/kc/ - Krautchan

sleepies png
(755.02 KB, 866x764)

when were they flying? i need a year. you cant just drop this kind of shit on us. its heavy.

cat_paws jpg
(26.64 KB, 720x720)

cat_skeleton jpg
(69.77 KB, 720x502)

> their underside is white
Au contraire. Ofc, I can't put a percentage how many cats don't have that. Besides there are full white cats out there.
Tho I could imagine something like a wingsuit, a hairy membrane straining between the front and back legs, allowing cats to glide over distances, like these guys: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_squirrel
I would guess cats lived on trees, stalking their prey above those heads among the branches and dropping on them even from a distance. This would also explain their ability to arrive onto their paws when they fall from a height.

 >>/41498/
It's hard to say, I will say this however and you may want to sit down for this.

We have no conclusive evidence that they ever STOPPED flying. I think that in places of high altitude and sparse resources like the Himalayas they could still be cast that do fly, this could happen in the interior of Antarctica as well, being often nocturnal they would be even more difficultly to see and may get passed of as owls, dinosaurs or Mothmen in the dark.

 >>/41499/
More seem to than not and pretty much every big cat does, even the ones that are pure black are only that way due to a rare condition causing melanin excess.

 >>/41506/
Would it not be more of a gliding than flying? As like with a gliding marsupial

> In 2019 it was observed, by chance, that a flying squirrel fluoresced pink. Subsequent research by biologists at Northland College in Northern Wisconsin found that this is true for all three species of North American flying squirrels. At this time it is unknown what purpose this serves. Non-flying squirrels do not fluoresce under UV light.[18]

Screenshot_2020-12-13... png
(482.91 KB, 900x500)

 >>/41507/
No they would have had wings like this. Gliders are small and would only eat even smaller things like bugs, not like what Tigers hunt or even small cats.

 >>/41497/
> but their underside is white. This doesn't make sense

I believe the default lowest energy consuming colour state of fur is white. Changing colour from white requires building complex chemical compounds which require more energy. If there is a part of the animal which is never seen by its prey it makes sense not to add colour to that part, thus conserving a bit of energy.
Evolutionary biologists probably could site a dozen other reasons why a white underside is advantageous to a cat. For one example, if you are seeing its white underbelly, the cat is not intending to hunt you as food. Nice signal, what?
> the ancestors of cats must have at one point been capable of flight

Maybe. But, then they evolved into cats.
Of course, if evolution was so damned important to a successful species then way haven't cats evolved into accommodating neko-girls by now?

https://youtube.com/watch?v=cqZc7ZQURMs

ZZB 0361... jpg
(1.55 MB, 1200x1600)

Humans are actually 80% slime when you think of it, it could be said that we are slimes masquerading as carbon based lifeforms.

 >>/41703/
Looks like a careful way of saying that people are like used condoms.

Touhou Reisen 032 png
(7.55 MB, 4912x3473)

 >>/41704/
I would never say such a thing. And this thread is for serious scientific discourse and theorization not such lowly comments what one would expect to here form the myriad of black headed folk in their fields.

The denizens of this website ought to display proper decorum, I ought not have to be subject to such vernacular. I daresay had I wanted such I would converse with the peasants in the fields.

 >>/41705/
 >>/41706/
Well, be careful in the future, the implications were really strong.

Dinosaurs have only been properly discovered and analysed quite recently, before then people thought they were bones of giants or dragons. Generally all that remains of this are the drawings of a 16th century Englishman or a mention of Dragons bones being found in a mountain in a Chinese chronicle, we don't really get the specimen itself. Dragons being large aerial creatures would of course not live in the same conditions that the classical dinosaurs that we find are discovered in, and so much like flying cats they would likely not survive into the fossil records. Both Dragons and flying cats would likely live in lofty mountains that have solid grounds and don't permit the fossils to seep into boggy soil and be preserved that way like most dinosaurs did. It is interesting that we lack fossils form the time from Scandinavia, well clearly something lived there, just what though? Clearly probably dragons that may have either failed to be preserved due to the climate and such or that was left more exposed in the mountainous and cold regions and discovered by early man leading to the dragon myths of the regions. It could even be said that many of these dragons that were found by people long ago in England and even China as well were actually just that, dragons. But of course they never looked after these dragon skeletons.

 >>/41721/
> Dinosaurs have only been properly discovered and analysed quite recently, before then people thought they were bones of giants or dragons.
Well they just renamed giants and dragons to dinosaurs to make it sound more scientific.

isnt that dinosaur thing a scam

ZZC 0020 E png
(1.33 MB, 1512x1800)

If the power of a god is created through the prayers and faith of their followers then how would a god like the Jewish god ever become strong enough to usurp all of the others? You would think the Gods of China would become the strongest through sheer numbers of followers or even the Greco-Roman gods who would still have far more followers than the Jewish one did, so how did this ever happen?

 >>/41928/
Great question.
You see, Yahweh's power does not come from the faith of his followers, but from the number of occasions when his laws were circumvented in some clever way. This is why he created 613 commandments all of which inconveniences the life of his people so much that they are forced to find the loopholes in the commandments. They bending his rules for thousands of years now, day in day out, this made him very strong.
The topic reminds me of M.A.G.U.S. the Hungarian role playing game I wrote about here  >>/12621/
The fictive philosophers and theologians of Ynev - where the existence of gods is a fact - came up with many ideas where the gods' power originates. One idea is the "parasitic gods theory" which assumes that the Gods live off from the worship of their followers.

Facão JPG
(36.98 KB, 1000x1000)

Is a machete a form of energy storage and spending? Energy is spent making it sharp, this allows it to split apart objects much faster than a blunt instrument but losing its sharpness in the process. Same for cutting tools and tools in general. On the other hand tools are a form of using energy with greater efficiency towards desired outcomes. If, for instance, the objective is to cut a branch, a machete will concentrate much more of spent energy into causing the cut than a blunt instrument. Scissors apply energy very precisely and sledgehammers are all about applying the energy delivered by the user.

 >>/41960/
It's a channel for energy.
The energy stored in the muscles plus gravity is channeled to a segment of the edge where it contacts with the wood (or anything the user intends cutting) and used to break the bond between the atoms of the material getting cut.
If it stores the energy spent on sharpening it? Hmm.
When we sharpen the blade we remove material exposing the the sharp edges of the ferrous molecules non-stainless steel atoms are bound together in a smaller angle, I think with stainless it's 45°, while the angle between atoms in "normal" carbon steel is liek 30-35° so we are spending energy to break the bonds between those atoms with the abrasive material, and not raising overall energy level in the tool.
When we hone the blade we just bend the edge back to straight. And while we don't remove material like in the previous scenario well some gets removed I think, but very little we still not put more energy into there.
But while we sharpen/hone the blade some of our energy spent will turn into heat with the friction. The blade itself is warmer which means it got surplus energy. However this isn't get stored but the blade dissipates this heat, the surplus energy - into the air (if we use water - for example - during sharpening that also helps with the cooling).

 >>/41928/
Maybe he is God of Usury, and Media. A banker and narrative concocter among Gods.
A provocative hypothesis: "How is it that Rome ended up adopting as its spiritual foundation a doctrine and a book claiming that God chose the Jews, at a period of widespread Roman Judeophobia? And how is it possible, that, less than two centuries after turning Jerusalem into a Greek city named Aelia Capitolina, where Jews were forbidden to enter, Rome adopted officially a religion that announced the fall of Rome and a new Jerusalem? How is it that the glorious and self-confident Roman Empire converted to the cult of a Jewish healer tortured and executed by Roman authorities for sedition? Many today ask: why are we so weak? It is high time to consider the obvious: having been taught for generations to worship and emulate the man nailed on the cross under Jewish pressure is not the best incentive to resist martyrdom. There is an obvious correlation between being told yesterday that it is moral to "love your enemies" and getting jailed today for """hat speech"""." Based on a "conspiracy book" about the origin of christianity. Take it with a grain of salt. https://www.unz.com/article/how-yahweh-conquered-rome/
I like the criticism of the "pacifist", universalist, feckless, and unloyal character of current christianity in the west

 >>/41971/
> cult of a Jewish healer tortured and executed 
> Jewish healer
But he was Parthian therefore Scythian therefore Hungarian.

 >>/41971/
Somebody needs to stop him.

ZZC 0149 png
(230.02 KB, 726x720)

Almost 400 thousand Americans have died form this flu, isn't this amazing? I didn't realise that before. I hope this continues.

 >>/41993/
Er strafe es.

ZZC 0450 jpg
(1.27 MB, 2000x1250)

Right now the upstart and degenerate western power that protects the sovereignty of the breakaway province is in turmoil. These coming days would be the perfect opportunity to unite the middle kingdom, I wonder if they will realise and act on this? Probably not.

 >>/42067/
> breakaway province
Is this the UK?
> unite the middle kingdom
It's starting to look like a Quasimodo prophecy.

 >>/42113/
No... The breakaway province is Taiwan and the Middle Kingdom is China.

[HorribleSubs] Fate... jpg
(907 KB, 1920x1080)

The US Space force soldiers are called guardians.

 >>/42115/
Oh, I thought liek Midgard or sumtin.
So as of now nothing new seems to be brewing there?
I think polarization will develop, and the US will guard every bit of influence she has.

KF Lion 001 jpg
(394.33 KB, 800x800)

The administrators of Australia complain of the abundance of ground dwelling Laurasiatheria in the wilds of the land and the detrimental effect this has on the native ecology of said land but does not the basis of evolution lie on the notion of survival of the fittest? And is not Evolution a natural process? If these native creatures cannot handle the pressures introduced by the introduction of more advanced lifeforms then do they really have a place in this world? Who are we to interfere with natural selection.

Why should we genocide millions of cats, dogs, horses, buffalo, camels, goats, pigs and deer just so that a handful of stupid marsupials survive? And why should we care if they alter the flora of this place? The flora could do with some altering. This goes against the greater good.

uglybastard jpg
(42.01 KB, 474x316)

 >>/42178/
What about those motherfuckers?

 >>/42179/
I can't choose sides it would go against my own argument, if Laurasiatheria are allowed to be left unmolested then I suppose amphibians must be afforded the same luxury.

Back to the matter of felines.

An interesting phenomena that I have come across is that of the Australian Panther. For a long time now there have been sightings of large black panthers in parts of NSW and Victoria, they are usually ignored as nonsense, I myself thought it to be ludicrous. However, there does appear to be evidence that some kind of large black cat does exist in the area and it not just being an isolated case. There is not much information on this in the scientific world, most comes from citizens and cryptozoologists(lunatics in other words, one attributed this to being a Marsupial Lion that he claims must still exist) so bear this in mind(it's a shame I think it really should be investigated). 

First of we have the eyewitness sightings, well that is a start but on their own they don't mean much, then we have the reports and footage of dead livestock. There are reports of the bodies of the dead animals being kept in trees as cats do and there are reports and images of animals being killed in a similar manner to how large cats kill, the mouth is bloodied or the throat is ripped out. Large cats tend to either target the throat or bite the snout of an animal to suffocate it, this still does not prove it however, it's not impossible that a dog could have done it and just killed in an unusual way in a few isolated incidents, one or two bodies is not proof. Lastly we have video evidence. These are certainly of some large cats. But are they panthers? Maybe not they could be feral cats that are growing to large proportions, but these are really quite large indeed. However, Australia has no proper Apex predator, yes by definition almost any ecosystem has an apex predator but we lack a creature on the scale of a true apex predator like a tiger or leopard, we lack even a lynx, therefore it is likely that feral cats would eventually specialise and some would become large cats to fill this niche, but this is a process that would take thousands of years.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=MwXbLaw3xtc

https://youtube.com/watch?v=hdzNdYjqt2s

 >>/42181/
Interesting. There is similar modern folklore revolving around out-of-place big cats in Britain (see e.g. this thread: https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/alien-big-cats-abcs.69/).

The animal in the second video definitely looks like a domestic cat to me (at least in proportions and motorics, I can't get a good reference for the size from anything in its surroundings).

 >>/42182/
I came across that too. I could not find any stand alone Youtube vids like the ones I posted, you mention issues with the second video and this may be true, there are other videos of them in Australia but they are usually part of news stories and such so I was not sure I wanted to post them.

Anyway, Oddly enough there is solid proof that large cats exist in the wild in the UK because of captured specimens of Lynxes and a cougar(but they were said to be escaped individuals) but I could not find as many or any videos of them like the Australian panther, so it may be that in Britain it is predominately escaped animals.

An interesting thing to note however are the witness accounts and some images(but that are blurry and hard to verify size with) that show and speak of black animals. It's odd that every recorded Australian example is black and that there are black animals mentioned in the UK, black panthers are actually just an animal of the genus panthera with a gene that causes an excess of melanin. It's odd that all of the Australian animals and possibly the British type would have this same gene. In a small breeding population this might be possible but it's still unlikely.

 >>/42178/
Well, they were introduced to the continent by the Anglos, them being there is human interference in the fist place. So we don't really have to resort on discussing what is natural or not.

 >>/42184/
They would get here one way or another eventually, just like how dingoes and the resident ape population did. All we did was speed the process up. Funnily enough there are theories that  >>/42181/ could be relatives of a kind of cat that made it to the main land from Indonesia but I don't think it's that likely or they would be more widespread one would think.

And what is done is done, we should not stop this natural process now. Particularly not when we have to kill so much to do it.

KF Thylacine 003 Bk jpg
(2.48 MB, 4000x2649)

And also, they can just bring back any animals that are made extinct by more advanced creatures. Like is currently being undertaken in regards to the woolly mammoth and that will be done for the thylacine.

They already have the technology to do this and they already have a genome for the Thylacine, the only issue is that the nearest living relative(the numbat) is more distinct from it than that is the case for the Mammoth and it's relative the Asian elephant. So the act of splicing the genome of the Numbat with the genome of the Thylacine requires more advanced technology, once technology has advanced to this point it will be possible however.

Map_of_Sunda_and_Sahul png
(181.25 KB, 661x599)

 >>/42198/
> They would get here one way or another eventually
Sure. Next time there will be land connection to other landmasses.
Otherwise there is no chance that enough individuals of a foreign species could make their way to form a viable population.
> resident ape population
Boongs? Or the yowie?
> dingos
Btw many canines have lighter/white belly, dingos too. Maybe back in the day flying dogs chased flying cats up to the top of flying trees.

KF Thylacine... jpg
(233.09 KB, 1500x2081)

 >>/42207/
Australia is moving northwards by 1 or 2 metres a year, it's only a matter of time before it reaches a land with cats. What then? We might not be in a position to protect them then, it's better that they learn to live alongside cats now than have to suddenly learn rather quickly to live alongside tigers and leopards when we crash into china. One might even say that it is in their long term interest to have them live along side cats and dogs now. The survivors will be better of for it.

They are probably the same thing.

Now you are just being silly. Yes some have lighter bellies but it is not as common and I don't think the skeletal structure and musculature of a canine would lend themselves to flight, they lack the agility and flexibility of cats who are better able to twist, leap, and land than dogs and whose longer tails and flexible bodies would enable them to better manoeuvrer and shift weight in flight.

However, as your image shows even when the sea level was lower we were still not connected to Asia by land. It is believed that the ape population got here by island hopping, and it was previously believed that the dingo must have came with them. However, the dingo actually is not actually a domesticated dog, it's semi domesticated and furthermore the dingo arrived here before the ape population, so how then did they get here and could other Laurasiatheria follow this method to arrive here?

 >>/42208/
> lack the agility and flexibility of cats who are better able to twist, leap, and land than dogs and whose longer tails and flexible bodies would enable them to better manoeuvrer and shift weight in flight.
This is why flying cats were able to seek refuge on top of flying trees and flying dogs couldn't reach them.

