WarRatsG

It's a real nostalgia trip to get a notification from here. Afraid it's not being worked on as far as I know. Pretty sure I don't even have access to the files any more either. Loved every second I spent on this and have no regrets. I still think back fondly of this project sometimes. I often wonder what happened to Urko, the man who recruited me to the project way back. He ran the world design and story components of the mod, whereas I ran mechanics and implementation. Last I heard he went into University for graphic design (for videogames I think) so maybe we've seen his work elsewhere. My troubles worked themselves out and things got better. I applied myself to new projects, things are great and I'm living the life I want. Murdershewrote2328, it would have been amazing but tbh only if Urko had stuck around. I was a pretty decent script guy, but Urko was a sublimely talented level designer and world builder. I always wondered why dungeons in the base game weren't made the way he did. I fondly remember one trick where he used hanging ivy to conceal a hiding place for the player to be used in a cutscene. Working with him always got me excited about where we were going. Kept the dream alive for a while, challenging myself to implement the most elegant code and taking on the amazing feature suggestions posted in this thread. However turns out I couldn't write decent dialogue for s#*! (thinking back it was mostly exposition dumps) so the story suffered a lot in Urko's absence. Frustration was building and my focus was really needed IRL. Final straw came when someone offered their help and ended up trashing the shared folder, costing a fair amount of work and losing some crucial custom assets. In the last 10 years I've picked up a lot of new obligations, so I'm unlikely to be picking this up again. I reckon this one won't see the light of day (pun intended). A mod called Unholy Darkness did a wonderful job of oblivion vampirism including a bit of world building. In particular they added some of the hardcore mechanics similar to mine and use keyboard hotkeys for powers, makes for a very smooth experience. It wasn't on the Nexus but came from his own forum, mainly so he could generate ad revenue. There were some claims that later releases contained a Trojan, never had issues myself. There was another mod called Blood is Everything iirc, which is more streamlined but delivers beautifully. We worked together briefly, he's very gifted and also a generally lovely person. Probably still on the Nexus.

Run as Administrator if you aren't already, that may help.

Hi. This is a problem that has cropped up twice now, the first time I made a fresh installation of Skyrim and this fixed the problem, but now reinstalling has not worked. I've tried many things to fix it myself but now I'm stumped. I'd love if someone else had a fix. So here's what is going on - I go on to Wrye Bash, activate the same set of esps that I always use and have never had any problems with. I then boot up the game, and the only plugins active are Skyrim.esm and Update.esm, along with SkyUI.esp. The first time this happened, it would also load up an esp for dual-wield blocking, although I don't remember the exact name. The first time it happened, it was after a year away from Skyrim. Clean installation fixed the issue. This time, I booted up the game and it kept minimising itself, as if another window was opening up. This doesn't normally happen, but if Skyrim minimises for me I have to close it because it will not re-open properly. Now it was happening every 5 minutes, so I restarted the computer (including a windows update, which feels a little suspicious) and when I tried to load my game it mentions "missing content" as though esps were missing, then CTD'd during the loading. Additionally, my settings like difficulty and controller had reset to default. I made a new save with the same configuration, and looking at the save in Wrye Bash showed only the 3 plugins. The CTD makes sense, since the save was on Solstheim and now the Dragonborn DLC wasn't loading. I tried loading the plugins in Wrye Bash, NMM, and the Skyrim Launcher itself - all three recognised the ESPs I wanted to load, and all three allowed activation, but on loading the game only the three mentioned would load. Now here is where it gets really weird. I deactivated all esps that I could, leaving ONLY skyrim.esm and update.esm. I tried loading the game then, and it STILL loaded SkyUI (and the dual-wield mod when I had it), even though it was now deactivated. Removing the esp from the folder prevented it from loading up in the game. So, clearly the game is able to load esps because it is loading up skyui and dual-wield blocking whether they are activated or not, and it is definitely loading from the correct directory because removing those esps prevents them from being loaded. The other esps are recognised by the launchers, and can be activated by the launchers, but do not appear in the game such that wrye bash does not detect them in the save file. The fact this immediately followed a windows update is a little telling, and the fact that the configuration settings all reset themselves is slightly worrying. I had changed a few config settings while testing, such as the controller to easily get around the menus, but after reinstalling this time they did not change back to default. I've tried changing Read-Only attributes, I've tried Run as Administrator, I've reinstalled, and at this point I no longer have any idea what to do. I've got a fair bit of experience using mods for Skyrim and I used to make mods for Oblivion, so I've some notion of how they work. If anyone has a solution, I'd be very grateful

