Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
It appears that you are using ad block :'(
Hey, we get it. However this website is run by and for the community... and it needs ads in order to keep running.
Please disable your adblock on Smashboards, or go premium to hide all advertisements and this notice. Alternatively, this ad may have just failed to load. Woops!
I don't like dittos much. I mean, I'll play them, but I probably won't be enjoying myself. (unless they're Samus or Link dittos -- those are actually fun.) Falcon dittos are the least fun for me. But yeah, dittos are mostly exploiting the character's weaknesesses and I know that this happens in non-ditto matches too but it gets boring when they're both the same character. Wanna know how to be good in Mario dittos? Get them off the edge and nair when they up b. You'll get your lunch money taken, but the other Mario will get sent back. Luigi vs Mario matches are kind of the same. Unless you mess up the timing, you'll be guaranteed an edgeguard which kind of encompasses a qualm I have with 64 but I might make a thread later.
But Bond movies are better than your typical action movies because we know the character so well, and Craig added another dimension not previously seen that makes Bond even deeper.
Craig adds substance and a grounded reality to take it above your "typical action movie".
At least we don't have the crazies here who don't like Craig because of his hair color.
I actually agree; I just don't want it to go much further in that direction (towards being a serious action movie). I haven't seen Skyfall yet btw.
The best moments in the Bond movies are the "theme music" moments. Bond is in a bad spot, his back's against the wall, and suddenly he pulls something completely ridiculous and the theme music blares. Awesome.
what i posted
'all non science/non math is not relevent to life, i would never aspire to perform such a lifelong troll on many people. LOL @english philosophy and history...what a waste of living teaching/learning those things beyond grade school'
first off, im am not against chaning my mind or view on anything that makes sense, so i am not hard headed about this, i am genuinely of this mindset at the moment.
i dont feel that i need to explain how learning or teaching math and science (technology, modern medicine; those that truly increase the quality of life of everyone on the planet) are relevant to EVERYONE.
maybe i phrased myself incorrectly previously, but i believe that these extremely broad subjects/areas (math+science) are MORE relevant
(as to completely overshadow the relevancy of aforementioned subjects/areas)
than the other subjects/areas that were named as well (english+philosophy+history), in addition to
(i only assume, because there are MANY jank and truly useless subjects that are taught, imo)
all of the other non-relevant yet still taught subjects.
i understand the importance and relevancy of a subject like SOCIAL STUDIES
(i mean real social studies, not jank *** fake history -that helps social understanding exactly 0%- in disguise class)
or ART
(self expression, can't exclude this, inclusive to MUSIC)
, but NOT stuff like "advanced philosophy" or "english 501."
how are the subjects i think are not as relevant at a certain point, relevant? ...like at all? genuinely curious, like i said before im not against changing my mind or viewpoint so long as there's legit counter argument or straight up education on the matter.
I had a dream last night about Isai and other smashers. We were at a hotel, and Isai said something like, "Hey guys, let's go outside. I've got something to show you." So we went outside, and we were just standing there, then someone said "It's a trap!" because Isai started throwing water balloons at everyone.
what i posted
'all non science/non math is not relevent to life, i would never aspire to perform such a lifelong troll on many people. LOL @english philosophy and history...what a waste of living teaching/learning those things beyond grade school'
first off, im am not against chaning my mind or view on anything that makes sense, so i am not hard headed about this, i am genuinely of this mindset at the moment.
i dont feel that i need to explain how learning or teaching math and science (technology, modern medicine; those that truly increase the quality of life of everyone on the planet) are relevant to EVERYONE.
maybe i phrased myself incorrectly previously, but i believe that these extremely broad subjects/areas (math+science) are MORE relevant
(as to completely overshadow the relevancy of aforementioned subjects/areas)
than the other subjects/areas that were named as well (english+philosophy+history), in addition to
(i only assume, because there are MANY jank and truly useless subjects that are taught, imo)
all of the other non-relevant yet still taught subjects.
i understand the importance and relevancy of a subject like SOCIAL STUDIES
(i mean real social studies, not jank *** fake history -that helps social understanding exactly 0%- in disguise class)
or ART
(self expression, can't exclude this, inclusive to MUSIC)
, but NOT stuff like "advanced philosophy" or "english 501."
how are the subjects i think are not as relevant at a certain point, relevant? ...like at all? genuinely curious, like i said before im not against changing my mind or viewpoint so long as there's legit counter argument or straight up education on the matter.