 >>/42209/
...Cats as a whole don't need to hide from dogs it is dogs that should be hiding from cats, the most deadly apex predators are cats. Anyway, even a housecat would beat a dog in a dog fight because the dog can't manoeuvre and they rely solely on their bite whereas cats are more versatile in their armaments.

Hmmm..... This actually made me think of something. The fact that cats could and possibly still can fly is established but you mentioned the dog having vestiges of the traits of flight namely in regards to the patternations in some examples. The cat clearly is more physiologically suited to flight, clearly if the dog did try to be or was capable of flight it would be rapidly out competed by the cat. Therefore it may be that cats are more flight like because they evolved from a more recent ancestor that could fly whereas dogs had been grounded by the cat long before.

KF Tasmanian Devil... jpg
(143.32 KB, 1024x1024)

Also, why are they genociding dingos then when dingos are not even a foreign species? And additionally, people say that cats and foxes should not be allowed here because the native animals are not used to such creatures and so have no defence, yet dingos are native, thylacines are native and used to be on the mainland, quolls are native, Tasmanian devils are native and used to be on the mainland, Thylacoleos used to exist here etc. So clearly they had lived alongside predators like cats and foxes.

ZZC 1431... jpg
(1.17 MB, 1000x1495)

Today we celebrate Invasion day, the day we came to bring civilization to this continent. Did it work? I don't think so. We didn't manage to kill all of the Natives on the mainland and now we have an infestation of uncivilised convict descendants too. I hope China invades us and kills all of the poor people.

 >>/42269/
> Invasion day,
> invasive species
Does this ring a bell?

una jpg
(26.16 KB, 650x365)

 >>/42269/
The blood of the An*lo must soak the red earth so the Dreamtime can finally come back.

emu-war png
(165.61 KB, 320x660)

australia-best png
(27.47 KB, 768x728)

 >>/42269/
> Today we celebrate Invasion day, the day we came to bring civilization to this continent.

Local civilization won over yours.

 >>/42270/
Invasive species are good.

 >>/42274/
And now the Government is starting a war with cats... They have not learnt at all.

KF White Tiger 004... jpg
(1.44 MB, 2000x2000)

There are only 5000 Tigers alive in the wild. If people in Australia really care about Bio Diversity so much and really want to decrease the populations of feral camels, horses, deer, pigs, goats and buffalo then they should introduce the tiger here. The reason these ungulates are able to live in such numbers is because they have no predators in Australia, Tigers will not affect the local ecology either, they are all too small for a tiger to bother with.

Well, I sent an email to the Minister of the Environment to tell her the error of her tactics and to suggest that she introduce tigers, maybe she will see sense.

 >>/42279/
> maybe she will see sense.
I'm sure.

 >>/42181/
Okay, watched the vids.
The second with is definitely a feline, but as for the size, that thing it rests on at he beginning of the video (the thumbnail also shows it) is it a tree trunk? Looks like it, then it might be just a big cat.
The first video is too shaky to tell what it is. And the camera always shakes when the creature comes out behind the vegetation to the open. Plus it looks like as if the tail would be large, and dragged. Smells fishy.
UFO and Sasquatch sightings were dismissed recently saying, "lo, now everyone has excellent cameras in their phones, no excuse not making a good video about them if they exist", some type of a wild cat in Australia sounds more likely than UFOs still noone makes a quality record of them.
> I think it really should be investigated
If you can secure financing, I'm in. I travel to Australia and we gonna investigate. Interview people, gather the locations of the sightings, camp out with all kinds of equipment from bodycams to trailcams, and see what we can find.

 >>/42290/
*The second one is

 >>/42290/

Actually I think they are just feral cats, they can get huge it seems.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Xur-YzIKBDQ


But the ones in the wild always seem to be melanisation for some reason, it's bizarre.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=kG6c3tuoia8

 >>/42292/
I meant melanistic not melanisation.

 >>/42292/
Jesus fogging Chroist, those are big fogging kots.

KF Jaguar 006 png
(2.41 MB, 2500x2500)

Regarding the colouration of feral cats I have a theory.

When one looks at feral cats in an urban environment they look much like the cats what we would find in our homes, often being tortoiseshell or otherwise having large portions of white or spots.

Now, when they are seen in more wilder environments they seem to be tabby, ginger and black but mostly tabby and black. This makes sense, in the wilderness environmental stresses would dictate that the best suited to this new environment would survive and pass on their genes. A tabby cat is particularly suitable to hunting in the Australian environment whereas a white one would stick out quite a lot. Black is quite noticeable too but it would be less so in the dark, cats are specialists so within a population some will predominately hunt certain kinds of prey while others will hunt different prey again, the time they hunt also varies.

But why then are these large cats all black in the wild and not tabby? I would conjecture that either the Black cat hunting at night enables it to hunt larger prey making the cat bigger, or that the cat is able to hunt more prey at night and this makes it bigger though I don't fully support this theory as predators tend to adapt size to what they prey on and factors like that, not how much of it they can get. Animals adapt to environmental pressure, an animal might develop the ability to eat large game so that they can target a niche that others cannot but evolving to eat more of the same game makes little sense, they would be more likely to remain small but have larger populations or smaller ranges.

 >>/42295/
So there's a highly advantageous large nighttime prey.

Toho Rumia... png
(636.54 KB, 850x1200)

 >>/42297/
Probably humans.

 >>/42298/
Man-eater and generally murderous fauna on the Australia isn't news.

 >>/42302/
The only man eating fauna we have here are Crocodiles, but they live in the north away from civilization anyway, I guess sharks too maybe if you count them as Australian. Australian fauna is not that dangerous, redback spiders very rarely kill(they can't kill a healthy adult anyway), snakes can kill but rarely do as well, they only act in self defence and we have anti-venom. I'm not actually sure how deadly Australian snakes are to begin with, yes in theory they are the most venomous snakes on the planet but that is not the end of the story, very few are actually bitten and some of the few that are have survived, some other snakes bite a lot more people so have a much higher sample size and have 90% untreated kill rates.

 >>/42315/
Yeah I guess they are safe if we don't count their deadliness.
I think for the expedition we should add fauna repellent equipment for the list.

KF Serval 015 XC Mil... png
(2.53 MB, 1600x1200)

Every year 7 people go missing in the Victorian wilderness and are never seen again.

KF Serval 027 png
(174.21 KB, 358x358)

The international community condemns the Democratic government of Myanmar for genocide but then it condemns the military for arresting the Genocide Government.

 >>/42350/
Must be the cats.

 >>/42362/
> Myanmar coup
I have to look it up what went down.
Also the genocide.

 >>/42362/
Who will arrest the military?

I was looking up my local zoo to see what animals they have and apparently people broke in and killed 64 animals there once and another time some teenagers beat up a pink flamingo... Sometimes I don't think I am in a first world country.

 >>/42364/
Nobody can, they need a king to do that but they don't have one(idiots).

hevi-reissu-wolverine... png
(1005.42 KB, 1920x1028)

hevi-reissu-wolverine... png
(1017.16 KB, 1920x1028)

 >>/42367/
> beating up animals in the zoo
Reminds me

Screenshot_2021-02-03... png
(16.99 KB, 652x369)

The weak are meat, the strong eat.

 >>/42367/
That's just standard proletarian behaviour, it's the same everywhere.

 >>/42367/
ngl fam, but some people are really shitty.

 >>/42368/
I don't think there's anyone, any group, institution or powerful people around these days telling other people to behave or act civilized. That's also a problem

 >>/42396/
Probably true... Well, we won't need them anymore soon.

 >>/42412/
> I don't think there's anyone, any group, institution or powerful people around these days telling other people to behave or act civilized. That's also a problem

That's probably why people are beating up pink flamingos too.

 >>/42432/
> we won't need

Don't you mean they lol? It is you the ones getting replaced with a fresh prole class ;^).

kun spede turallin jpeg
(452.83 KB, 2473x2119)

 >>/42432/
> That's probably why people are beating up pink flamingos too.

Well I don't think that will last forever. Humanity is always in a state of change tbh. What is tolerated today can be forcibly prohibited tomorrow

 >>/42474/
I really doubt that.

 >>/42477/
It's illegal to beat up pink flamingos at zoos here, that did not stop them. I think humanity is always in a state of change yes but what is not tolerated by some groups well be tolerated by others. Most people here probably would nto tolerate beating these birds up but bogans probably would, bogans probably won't stop believing that either.

Untitled9 png
(1.4 MB, 1270x710)

Sigh...

Untitled8 png
(1.38 MB, 1273x710)

I agree.

ZZC 1541 Mil... jpg
(271.75 KB, 2150x3035)

Australians did not exist until 1949. Creating Australians was a mistake.

1547412710943 png
(4.82 KB, 210x230)

 >>/42546/
Who is the responsible?

Untitled12 png
(1.45 MB, 1272x707)

I guess I'll never be ruler of Transylvania....

 >>/42576/
Interesting game.

test

test

Toho Hong Meiling 188 jpg
(90.09 KB, 672x626)

 >>/42578/
 >>/42579/
I hope your tests were successful.

Flandre 037 jpg
(310.51 KB, 651x935)

Democracy is a farce. Good governance and good administrator clearly come from above. One would not expect the tools to know themselves how to construct a castle so why do we expect tools to know how to administer the realm? The masses are fools and would forget to breathe if not reminded, they don't know what is in their own interest.

I don't think they should even have the right to choose their own clothing or the food they eat or the media they produce and consume let alone to choose the laws of the land.

ZZC 0841 jpg
(582.05 KB, 1459x2639)

Also Phoneticians are the cause of all the worlds problems too, in fact they are probably the cause of monarchless societies as well. Salting Carthage was not enough, we have to go to Israel and finish the job.

 >>/42721/
Imperator campaign got hard?

 >>/42722/
No, I never have played as Rome. It would be too easy and it's not really fun to conquer the world as an empire that conquered the world.

It was just a realisation I came to, the Phoneticians have been a problem the entire time. First there are the Punic wars and then when they are finally dealt with and when Rome gets to Israel they start revolting there as well, then they create Christianity to destroy the empire, then they create socialism and communism and then they fill the world with degenerate western socialist media and even now they keep bombing Syria. Something has to be done about them.

 >>/42729/
Well you were playing with a Hispanian tribe, no? And clashed with puns.

Screenshot_202... png
(138.19 KB, 787x1027)

While I was doing some digging into the ADF I came across a report by RAND that had this in it. I forgot how much of a joke the ADF is. Instead of doing Defence things they worry about inclusivity, and work place safety and other bollocks, they also banned the colloquial term 'guys' and changed the national anthem to be more inclusive.

ZZY 0829... jpg
(690.82 KB, 707x1000)

I don't think living on Mars is a good or practical idea.

There is much focus on the physical possibility of living on Mars, yet little on the actual practicality of it. Life on mars in these conditions would be more basic, isolated and harsh than even living in Antarctica. Life would be so limited, basic and restricted that it would be barely life at all. Who would actually want to live like that? And if they did they could easily do that on earth anyway. I think it will be a place for the occasional expedition of scientists and that is it. I don't think we will ever colonise it.

 >>/42873/
Living on Mars is the opiate of the millenials. Well, one of the opiates.
Although I'm skeptical about all these fancy tech and shit, liek AI, and uh, something and the other. None will be actually realized, and all just used as cheap marketing tricks. Then finally the inevitable civilizational collapse will arrive, which will either manifest as a technological stepback, or will be an actual step forward but make these pipe dreams obsolete and out of fashion (or this will depend the angle we view it, from here it could seem as a regression, but from their viewpoint it will be a progressive change - not in the sense of current liberalism).

 >>/42875/
Probably true, in fact anything to do with Elon Musk seems to be that way, which is ridiculous. The other thing that really annoys me about that is how they attribute anything that his companies do to him personally, like it is him that personally designed the Tesla cars and Space X rockets, he is just the CEO and has no relevant education in those fields.

ZZY 0618 jpg
(2.75 MB, 3200x2000)

And on the subject of stupid space ideas again. The Dyson sphere/swarm idea annoys me as well. There is this idea that any advanced civilization would create huge structures around the sun to capture the energy of the sun and somehow it is guaranteed and all advanced species must reach this point. Doing this would of course involve huge amounts of resources to the point that you would be dismantling entire planets but the real question is why? There seems to be this assumption that to progress would require this huge amount of power and that for some reason we will just keep consuming more and more power forever. In fact some have similar ideas regarding resources, that space civilizations are going to want to tear apart all planets they can get to for resources.

Why? This makes no sense. There is clearly a limit to the amount of power and resources we actually need and as technology advances that limit will only plateau. We are not going to need to harness the entire sun and tear apart the galaxy, what would that even achieve? If anything an advanced civilization would do it's best to limit the energy and resources that it needs in order to create a perfect and balanced world. They would reach a population that was comfortable to support, find ways to sustainably and comfortably sustain that population and live like that for all time. We already actually see this in real life, most populations stick at a level they feel is comfortable for the nation to support, it's why the population of France hovered at around 20 million for so long until technology increased that comfort level, it's why nations like Japan, Italy and Germany hit a plateau and actually started seeing a reduction in population(though immigration started changing this for Germany).

 >>/43081/
I think these ideas comes from the time when they were sure humanity's population boom will keep going. More people will need more resources.
Back then a family kept producing children, because child-mortality was high, people kept reproduce because that was the only way of ensuring survival. But with a couple of simple changes child-mortality could be pushed down. It wasn't something mindblowing high tech thing that does that, but first doctors realized they had to wash their hands with hot water and soap after butchering cadavers, mothers have to keep a better diet while pregnant, and overall just a slight more calories, and bit more hygiene went a long way of ensuring that most kids will reach adulthood.
Then with the rise of standard of living, the population boom halts (unless some dramatic happens like WWII, which gave a boost for a while). Now we don't need to rely on the production of children in large numbers to ensure survival.
What if in the future we find other ways the complement this or develop on it. What if we could ensure longevity for the individual, extending life expectancy, or preserving consciousness in some other form. Cushioning ourselves from harm better. Here I don't want to go in the "getting soft and weak for the lack of challenge" direction.
Right now humanity could do just fine with the fraction of the population now we have, I dunno how the African boom will pan out, supposedly the Chinese and the Indian slowed down I think. How many more people we're gonna have here? Do we ever need a giant space what a Dyson sphere could offer?

CosENTa png
(53.62 KB, 1527x770)

elon-musk webm
(3.41 MB, 640x360 vp8)

 >>/43080/
> The other thing that really annoys me about that is how they attribute anything that his companies do to him personally, like it is him that personally designed the Tesla cars and Space X rockets, he is just the CEO and has no relevant education in those fields.

It is true, but he is actually pretty idealistic person and very good manager (and maybe cruel manager too, but there is no other way). US space tech was always private, at least as private as Boeing, Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman can be (i.e. "private", with large government influence). NASA rarely does anything big by themselves, especially in launch field, and everything is made by private companies (with mostly state funding).

And Musk looks much better than anyone. Others get endless amount of money and do nothing remarkable compared to Space X (in launch market), while having bigger resource pool. Having money and engineers still doesn't guarantee success without proper management. It is clear that Musk is slightly crazy, and this helps. His company made successful cheap reusable first stage, while ULA still sells tech from 90s at large price. Reusable first stage that actually works may be no groundbreaking technology achievement, bus still very hard engineering task that no one did.

It is sad that nowadays proper management is a rare thing, because most of "managers" are just some idiots with MBA who can't think about anything except profits and losses, and don't even understand how electric circuit works.

