about video games that I haven't watched yet because I'm in the library and I'm supposed to be doing work or something but am posting for the benefit of this thread having something to talk about besides sad people and their sad beliefs about ethics in gaming journalism, you're welcome thread. just finished it 2 minutes ago and was going to post it once the previous discussion got to its ends. It is a pretty funny/good 90 minutes of explanation of the problems of Bethesda open-world design philosophy and the ways that it writing palis in comparison to the classic fallout games and even New Vegas. Especially where it fails as a "Roleplaying Game" in a story telling sense.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
A lot of internet atheists love to use that tone of smug condensation in their videos. Be it about the wage gap or feminism or anything really. It really doesn't feel like it comes from a genuine place either. If the tone was more angry and earnest, I could probably believe it since there's plenty for an atheist to be angry about organized religion or individuals who hide behind it to excuse their lovely behavior (something lovely atheists do but instead its freedom of speech/censorship) but most just come off as pandering to crowds of people with terrible opinions, worldviews or haven't yet matured.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
But no hbomb, you see you had to read in old games and that's bad. Really though good video, it blows me away that some of those reviewers were able to keep a straight face saying what they were, even at the time.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
how can anything "pale in comparison" to fallout 1's writing, that poo poo was the most basic-rear end barebones writing in the universe
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Alaois posted:how can anything "pale in comparison" to fallout 1's writing, that poo poo was the most basic-rear end barebones writing in the universe FO1 with The Master: "You know your plan isn't gonna work." which needed the choices to be able to get to that, plus found evidence to show or he'd call your bullshit. FO3 with Eden: "You gotta stop all this." - "But why?" - "Because where will it end!" and he just goes welp, ptttbt and dead. Basic writing is better than not fun bad writing.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
A lot of the good writing that Fallout gets associated with is mostly from the second game if only because it became a much wider sandbox with a genuine sense of humor to it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Testekill posted:A lot of the good writing that Fallout gets associated with is mostly from the second game if only because it became a much wider sandbox with a genuine sense of humor to it. Yeah basically, I think a lot of people have inflated opinions of Fallout 1, considering how insanely bare-bones that game is in all respects.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
So, CA made a comic book show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37cq07GN5NU I have not watched it yet, I just saw it on a preview for another video. It's 70 minutes long, or half of a Spoony vlog. PassTheRemote fucked around with this message at 18:36 on May 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:15
|
|
wins.
|
Alaois posted:Yeah basically, I think a lot of people have inflated opinions of Fallout 1, considering how insanely bare-bones that game is in all respects. A more apt comparison would be fallout 3 to new Vegas on dialogue but we all know how well those debates turn out. someone will quote mrbtongue WAT DU THAY EAT? And completely miss the point the video was trying to make.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Augus posted:hbomberguy made a new video about video games that I haven't watched yet because I'm in the library and I'm supposed to be doing work or something but am posting for the benefit of this thread having something to talk about besides sad people and their sad beliefs about ethics in gaming journalism, you're welcome thread. The breakdown of that first mission and how everything it does wrong is repeated throughout the game is incredibly well-done, and it made all the wait worth it. Great vid.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Half an hour into the review, I really like how he explains that an open world game like Fallout 3 uses openness as a substitution for actual game design, while that doesn't at all need to be the case for an open world game. This is an idea that gets ignored way too much, I've seen people discuss the new Zelda game quite bit and there's basically this unspoken assumption among everyone that the fact that Zelda is going to be open world means it will have no structure whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Just saw the Fallout 3 vid. Good job man, you really hit the nail on the head. I know it's not nearly as good a game as Fallout 1 or 2, but I hope you do a video on Arcanum one day.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:FO1 with The Master: "You know your plan isn't gonna work." which needed the choices to be able to get to that, plus found evidence to show or he'd call your bullshit. Yea I'll take barebones writing that still feels organic and interesting to work with over 'don't do that' 'what why' 'it's bad' 'oh gently caress you're right bye' any day.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
PassTheRemote posted:So, CA made a comic book show: Don't they already have Linkara? Actually, how many comics reviewers are there? I thought it was just him and LAG. Are there others I'm unaware of?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
 http://spoonyexperiment.com/movie-reviews/reb-brown-retrospective-firing-line/  New review. It's alright. Nothing special but can't really complain though. It's only about three months late though so it's a step up from, well, never on most things. PassTheRemote posted:So, CA made a comic book show: That intro just made me cringe so hard I had to force myself to watch the rest of it. It feels so tryhard and nerd pandering already. Lets hope it somehow gets better.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
