Gimmy how did you do that to your username?

looking at one of your older games and seeing how bad they were.

ugh, yes.

Today I beat Christian223's flash game, Zombie Home Run.

Also, more Crystalis

I know a LOT more about brains than I do about music and music theory, so I'm a bit concerned about it being boring on that front; but that's always my concern with popular(ish) neuroscience books

Oh, then I don't know.  It's very casual; that's all I really remember about it.

I have read this one! I don't normally enjoy Sacks (I find he often puts too much stock in his own anecdotes-- and the SAME case study anecdotes in evvverrryyyy booook-- at the expense discussing research) but I really liked Musicophilia. I wonder if there would be much overlap between the two books? I know Sacks approaches it from a very clinical standpoint, I imagine Levitin comes at it more from experimental work?

I like Sacks, usually from what I hear from him on the radio (mostly Radiolab?).  Levitin speaks mostly in anecdotes, IIRC.  I would just browse the first couple chapters before picking it up.

I read This is Your Brain on Music.  It wasn't as good as I was expecting, and if you know much about music, it might be kind of boring.  There were a few snippets here and there that were good, but it was a mostly forgettable book.  I'm gonna try reading Musicophilia by Oliver Sacks.  I usually like his stuff.

thanks for the replies and
yes, it's supposed to be pretty dull and non-contrasty (inspired by bof4)

i tried getting it better and also made another portrait
critic me so i can get better to stellar levels like... delicious! ; _ ;

I know you want crits, and I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I think these are fantastic.

Ate red velvet cake.

Who's to say I would have? I think BioWare made absolutely terrible mistakes I most certainly would not have made myself. Should we pay babies for demonstrating how not to walk? Or talk? Obviously not.

That's a straw man.  You said you gained knowledge from playing the games.  If you "most certainly would not have made" those mistakes, then you didn't gain knowledge from them.  I'm obviously talking about the mistakes you *did* gain knowledge from.  Also, these mistakes are the type of thing that usually get brought up in a decent review of the game, so you could save money and time by reading free reviews.

It's becoming more apparent that you're not really going to accept the flaws in your argument, just justify your point.  Your work-already-done argument did not hold, and you never contested my analogy that basically said if you buy things, there is always some uncertainty with what you're going to get. 

@paste - I suppose it is a pretty broad group. Most of the times I've heard of it, though, it'd been along the lines of 'you can't know' as opposed to not knowing.

Yeah, the "I don't know" part sounds close to just someone who belongs to a religion but has little faith.  But I have no qualms with people calling themselves agnostic.  It's strange how sometimes atheists get down on agnostics for their lack of conviction... or faith, if you will.

I'm only coming for the roti.

[atheist]

Perhaps my perception is not correct, but I've come to understand that an atheist is one who believes there is no god. An agnostic believes that there may be a god, but the key being that if there is, it is futile for humans to try to understand the deity, like trying to explain mankind to an animal. I am personally atheist because I don't believe that a god as religion describes exists. That doesn't mean I don't think there are/can be superior beings from places where evolution or similar processes have occurred sooner or more rapidly, but I don't envision them as godlike, just different.

From what I understand, agnostic means one of three things: either you don't know if god exists, you believe it's impossible to know if god exists, or you just don't care one way or another.

I like this one, particularly the guy's face.

Today I somewhat tackle Andre Stern: American Spy by the legendary Hamletz.  Note that one of youtube's suggested tags on this video was "superhero film"

Also, more Crystalis

ethics is based in rights and respecting them

Believe it or not, I agree with this.

Why would ethics be based on rights?

I would think that rights would be based on ethics.

Everybody Wants to Rule the World by Tears for Fears.  One of my all-time favorites, probably due in part to the movie Real Genius.

I vote that Hamletz rewrites this poll.

I'm disconnected!

Actually it supports itself.  The worst X ever is something that is not X.

Everyone is agnostic; they just don't know it.