So, even while hype about Musk is exaggerated, but he is not just another millionaire with government contract in pocket. Just compare Space X that pretend to be a commercial launch market leader soon, and Boeing that is only good in building electronically assisted self-crashing planes. Or Roskosmos, that had advantage over everyone 20 years ago and now only can publish cheap unfunny memes in twitter.

Considering Tesla, it is also pretty interesting that everyone messed with electric cars for years, but only Tesla started real movement on market. It is also good example to GM or Ford who just can't do anything right because mismanagement.

Other Musk things like hyperloop are just memes though.

 >>/43090/
His companies have a large pool of resources to draw from as well and they also have the ability to place those resources in specific places(Boeing does far more than just rockets and can't commit everything to just that).

He is an idiot and that is actually the reason for his success. He just throws money at projects taking huge risks even when they are not actually liable to see a return in the near future. Even Tesla has only just started making a profit and that has been controversial as well(Tesla makes a large amount of money selling environmental credits). The reason the big car makers have been slow to get in on the EV market is because they don't like investing too much into releasing nascent product lines that will only lose them money, they don't like to take huge gambles like Tesla is. Nissan came out with the first electric car and it was reasonably priced but still a nascent technology so range was low, Tesla sold a car with increased range but at a far larger cost. It is only now coming to the point where cars with reasonable range can be sold at a reasonable cost(thought they still aren't cheap) and because of that many of the big car companies(even Ford) are coming out with new electric models this year. Now that the technology has left infancy we are going to see much more interest by the large auto companies.

 >>/43082/
This is true but it still kept at 20 million in France even though they had larger families. It was not like they were breeding at 100% capacity and just could not get past 20 million either. The population suffered a huge hit after the black death yet in not long it climbed back to around 20 million and again hovered there.

Longer life will not effect that much in the long term, again I will mention Japan. Many of the resources of the nation are being held by old people so the breeding population is shrinking and so the population as a whole is shrinking. However, this will stabilise one way or another even if that involves large portions of the population ageing and then dying to significantly reduce the population, the younger generations will just expand into the gap left by that and we might just see populations change in cycles with the population getting old and dying off to be replaced by a young population boom in the following years only for them to then die off in 80 years.

Immortality is something different and may actually have an impact. The population will reach the comfort point and if it doesn't stop breeding by enough it might just mean governments have to get involved. But creating a Dyson sphere would not solve this because again, populations like to hover at comfortable levels. So if we made a habitat in which 200 billion could easily live it would not take long at all for that habitat to be filled to 200 billion and then you are back at square one.

Africa could be an issue if they cannot curb that. We don't know, maybe they legitimately just haven't reached the point that they as a society feel they can comfortably sustain(as this changes by the perceived needs of a culture) but it's also possible that they just don't have the control to stop the increase and are just going to perpetually increase forever. Maybe it require a degree of intelligence on the part of the average citizen that they do not yet have.

 >>/43091/
> His companies have a large pool of resources to draw from as well and they also have the ability to place those resources in specific places(Boeing does far more than just rockets and can't commit everything to just that).

But Boeing is also larger and richer, and can easily make subcompany for this. Even having access to engineers market doesn't mean that Musk has unlimited possibilities to do anything.

> He is an idiot and that is actually the reason for his success. He just throws money at projects taking huge risks even when they are not actually liable to see a return in the near future. 

That is the reason why he is a good manager - doing crazy things and keeping company afloat. It is pretty hard to innovate anyway, if you consider the risks and trying to do only safe actions. Stagnating companies may innovate only in new forms of payment management bonuses.

> Even Tesla has only just started making a profit and that has been controversial as well(Tesla makes a large amount of money selling environmental credits)

Main error of modern management class is concentrating only about profits. Using only profits calculation you can't even build anything that doesn't provide financial gain in few years (big infrastructure for example). That is why USA uses government subsidies for anything big and nonprofitable, from dams to rockets.

Best profitable thing for modern corporation is to lay off anyone except management, outsource everything and squeeze every dollar from market by making some unreliable stuff. It isn't fair to consumers, but who cares about them? They'd buy stuff made in China that would broke in one year, when corporation would lie about "same quality control standards as in past". Boeing with its 737MAX is a fun example of this in high-tech sphere.

Personally I don't like Tesla, but their actions made automotive market moving. Even Germans who sat on the top now are slightly afraid. You actually said same things in the rest of the your message.

It is also fun to see that companies like Ford cry about low "car" sales (in US terms, where car is sedan/hatchback and non-car is crossover/SUV) and stop making their legendary models, continuing to produce only non-distinguishable coffin-like SUVs. Meanwhile one of most popular cars in USA is mid-sized sedan made by Tesla. This proves that these old companies just can't make good cars but blaming the market and consumers.

A good conspiracy theory may be made from this (maybe already made, don't know): Musk is a way how US government tries to retain tech domination and reorganize own rotting car and space industry.

 >>/43094/
They have many subsidiaries and divisions some of them involving Space. But they are still working on far more than Space X or even all Musk's companies combined. It's hard to say how much they each spend on their space programs(not individual rockets) and what they get out of that, I could not find it.

> That is the reason why he is a good manager - doing crazy things and keeping company afloat. It is pretty hard to innovate anyway, if you consider the risks and trying to do only safe actions. Stagnating companies may innovate only in new forms of payment management bonuses.

Yes it's the reason they are where they are now but as I said, they have only just made a profit after all of this time and that was controversial and in a new market that is about to see some serious competition so it's too soon still to tell whether this has been a success or not.

> Main error of modern management class is concentrating only about profits. Using only profits calculation you can't even build anything that doesn't provide financial gain in few years (big infrastructure for example). That is why USA uses government subsidies for anything big and nonprofitable, from dams to rockets

True, I agree but there has to be results from that in the end, it's still too soon to tell.

> Personally I don't like Tesla, but their actions made automotive market moving. Even Germans who sat on the top now are slightly afraid. You actually said same things in the rest of the your message.

The market is moving but I'm not sure how much of that I would attribute to Tesla, it was always heading this way as I said Tesla didn't even release the first electric car let alone hybrid. This has been a long time in the making and the push for it was always there. It's just that it takes time for large manufacturers to adopt early technology like that on scale.

> It is also fun to see that companies like Ford cry about low "car" sales (in US terms, where car is sedan/hatchback and non-car is crossover/SUV) and stop making their legendary models, continuing to produce only non-distinguishable coffin-like SUVs. Meanwhile one of most popular cars in USA is mid-sized sedan made by Tesla. This proves that these old companies just can't make good cars but blaming the market and consumers.


The best selling car in the US was some ford ute(or truck as they call it) in fact I don't think Tesla even made the top 10 they are really still expensive and most of the Tesla fanbase is made up of people that can't actually afford a Tesla. Though they have still sold a fair few cars but the thing is that they are competing in a very small market right now, Ford does not have a model to compete with them nor do most manufacturers but this is changing. This goes back to what I said about not knowing if it has been a success or not. They spent a lot of money on factories and have just started to make a profit but they never had much competition, now that they are about to get it will they still be able to survive?

 >>/43090/
> Musk is slightly crazy
He is definitely a bit eccentric compared to those other guys their name floats around. Zuckerberg is just simply weird.
> Boeing that is only good in building electronically assisted self-crashing planes.
I remember joking with this since my childhood, that Boeing planes drop like flies.
> hyperloop
I don't even know wtf is that.

 >>/43091/
> He is an idiot and that is actually the reason for his success. He just throws money at projects taking huge risks even when they are not actually liable to see a return in the near future. 
Maybe there are information we don't know about he base his business decisions, and this makes us think it's random. Sometimes (actually, often) happens with me that people do not understand why I do what I do simply because they have no insight to the background of my choices.
But there are definitely stuff that raises eyebrows.

 >>/43095/
> They have many subsidiaries and divisions some of them involving Space. But they are still working on far more than Space X or even all Musk's companies combined. It's hard to say how much they each spend on their space programs(not individual rockets) and what they get out of that, I could not find it.

Comparing large multi-profile company with niche thing like SpaceX is hard, but we can compare their space program - they are nowhere near not on reusable (i.e. cheap) launch rocket, nor in manned spacecraft (their Starliner still doesn't work, but SpaceX Dragon is).

I don't want to say that Boeing (or Lockheed) is nothing - but they are slow and bureaucracy-ridden. While Musk with his ideologically-motivated personality get tasks done. I guess without Musk there would be no such success - compare his company to other new private space players, like Blue Origin. Same startup-like thing, same money, same promises - no visible results.

> The market is moving but I'm not sure how much of that I would attribute to Tesla, it was always heading this way as I said Tesla didn't even release the first electric car let alone hybrid.

You are right. Tesla not the inventor of anything, there were plenty of electric cars, hybrids, and hydrogen cars (personally I think that this is better way than batteries). But market was _slow_. It was more talk than actions, few models every year, small sales, small charge network. Only really big thing that Musk did is cheap long-lasting batteries, because range of car and charge speed is one of main reason against electric cars. And now, when infrastructure and public acceptance is ok, it is easier for everyone to proceed. Musk hyped personality and his cult followers are one of the reasons (another one is ecological propaganda of course).

Without Tesla that market would be slowly stagnating for years. And now everyone are hyped about these cars and make them. I think that in future Tesla wouldn't even be a leader, when other players would really invest in this, Tesla was motivator.

> The best selling car in the US was some ford ute(or truck as they call it) in fact I don't think Tesla even made the top 10 they are really still expensive and most of the Tesla fanbase is made up of people that can't actually afford a Tesla

Not in top 10, but it top 30. But half of competitors are "trucks" or big jeeps that aren't really crossovers/SUVs and have different market (and different type of users, i.e. rural people who need large pickup anyway).

https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2019-us-vehicle-sales-figures-by-model/

In city-car-only competition Tesla looks very good, even considering its high price.

German automakers were really afraid, so used cheap administrative methods to delay proper Tesla's Europe launch: https://www.dw.com/en/germany-tesla-site-blocked-twice-in-one-week-over-hibernating-snakes-and-lizards/a-55898771 (everyone understand that no one really cares about lizards and snakes).

1o-its-ok-to-have-you... png
(75.44 KB, 500x300)

apis jpg
(96.12 KB, 878x652)

I think humanity moving into space will fail (well, Earth is in space, but you know what I mean), because we're lacking in good reasons.
I read scientists saying "it isn't a wise thing to keep all the eggs in one basket", if something happens to Earth, humanity will be done. But who the fuck actually cares about this? It's wise thing to say, but hard to make it into a personal motivation to support moving into space. People themselves personally want to be safe, that's what they can understand, "who the fuck cares about humanity if I or my loved ones die?", they would want an option to flee if shit happens, and don't think about such bs, like "preserving humanity". It's just too abstract for us, and to be honest due to living things' "selfishness", preserving humanity starts with preserving ourselves.
No doubt there are altruistic people, and people who would want to conserve more than just humanity, other species in huge numbers would be fucked, and some people have Noah complex too. But they are just an insignificant part of humanity.
The other chief reason I see reoccurring is the abundance of resources in space. Giant rocks orbiting in our solar system with all kinds of usable materials, from water to metals, even rare elements in huge amount (compared what we have on Earth). But reaching those resources would mean giant effort, time, work, capital thrown into it, and would cost great amount of said resources extracted on Earth which could be spent otherwise. And when we reach them, then what? They need to be extracted and process, we need places to utilize them. Foundries and whatnot. And brought back down the well, since here on Earth we'll need them. Unless we move most people out somewhere. The whole thing sounds extremely unfeasible, and exactly the type of thing Rusbernd wrote: private firms won't touch it but wait until govt finance it. But governments are swamped enough with filling potholes of poorly constructed roads. No.

 >>/43103/
I don't even think it's realistically possible to destroy all life on earth, it's never happened before and back then they didn't know how to make nuclear bomb shelters, even an asteroid the likes of which wiped out the dinosaurs would still not wipe us out. Plus astronomers have catalogued all asteroids of that size and so we know that none of them have any chance of heading us fro more than 100 years(after that it becomes hazy and hard to predict but still very unlikely).

44b1dfbcbea3e7fbb042a... png
(62.23 KB, 360x293)

Mathematics is ridiculous and mathematicians should put their endeavours towards something that is actually useful and not completely ludicrous and not even real. I just heard of something called the Doomsday argument, simply put what this 'argument' says is that we are humans that are born halfway across the lifespan of humanity as statistically it is more likely that we are born in them middle of humanities existence than on the end or at the start. It's stupid and not based in reality at all, somebody has to be born at this time just like somebody had to be born as the first human or the 100th human. According to this theory the 100th human to be born would only have 100 humans follow him and we cannot exist.

Mathematics isn't real and as that is what a large part of our understanding of the universe is based on it follows that a large part of what we know about the universe is not real either.

 >>/43104/
That was another thing I was thinking about.
Change is the normal state (well actually statelessness) of the world. And the job of life (now I mean the abstract entity) is to adapt according to the new situation, to transform shape and behaviour along the change. Catastrophic events - like that asteroid hits - which caused extinction waves are part of the change. The extinction came from the inability of a certain species to adapt, and their disappearance pulled many other species into oblivion relying on their existence. So life itself (as an abstract entity) wasn't in danger, but certain forms of life.

 >>/43156/
I really should log out or turn off that fuggin role signature. Sorry dudes.

 >>/43157/
It oghey bernd. You can just use a password before posting and delete your post whenever you forget to have the role signature

Heinrich und... png
(269.52 KB, 600x865)

 >>/43103/
Space travel just isn't profitable or sustainable, neither short term or long term. At least in our current era. We should focus on solving earth's numerous problems instead of having such escapist fantasies.

 >>/43172/
I think of space travel as a side project.

 >>/43171/
I can delet virtually any post of anyone without password. I just rarely "cover up" my mistakes.

 >>/43172/
> Heinrich und Bismarck
Saved.

 >>/43174/
Enjoy it bernd

I got it off an old thread. And I think that's the only Heinrich I have. Also: R.I.P Krautchan :(((

Laguna-Garzon-Bridge_... jpg
(109.67 KB, 936x527)

Laguna-Garzon-Bridge_... jpg
(91.46 KB, 936x527)

Laguna-Garzon-Bridge_... jpg
(103.41 KB, 936x673)

Laguna-Garzon-Bridge_... jpg
(98.72 KB, 936x527)

Googled "pointless bridge" and found this:
https://www.dezeen.com/2016/01/19/laguna-garzon-bridge-circular-rafael-vinoly-uruguay-lagoon/

> The road is bracketed by a pair of pedestrian walkways.
Because it's a circle, the inner walkway is inaccessible, so they had to create pedestrian crossings.
> The concept of the Puente Laguna Garzon was to transform a traditional vehicular crossing into an event that reduces the speed of the cars, to provide an opportunity to enjoy panoramic views to an amazing landscape, and at the same time create a pedestrian place in the centre.
> reduces the speed of cars
What kind of logic is that? The point of a bridge is to be crossed.
> The ring-shaped structure frames a circle of water, creating a "lagoon inside a lagoon" where people can swim, fish or sightsee.
I don't see any stairs going down into the water level, and nobody's jumping down from the bridge onto the water.
> "It is an iconic architectural piece that will be a catalytic factor in driving the development of Rocha’s coastline," said Argentine developer Eduardo Costantini, who invested 80 per cent of the $10 million (£7 million) construction costs.
It sounds like a very strange structure that will be found as a curiosity in Google Earth 30 years later. 
> Viñoly is perhaps best known as the designer of London's Walkie Talkie building, which was nicknamed Walkie Scorchie after the glare from its curvy glass facade melted the bodywork of nearby cars.
Oh.

 >>/43278/
I don't think people should be looking at the views while driving on a curved bridge...

tunnels jpg
(419.55 KB, 1308x945)

 >>/43278/
That's fun.
Worth every dime.
> nobody's jumping down from the bridge onto the water.
I'm sure some do. Although doesn't seem to high.