Three things are needed for a screening system to be put in place: - A test that is both sensitive and specific, that is not giving too many false negatives or false positives. Getting both of these things together is pretty difficult even with objective tests like serum biomarkers, let alone subjective assessment which is pretty much all you have for mental disorders. Everyone can be hyperactive or inattentive, problem is deciding when your characteristics are classed as a disorder. In a school environment, the best person (in theory) to see if a child's behaviour interferes with learning is the teacher, and any problems should really warrant a closer look after notifying parents anyway. If that's not working, screening won't do much better. - An effective means of treatment. When it comes to mental illness, medication alone won't cut it in most cases. Treatment of ADHD with medication is intended to be used to help in school and with the early stages of cognitive behavioural therapy until the latter, combined with maturity, allow the child to manage their own behaviour in a way that allows them to focus. This does actually happen, although we don't hear about it since no-one panics when things actually do work out, although there is a significant proportion of parents that don't follow up properly and just ply their kid with meds. Medication for depression is known to be quite hit or miss (I have a theory there is a link between antidepressants and oral confession, and that antidepressants are only marginally more effective and perhaps slightly less detrimental). Certain elements of schizophrenia can be controlled quite well with antipsychotics at least. A lot of mental illness diagnoses are in fact cultural illnesses though, since high school is where children start pretending to be adults and simply follow the examples they have around them. Can't treat that with meds, and if there is nothing that can be done about it then there is no point in diagnosing it. - Must be cost effective. Details depend on the health system in question, but in terms of the UK's NHS screening will only occur if the cost of screening everyone and catching it early are less than allowing the disorder to develop and dealing with it later. Then there's also the involvement of the school system that must be accounted for. Since treatment tends to end up being lifelong due to the self-perpetuating way it's designed, the NHS at least would probably not find this cost effective. Pharmaceutical companies would have a field day though. Long story short, I think direct screening for a variety of specific mental illnesses is not the way to go. The teacher is in the best position to notice any problem - be it with (mis)behaviour, strange bruises, or difficulty learning for whatever reason. They are then in the position to notify the parents, who can (in theory) take remedial action. That said, if we genuinely want to do something about mental illness and slow down it's growth (depression may be the world's leading cause of disability by 2020) then that would require a very radical change in some of the most deeply ingrained ideas of western culture. These notions are also probably the most viciously guarded though, so we best hope some shiny new meds make an appearance soon.

Truth is and truth isn't. It is true and it is not true (which is true). To me Truth is the paradox that arises when you add together what is and what isn't Every "Is" implies an "Is not". One truth implies every other truth. We can't be more exact when we say truth, it's the stuff that all other stuffs are made of.