Not every useful job on the planet is related at all to science or math. I'd argue that lawyers, for example, have more concrete and immediate value to society than, say, theoretical physicists or rocket scientists or high-level mathematicians, all of whom contribute in very abstract and knowledge-for-the-sake-of-knowledge ways.
Another example--foreign policy is far more important to the day-to-day lives of average folks than tons of random scientific disciplines (the folks who study animal behavior, for instance). Who are the people who make the decisions or give advice about how one country should act towards another? History majors or public policy majors or whatever. No science or math involved.
Now, there might be an argument to be made that too many people try to study english, or history, or art, and that the dumb ones end up living unproductive lives in coffee shops around the country. Maybe that's true. But try to imagine a world entirely devoid of these people and LOL you.
The only truly useless discipline is sociology. Real talk.
Lawyers were probably the worst example to use bcow. People could defend themselves in court, and in fact they did for a long time before lawyers. Some lawyers can be a benefit to society MAYBE, but most just increase the cost of trying criminals and tie up the system with extended trials and appeals, costing us lots of money.
I kind of agree with Knitephox, in the sense of talking about these areas as SUBJECTS, not occupations. The issue for me with non math/science subjects is that they involve little to no facts, and a whole lot of theory/speculation. This type of thought doesn't need to be taught in school imo, or rather, people would be better off learning about math/science than those kinds of subjects. Would I rather have a math major or a public policy major make decisions for my country on foreign policy? Well, assuming we are talking about the same person (aka no external factors), then math major hands down. Its a more logical, thought developing education imo.
McDonalds would operate by itself as everyone would have figured out that about 90% of the business' processes can be automatized (using "Not so important" factual sciences), the other 10% would be just monitoring and sustain such system.
but then, I wouldn't be able to work at McDonalds for $8.00/hr so now I need some lawyers to ban automatized McDonalds.
Not every useful job on the planet is related at all to science or math. I'd argue that lawyers, for example, have more concrete and immediate value to society than, say, theoretical physicists or rocket scientists or high-level mathematicians, all of whom contribute in very abstract and knowledge-for-the-sake-of-knowledge ways.
While your general point is correct, as clubba said using lawyers was possibly the worst example of all time.
Another example--foreign policy is far more important to the day-to-day lives of average folks than tons of random scientific disciplines (the folks who study animal behavior, for instance). Who are the people who make the decisions or give advice about how one country should act towards another? History majors or public policy majors or whatever. No science or math involved.
Uh, political science or economics? Public policy probably fits in with political science, but I prefer to call it political science to emphasize that it is still science.
The only truly useless discipline is sociology. Real talk.
I kind of agree with Knitephox, in the sense of talking about these areas as SUBJECTS, not occupations. The issue for me with non math/science subjects is that they involve little to no facts, and a whole lot of theory/speculation. This type of thought doesn't need to be taught in school imo, or rather, people would be better off learning about math/science than those kinds of subjects. Would I rather have a math major or a public policy major make decisions for my country on foreign policy? Well, assuming we are talking about the same person (aka no external factors), then math major hands down. Its a more logical, thought developing education imo.
It's not really that non math/science professions are useless. It's more that non math/science subjects IN SCHOOL can be whacked due to subjective grading and course material that is not as connected to the "real world".
Also clubba if you control that math major vs public policy major hypothetical for general intelligence then I'll definitely take the public policy major.
BTW writing and communication are hugely important skills that can be taught well through non math/science courses.
Jaime, I agree. Automate everything possible and the job day will be cut to like 2 hrs for less than 5% of the population while the rest advance in whatever they want 100% of the time...too bad lawyers judges and worst politicians and religious people constantly ban all the good stuff for us real humans
Uh oh socialism! Actually giving a **** about everyone via automation is straight up bat-**** insane! WANA GET BANNED?
Just got back from the Gainesville tournament. Here's a quick recap:
Tank and Sheer won doubles from the losers bracket. Loto and I 3-0'd them in Winners and they came storming back to take it 3-1, 3-1. We were really dominating them in Winner's, so props to them for making the adjustments. Wizzy didn't come so Eikelmann was left out without a teammate.