Reminds me.

 >>/43278/

Actually, it is strange that this isn't roundabout.

But whatever. It is made by famous architect, these people rarely have common sense, as famous designers or other "creative" persons.

But cynical explanation also exist: someone used this to get money. Large project, especially construction, is a best way to sink money with less problems from authorities. Like using overpriced contracts with hidden payoff back. Just corruption, as always.

 >>/43285/
> Actually, it is strange that this isn't roundabout.
That'd probably interfere with the very important inner pedestrian walkway.

puente-laguna-garzon jpg
(530.63 KB, 1920x953)

 >>/43285/
> cynical
Realist.

 >>/43287/
It wouldn't. They would need to add more crossings. The question is, would a roundabout change it's uselessness? Since it's in the middle of nowhere adjacent, no other roads lead there. It's just a lonely coastal path. At least user rating is high. And some say people are evil and mean.

 >>/43288/
> The question is, would a roundabout change it's uselessness?

No. But at least it would look like proper Cities Skylines screenshot.

 >>/43295/
> my-first-cities-skyline-city-screenshot.png
t. normiegamer

Touhou Ringo... png
(1.49 MB, 907x1261)

Russia and China are going to build an International Moon base and have humans there by 2036, Americans are supposed to be there by 2024. The Moon looks like it's in for a new round of invaders.

But it's odd that Russia and China made such a deadline, that's more than 10 years After America's, it's like they are not even trying.

sf-big-red-button jpg
(3.44 MB, 3240x2160)

Its-good-to-be-black-... jpg
(64.01 KB, 1024x566)

 >>/44276/
They gonna put boobs on the Moon. It will be liek in mug sitcoms.
I don't think the Americans calculated this economic depression into their plans (Trump put this project in motion, no?), I expect that 2024 to be a later date.

 >>/44277/
> mug
*muh

 >>/44277/
True. There is also the nature of the respective plans, the Russians and Chinese plan to explore and then slowly set up resources there for humans to finally arrive at 2036. The US is supposed to be landing there outright in 2024 with maybe some exploring but not much, I don't think it will happen by 2024 but I don't see it not happening by 2036.

 >>/44276/
> Russia and China are going to build an International Moon base and have humans there by 2036

China - of course, but Russia - never. Maybe only as minor partner of China, but chances are low, at least now.

Russian space program is basically dead. Roscosmos had all money they want in 2000s, and only thing they did is corruption scandals, like stealing 1 billion rubles by Energiya or case with Vostochny:

https://tass.com/society/1194933
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/02/26/russias-vostochny-cosmodrome-bosses-jailed-mass-corruption-a60628

Some results:
- module "Nauka" that was planned as large Russian part of ISS still isn't launched. They've planned to launch in in 2000-s (!), and it still under construction after multiple flaws in design and assembling. It was planned to launch it in 2007, 2011, 2015, 2021... Still nothing.
- Combined moon program with China failed, Chinese waited for some time and decided to launch everything by themselves, because Roscosmos failed all schedules.
- Vostochny cosmodrome still in building phase
- Angara rocket family still has serious issues in development. It must be completed in 2010s, but still nothing but several test launches
- While Roscosmos was leader of commercial space launches in past, now it almost completely eaten by evil Elon Musk and his SpaceX. Protons were good, but relying on same tech and thinking that they'll last forever in market is not a good way to do business. Now they are not that good in price terms. Cheap reusable rocket only planned in future
- Everything that Roscosmos planned is failed. Soyuz replacement is dead (Federation), funny plans like "moon base in 2015" that were loudly announced are dead too.
And much more.

Current manager of Roscosmos, Dmirty Rogozin, is known for two things: large twitter activity and large wage. He was politician from fake-nationalist "opposition" parties in early 2000s, now he is known state official. After ruining some programs in military industry, he became a manager of Roscosmos. I guess it's made to hide the disaster that happened in space industry with his clownish personality. His achievements:

- New line of clothing merchandise with space logos: https://youtube.com/watch?v=J4mEhzD6HuQ
- Multiple jokes about Elon Musk and his "trampoline" rocket in twitter.
- Multiple plans about glorious future. Now there will be fully Russian space station in 2025, because we don't need those stupid westerners. In 2025. Or in 2030? Whatever. Maybe before lunar base from 2015.

Ukladka-plitki-svoimi... jpg
(39.02 KB, 512x320)

 >>/44297/

Now I'm Moldavian even on .gg. There is stereotype in Russia that Moldavians are good in paving brick laying, so maybe I need to try.

 >>/44298/
Yeah, an opportunity to expand your skillset.

 >>/44297/
Russia's economy is only a bit bigger than Australia, so yes they may have issues being a major player but China herself should pull them through.

 >>/44298/
They really should concentrate on one project or something.
> Multiple plans about glorious future. Now there will be fully Russian space station in 2025, because we don't need those stupid westerners. In 2025. Or in 2030? Whatever. Maybe before lunar base from 2015.
They actually working on a time machine, and will finish that moon base in 2015, you'll see.
I guess if there is no real pressure like in Cold War era, things tend to go slow or not at all.

Space X's Rocket, Starship is going to have 33 engines in the first stage and 9 in the second stage producing around 80MN of thrust and could send 150t to Low Earth Orbit in theory(or so they claim) but the number of engines keeps changing(getting bigger). Saturn IV had 5 in the first stage, 5 in the second and 1 in the third producing a bit over 40MN of thrust and was capable of sending 140t to Low Earth Orbit. So for half the Thrust Saturn V could send 95% of the payload that Starship can to Low Earth Orbit, and Starship has never even proved that it can do this. The engines for Saturn IV were designed in the 50's too(but they use Kraut Space Magick I guess).

Much of this is due to how awful the design of Starship is, it's a meme con, the Hyperloop of space(or the sky so far) if you will. Additionally, I don't believe Starship will be capable of making the landing that it is planned for it. They have had trouble sending the Starship second stage only 50km and landing it, they only managed it once and for all the talk of testing reusability they never flew it again which shows what shape it was in, sending the whole thing to orbit and back and then sending it back up without severe repair is something completely different.

The Problem is the design, not only does the poor form and design of it mean that it spends more energy going up but it also means it will be under quite a bit of stress coming down. The Larger a surface is the more friction it creates and the more heat and pressure it will be subject too, the ship itself is not rigid or reinforced in anyway either while at the same time as being fat it is also long(and that length will create uneven pressure and friction), that is ALOT of stress for a hollow shell of thin steel strips to handle, the fuel within makes it little better than a time bomb as well, sure it will pressure the interior to degree but it will not be enough and a rupture may prove to be catastrophic. And that is before this hulk even hits the ground. This is a lot of money to spend on a meme.

 >>/44347/
> 150t
That's just barely a couple of Americans.
> The engines for Saturn IV were designed in the 50's too(but they use Kraut Space Magick I 
I recall that one video, where some egghead from NASA claimed they cannot into moonlanding anymore because those people who handmade those stuff aren't around anymore. So essentially they do not have anybody who could build a fugging rocket. The thing that prevents them to be effective is that they think spaceships should be serial products, from standardized parts assembled in a chink factory like their phones, and not individual pieces of art tailored just for the task. So they can't even create the first pieces, which parts could be replicated for subsequent rockets.

old-art jpg
(98.94 KB, 540x726)

 >>/44347/
> Starship is going to have 33 engines in the first stage

Just because they want to use same engine that they already got (they have none others anyway). All Musk enterprise is about cheapness and quantity, not about best design in technology terms.

It is not really good to compare SpaceX with past NASA, because their goals are completely different. NASA had goal to get onto Moon, Musk want to get at profitable rockets mostly for commercial purposes on Earth orbit. Starship is mostly about space tourism - original goal was about 100 people to orbit - there were no crafts with that size in past. Moon/Mars expedition concept is different, it is a way for Musk to get free PR plus money from US state.

If project will succeed, maybe it would be adapted as Mars craft, but main goal is purely commercial and practical now.

 >>/44348/
> where some egghead from NASA claimed they cannot into moonlanding anymore because those people who handmade those stuff aren't around anymore. So essentially they do not have anybody who could build a fugging rocket

This. You can't rebuild Saturn because there are no tools and materials from 60s, and using new tools and materials requires at least big redesign and recalculation of everything. Or you need to recreate full production chain for old things, that is possible but economically inefficient.

 >>/44358/
It's no the same engine, the Engine they are using on Starship is the Raptor engine, an Engine developed solely for that.

Starship isn't a good design for Space tourism either(particularly not if it explodes). It's far too large and uses far too much fuel and has far too many engines for that to be economically feasible(imagine the maintenance those engines are going to need and the fuel cost). I forgot to mention last time but the Chinese are also making a rocket that will carry 150t to Low earth Orbit too, the Long March 9, it will do it using 12MN of thrust. 12! That is almost an eighth of Starship. Starship is simply an inefficient design made solely for meme value(and to attract Billion dollar government subsidies).

 >>/44358/
> You can't rebuild Saturn because there are no tools and materials from 60s, and using new tools and materials requires at least big redesign and recalculation of everything
And I bet half the oldtimers could build a rocket in their own garage from spare parts of their cars and plywood. These acne ridden fat /b/tards and token PoC women these companies hire couldn't even tell blowtorch from a spanner.

_116370061_compar... png
(336.43 KB, 1282x1472)

 >>/44359/
> It's no the same engine, the Engine they are using on Starship is the Raptor engine, an Engine developed solely for that.

Hmm, yes, I was wrong, I thought Raptor is direct enhancement of Merlin, but looks like it is very different. 

Technically Raptor has pretty good parameters, at least on paper.

> Starship isn't a good design for Space tourism either(particularly not if it explodes). It's far too large and uses far too much fuel and has far too many engines for that to be economically feasible(imagine the maintenance those engines are going to need and the fuel cost). 

Concept of vehicle carrying 100 persons is pretty good for tourism - there are no alternatives. Another good reason is slow comfort landing (on paper too) - it isn't fun to land in reentry ballistic vehicle like Soyuz. Both these factors, large crew capacity => large cabin and direct landing on engines make Starship worse than classic rocket-to-orbit with classic reentry. But it isn't that bad for tourist orbital purposes I think.

Of course for normal launches (with satellites or classic spacecraft) it is redundant. It is sad that alternative approaches like air launch died, they must be pretty effective for satellites and small things.

> economically feasible

People will pay, there are no alternatives in sight. Maybe China will do something though.

 >>/44387/
What constitutes as payload? Because 29 tons in itself is quite a lot. 'nauts, their food, water, clothing, personal items, scientific equipment, tools - these are okay, but stuff like seats, or carbines, webbing or whatever, are those counts as payload I wonder.

 >>/44359/
> particularly not if it explodes
If I really wanted maybe I could come up with a couple of names whom that would be just perfect.

 >>/44395/
> What constitutes as payload? Because 29 tons in itself is quite a lot. 'nauts, their food, water, clothing, personal items, scientific equipment, tools - these are okay, but stuff like seats, or carbines, webbing or whatever, are those counts as payload I wonder.

For all rockets in picture excluding Shuttle and Starship it is just mass of that thing that lies on top of third stage.

For Shuttle it is different, because Shuttle itself both a rocket and a "payload". So, I guess it is payload that can be delivered by Shuttle (it had bay), maybe also including weight of some support equipment in cabin, but not all, because Shuttle had fixed configuration, and most of plane is not payload but reusable spaceship too. This also may explain why it is so low, although technically Shuttle was pretty powerful, and plane part was 100t or such.

Don't know how Musk counts his payload (with reusable parts or not?). Considering that number is too round (100), it is not precise number anyway. I guess it includes spacecraft part (not like Shuttle), otherwise it is too large number to be real.

Touhou Rumia and... png
(616.07 KB, 900x900)

If we go to Mars, what people forget is that mars has very little in the way of nutrients in the soil or even nitrogen in the air. Almost every nutrient we need will have to come from earth in some way, even the nutrients that go into the plants that we grow there. What does this mean? It means that everything is going to have to be reused, everything. We can't afford to let bodies be put into the ground and waste 70kg of nutrients that we brought up from earth, humans will have to be eaten or else the colony won't be able to sustain itself. Everything has to be part of a sustainable cycle of nutrition.

saturn-V jpg
(3.87 MB, 5945x4830)

saturn-v-s... jpg
(28.62 KB, 254x896)

 >>/44398/
So in case of the Saturn everything above the 84-85 meters.

 >>/44416/
Well you know, they just grow potato in their poop.
> recycling human corpses
We do that now, although not that directly and not to be efficient. Corpses in old burial sites decomposed and got back into the cycle of materia, and we sure eat carbon atoms (for example) which were once part of a human beans. Maybe even in case of contemporary cemeteries.

 >>/44417/
They will have to do that too...

Yes but it would have to be direct and much more upfront. Another interesting thing about Mars is that it has no life or at least none that we know of. If a body was placed in the Martian soil to become part of the food cycle it would not, it would just stay there. There is nothing to eat it in the soil. We would have to place bodies in a green house or even eat it ourselves. But even in a green house the bones might be an issue, can we afford to waste calcium like that? We might not be able to and the plants won't deal with it in any hurry.

 >>/44418/
It was a reference to that movie with that guy from Dogma.
> Yes but it would have to be direct and much more upfront.
Well those on Mars would be a bunch of atheist so for them shouldn't matter where the matter they consume comes from. In fact it shouldn't matter if they had to cannibalize corpses right away, because it's just nutrients.
> If a body was placed in the Martian soil to become part of the food cycle it would not, it would just stay there.
Yes, decomposition has to be done in a different way. And all the lifeforms that does the job here has to be exported there.
How different the soil there than barren parts of Earth? Could experience gained from battling with deserts or salinized soils help?

bring_blini png
(819.15 KB, 559x828)

Oh I forgot. I think this movie was.

 >>/44421/

Does a body have enough microorganism to decompose by itself?

grave-ads jpg
(92.96 KB, 910x607)

 >>/44425/

Looks like this question is popular: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/what-happens-if-someone-dies-on-mars

> In the immediate aftermath of death, a body would still start to decompose there: the bacteria inside, transplanted from Earth, would go to work. If a dead body was left outside at the Martian equator, where temperatures sometimes reach pleasant-enough highs during the day, this could go on for a few hours. Without an insulating atmosphere, though, the planet cools quickly, and even balmy Martian nights are as cold as polar nights here. The body would freeze, stopping the work of the bacteria, and begin the slow, dry process of mummifying.

> Working against the preservation of the cold would be ionizing radiation, which destroys organic compounds and bathes Mars at levels unheard of on Earth. One plausible explanation for why we haven’t found any traces of life on Mars is that the high levels of radiation there zapped any organic compounds into gases that show no trace of their former life.

> Eventually, radiation would do away with more of the body, but it would take eons—100 million years from the first human death on Mars, it’s possible that the person’s bones could still be found.

 >>/44428/
Well if they leave the corpse exposed. They could build "decompositories".
But it actually replied to my question. The body itself has enough, it doesn't need outside help. Although I guess maggots and larvae and such could accelerate things. And then the bones. Even here, depending on the place bones can remain for long. And again even here, certain circumstances allow non-man-made mummification (too dry, too cold, too "marshy").
> space bioethicist
Lolwut.
> How should the PR team respond? 
Important question.

But would those micro organisms even be able to survive in the Martian atmosphere to do anything in the first place?

 >>/44430/
Well, they are on the corpse, and the corps is shielded in a "decompository".

I warn everyone yesterday I watched The Martian, so I know everything about the topic.
Firs and foremost I know you can find spaceships in mint condition, and standing upright even tho the movie starts with a storm that can push over these things and they barely managed to flee with theirs.
Also you can take off with nothing but a tarp over your head.