I have this theory about masculine and feminine behavior. They are not confined to either gender (although it is more pronounced in one or the other, and is therefore named for its association rather than cause), and to be completely lacking in either one would make you a horrible person. Thing is, we know masculinity and femininity when we see them, but it's very hard to figure out what is the elemental component that each type of behavior shares. Take masculinity for instance: all the obsession with sports and being (or looking) fit, that's about displaying strength. The whole idea of dominance is about showing that you cannot be beaten. Being protective (not necessarily restrictive) is often thought of as manly. So in reality, masculinity is a measure of how capable you are of resisting a negative influence on your state of being, and by extension that of those you care about. In a similar way, feminine behaviors are about enhancing a positive influence on your state of being and that of those you care about. Think about it. Which gender tends to be more emotionally stable? Which tends to be more playful? Any behavior that is enacted to prove you are a man (or an adult in general) only proves that you are not. An adult does not have to prove it, you only stop being a child when you stop trying to show everyone you're not. So all these competitive behaviors you see from people, the bullying and such, they're just ways to hide their own insecurities. Their insecurities cause them to make others look worse so that they themselves look better by comparison. The other way to do it is to bury the inadequacies, and pretend to yourself and everyone else that they don't exist. Many people use both ways simultaneously. And so they are playing this game of pretending to be perfect. Consider the pseudo/hyper-masculine behaviors and sentiments that arise everywhere these days. "Real men are impervious to alcohol". "Real men have no time for weakness." These are very corrupted extrapolations (made mostly by media and perpetuated by society) that are meant to imply you cannot be hurt, which means that you can protect those around us. As you probably realise, alcohol does not make you dependable, nor does it affect your Y chromosome, your testosterone levels nor the length of your penis. So the way to achieve masculinity? There isn't one. You can put whatever labels you like on yourself, at the end of the day you're just you. The day people stop pretending that isn't true, this world will be a much more beautiful place to live. I'd love to hear what you think about this. It's a sentiment I've always danced around but never been able to articulate, and I really feel like I'm on to something. On a side note, if anyone out there is suffering from insecurity about themselves, I'd ask what is it your hiding? Why do you feel that this aspect of you is not good enough? For instance, if your answer is something to the tune of "It's not manly enough" or "It's childish", who is it that you are comparing yourself to? Who is the exemplar adult? Do they actually exist? Then ask who is the exemplar child? Well if you don't feel like the adult, then you must be the child. But what is it that makes the child? What is it about you that you are hiding? Is it the person you really are? Is it You? What is You? Is You an adult? Is You a child? How does You know? Do you see how everything You knows comes from lots of other Yous playing the same game of pretending you don't exist? If your sense of inadequacy makes you feel bad, then this is why. It's because this sense of inadequacy creates a state of thinking, a state of depression, in which lacks any self-appreciation and is out to destroy itself. Depression is literally self-destruction. The key word here is Self. The Self is a construct our mind uses to represent itself. What you want is a new representation of you. A representation where those inadequacies become flaws. You see, an inadequate perspective says that your state of existence is not good enough, that it is an undesirable way to be. A flawed perspective is simply flawed. And even then, what is a flaw? It's just a crack in the facade. It's just a reminder to everyone that You is still in there, playing its games. The imperfections are what make you different, and your difference is your identity. Since we have nothing else to do but play this game, we may as well play it for all it's worth. We should all make the game interesting and fun to play, and help the Yous who aren't having as much fun. And so by becoming aware that it's just a game, it becomes possible to appreciate the game for what it is - to truly enjoy it, to turn work into play, to live up the illusion. The conclusion is underwhelming simple. Either you live your life constantly chasing someone else's idea of perfection, or you are at peace. Stop succeeding and start living.

It would be illegal to sell a mod due to copyright laws. That said, this would be a fairly simple mod to make if you felt like giving it a try yourself. If you get stuck, the people on here tend to enjoy helping out.

Vanilla quests in Oblivion are at best difficult to reset, usually it's impossible. There are a few reasons for this. Many quests only allow each stage to be activated once, so that in itself means they cannot be redone. Topics that have been added can't be removed, which would allow you to talk to NPCs about things way before you would normally. Many small details can be fixed - some flags can be restored, some people can be resurrected, and some objects replaced - but this usually has to be done manually and no automated process can do this for more than one quest. If Glarthir is dead because you just left him, there is something you can do. You can use a console command to finish the quest, using setstage. The code for this particular quest is MS38, so you would type SetStage MS38 <stage>You could use stage 65 to explain away why Glarthir was killed, or any other stage from the bottom of this page: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Paranoia

An individual will be in one of two states: logical or emotional. It's when a group becomes emotive that mob mentality kicks in - as complexity starts to go, the mob will adopt a "with us or against us" mentality. Without a gray area it becomes difficult to maintain a unique and individual view without alienating the mob. As the mob grows in size, it becomes easier to simply adjust your views so as not to alienate the mob. We are always influenced by those around us, not in a sinister way but simply through group dynamics. That said, groups can also be functional or even inspire individuality. So to answer your questions: Yes, black or white views, diminish, any trait can be amplified by a group.

duplicate

Israel's Deputy Prime Minister Eli Yashai has gone on record as saying: "We must blow Gaza back to the middle ages, destroying all the infrastructure including roads and water." There's plenty of these quotes, from all areas of government including their transport minister, from rabbis and from Israeli civilians demonstrating on the street. I can't find it, but I saw one saying "Palestinians are not human". Doesn't sound to me like they're too concerned about Hamas' human shields. If anything, it sounds like they actually want to take down the civilians.