Sheer won singles, and it was really intense. We were tied in Loser's Finals 2-2, when his Dino went on crack and took the last game. I got to counterpick to Congo and thought I had it in the bag. Props to him.
Sheer beat Tank 3-1, 3-1 in Grand Finals. They were all really good games. Tank's Fox has gotten a lot better from what I've seen in videos/online. He sent Sheer to Loser's 3-1 (I think). Sheer sent me to to Loser's 2-1.
Round of applause for Sheer and Tank. Good job dudez.
1st: Sheer
2nd: Tank
3rd: kys
4th: Loto
5th: Eikelmann
6th and 7th: Two random noobs.
Lol yeah, only 7 entrants for singles. There were 6 doubles teams, but a lot of them left after they got *****. A couple of guys came in thinking they were big stuff, and they weren't the happiest customers once they realized we toy with them like we toy with our food.
I believe Grand Finals in teams, Singles Loser's, Winner's, and Grand Finals were all recorded, but the tape did crap out at one point.
My modded controller failed me miserably, and I had to use a borrowed Superpad 64 for most of the day. Controller johns all day. There were a lot of combos I dropped that I normally wouldn't, but whatcha gonna do? I still had a blast.
I'll post later and give a recap of some of the funny stuff/memorable moments that happened.
Also: If you guys are gonna go the blue-collar "DEM DURN LAWYERS TEKKIN MA MONEY!" route, I'm a little disappointed. An advanced country needs an advanced and complicated legal system, and if you think there would be more justice if no one studied or thought about the law professionally you're ****ing idiots.
ALSO clubba were you serious or sarcastically mocking kphox when you said you'd rather have a math major than a public policy major making decisions about foreign relations? Because I know a fair number of genius math majors and a fair number of genius history/pub-pol majors, and let me tell you, you don't need to be that smart to see that one group is better at interacting with people and understanding complicated social problems than the other.
I was joking about sociology because I hate sociology
Knitephox there's no conspiracy and it's not possible for us to automate 95% of the workforce and leave you to a life of supported leisure
Also: If you guys are gonna go the blue-collar "DEM DURN LAWYERS TEKKIN MA MONEY!" route, I'm a little disappointed. An advanced country needs an advanced and complicated legal system, and if you think there would be more justice if no one studied or thought about the law professionally you're ****ing idiots.
In many cases our overly complicated legal system adds little overall value to society. And you hear all the time about lawyers filing ridiculous lawsuits that again don't seem to add much value to society.
It's actually kind of a shame that society has to devote some of its smart people to figuring out the law.
Knitephox there's no conspiracy and it's not possible for us to automate 95% of the workforce and leave you to a life of supported leisure
False! LOL @ leisure. In my case id try to quickly and fully absorb as much information I could on things that interest me but don't have time to legitly study now (most assuredly NOT philosophy/history). Most crime stems from inequality(not debatable), that which would be severely reduced in such a world; less inequality less crime less lawyers less laws less judges less politicians. 2gud2btru
Simple, clear and concise (real) laws would retire all lawyers as everyone could understand and interpret them(hence defend themselves), no complexities or 137 page fake laws needed or required
It was possible in the 60s-70s lolo, just uneducated people (greedy) prevent it
In many cases our overly complicated legal system adds little overall value to society. And you hear all the time about lawyers filing ridiculous lawsuits that again don't seem to add much value to society.
It's actually kind of a shame that society has to devote some of its smart people to figuring out the law.
In some cases the law's overly convoluted and needs to be reformed, that's true. Good lawyers and judges and policy-makers fight to combat that. And a smart guy like you should know that for every "frivolous" lawsuit that succeeds there are about a kazillion that flop and leave the *******s who brought them to pay the cost, and that they're simply not covered because they're not interesting.
In places where justice is simple (see: all ancient societies) justice tends to suck major **** and people get shafted 24/7. American law has problems, but it also has some of our best and brightest working day and night to ameliorate said problems. I don't tell you that cancer ought to be cured already and that if lawyers were medical researchers there would be no sickness.