MrSlam posted:Just saw the Fallout 3 vid. Good job man, you really hit the nail on the head. I know it's not nearly as good a game as Fallout 1 or 2, but I hope you do a video on Arcanum one day. Myself I'm hoping for Bloodlines.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
'Really good RPGs made in spite of their own engines by hacking the poo poo out of it' is a genre itself at this point, comprising at least Vampire, E.Y.E. Divine Cybermancy, and to a lesser extent New Vegas and Deus Ex Invisible War (I believe the original team was fired and the people who finished the game had to reverse engineer the code)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYr4S7fRwmw ...jail.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
Yardbomb posted:FO3 with Eden: "You gotta stop all this." - "But why?" - "Because where will it end!" and he just goes welp, ptttbt and dead. I can't remember exactly how it went, but I remember seeing a post where someone proposed a line you'd have if you had high Intelligence where you could say, 'You use an X-16 chipset? Those were manufactured outside the US, so legally, you can't be president', and Eden would self-destruct because of that. I really liked the video HBomb, but I have to disagree with you on Fallout 2's start and end fight. Mechanically speaking, I found the Temple of Trials to be pretty badly done. Convincing the guard not to fight at the end is a good idea, but the main issue I have with it is that you still have to fight enemies hand-to-hand/melee when you may have decided to specialize in firearms. As to the final boss, it makes sense that Horrigan isn't someone you can really reason with, but the game gives you no option other to fight him, which is frustrating if your focus was on diplomatic skills. Also, as an addendum to your observation with the morality point regarding Killian/Gizmo, the endings for Junktown were originally going to be different. From the Fallout Bible: Jesse Heinig posted:Didja know... in the original write-up of Junktown, the "ending sequence" was reversed from its current incarnation. That is, in the endgame slideshow, if the player had favored Killian, the original write-up was something like "With Gizmo out of the way, Killian enforces his brand of frontier justice on Junktown. The city remains orderly but small, as travelers steer away from his rigid sensibilities," and the picture background behind Killian was a gallows with shadows of dead men hanging from it. If the player favored Gizmo, it was "Under Gizmo's leadership, Junktown becomes a trading center and resort, where people come from miles around to gamble, spend money and enjoy themselves in relative safety. Gizmo keeps the town prosperous but healthy, as he has no desire to injure his own affluence. The inhabitants of the town become wealthy and famous," with the background picture showing Junktown as a Reno-like casino with electricity and clean streets free of any drug dealers or riff-raff who might endanger Gizmo's operations. Marketing decided at the last minute that we had to "reward good and punish bad," though, so the sequence was changed to its current incarnation.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:'Really good RPGs made in spite of their own engines by hacking the poo poo out of it' is a genre itself at this point, comprising at least Vampire, E.Y.E. Divine Cybermancy, and to a lesser extent New Vegas and Deus Ex Invisible War (I believe the original team was fired and the people who finished the game had to reverse engineer the code) EYE is an amazing game and I will fight anyone who says otherwise. Plus the "true ending" is just as great as The Holy Mountain in terms of trolling the player/viewer.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
wait, people are still pretending Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines is a good video game?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Alaois posted:wait, people are still pretending Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines is a good video game? See, I love the game, but having replayed it recently it's also pretty flawed and that's why I want hbomberguy's take on it since it was in his line-up of great games in the video.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:'Really good RPGs made in spite of their own engines by hacking the poo poo out of it' is a genre itself at this point, comprising at least Vampire, E.Y.E. Divine Cybermancy, and to a lesser extent New Vegas and Deus Ex Invisible War (I believe the original team was fired and the people who finished the game had to reverse engineer the code) Since you bring it up, has anyone ever done a breakdown of Divine Cybermancy to figure out just what the gently caress that game is suppose to be or what's suppose to be happening? Oh and awesome video Hbomberguy, as always. Gotta be honest, I don't know which of your two series is better. Your video game stuff or the Measured responses. If I can ask, what's your feelings on the New Vegas DLC? BigRed0427 fucked around with this message at 03:13 on May 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Augus posted:hbomberguy made a new video about video games that I haven't watched yet because I'm in the library and I'm supposed to be doing work or something but am posting for the benefit of this thread having something to talk about besides sad people and their sad beliefs about ethics in gaming journalism, you're welcome thread.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 23:44 |
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:Really good video I kind of want to see one done on Fallout New Vegas, just as a nice contrasting companion piece Or better yet, do Fallout 4 and see if Bethesda learned anything.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2016 04:12
|
|