 >>/44433/
> I warn everyone yesterday I watched The Martian, so I know everything about the topic.

> Firs and foremost I know you can find spaceships in mint condition,...

Yeah, well, the movie The Thing already covered such truth long before.

> Also you can take off with nothing but a tarp over your head.

Ditto Jimmie Hendrix, having so also proven long, long, ago.

 >>/44434/
But The Thing's spacecraft is alien made. (Plus one movie to rewatch.)
> Jimmie Hendrix
I guess he flew high as an aeroplane a couple of times, but I did not know he was an astronaut like Louis Armstrong.

How are the relations with North Korea these days?

 >>/44435/
> How are the relations with North Korea these days?

Boring, aside from some occasional mildly radioactive rain showers when the wind is just right. Of course, I like to keep on the move just in case something real happens.
So...

 >>/44436/
> radioactive rain showers
whats this about?

closeup-shot-grilled-... jpg
(151.3 KB, 1600x1156)

Tomatoes are a greatly underappreciated element of sandwiches. Rather than just a random piece of salad, they add vital meatiness and volume and can compensate for a meager meat component.

Touhou Remilia 079 jpg
(110.82 KB, 1748x1000)

I was thinking, if I was a magical being it is actually far more in my interests to hide that than to announce it. If I was a non threatening little magical girl I could appear before the king in medieval times and demand an income and house from him and refuse to leave the castle until he accepts, even if he thought I was a demon he would eventually have to accept and maybe living with a non threatening little girl would convince him that I was not a demon. But there are bound to be people that would see me as a demon and the Pope might even call a crusade on me, I would never be able to live in peace. It is even worse these days, if I tried the same approach at parliament they might not even think I was a demon and they might accept or be made to accept but I would instantly become the most talked about person on earth and my entire life would be under the most attention that any life ever was, added to that you still have religious nut jobs and all it takes is one of them with a rifle to finish me off, or the government of a foreign nation may decide to send agents to kill me for fear that I may be used against them, the government of the nation I live in may even do that. I would not get any peace in modern times either.

And what for? There is not actually much benefit to using my powers in public, sure the king may benefit from it but I will not so much. So approaching the king or Prime minister in private would be the better option, that way I could force them to give men an income but keep that hidden from the public. Or I could use clandestine actions to make money, like stealing, shorting companies and then sabotaging them, corporate espionage, using my powers of flight to fly around Papua new Guneia to look for Thylacines etc. So we would never know about these magic people, they would make sure to never be known about.

 >>/44491/
If not integral part of a sandwich I bought, but for something I make, I rather not place them in the sandwich, but slice it up as wedges and eat it as a side. Sometimes ofc I put them in the sandwiches, but those occasions aren't frequent.

 >>/44493/
Subtle ways to do things.
> medieval times
> an income and house
Well this is basically nobility. You'd need to gain nobility.
You could pick a minor family and infiltrate them, ofc you need to appear as a man before people for practical reasons. Maybe you could pick some old dying noble without relatives and make him accept you as his son - you could make a deal, or trick him or something - and the situation could be presented that he thought you died when you were a kid or you are a bastard of his whom he made on a campaign or travel, etc. (in this case you'd need to be legalized or how that is called). This old noble can be a nobody, just with a house and a letter proving his nobility.
Then when it is accepted that you are his son, with the help of your magical powers doing low key tricks (liek telekinetically deflect lances of opponents during jousting or blinding your enemies in battle so you could defeat them), and with the help of your knowledge (for example mathematics), you could rise in prominence, winning the favor of higher nobility or the monarch.
Then you could trick people seeing you aging, then get some old bloke to play you and you could take the role of your son. Rinse, repeat.

Fate Jeanne d'Arc... jpg
(3.47 MB, 3591x2020)

 >>/44504/
> You could pick a minor family and infiltrate them, ofc you need to appear as a man before people for practical reasons.

Maybe not, if you picked an old noble and made him adopt you as a daughter that could work too, you just marry a noble and live happily and easily forever(or maybe use magic to seduce a king and enthral him) or use the fact that you are the last left of your house to force a reverse marriage (forget the real name) on a lesser man and then you would still have full control over the house. But that still involves marrying a man...

I guess the best option for if you don't want to marry a man is to go to a village, pretend to be a peasant's daughter, pretend that you are hearing the voice of god and that he is telling you to free France from the English, use some minor magic tricks to make them believe you, make them train you as a knight and give you armour, make them give you coomand of the army and then you can lead the army to victory and once you are famous enough and manage to defeat the English you can retire and live as a living goddess.

 >>/44777/
One's saint can be the other's heretic. Maybe the real one made a miscalculation somewhere.

They can never take our Freedom!!!

https://youtube.com/watch?v=KZWwd9DFYaw

 >>/44817/
Very hussary.

ZZC 1456... jpg
(426.22 KB, 1525x2000)

There is a series being made about The Silmarillion(basically a histography of Middle earth published by Tolkien's son after Tolkien's death) so I decided to look into this and some other things, I have read the hobbit but that was a while ago and I have not read the lord of the rings or The Silmarillion so I looked at the wiki for most of this. First of all the series does not look like it would make good material for a series, it is more of a series of creation myths. But looking into the world itself while I respect Tolkien what bothers me about the world he made is how empty the world is, it would never happen like that it implies that all the peoples of middle earth completely lack the agency to spread. We humans spread to every corner of the earth apart from Antarctica and maybe some other places, yet Humans would not even settle in east of Bree at all even when they had used to live there thousands of years ago, there is perfectly fine land sitting there with nobody living there until Aragorn rebuilds some of the cities there, thousands of years after they left it. Speaking of that, the rangers of the Dunedain seem absurd too, the idea that your nations was destroyed and instead of rebuilding it(when as I said, the land where it was is completely unclaimed) you travel around the wilderness being rangers for thousands of years, not even nomads so I don't know how they breed or if they do.

 >>/45103/
I read LotR, and some pages from Hobbit (that really is children tale), nothing from Silmarillion because I decided it not worth my time. I know it is a collection of much Tolkien envisioned and put to paper, without much coherence, I imagine it's kinda like an anthology.
For the little I know, his work is a combination of assburgerish pedantry and soaring fantasy. This stuff is an outlet of his creativity, first he wanted to give some stories to his children, then himself found it fun to make up stuff. He had great many ideas, worked on all, and wanted to place them into one framework. The whole thing left unfinished.
I think many what he wrote is bound to have contradictions, leaps of logic, and plotholes why didn't they just fly in with the eagles??? - 'member?Fuking Tom Bombadil!!!!. Can be fun to poking at them, but judging him harshly for them would be a mistake.
It is hard to create a consistent world, with everything in it, from the genesis to the armageddon (or at least halfway to that). You need to know hard and soft sciences at least in some depth to create it plausibly, and this makes it impossible, it's just too big.

These days it seems movie and tv-show creators are reaching to the classics, and Tolkien is a classic in Fantasy. Two monumental movie series are already out, all his other works cannot be left without exploiting.

 >>/45103/
More than likely an incomplete list:
http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Mistakes_and_inconsistencies_in_Tolkien‘s_works
> Tom Bombadil is the first on the list...

 >>/45104/
He was making his own world before he had children, he even said that before he had made both the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings he had already created the world. But yes, I think it was just something he liked doing and had not really thought much about before it became popular and he just then kept on doing it.


 >>/45108/
They don't mention the things I mentioned there... Most of what they mention are fairly minor actually, for example that Tom Bombadil one could just be attributed to one character having learnt that Tom Bombadil is oldest and another having learnt that the Ent is, people have differing opinions on things like that all the time. Or they could have just made a mistake, much of that list could be a character just making a mistake or misremembering.

 >>/45112/
His work should be judged on the basis of his zeitgeist too. Criticism can be applied from our viewpoint, with our different taste ofc, nothing prohibits that (how a Hungarian fantasy author made his criticism, at a certain points it was very similar what GRRM said/wrote later, but I think the Hungarian bloke went into the topic deeper, sometimes I'm tempted to translate), and nothing wrong with it either. And this even can help to understand Tolkien's naivety, yes I think it can be called that. So for example with the Dunedains aren't following the normal human program also can be attributed to that. Also maybe we can make up some explanation, like some psychological shock their fall caused to them, or whatever (I don't really know their tale, I'm sure it is gappy enough to insert explanations there).

Yes, as I introduced it, it's an incomplete list, I did not read through it.
Tom Bombadil might be Ilúvatar himself, and it can be argued that the comparing him to other living things is, uhh, problematic.
> Most of what they mention are fairly minor
If you only read the Hobbit, how do you know?

Also I think generally those become great Tolkien fans who get to know his works in their teenage years. At least the few whom I know personally they are all that.
For an adult it still can provide some escapism, but for example the LotR longwinded narration and monologues are bound to be boring. And the inconsistencies will be more apparent ofc, and some explanations will be harder to digest.
Maybe my friends are right, and the Silmarillion would actually be better to read, since it contains shorter, mythical stories.

 >>/45103/
> series being made about The Silmarillion

More ignominious butchering by the Orcs of Jewllywood. May the soon meet their Narsil.
> how empty the world is

meh, Tolkien liked nature and, like Poe, saw his experience of it spoiled by the encroachment of man and machine. Tolkien did nothing wrong
> Humans would not even settle in east of Bree

We have no predators. In the Third Age of the world there were predators and other dangers outside the mostly disconnected, non-integrated, enclaves of decayed and retreating civilization.
> perfectly fine land sitting there

Also orcs, trolls, wargs, cursed living forests, etc. Population was also decreasing, not to mention already relatively small
> the Dunedain seem absurd too, the idea that your nations was destroyed and instead of rebuilding it(when as I said, the land where it was is completely unclaimed)

Arnor was not "destroyed" as such. If I remember, it divided into conflicting little realms and dwindled in power and population, to the point of disintegration. Also Sauron was hunting for the heirs of Isildur, which gives one motive for them wishing to remain "off the radar"

 >>/45104/
> why didn't they just fly in with the eagles???

Stupid meme
> Fuking Tom Bombadil

I think he addressed this one acceptably. In short, the Song was not known in full even to the Valar. Many would call that a deus ex machina, but Tolkien developed it so much that I have no problem forgiving him for such oddities or curiosities

 >>/45113/
> Tolkien's naivety

Incorrect. He wanted to write a fantasy tale of good an evil in the style of ancient mythological nordic tales, but more attuned to England, his sensibilities, and later that of this children, since he started writing those tales for himself and then his family. LOTR even started as a continuation of the Hobbit, a children's tale, but then turned much more serious (writing the LOTR was long process, his children were also growing up). He was not naive, he knew well enough what he was doing. This is perfectly clear from his Letters

 >>/45126/
With the naive I kinda wanted to be nice. For example we was clueless about women and humour, from the LotR both almost entirely missing. From the 150+ named characters of the book 5 are women and they are horribly written and depicted, they could have been left out with no consequences. As for the humour he only accidentally touched it with the ludicrous banality of the Shire and the pathetic hobbits, but even this wasn't intentional on his part, he wrote the whole thing with straight face and the highest seriousness.

 >>/45113/
> If you only read the Hobbit, how do you know?
What do you mean? You posted a list...

 >>/45124/
> meh, Tolkien liked nature and, like Poe, saw his experience of it spoiled by the encroachment of man and machine. Tolkien did nothing wrong 
Yes, that's partly why but it is not so much based in logical world building.

> We have no predators. In the Third Age of the world there were predators and other dangers outside the mostly disconnected, non-integrated, enclaves of decayed and retreating civilization.
Not in these areas.

> Also orcs, trolls, wargs, cursed living forests, etc. Population was also decreasing, not to mention already relatively small 
There aren't many of them around the east, it's peacefulness is one of the defining trait of that area. There are no orc strongholds in that area so any orcs in that area are just small groups that could easily be beaten by a coordinated group of settlers from Bree. But speaking of this, there still are actually humans and elves that live around some of the Orc Strongholds like Dol Ghudor and Moria, so it's not as if even these areas are so dangerous as to make them even as barren as east of Bree is.

> Arnor was not "destroyed" as such. If I remember, it divided into conflicting little realms and dwindled in power and population, to the point of disintegration. 
From what I read it was, it was divided and then decayed with the final part being destroyed by Angmar, then an army from Gondor came and destroyed Angmar.

> Also Sauron was hunting for the heirs of Isildur, which gives one motive for them wishing to remain "off the radar"
This makes a bit of sense but they would just not claim to be airs of Isildur, but found a normal village like bree or any other place.

 >>/45159/
He had a wife and kids so I don't think he was entirely clueless. They probably simply didn't fit into the story he wanted to create so he did not add them and I mean if you were to look at random wiki pages about battles and such you will see that pretty much everybody in them is a man so it's not even unrealistic or 'naive' for him to do this just like it would not somehow make somebody not naive if they did add more women or even only added women.

 >>/45176/
> What do you mean? 
Well, how can you judge the list, or anything really when you only read the Hobbit?
For example:
> if you were to look at random wiki pages about battles and such you will see that pretty much everybody in them is a man
I have to assume you think battles are take up lots of space in LotR if that is your real life analogy why women aren't represented more. If you plan to read LotR you're gonna get disappointed. Besides camp followers featured many women (so just the exact field of battle were devoid of them), and we even see sieges in LotR, with many women trapped inside. IRL during sieges, btw, women were very active in all kinds of roles except melee, or gunning with artillery.
150:5 ratio is huge disparity. It isn't needed that every 2nd named character be a women, but this is pretty slim. Besides I also said, that how they are depicted, their character is very bland, and well, lacks character (although Tolkien is awful in characterization of his heroes in general, very flat). Here all the five:
1. thick, stupid peasant girl archetype (forget the name, that hobbit girl whom that dullard Samwise Gamgee will marry)
2. cranky mother-in-law archetype (forget the name, some relative if Frodo)
3. Galadriel the ice-queen, archetype of frigidity, we are assured she is very butifel, but the effect of that beauty on men as if they would stare at a glacier.
4. Arwen uhh, archetype of nothing? If you've seen the movie they way over-featuring her. These are her characteristics: she likes embroidery and has a platonic crush on Aragorn, sometimes sings. That's it.
5. That Rohirrim chick, Eowyn, the niece of the king of Rohan. Now, she'd like to participate in politics and battles, manly stuff, but Aragorn tells her, her place is in the kitchen, so she goes and happily washes Faramir's soiled underwear ever after. Also has platonic crush on Aragorn.
This isn't even the summary, this is all what's in the book.

 >>/45177/
The root of the problem is Tolkien's Victorian views on women and sexuality which repulsed by the notion that sensual desires exist, the flesh demands love. He can and does depict deep relationships based on friendship and camaraderie between men in LotR, but all in that mountain of words, there is no mention that any kind of relations are had between men and women. This is the reason why the homoerotic nature of the book (and the movies) are mentioned sometimes, it's even made fun of in Clerks 2.
I heard Silmarillion is better in this question. But that is a collection of mythology, and every IRL parallel of that, all the mythologies of our Earth are chokefull of women, sex, and frankly sexual deviancies as well. So there was no possible way he could avoid women.

Oh shoot, I forgot that healer woman I think by the end of the book. She tends the wounded. Her role is to be the butt of japes made by the chivalrous Aragorn and the sage Gandalf, when she did not hear about a healing herb which only blooms liek every 500 years once and only the True King (Aragorn) can use it for miraculous healing.
Okay that's liek 6 named women. From 150+ (moar liek 160+) named characters.

 >>/45177/
Did even you read the list you posted?