Only you can answer that for yourself. Your priorities will decide that for you. For example, when asked the question "How do you think others view you?", any answer you give is an extension of how you view yourself. Some people are well aware they are hated, but just don't care.

Justice is a broader term. It can apply to anything, because it is about creating a fair solution to a problem. I caused the car crash, I pay for the damage I caused. Revenge is only about causing injury to a person who previously injured or wronged you. A criminal can enact a revenge on another criminal, but not necessarily in a context that might be called justice. You insult me, I send the boys around to your house.

The eye of the beholder

I did know that memories can be easily influenced, I hadn't realised they could be created from nothing. I mean, even the words used to describe an incident can affect your memory of that incident - for example when asked "did you see any broken glass following the car crash/collision/bump" the likelihood of you remembering any glass is affected by saying either crash, collision or bump. Truly pathological liars can't remember which details they altered in a story, or to what degree. Even without external influences or behavioural disorders, a memory can be changed by entirely internal processes, usually expectations. For example, you may have a memory of someone wearing glasses before they received their first prescription for glasses. You may remember someone being present at an event they would normally have been present for, even though on this occasions they weren't. As for making up memories from nothing... I can't really be sure as to how that works. I have heard of studies showing that it is frighteningly easy to create memories in this way, although I'm not sure I could link anything. Maybe you are remembering a dream, only your mind has forgotten that you only did it in a dream. A man I worked with once told me about how occasionally he not only had memories from his past but also his future - it's not something I normally go for but he did appear to have an uncanny ability to predict things no-one would have guessed. There was a time I lost 12 hours of memory; I don't know what I did in that time, although I still have "memories" based on what I was told had happened. I know that they aren't real, just as you know yours are not real, but the point I'm making is that the human mind has to resolve conflicting information. I suppose in terms of cognitive dissonance, given the information available your mind either has to accept that this is something you remember doing (regardless of whether you were dreaming at the time) or reject it entirely, since our brains don't really like "sort ofs" or "nearlys". That's pretty much all the theories I can offer, even the slightly absurd ones.

In my book, terrorism does not necessarily require any killing or destruction. At its most basic level I'd define it as the use of fear to attain your goals. This basically makes 50-90% of the world's population terrorists. This could be narrowed down to political goals. Now it's only every government, advertiser and several (but not all) religious organisations. Everyone is afraid of war. Any military will instill fear in it's enemies, otherwise it's not a very good military. As such, any fighter - be it for freedom, money or power - will inadvertently create fear and can thus be described as a terrorist. So I suppose all freedom fighters are terrorists. But then, so are the ones they fight against.

In some places, the terrorist is the new heretic. I heard a story that the US government tried around 20 times to create 1 catch-all definition of terrorism, only they couldn't because they would have been guilty themselves every time. Can't verify how true that is though

I don't think that is necessarily the case...... Given the circumstance: I need to go to work. Under your supposition, I would drive the exact same route every day. Now, more often than not, yes, that would more than likely be the case, but, what if I am tired of that particular bit of scenery one day? I would take a different route...... There are many permutations of any given situation, where we can exercise choice. Someones MOOD would be sufficient to alter their response. I get where you're coming from. That said, when I say the exact same conditions I mean it in the most literal sense - ie no additional experience since previously making a decision. Obviously this is entirely hypothetical because it would require a "rewind" sort of time travel, but if you did rewind someone and they lost their memory of all future events, they would repeat their decisions exactly. I agree that mood is a factor. Everything is. Anything you can perceive or have ever perceived is a factor, whether it originates internally or externally.

