Comments by "Warren Cash" (@mandowarrior123) on "Asmongold TV "
channel.
-
493
-
315
-
242
-
225
-
218
-
193
-
120
-
118
-
101
-
81
-
61
-
56
-
53
-
49
-
46
-
28
-
21
-
20
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
They constantly infantilize the youth for a few reasons, one is to push up school age more and more to indoctrinate young adults, and treating them as children means they never develop responsibility like most millennials, so are forever childlike. Another is insidious, because by saying 20 year olds are basically children, they need to modernize their approach to love that can happen between all ages.
It's also only done on convenience 'the 30 year old migrant is only a childd!!! (Happened here in the UK for a little while, age checks were racist!!!!)
Crim only a child! (Show middle school photo) (did that here for the southport killer)
Frankly, its only the responsibility at 18 that matures you, not age. It'd likely be the same if you started working at 15, whereas unemployed uni students shouldn't be able to drink or vote until they graduate.
Maybe an opt in scheme, you get to work, vote, drink, use social media, live or international travel without guardian , etc but sign up for the draft and taxes. We can make it a big coming of age ceremony, otherwise your parents or husband/wife gets your vote, and you give big tax breaks to your head of family...
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@VengefulAntihero except israel, actually. It goes back as far as we have records including the most ancient babylonian texts. That's pretty much the issue- they can go back furthest.
And if you ignore it, you have to work on might makes right, or population, used by mid century germans, russia, israel, the UK in falkland islands, to enforce your claims.
Obviously as a Briton population and might makes right are what I lean to, but most left wing perspectives view that as colonisation, theft and oppression, which does have merits, too- but I still think the only settlements are through conflict, such as Ukraine.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
It leads many to change their minds over time. You have to go through the grief process for beliefs to change, so the 5 stages of grief, denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.
Everyone assumes the denial and anger means they won't change their minds and thus don't try but the reverse is true.
The outburst ones are getting challenged from their (cultural bubble?) for the first time ever and often simply haven't thought about it really.
I got asked what a soul is and it took more than a year to grieve as I lost belief and had to reconstruct my entire world view. I'd just never thought to question it and the bible doesn't explain it, assuming you are familiar with the ancient babylonian stories common at the time, even they only build on older ideas.
So yeah. Even a 173 IQ genius like me was raised in a religious bubble where even news articles claimed 'scientists proved that souls were real' I just didn't consider it at all. The more fundamental the belief it questions, like morality, the worse it is. Thankfully I was gratious just confused as I never knew I 'believed' in a soul in the first place. I thought atheists didn't believe in god and it wasn't proven where the soul goes on death.
Now I'm sceptical of everything, actually read the 'climate change' scientific papers that exist for example and that'll turn you off the media for life. When I found out 30m sea level rise and 2 degrees warmer was based on no human activity, and that al gore paper '97% of climate scientists' was a study that claimed 4% of papers supported man made climate change and 3% refuted it... and it failed peer review, because the papers studied complained their work showed no such thing, plus studying % of 100 papers was meaningless.
Then the 'Temperature anomalies' nasa issue using an artificial cold spell baseline as real temperatures are in fact... worryingly low.
Yes, the climate is concerning, no a few degrees warmer is beneficial if anything, yes 99.9% of species will die off soon in the next cooling period once again, no we don't know how it even works to stop it, possibly runaway cloud cover. Cloud seeding may kill us all.
If co2 raised temperatures (al gores graph shows the OPPOSITE relation, temp increases co2 with no evident reverse relation) i'd be quite relaxed.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Elder scrolls were make your own fun games. I've not played skrim's story once and often never complete the quest that spawns dragons. It isn't that it's 'good' but there is no competitor for that true open feeling and 'pick your genre' game. You can choose to be a scourge if you wish- well, child murder aside.
It's got the feeling of the precursor story- how you became a vampire lich mage, or fell for faendal and were the gay twink elf couple.
Asmon thinks it's shit for the same reason he doesn't like the sims.
Getting married and building a house is chad RPG shit. What it lacks is leaning into that more. Yes it's 'offensive' to be able to have a harem of skooma slavegirls or become a dark wizard and take over a city turning the npcs to reanimated skeletons, etc,
In a game I can be a crime kingpin or dean of a university, or both, that IS enjoyable.
What options are there in starfield? It's why i didn't check it out. What fantasy can i fullfil? Pirate captain? Probably not really, right? Space slaver? Nah. Ethnic cleanser? I mean maybe, skyrim let you. Hire only attractive women? Probably not. Alien brothel? Become a mutant with extra body parts? Can i keep my enemies heads in jars and talk to them? Other mad scientist stuff?
See, fun things would be fun. I don't care about starfields story, that bit is my job.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's almost like they aren't arguing based on logic or principle and only power? Who'd have guessed. They are debate clubbers, always in bad faith. They know the side they are on and argue to manipulate feelings. Points of fact never mattered.
They're functionally the opposite of autistic. Logic is no more than a quirk to them. "Increase standing through emotional manipulation, repeat"
Back when emotional arguments favoured the religious side, they used them. Same behaviour, same people even in some cases.
When my grandad grew up in a Ukranian village a girl claimed she saw the virgin mary and it was no different to transgender now. Listen and believe, how dare you not support her delusion, etc.