Camp followers and women being trapped in sieges don't really play much into the narrative of such a story, unless the author wanted to make it so which is their own choice, if they don't wish to write extensively about old hags washing underpants then they don't have to and there is nothing wrong with that.

It doe not matter how many women there are or are not in the book, even if there were zero that would be fine, and Eowyn does kill the Which king so it's not like she was completely useless or neglected or that women in general were portrayed that way.

 >>/45178/
...As I said, if that doesn't fit into the narrative of the story he wishes to wright and so he does not add it then fine, there is no problem with that, not everything has to be a romcom or an eromanga. Sex and romance are one of the biggest issues I have with modern fantasy/non fiction, 99% of the time it adds nothing.

You seem to be complaining about him not making the story into some other genre or wanting him to write a completely different book about something else if anything which makes no sense.

 >>/45179/
> Did even you read the list you posted?
Did you even read LotR?
> Camp followers and women being trapped in sieges don't really play much into the narrative of such a story
There is no reason they can't. If you have the chance read Eclipse of the Crescent Moon by Gárdonyi Géza. It plays on the borderlands of Hungary during the Ottoman Wars. Most of it is a siege. (Sadly libgen only has it in German.)
> doesn't fit into the narrative of the story 
Great many things related to women could have fit.
> romcom or an eromanga.
The whole literature is full of women. Fugging epic of Gilgamesh - which is also a tale of a great friendship - starts with him fornicating with all the women of the land. But read the books of Maurice Druon for example. He writes interesting female characters. Nothing in his books are romcom or eromanga.
Tolkien forgets about a huge aspect of male motivation, and life itself. He conveniently does that due to his innate aversion of the topic.
> You seem to be complaining
I was making observations. Btw you were the one who initiated the boogering of Tolkien, be thankful I give you munition when you troll his fanbase somewhere else on the internet.

 >>/45180/
I already told you I have not... But if you had read the list of the errors you posted then you would understand my point.

There are many reasons that they can't. It changes the whole story. Writing a story about the human factor of a siege and the lives of the little people is fine but that is a different story and clearly not one he was aiming to tell. I found the book you suggested in English so I might buy it at some point.

> Great many things related to women could have fit.
It changes the whole nature of it so it would have changed the different story, again, yes he could have but it would have made it a different kind of story and not the one he was wanting to write.

> The whole literature is full of women. 
And there are whole genres that solely have women(Slice of Life for example) there is nothing wrong with having all women or no women, it's all dependent on what the author is wanting to write and the story he wants to tell. Many old books have very few women that play quite minor roles like The Water Margin, Outlaws of the Marsh Of the 108 Heroes I think 2 of them are women, one just being the wife of another hero and the Other actually does fight but only in one brief mention and then she gets married off to another hero, usually women are portrayed quite badly in that book.

> Fugging epic of Gilgamesh - which is also a tale of a great friendship - starts with him fornicating with all the women of the land. 
But are they named and important though? They don't sound like it(I don't remember I have read it but I probably read a more tamer version as I don't think that part was in it).

> But read the books of Maurice Druon for example. He writes interesting female characters. Nothing in his books are romcom or eromanga.
There is nothing wrong with that, I'm not saying that nobody can write female characters if they want to, they can do what they want and make the story they want.

> Tolkien forgets about a huge aspect of male motivation, and life itself. He conveniently does that due to his innate aversion of the topic.
Many stories use alternative motivations, most good ones do even. There are more motivations in the world than just that primitive one. You mention Gilgamesh, that isn't about the desire for women.

> I was making observations. Btw you were the one who initiated the boogering of Tolkien, be thankful I give you munition when you troll his fanbase somewhere else on the internet.
But your observations seem more to be about wanting the book to be a completely different book with a different theme rather than anything else.

 >>/45181/
LotR is a 1200 pages book with 1000 pages of nothing but empty narration. He could have spent at least 100 pages from that on his characters, and maybe 10 of those on women (and men being men instead of reptilians) and still wouldn't change a thing on the greater aspect but could have made it considerably all right-ish.

 >>/45176/
I disagree with your "nitpicks", I say go read the books first then maybe argue

 >>/45159/
Lol, you are literally repeating that pathetic feminist whining about muh wimmin characters. This idiocy has been levied at great writers (Borges is another) since inception, Tolkien's "Letters" also mentions it
Yes, the story mentions fewer women. So what? Maybe you did not pick up what I was saying, so I'll repeat: his intention was to write an heroic epic tale in the nordic style. And not a parody or humorous one, but one which readers were meant to take seriously: he was a university professor at the time and wrote "scholarly" essays on these topics. I also said that he wrote according to his sensibilities: he was a devout catholic (in England, mind you). And I also said that the wrote for his children: most importantly one of his sons, Christopher. It is perfectly well that the role of women in the story is confined to the relations of the heroes and little more. Who says there should be more feminine, intimate, or humorous stuff?
Those who do not enjoy such stories are perfectly within their right to go read something else, perhaps wand-waiving brats or softcore vampire porn might be more their taste. But it's not within their right to criticize the writer on such subjective grounds while pretending that such criticism has a non-zero value in what regards writer's competency
Also he had like 4 children or more, he knew about women well enough
Again Tolkien did nothing wrong (apart from choosing a crappy publisher)

It's over. China can't compete with this.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=_-L5NywFoX4

 >>/45251/
That isn't even a bad idea. Bikes, especially with additional electric motor can offer a mobility upgrade. They can be transported with APCs, and deployed as from a mothership.
Question is the reliability of such e-bikes, and the price the army purchases them. And the video doesn't show the enthusiastic bushhoppers pedaling with 40 kilos duffel bags on the hillside up when the batteries run out. Frankly the video doesn't even show how the assault rifle gets in the way and such.

48aeb6a89affa52984c52... jpg
(66.12 KB, 700x528)

624b9dde811afa8d5688d... jpg
(67.5 KB, 700x490)

 >>/45251/

Now recon infantry is slowly replaced by drones, so mobility and quietness of recon squad doesn't matter much as in past.

Nothing conceptually new though.

 >>/45260/
> Now recon infantry is slowly replaced by drones
They should complement each other. It is different what can be seen from above, and on ground level.

 >>/45244/
> muh feminists
It's liek a reverse Godwin's law. Erry time.
> mentions fewer women
It's not just about the pure numbers of named characters, but their depiction. Actually the fever women appears their importance should grow, since there have to be a reason to make them as a named character.
And this also about sexuality. inb4 you show you can only think on one bit, and claim I said I want porn in LotR..., misrepresenting my opinion
> nordic style
Sagas are full of women, and sex, and all kinds of degeneracy from bestiality to cuckoldry.
Also these nordic tales are full of schemers and fallible characters, with good and bad in them, frankly, they are very realistic, while Tolkien's characters are either good (which doesn't shows in the actions the take, Tolkien just face us with the fact that they are "good") or damned. But that's another tale about Tolkien's lack of talent when it comes to character building, motivations, and how they should come alive. 
> not a parody or humorous one
It is a 1200 pages book. A couple of humorous moment can fit. In fact there is a part which turned out to be funny (as I mentioned) the part about Hobbiton. It wasn't intentional on his behalf ofc. He can describe throughout dozens and hundreds of pages with straight face and absolute seriousness that idyllic of petty bourgeois, and the danger of industrialization, and how the brave heroes put things in order by bullying some wretched creatures. The whole thing is absurd.
> that the wrote for his children: most importantly one of his sons
> so it mustn't contain women and homour
> but an heroic epic tale in the nordic style must be very entertaining for kids
Are you nuts?
Besides it was started as something he wanted to publish to greater audience, later wrote some stuff of it to his son.
> he knew about women well enough 
And he was deeply ashamed like a good Victorian kid he was.
> Again Tolkien did nothing wrong
He did nothing good either.

That Tom Bombadil scene too is funny. Again with its absurdity, but that comes from its strangeness instead of ridiculousness, unlike the petty and inane hobbits and their habitat and habits.

 >>/45252/
But how far could they reasonably be expected to go from there mothership? There mothership is almost the size of a ship, they are huge. Bikes like this  >>/45260/ make sense because they are just can be used for long distance and are really just a form of transport I remember reading somewhere that they enabled soldiers to carry much more wight but also the Truppenführung gives some figures of marching speed for commanders to use. Large units with related weapons and such 4kph, infantry is 5 kph, infantry in small groups 6kph, mounted troops at the trot and walk 7kph, mounted troops at the trot 10 kph, Bicycles 12 kph, motor vehicles 30 kph and motor bicycles 40kph. So they can actually outpace horses, but that would only be on open road, a horse is better for cross country recon hence why some nations still use them. If they are operating short distances from an huge APC then there operation effectiveness will be minimal and the APC they come from could easily be found or heard even if the e bikes cannot be.

 >>/45260/
 >>/45262/
People in the ground are always going to have a better feel than drones, even land based drones. Actually being somewhere is far better than looking at something on a screen, you could notice far more small details that you might miss on a monitor like tracks and very well hidden positions. But then thermal cameras can easily pick things out as well and with the way modern armies work being mechanised or at least motorised it probably would not be hard to find them. Sure there are ways to shield a position from thermal view but that involves setting up and is not really something that can be done on the move so the drone would spot the unit moving into position, but then of course the drone operator might be lulled into a false sense of security due to this and think nothing is out there when in fact there is some new and advanced technology that is just defeating there optics that they don't know about.

But all in all I think infantry is obsolete for gathering intelligence stealthy, an ebike or man on foot can easily be picked up with thermal and a drone can find more than he can. But IFVs and infantry are still useful for force recon.

 >>/45265/
Aren't Eowyn and Galadriel actually fairly important? Certainly as important as can be without changing the story into something else. Also saying you want porn in LotR would not really be misrepresenter your opinion either, that is akin to what you want, you want the author to change the nature of the story by adding needless sexual themes.

I have not read the sagas yet but Tolkein is hardly alone in gentrify Nordic stories, the Medieval German version of Nibelungenlied presumably does it too as that is even more good, there is not a single evil character in the book and no character is actually acting out of a real evil intention, even underhanded deeds are made to look bad, characters lament the tricks that they play while they are playing them. Unless the original was like that too which is highly possible, I think that you can nitpick either way which seems to be what you are doing. Some stories have more sexuality in them than others because that is the nature of the story, it's basically a different genre. You are comparing apples to oranges and demanding that the apple be an orange.

Also, I think context is fairly important, as I mentioned I did not read the Norse sagas but just having bestiality does not actually make them degenerate or even sexual, it's the context that does.

 >>/45267/
We would need the army's reasoning. I see a relative worth in those bikes. They ain't that big, and maybe only a couple is needed for a duo from the team transported in the APC.

 >>/45268/
Galadriel could have been Galahad, king of the Elves, and the story was fine with him.
Eowyn come close to be all right. If she had died on the battlefield like a tragic hero (finishing her story similar to a Joan d'Arc). But no, Tolkien made a backstabbing murder from one of the hobbits enabling her to slain the nazgul (since Tolkien couldn't imagine a situation where a woman could defeat anyone one-on-one), then he drown her dramatic arc into a pink fluffy everafter where she settles as happy housewife of Faramir.
Btw not one woman character dies in LotR. Not for any reason. Another mishandling of them.
The Nibelungenlied is a poem, and as far as I know it was reworked by every bard at every iteration, could be as you wrote. I tried to read a version of it, but the metric was killing me (I found myself trying to read simple text with the metric going on in my head), and the story dragged too slow so I gave up. I remember one important motivation of heroes: women.
On the other hand during the long journey Aragorn thoughts don't really wander in the direction of Arwen. I'm fairly sure never.

 >>/45269/
Sagas aren't erotic or pornographic (not those what I read), they're just realistic, about simple people, heroes, and gods, but even the gods are just people, with all kinds of cravings and "sins" (and sins as well).

Also Nibelungenlied was recited as a background noise during gatherings and feasts, and not really for reading as is.

 >>/45270/
She basically was king of the elves, even though she had a husband he play second fiddle to her.

I don't think that would have made her better at all... She still fights him and cuts down his beast and of course she will marry, that is what people do, men too. Next you are going to complain about the lack of gay marriage(which while I jest is actually an argument on very similar lines to your own).

Why should they need to die particularly if hardly any are in there?

The Saga were poems too I think and they certainly were reworked, the ones we have are from the middle ages. Women were not actually the primary motivator of the heroes, it played a minor part and was manly a background to the plot, Honour and revenge were the primary motivations.

What is realistic? Reality is different for different people, different people and societies will live different realities where sex will play more or less a role in it. You must remember that the society we live in now is actually hypersexualised, it's not like it used to be or would have been in a Middle Earth like world at all.

 >>/45271/
So were the Sagas.

ZZC 1028 jpg
(333.76 KB, 1000x1415)

I hath no quarrel with several of thee, journey not to the market square on the morrow.

 >>/45272/
> She basically was king of the elves,
And could have been a man. Wouldn't make any difference.

> I don't think that would have made her better at all.
> She still fights him and cuts down his beast and of course she will marry,
Not her literary/semi-historical counterparts, like Cordelia or Boudica, who fell after a lost battle.
Well, they marry and have kids beforehand (they start at a different point in their lives when they become warrior women), but in the arc of Eyowin if not marriage and obscurity (like Tolkien did), the next step as strong warrior leader would have been the Queen of Rohan, satisfying the actual feminist power fantasy (which isn't simply interesting female characters like implied here:  >>/45244/ ), and living happily ever after.
Best would have been this: kill the nazgul without the help of the hobbit, get a unit for herself and some task to do, she gets defeated and her men killed, commits suicide.
Btw. Eyowin and Theoden was inspired by Cordelia and Lear (although Lear was used for Denethor too for sure; also Cordelia gets hanged at Shakespear).
To be honest Faramir should have burnt too, completing the dual destruction/downfall of the two ruling houses of Rohan and Gondor, and tragedy of their leaders.
More to be honest Tolkien should have written a Ragnarok where all kingdoms fell, or a mini-Ragnarok where the three neighboring kingdom (Rohan, Gondor, Mordor) gets destroyed, plus the dwarves (Moria) and Isengard, and ends the royal line of Aragorn. Then - ofc - new life should born on the destroyed world with a new promise (just like after Ragnarok).
Then it really could have been some Norse story, or a Shakespearean drama. Instead of childish fairy tale, or melodrama, which Tolkien finishes every character and threads of story in.

His noticeable talents in his assburgerish linguistic skills, and his achievement is pioneer worldbuilding, and not in being a good writer.

> The Saga were poems too
No, they are prose. At least those which I read (I remember I read both the Vinland sagas, and a couple others I can't recall now), or have a copy of.
Edda has both version.

 >>/45331/
Well it would as she would no longer be an Elf Queen but a king and that has different themes and connotations but I get what you are saying though even that goes against your arguments in a way, if he hates women so much and she can easily be replaced by a man, then why wasn't she?

I would not really compare Cordelia or Boudica to her at all, they are completely different in pretty much every way, even you elude to that.

> the next step as strong warrior leader would have been the Queen of Rohan, satisfying the actual feminist power fantasy 
> Best would have been this: kill the nazgul without the help of the hobbit, get a unit for herself and some task to do, she gets defeated and her men killed, commits suicide.

Even you have to admit that you are just getting silly now. In fact most of this is just silly now. You are talking about a completely different book with completely different themes, if Tolkien didn't feel like making a doomsday feminist power fantasy then that's fine, if he did then that is fine as well, but it's a different story and one should not criticise an author for picking one and not the other any more than one should criticise an author for writing fantasy instead of historical fiction.

> No, they are prose. At least those which I read (I remember I read both the Vinland sagas, and a couple others I can't recall now), or have a copy of.
Edda has both version.