There are many ways to interpret free will. There's a story about a man who acquired paedophilic tendencies as a tumour in his brain developed, which were entirely out of character considering he had been happily married for decades - following surgery these thoughts disappeared with the tumour. In my mind, free will can be seen in 2 ways: subjective or objective. So one can interpret free will in the Sartre philosophy, humans being "condemned to freedom". Choice is neither a pre-requisite nor outcome of existence; rather existence is freedom. At any time we are free to choose or not choose between infinite options, instant to instant. Or, one can look at free will as just another factor in our decision making process, a mere step in the many interweaving algorithms that make up who we are. Given the exact same initial conditions, the outcome will also be the exact same - in the same way, the level of restriction and coercion can be looked at as simply another of those conditions. In the subjective sense, free will exists and is always infinite. Even under coercion or physical restraint, you can still make choices as to your intent. Whether or not you can actually carry out your will on the world is irrelevant. The only limitations of what options you have are the ones you place on yourself. In the objective sense, it does and it doesn't exist. Since decisions can be interpreted as what is essentially an equation, with each input giving a specific output, then any choice you make is basically predetermined. You aren't really choosing, just processing. However this equation is made up from many variables, most of which can be influenced by our experience. As such the equation, and thus our decisions, can be manipulated. Personally, I feel that these 2 ideas aren't mutually exclusive. I believe in free will, and I believe that our decisions are the sum of all the choices ever made by everyone everywhere.

May as well vote between a slap on the left cheek or a slap on the right cheek ;) Arresting this guy is a real statement about the nature of free speech in the UK. Everyone should have the right to express their views on whatever beliefs they have, no matter how valid they are. Consider Westboro Baptist Church: consider how much attention they received and how much publicity their rabid hatred gained them. Now consider how much attention they brought to the gay rights debate. They represent baseless bigotry and needless hatred towards a stigma that should not even exist. It's not ideal but the stigma has always been there, although just one look at the depth and veracity of the WBC's animosity confronts you with any reservations you may have towards that stigma. People see how pointless the WBC's aggression is, and people see how pointless their own intolerance is. Nelson Mandela is a hero. If the guy wants to disrespect him with his jokes then he should by all means be allowed to go on ahead. We all make our choices and we face the consequences, so on his head be it.

Fun fact - many young adults and teens were found to have worse memory skills than the elderly due to over-reliance on the internet.

As HeyYou said, government has little sense to spare. Mainstream "role models" are interchangeable w***ers who have never had an original thought in their pointless existence (ie Joey Essex, Katie Price, Justin Bieber). The other day I met a 16 year old who had never heard of sexism. This week a 9 year old boy hung himself in a town near me because of racist bullying - some Asian kids made fun of him being white. The future looks bleak.

Sex. Hundreds of sex :)

Very comfortable answers and the last you would be making that decision for everyone, not just yourself and you would be rewarded by the child's death, along with the others.I said I wouldn't kill the baby, especially since if it was my own, but I could try to find another option. Even if that meant leaving the baby in the hands of someone else while I sacrifice myself to lead them away from the house. One way or another I'll die someday - maybe one day someone will finally manage to stab me (a few have tried), maybe a horrible accident, disease or old age. We all will. When, where and how I go makes little difference to me. I'll go with my integrity and take my chances against a thousand machete wielding cannibal rapists. And if the others feel unfairly treated, I'll take all 20 of them if they want to separate me from my integrity - or my kid. If survival would take away either, what's the point?

And for good reason. Between a regulated world and a world where survival depends on my ability to kill, I'll take regulation. It may not shock you that someone had to make a hard decision - when you're sitting on your couch watching the news. You may become slightly more sympathetic if you find yourself stranded without supplies, or when someone presses a 4 inch blade to your throat, or your partners throat. I've mentioned this elsewhere, but humans have very little innate capacity for violence towards other humans. Close to 90% cannot even look you in the eye when attacking. There is an extremely high percentage (>70%, the sources vary) of people who are psychologically incapable of initiating combat. It doesn't matter what you think you would do in a situation - when the moment arrives, most back out. Only training or imminent unavoidable danger will circumvent this. To answer your questions though... Given the constraints of your question (ie yes/no, without middle ground or compromise): 1. Pull lever, save 5 compared to 1. In reality I'd go with derailing. 2. Don't push the man, not only is it direct murder but it may not even work. 3. Don't suffocate the baby, I'll gladly die before I commit infanticide. I don't care if it means we both die.