And I'm just talking about one example here but there are a million. Journalists, Linguists, artists of all stripes, social workers, and so on and so forth.
ALSO clubba were you serious or sarcastically mocking kphox when you said you'd rather have a math major than a public policy major making decisions about foreign relations? Because I know a fair number of genius math majors and a fair number of genius history/pub-pol majors, and let me tell you, you don't need to be that smart to see that one group is better at interacting with people and understanding complicated social problems than the other.
That's why I said if we were talking about the same person. Obviously if you take a person who can't interact with people, they won't fair well in that occupation no matter what education they have. If you take a person that is not introverted and can interact with people, then yes I would rather give him a math education than a public policy education. I just think it teaches you to be more logical, which imo is the only way to really look at the world if your job is to solve problems.
It could also be because I've been very unimpressed with the "genius" history/pub-pol majors I met when I was at UVA, which is supposed to excel in those areas.
So let's say Jimmie is the guy who has to decide whether or how the U.S. should continue to give aid to Israel. You think honors analysis prepares him for that better than a class on the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
Not just english, literally everything non math/science related
knitephox: our society has decided that some of our greatest works were and are produced in the form of literature and that some amount of scholarship in that field is worth undertaking. It's a matter of opinion, but most educated people would agree with me when I say that without an infrastructure for the study of past works of genius, we'd lack some of the wisdom that's available today.
So let's say Jimmie is the guy who has to decide whether or how the U.S. should continue to give aid to Israel. You think honors analysis prepares him for that better than a class on the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
no you are lol. But okay I'll respond, though that wasn't really a rebuttal...
Do I think Jimmie needs to know the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Of course. In order to get that knowledge does he need to take a class that has some facts but is also filled with the opinions of whoever is teaching that class? Imo, he does not. That knowledge can easily be obtained outside of the educational environment.
For jobs which require people to make decisions based on constantly changing sets of information (i.e. foreign policy), all I would hope an education gives them is the proper mindset, which to me is just thinking logically about problems. I think math/science prepares people to do this more than language/social studies classes.
Also @prisonchild, have you been to college? It is actually a pretty common place opinion among college kids that english is a useless major. And yes, even most of the english majors will admit it lol.
English is a form of expression, and can be considered a form of art in many cases. You can technically express yourself through a novel at a beginning english level, just as you can "make music" after hearing a few drumbeats and whipping out FL studio. Understanding how to express it and be more technical at it requires you to learn more about it.
There were good points made about how science/math are probably the best ways to learn about different ways to think about a situation, which I can agree with to an extent. English is crucial to organizing your thoughts, and structuring things in a manner that anyone can follow. Also I believe everyone should have a common understanding of basic english to communicate with each other.
On top of all that a large amount of entertainment is inspired or adapted from literature, it's not always english literature obviously, but ya know. Good way to use your imagination too and apply it.
English is a form of expression, and can be considered a form of art in many cases. You can technically express yourself through a novel at a beginning english level, just as you can "make music" after hearing a few drumbeats and whipping out FL studio. Understanding how to express it and be more technical at it requires you to learn more about it.
There were good points made about how science/math are probably the best ways to learn about different ways to think about a situation, which I can agree with to an extent. English is crucial to organizing your thoughts, and structuring things in a manner that anyone can follow. Also I believe everyone should have a common understanding of basic english to communicate with each other.
On top of all that a large amount of entertainment is inspired or adapted from literature, it's not always english literature obviously, but ya know. Good way to use your imagination too and apply it.
As a Government/Economics/Philosophy triple major I completely object.
Science people are stuck in the small picture + they typically are bad at social interactions needed at the professional level. (Science/math majors are nerds)
I love English majors they add such good
(hammered on smash boards)
not to get in the way of your silly discussion (english exists as a major for retail clerks to fill the time between shifts, btw), but
anyone else bought a ps vita? it's so ****ing amazing, why do people hate on it so much? i get that it has a mediocre game lineup but meh, it's a great device
for the record my vita's screen was cracked about a week after i got it but i liked it enough to get another one
As a Government/Economics/Philosophy triple major I completely object.
Science people are stuck in the small picture + they typically are bad at social interactions needed at the professional level. (Science/math majors are nerds)
I love English majors they add such good
(hammered on smash boards)