There is a Poetic Edda and a Prose Edda as well as poetry in the Prose Edda and much of the Prose Edda may have been based on Poetry, it's irrelevant. The point is that it wasn't ever written down before the middle ages, in the same way you can say that the Nibelungenlied could have been rewritten over the years(and was) so could have the Sagas been and they most likely were.

 >>/45332/
Tolkien did not hate women, he had an aversion of what women represents, intimacy, sensuality, and sexuality. In his Victorian prude world no such things exist.

> I would not really compare Cordelia or Boudica to her at all
There is no other women in literature Tolkien could have as any kind of basis for such character. Maybe he knew Groenlandinga, then that gives another literary parallel of a warrior woman: a psychopath (daughter of Erik the Red; talking about nordic heroic epic...).

> a doomsday feminist power fantasy
It is not. That's a proper arc for that character, based on literary parallels, which could raise her as a dramatic figure instead of melodramatic.

> You are talking about a completely different book
You did not even read the book. It's a monumental empty narration with many missed opportunities (we did not really touched how unfair with male characters yet, probably won't), it's one. He could wrote that idiotic suicide mission scene of Faramir (although fits nicely with Denethor, whom is the sole worthwhile character in the whole book, again as with humour, it was done by accident on Tolkien's behalf), so my idea isn't far fetched.

 >>/45333/
And again, the book is 1200 pages, so ten pages of that arc could fit anywhere.

 >>/45333/
They only represent that to men because that is the way men are, men are far more driven by sex than women. In fact you could argue that if Tolkien forgoes that then actually he is creating a much more realistic representation of women and not just a male fantasy.

Well considering how they aren't really anything alike at all there actually are, but I don't see why Tolkien would have even needed a basis for her. What exactly is so special or niche about her that would dictate that she must have been based on something else and that nobody could have thought that up on their own?

> It is not. That's a proper arc for that character, based on literary parallels, which could raise her as a dramatic figure instead of melodramatic.

It is, and it's also a completely different story, like I am always saying, there is nothing wrong with an author doing that but it is a different story with different themes. It doesn't need to parallel anything either.

> You did not even read the book. 

And that is irrelevant to the arguments you are making.

> It's a monumental empty narration with many missed opportunities

This actually would be a relevant argument for the above as I cannot attest to it because of the fact that I have not read it.

> He could wrote that idiotic suicide mission scene of Faramir (although fits nicely with Denethor, whom is the sole worthwhile character in the whole book, again as with humour, it was done by accident on Tolkien's behalf), so my idea isn't far fetched.

Though I don't agree that adding that would have been better.

 >>/45334/
So long as they don't ruin the story and turn it into something else which all of your ideas seem to do.

 >>/45335/
> themes
What theme do you even talking about?

 >>/45335/
> men are far more driven by sex than women.
Post proofs.
> In fact you could argue that if Tolkien forgoes that then actually he is creating a much more realistic representation of women and not just a male fantasy.
You can't make that argument since you did not read the book.

> Well considering how they aren't really anything alike at all
You can't tell if they are the same or not, since you did not read the book.

> What exactly is so special or niche about her that would dictate that she must have been based on something else and that nobody could have thought that up on their own?
Eowin is set up as a warrior woman. And ends up as a housemaid. What kind of author creates such arc? Those who write "nordic epic" sure don't. Maybe in your animes.
Tolien is simply a bad novelist.

Read the book. And suffer.

 >>/45337/
... How many women have you even talked to? How many sisters do you have? This is fairly common knowledge. Most women don't even like s*x which makes sense as you probably would know, it's a lot different for a man than a woman in that a man pretty much always climaxes whereas a woman doesn't most the time. They are also nowhere near as driven by lust as men and nowhere near as attracted to the opposite sex as men, women would rather see a man in a suit than naked because they are not actually that attracted to men physically but they are attracted to status and personality. It's why there is a huge industry made to cater towards lustful men but that industry simply doesn't exist for women. Well it barely does, there is some literature that caters towards them but that reinforces my point, it's not the visual and physical nature of a man that attracts a women but what that man represents which is often better portrayed in literature.

> You can't make that argument since you did not read the book.

Well I am just going by what you said so any error is on your part, perhaps you should read the book.

> You can't tell if they are the same or not, since you did not read the book.

... I'll humour you. In what ways are they the same that I would not know because I have not red the book?

> Eowin is set up as a warrior woman. And ends up as a housemaid. What kind of author creates such arc? 

Well that's what happens, people marry. I really don't get how you can complain about women not being realistic because they don't conform to your 21st century s*x fantasies but then complain when they settle down and get married like pretty much everybody does and particularly like what would have been expected in the 1940s/50s. It kind of goes with the rest of the ending, that the threat is gone and everybody can live happily and in peace.

I plan to read the book at some point but I have so much to get through and it's fairly low on my list of priorities.

 >>/45338/
> common knowledge
Proofs disregarded.

> your 21st century s*x fantasies
Way to misrepresent my point. [insert whatever that particular fallacy's name]
Also we already established that since the birth of literature every writer (except Tolkien and similarly Victorian influenced Anglos) had healthy attitude towards women and sexuality. Nothing particular 21st century in anything I wrote.

 >>/41971/
Because Jesus preached kindness, and kindness wins.

 >>/45339/
Live in your 21st century porn bubble bubble then...

No, we established that you were cherry picking and taking things out of context.

 >>/45342/
It seems like cherry picking because there are 5 named woman in the book and only 1 that has anything worthwile to it. So I picked the one that was pickable.
I would talk about Arwen, but she has even less substance.
Or if you think about the question of women as cherrypicking: nothing is going on in the book considering its length, and the issue of women considering all the social contexts in the book is really noticeable. Very different from the Hobbit, where it can be excused that there is no woman in the book, because yes, might not fit one (I don't see a need to shoehorn a token woman among the dwarves or whatever).
Although considering it's a fairy tale... Grimms' tales are chokefull of women, and some tale's main hero is a heroin.

Here's another issue, the question of morality.
It is said that he wrote a heroic epic with clear good-bad duality, so this is why the book lacks in shade of grey, the genre itself prevents that.
The problem is, there is no good and bad in LotR at all, if we consider what everyone is doing. Tolkien tells us who is the shining paragon of virtue and who is the despicable villain, but this isn't really come through the happenings, we have to take his word on it.
Here's this guy, his stuff was stolen, and wants it back. He is very evil, we should hate him.
Here's this guy, who doesn't care about nothing just broods all day, and humiliates a hard working women for their lack of knowledge. He is the good guy, we should like him.
Here's this guy facing immeasurable danger, with the potential destruction of everything him and his ancestors worked hard for, then some upstart rogue with a known meddler in his company comes and tries to tell him he fucked up and he should bow to him, and despite this he tries his best, but the weight is to much to his psyche and breaks. This is also a bad guy, we should hate him.
Etc.
Thank you Tolkien.

 >>/45343/
I was not talking about that but in response to.

> Also we already established that since the birth of literature every writer (except Tolkien and similarly Victorian influenced Anglos) had healthy attitude towards women and sexuality. Nothing particular 21st century in anything I wrote.

But anyway, as I have said, there is nothing wrong with having 5 named women in a book particularly when adding more would changes things so much and changed things from the story the author was trying to create as I have said repeatedly. There is nothing wrong with adding more women or adding fewer women, it's all dependent on the story the author wants to create but you can't dictate that the author should add more or less and change the story to a different one with different themes and even different genres just because you as an individual don;t like that genre, it goes back to complaining that a historical fiction writer isn't writing fantasy or vice versa.

Fairly tale and fantasy are separate things, people often don't really understand what a fairly tale is.

Well it looks like VR/AR is coming and it's coming exactly how I thought it would and exactly how I feared it would. If nothing else this video gives plenty of ammunition to the people that call him a lizard person though.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=afdnbXXbBTg

But also, another concern I have with this is that they are already talking about creating a whole ecosystem around AR/VR and creating many connected services and making it so products brought in one service can be transferred to another so for example you could buy a costume for an avatar and bring that costume to a game you want to play. If they achieve this and achieve it fast enough it will give them a complete monopoly on the AR/VR world, seeing as how all the services would be connected you would need one for the other but also seeing as it is virtual market place but a market restricted to META and META products, it will be difficult for even a large competitor like Google to compete as for a costumer to use the Google avatar lounge hang out service or whatever, they would not be able to use any META connected services and would have to forgo any product they brought on the META market place which would heavily dis-incentivise any competition.

 >>/45416/
> give them a complete monopoly
I know the matter very little to judge if that's true.
But FB got some criticism these weeks, and even previously got questioned if the service they offer with FB has monopoly, and it seems there is a will to break that monopoly. So it would make sense if they would seek some other way to hold monopoly.
On the other hand every publicity is good publicity, and all that recent criticism and bad publicity can be considered as a warm up, a marketing strategy to draw greater attention to FB, so they can make the change and introduce their new services when all the attention is directed to them.
Google had many projects which were started and scrapped, nobody really heard about, probably because they just started them casually like business as usual.
> META
Here on the qboards an anon shared a The Guardian article that meta means dead in Hebrew, and might have been an error to name themselves such.

VRChatlogo jpeg
(67.2 KB, 616x353)

typicalChat png
(817.03 KB, 1024x576)

xobaaax jpeg
(67.37 KB, 1085x543)

wii mii avatar jpeg
(9.69 KB, 225x224)

 >>/45414/
> Well it looks like VR/AR is coming

tbh VR Chat already exists and is completely free fam. And there's way more better VR alternatives out there anyway 

> But also, another concern I have with this is that they are already talking about creating a whole ecosystem around AR/VR and creating many connected services and making it so products brought in one service can be transferred to another so for example you could buy a costume for an avatar and bring that costume to a game you want to play.

Microsoft already did something like this with their avatar system nobody liked them btw And that was just a copy of Nintendo Miis to begin with

 >>/45417/
> Google had many projects which were started and scrapped, nobody really heard about, probably because they just started them casually like business as usual.

I got links for that fam

https://gcemetery.co/

https://killedbygoogle.com/



It's a fairly common thing to happen inside tech companies

https://killedbymicrosoft.info/

https://www.businessinsider.com/11-products-apple-has-quietly-killed-over-the-years-2014-9

 >>/45430/
It's different than VR chat. VR chat and VR in general is still an extension of the computer really, you just wear a huge and bulky headset while you are there.

Meta's plans revolve around what will essentially be glasses. Apple is already working in such glasses. The idea is that you wear them like normal in your everyday life and essentially become part of a network, like you are the mobile phone.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=7rUAVcWQjso

 >>/45430/
> xobaaax.jpg
> finally I can be anything in VR!
> be a cripple
Who does that?

 >>/45441/
Without opening the video I imagine the glasses draw virtual shit around you to interact with, while generally doing day to day shit.

I'm telling this for a while now: while it is true that inflation is the overabundance of the money, but we can see it as lack of goods to spend on as well (not my idea tho). In virtual environment (this can be just plain online stuff) virtual goods can be produced without limits. This means endless amount of stuff to spend money on, no inflation no matter how much money the govt. print machine pumps into the economy.
And the rich becomes even more richer.

 >>/45444/
That's basically the gist of it.

I don;t think that is really how inflation works particularly not the inflation we are seeing now which has many facets to it. 

If your idea was correct we would be consistently seeing deflation ever since the 90s or even before as we are always coming up with new things to buy these days. People don't actually have an excess of money and they have been losing expendable income over the years not gaining it(in Australia I know they certainly have, the percentage of income spent on housing has only been going up). All this new Market would mean is that people would spend on that instead of other products(and worse case scenario we end up in a dystopian world were people live in horrid physical conditions and make up for it by escaping into a virtual world, they stop buying real paintings or flowers and by virtual ones instead).

It would create a virtual economy which might help alleviate the pressures of job loss caused by automation though.

Some of the rich would get richer some would get poorer, some would stay the same.

 >>/45441/
Watched some. Augmented, not virtual, but it is what I kinda think it is.
That glasses is great. If there are too much white people around it can augment most of them to be asians, azns, blacks, and arabs. It's gonna be awesome.

 >>/45445/
Yeah, I meant hyperinflation.

 >>/45446/
It should be able to operate VR as well, same with the Meta glasses. And they do elude heavily to this in their advertising such as here . >>/45414/ that's more VR than AR. Also Meta does own Oculus rift.

 >>/45414/
Watched it.
Puked a little.

If the people had the ability to select leaders and parties with merit and there were leaders and parties with merit to begin with in a political system then elections would all be very defined, there would be a party that came out far ahead of all others as the people would have seen what the best party was and voted for it. 

This however does not seem to happen very often, most the time elections run very close, easily within a 10% difference. This would imply the opposite, that people cannot pick leaders at all and so it is essentially left to chance and like tossing a coin or that the leaders themselves are so similar that it would be like picking between two identical objects in a store, the chance would again be close to 50/50. So in yet another way democracy is a farce.

rus-legislative-2021 png
(46.44 KB, 447x450)

hun-election-2018 png
(78.83 KB, 724x564)

 >>/45470/
Not in Russia, or on the Hungary. Still they really lack in merit.
But we have many parties in both countries, and opposition does not form a unified side. Here this seems changing next year the opposition supposedly will work together creating an alliance of parties. Or something like that.

I disagree about the straightforwardness. There would be candidates with similar merits, and solutions of issues would be put forward with similarly strong reasoning supporting them.
But I do agree that differences, in the setting we have, are superficial and/or seemingly.

Screenshot... png
(72.52 KB, 663x892)

 >>/45471/
In those cases it looks like they might not have a bi-polar system, in both case they seem to be getting a bit under 50% of the vote they just have no unified opposition.

We have a coalition but it's such a strongly united coalition that it may as well be seen as one party.

One of the things I really hate about the US is how they got to where they are through pure luck. Europeans found a continent occupied by savages that could offer no real resistance, the British fought hard with the French and Spanish for her share and managed to established numerous colonies. The colonies themselves were now in a position where they occupied a whole continent basically unopposed, not only that but a continent separated on both sides by huge oceans. 

They never had to work or fight for anything, their success was guaranteed. The British were never going to be able to hold on to something so large and far away while at war with France, nor was Spain or France going to be able to oppose the US there. There are so many resources there and it's so far away from any threat that it's almost impossible to fail to be a superpower, they never had to work for it, it fell into their lap.

 >>/45533/
Circumstances were right for sure. But that needs men to make the right decisions to exploit the circumstances.
One more circumstance you did not mention (I'm sure there are others) is the large number of disgruntled Europeans who wanted to find another home.
> never had to work or fight for anything
The Civil War was quite bloody and tough. But in general they could play this thing on easy mode as far as conflicts go.

Now I want to play Colonization.

 >>/45534/
That's part of why I hate them so much, I don't think it did need such exploitive decision makers nor do I think it even had them. It was a rich and empty, continent sized land, all it needed was people to fill it and it would become a superpower. And as you say, they had plenty of people willing to do that too, there were always some Europeans disgruntled over something plus you have overpopulation in general.

So for example, nothing George Washington did actually made a difference, nothing anybody in that war did made a difference, the war itself did not make a difference. If the US had lost that war or failed to start it they would have become independent later down the line anyway, either through another war or through peaceful means. England was never going to be able to hold on to a Europe sized country of similar people to itself over a vast ocean.

 >>/45543/
I did not really mean the couple of top dogs, but meant every single men - including the top dogs. For example it needed people to decide to gamble their life on moving west (both those from Europe and the East Coast).
And yes GW too made a difference, them gaining independence at that time matters. If they gain independence later (maybe staying in the commonwealth, like Australia) they won't have the Civil War, which had a huge impact, it decided that the country will form around a common market, and this led to the huge economical rise which surpassed the economy of Great Britain, and remained unchallenged since then.