Ask them for 3 divergent viewpoints they have, you will separate someone like jk rowling with actual beliefs from the emotional leeches that would use ANY paradigm in the same manner. They often line up with communism not because it has logic but it works best with their nature, a structure that purely rewards emotional conflict, free from logic, merit, etc
White brain matter vs grey matter at its core.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moose6869 a christian that's read the bible? Shook. Yes, god derives his morality through man, not the other way around. Why would a god have morality before that i suppose. And yes, multiple gods (dei) exist else moses is completely out and demons, too, thus jesus.
However spirits (or souls/ghost however you want to anglicise) are not defined in the bible, reliant on existing belief in ancient babylonian beliefs, which only add to existing pre record beliefs. So being asked what a soul is stoppered my deism. 'Everyone just knows' isn't really good enough for me, its perhaps the most important and a glaring omission.
Jesus was an apology for the issac child sacrifice, which was warranted. Lot better not be up there, though. Offering his daughters to the woke mob?
Job being given a new family and children to make up for murdering his old?
Unable to reign in your angel's destruction?
Yes, non-intervention is certainly a good policy, though holy spirit plausible deniability but claim credit system is bankrupt.
I don't think the biblical god wants or needs our belief any longer.
Jesus was fantastic, real or not, god or not. Not flawless morality but very strong, genius level for the time. Treat others how you would like to be treated doesn't work for masochists for example.
I don't care if a story is true or not, just reflect on its lessons. Doubting Thomas was the best disciple, and christianity is meant to accept non believers, too. Jesus time and again shows its good vs evil, and religion can't get in the way of that. Samaritan, Roman, prostitute, tax collector, trinity rejectors or not. Evil claims to believe, and good exists regardless in many. Can we trust the devil wasn't in the hearts of the Nicaean council? Or the chinese whispers of certain beliefs?
The holy spirit is God's trust that we can do a better job at judging evil. Frankly I hope he can convince other gods if they still linger like baal to not thrive in human sacrifice just as he dropped child sacrifice. (Though Angels are positions occupied by deitic creatures so he is probably ahead of me)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@niixodus he did arguably provide material support by both hosting one and by showing their terrorism videos. He has encouraged his fans to donate, too. It's quite a thin line on freedom of the press grounds.
If he paid for the interview for example he is screwed, and even effectively being an advertising arm for their fundraising is... for a court to rule but,
Sharing classified documents is speech for example, or requesting someone be killed. Not all speech is free.
For example he showed how to make a weapon designed for assassinating public figures, that isn't free speech either, but training and distributing terrorist materials etc many laws apply.
Speaking isn't always speech if you will. I am an advocate for actual free speech, likewise 2a, but i don't break the law because i disagree with the law, even though i'm constitutionally backed, as juries decide if it is or not.
There are more laws you can get him and twitch both on, old obscenity laws, etc but many would not be a great idea.
Pursuing a borderline case on a political activist isn't great often.
1
-
1
-
Such an evil gremlin. Nothing like creatures like Kissinger, but still. Kissinger, cheney, bolton, bush, clinton, pence, nixon, McConnel, pelosi, some horrid people, and so many more slimy toe suckers. Thank goodness they having been very effective at spawing more of themselves, at least i hope they do not have apprentices.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Increasing employees = more growth and investment, things work backwards for public companies. You find an excuse to hire lots of barely functional people to draw blades of grass to say how successful your company is and hope busywork = money. But, ofc, you leave the company for the next ceo who either buys up other studios to grow, does more of the same, or tries to fight the unions, shrink the business etc.
For some fields it works fine. Increasing land and farmworkers usually makes more money, so investors back on these things.
Software developer studios are one of the few things worth less than the sum of their parts. In fairness it makes all companies pretty useless, however size has great challenges even in an unlisted company.
In game development, you need care and obsession with your work. It rewards highly logical people that are anathema in hollywood.
More than that, performance requires an understanding of the engine and technology the specialists building the product do not have. Tyler learned it himself because he needed to do the whole lot, but also he chose to not implement things beyond his understanding.
Management degree nepobaby "that looks good on here this ray tracing, put it in our game" "our team can do that"
Team cannot do that very well.
Even if they don't put it in, the back and forth meetings may take weeks, stalling development, and clearing up to the other teams if it's going to be in or not might never arrive to the other teams until after they've finished the shaders and scene lighting.
There's a known exponential drop in program development by more cooks. For example you need at least 5 programmers to outpace one working alone due to the complex model and keeping everyone updated and understanding.
If you can keep one programmer, things are much smoother, as one expert can know the application completely. That can even be impossible with a AAA bloated game.
This is another reason they are so bad at bugfixing. So many issues arrise where two professions meet, and a large company has specialists in both fields but potentially neither understands the issues when those systems interact.
They also aren't gamers, they're corporate graduates with 'qualifications' in things like 'level design' with ridgid structural academical understanding of what a game is.
Think, how does a studio make a schedule 1 with a level designer? It doesn't. So your studio has to make games with certain elements. And that's a broad job. If you have a mocap studio, what the hell do they do?
Hence, games are the same slop because they have to be because the framework of a company naturally interferes with any new game concept.
They can change, but it takes years. They all have meetings and restructure to make extraction shooters for example.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1