The Reserve Bank of Australia said that Crypto currencies are a fad. Watch out guys you should listen to them they know what they are talking about.

 >>/45599/
> Watch out guys you should listen to them they know what they are talking about.
Yeah, they are want to buy cheap, so they're telling people it's shit to generate more people who wanna sell, tipping the balance of demand and supply.

 >>/45602/
*they want

Amazon made a Wheel of Time series. I read the first few books a very long time ago but I don't remember much but the trailer looks nothing like how I rememberer it or how I see it. It looks far too fantasy like movie with the outfits all looking ludicrous and far too many brown people. If somebody never read the book then they might not be bothered by this as they are looking at the TV show as stand-alone media but to somebody who has then I would feel they would be quite distressed by this as it is so different to what it should be and what they felt it was. It reminds me of how I felt about the Saxon Stories when they were made into a TV series, I really liked the books but I didn't even watch the show because it just looked so different to what I saw it as being. I think that Lord of the Rings was probably the only good book adaptation made but I never read the books so maybe I am wrong and the people that did read them all hate the movies.

I think it's better that these books never get made into movies in the first place, just create your own stories for TV.

 >>/45607/
> Wheel of Time series. I read the first few books a very long time ago but I don't remember much
Similarly. It was some years ago, maybe in 2015 or something. To be honest I don't remember anything. It's the one with the ginger guy?
> far too many brown people.
Like Britannia. While there were only negro Romans, I said eh, fine, sure, sure, all the subsaharan Africans that somehow wandered to the Mediterranean ended up on the Small Island, why not. But 3rd season, now they have brown Celts.

 >>/45608/
No, I'm wrong. I read the Mistborn series by Brandon Sanderson.
And the one with the ginger guy is another novelist with another series.

Ok, what I read:
Sapowski - Witcher
Brandon Sanderson - Mistborn
Cook Glenn - Black Company
GRRM - Wincest
Abercrombie - First Law and the rest
Druon - Accursed Kings
Rothfuss - Kingkiller (the ginger guy, Kvothe)
Hobb - Farseer
Beyond these some Dragonlance too.

I have the Wheel of Time in my collection, but I don't think I read any.
Plus Steven Erikson Malazan series, Terry Brooks Shannara, not yet read.
I also read something I can't recall, by an author I can't name, and don't even find in my collection. I know who suggested it, and I know I read it afterward. It's a mystery.

 >>/45608/
I read it when I was 13 I think. So a long time ago. I've thought about reading it again as it's supposed to be good but it's huge. It's 14 800 page books, if I'm having trouble getting to Lord of the Rings I am certainly going to struggle to to get to this.

 >>/45616/
I have 16 books of that. The more you postpone it, the more books you have to read eventually.

SOUL-ful jpeg
(238.67 KB, 1200x1920)

 >>/45610/
Currently readings this masterpiece. I heard the brothers karamazov is raly raly good

 >>/45607/
> 2nd episode starts
> literal copypaste from LotR movies.
The heroes are chased to a river which they barely cross, the chasing monsters suddenly stop as if they fear water. Then chasing boss arrives, it's a hooded figure on a black horse. It shrieks with high pitched sharp noise, and also has a weird mouth, the hood covers the rest of the face, then with the shout it reveals peculiar dental characteristics.
Also the hero lady is similar to Arwen.
I guess the people need to be fed what they got used to. Familiar tropes gives familiar feelings toward the new product.
This reminds me: in the first episode the figure of the mysterious hooded man who stepped into the inn very much reminded me of Aragorn.

 >>/45624/
Dude yes, it really is. This term I had a huge paper due and I used the Grand Inquisitor as a framing for analyzing the rise of Putin. If you go and watch Awakening From the Meaning Crisis episode 16 on youtube by Vervaeke there are so many things that click in to place and make sense. I didn't grow up Christian, my parents are agnostic, which I think was a real missed opportunity. Once I listened to that lecture with the Grand Inq. short story my mind fucking exploded. There are many, many layers and they echo throughout modernity. Straight nut. 

I want to read the entirety of TBK but I have other books on my to-do list. Have you liked the rest of it?

 >>/45624/
 >>/45749/
Crime and Punishment was mandatory in HS, so I read that. That was pretty good. Brother Karamazov was mentioned, and maybe a part was in the books. We have several Russian writer in the curriculum.

 >>/45749/
> I didn't grow up Christian, my parents are agnostic
All the main Christian branches are agnostic. Agnosticism isn't halfway between theism and atheism. Or it doesn't equal with religiousness.
But I understand what you wrote.

It looks like Youtube got rid of Dislikes. What an awful idea, the whole notion of dislikes and likes is that it's a vote, you can see how much people like or don't like something and if you don't like something you can show that, hiding dislikes but not likes is meaningless, you may as well get rid of both and just show views as that is all it actually tells you now.

 >>/45760/
Just now? I heard some soy's feelings in the white house were hurt after his videos was mass disliked by republicans, qboomers and such, so they disabled it. Or maybe just announced the plan.

 >>/45761/
I don't know how long ago. I think I noticed it before, maybe yesterday or a few days ago but I didn't pay any attention and thought it was an uploader setting like disabling comments, but every video I have looked at has them removed now it seems, even Touhou music uploaded 5 years ago has them removed.

Untitled16 png
(750.85 KB, 1432x1351)

Hmmm, I was right. It is a meme con. Starship was never meant to go to Mars, they were just lies made up to seduce fanboys. It's purpose is to make starlink financially viable. This may explain the size of it and the cheap construction as well, it's made to carry as many small satellites to space as possible for starlink, it's likely that this talk of reuse is a lie as well and that it's just made to be as cheap as possible and it's going to tear itself apart on the way back down anyway. He's just mass-producing grain silos and engines that have reliability problems to send swarms of debris into space.

 >>/45775/
They building Raptors liek in Jurassic Park but they lack of DNA?

 >>/45760/
dae remember when youtube had a ☆☆☆☆☆ system

 >>/45776/
Raptor engines...

 >>/45780/
I don't believe you. I bet it's dinosaurs.

 >>/45777/
That isn't a good system. I think nexus mods has the same, and it fostered a "either full 5 or nothing" mentality, the rating 1-4 considered as 1.
It would be good, if people could take 2, 3, and 4 as what they mean, but they can't.

 >>/45783/
Well almost all of the ratings were either 1 or 5 anyway.

 >>/45792/
Tbh thats rather universal across various platforms. The only exception I can think of was a site where people rated your painted miniatures, coolminiornot or something like that. You could be really proud of yourself when people gave you 7/10 there. I guess on more assburgerish places people are more serious about this kind of grading.

 >>/45792/
 >>/45817/
Maybe the reason is that in the beginning there is no real standards to measure the performance to. A passable could look genius in a sea of crappy ones, so it gets rewarded with the top score. With a bit of talent that level can be reached easily, some will surpass it by miles, some will sweat blood to reach it but they do. But what all these can be rewarded with? The same top score what the passable got. And as time goes on the first who got popular gets more and more hits (because it already had the most to begin with, and people looked for the most popular back then too), and turns into an etalon of quality.

 >>/45607/
Continued to watch the show, somewhere in the 4th episode.
Why would negers live in such a climate (pines seems to be common)? It doesn't look like they were moved there as slaves, or came as conquerors neither. Doesn't look like the place offers comfy life for economical migrants, so I doubt they would leave their homelands after they heard about the riches and free gibsmedats of that colder place. Besides they seem to work, so it's not the state granted social security. Did the rulers enacted diversity quotas and imported somehow those people (again they aren't slaves, so how would that work out)?
It's kinda weird how this diversity fad screws things up. I bet the books never implies anything like that.

In the books about the Black Company, that mercenary outfit travels a lot, and in later books they move southward reaching jungles and lands where brown/black people live (I think they are analogous to Indians).

KF Clouded... jpg
(2.21 MB, 2200x3600)

Hominids are really weak it's embarrassing. Leopards aren't even very big for a big cat and even males only average at 60kg yet they frequently kill even adult Gorillas and they can weigh more than 200kg. That's the weakest big cat against the strongest hominid. The strongest hominid is just a quick snack to them. And it gets even worse!!! Clouded leopards even prey on Hominids, there was a case of them preying on Orangutans and they aren't big cats at all they weight between 11 and 23 kg! That's tiny and puts them in the small prey category according to the cost of carnivory. The small prey category!!! They should only be preying on things much smaller than they are. Hominids are so weak that they even break that and get eaten by kittens. They should probably just drop out of the evolutionary race at this point. So embarrassing....

 >>/45857/
Ofc felines have the advantage with their flight ability.

 >>/45857/
> Hominids are so weak

Can't say about all hominids, but modern humans have maybe strongest endurance in the animal world. Humans can run for much longer distances than horses or cats (although slower), and endure long marches much better.

https://slate.com/culture/2012/06/long-distance-running-and-evolution-why-humans-can-outrun-horses-but-cant-jump-higher-than-cats.html

 >>/45860/
Cats are not made for endurance, they are ambush predators and rely on fast sprints. I guess outrunning horses is much more of a feat but even then if you are slower it's kind of useless, that goes for cats as well, if you can run longer than a cat but so slowly that even they can catch you before running out of breath then it's pointless. And it's even more useless if you can only do it in hot weather and it may also depend on the breed of horse too, there are probably horses that can run for much longer than the ones they are using. I'm not sure about their conclusion on distance either, yes, humans have been known to run marathons and even super marathons but these super marathons are usually over short time spans that people train years for, they probably could not run 100km a day everyday all year. However migratory ungulates do run long distances all year and maybe you could find longer running examples of them, they also don't run for as long as they can but only as long as they need too.

 >>/45862/
The hominids traded physical power to brain power. They/we don't depend on predating for survival, but on exploiting circumstances, or creating those.
And we can make many species to disappear. Cats too. So we are stronger than cats.

 >>/45862/

It is not only about long running, but about long marches at all - it is easy for humans to migrate for long distance with relatively fast speed. Humans also easily adapted to different weather, although it depends if we counting intellect or just comparing basic human without clothes with other animals.

Also hominids are mostly pack animals. For example, baboons effectively protect themselves against leopards and other predators using their numbers.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=TEYv5hKhTQ8

 >>/45863/
That's only worked with one species, it's not going so well for the rest. How many hominid species even exist now? 4 or 5? If humans could not talk we would be done for, though Neanderthals could talk I think.

 >>/45867/
I don't think they can migrate that fast and many animals like zebras probably can go faster maybe even tigers, tigers still travel long distances because they have long ranges. Cats also adapted to pretty much every climate too but that is generally different species I suppose whereas humans can go everywhere. Though the domestic cat itself is actually fairly versatile, they are one of the most widespread animals in Australia, even more so than foxes(foxes don't seem to like the tropics).

Humans can build boats and rafts and use them to travel further though.

That just shows how weak they are and it often does not work anyway, that leopard just doesn't look hungry.

GuP Pekoe... png
(206.72 KB, 306x940)

I hope the James Webb telescope breaks when they try to deploy it, I don't care about the beginning of the universe and it would be funny to see how mad those nerds would get.

 >>/45868/
Hominid species were outcompeted not by cats but other hominids.

Uchuu Senkan Yamato... jpg
(898.08 KB, 1920x1080)

I think that in the future when we stop spending money on stupid things like the Space telescopes and spend them on Space Battleships instead that these space Battleships will probably handle quite similarly to Water Battleships. I think that having centreline main guns will still be quite important for the same reason they are on the water and I think they will still have an armoured citadel of a similar type to water Battleships too. In space you could technically rotate your ship so that you presented you deck to the adversary and thus opened up your guns more but your deck is less armoured and will be much broader for reasons I will go into so that would be a bad idea, ships would still try to stay level with each other almost as if they are on water. Maybe they could try to angle a bit but depending on layout and such that could do more harm than good. I think the difference would be the height of the ship itself. A battleship is actually fairly tall but most of her is underwater so her armoured belt is actually quite narrow, it only needs to go down a bit under the water line. There is no water line in space so they would have to armour the whole side, however, as they are not travelling through water hydrodynamics does not play a role so the ship does not have to be narrow across the beam and can be as wide as she likes so I think space ships will end up looking like what a battleship looks like from above the waterline and upwards but much wider when viewed from above.

 >>/46030/
Having guns like on battleships would send the ship spinning mad since the gas from the explosion pushed not just the projectile but the gun itself. The ship should have fuckhueg mass to absorb the kick.
Maybe railguns, but those need energy source.
Rockets or rapid firing cannons, like the Vulcan, or similar revolving miniguns are more feasible.
Plus spacebattleships needs to be get in distance somehow, which is a problem in itself. In space everything just orbits around something, so these orbits of opposing forces need to be calculated so they can fly away next to each other and pepper the enemy for the little time while they are in close enough proximity to use weapons.
I think we talked about a realistic space battle simulation game. I can't recall the name.
And the writers of The Expanse had some feasible ideas too.

 >>/46031/
The ship would be huge to begin with, it's a battleship of course. Because it's so huge you could probably get the energy to use railguns though that still might not help a light ship stay balanced, you are still throwing mass out at speed and there is an equal and opposite reaction to everything.

They would have rapid firing cannons as secondaries.

The idea would be that they are so large that they have the ability to properly power and manoeuvrer themselves and not be subject to the whims of orbit.

I'm not talking about space combat with what we have now that is different and indeed what you say is correct regarding that, but you would not need heavy battleship grade guns for that and they would not be able to have armour on them anyway, what we use now is by necessity very small and light, you would not even need a cannon of any kind, somebody on the Chinese space station with an assault rifle could just fire a magazine of at the international space station as they were passing(if they even do pass) and it would completely wreck it, they are very fragile and things move at very high velocities in space. But what I refer to are proper battleships, the kind you would assemble in space itself or maybe on the moon so weight would not be an issue.

 >>/46034/
> not be subject to the whims of orbit.
Just because something does not orbits a planet it orbits a start, if not a star then a cluster, or even the center of a galaxy. Even galaxies are in orbit of something.
> weight would not be an issue.
Weight always an issue due to propulsion.
Plus all the ships assembled (or just one hueg ass ship) needs materials to assembled from, and that needs transportation too. Or if the materials are produced in space that needs the whole production line to be set up.

space-battleship-yama... jpg
(804.92 KB, 2560x1600)

What enemy these battleships would face? What conflict they would participate? Inter-state wars? Planetary wars?

KF Leopard... jpg
(1.29 MB, 1587x2245)

Pumas and Leopards can breed with each other to produce a Pumapard. This is interesting because they are not actually that closely related. The big cats(including Leopards) are part of Pantherinae but every other cat(including Pumas) are part of the Felinae. Pumas are actually much more closely related to Cheetahs than they are to Leopards and are even actually more closely related to domestic cats than to leopards.

Pantherine and Felinae split around 11 million years ago, humans split from Chimps around 6-7 million years ago. So in terms of time separation it makes more sense for humans to be able to cross breed with Chimps than for Pumas to breed with Cheetahs. This just yet again proves how much more advanced cats are than hominids, because cats have not needed to genetically diverge as much over time and so subfamilies can actually still breed amongst each other.

I found out that Germans invented homosexuality and transvestites, really odd. And it happened in the Kaiser's Germany as well not even in that degenerate Weimar republic. But I guess that was a large driving force behind the Nazi party anyway, it was a reaction to that. The reason Germany could invent homosexuality was because it had so much freedom of speech(being gay was still illegal though), Imperial Germany was nowhere near as oppressive and evil as they are always seen as.

 >>/46304/
Sounds about right. At that time they invented the antiquity and especially Hellas. So they projected back their homosexuality to the Greeks, and said they were all pederasts. The pieces of the puzzle just fall into their places.

 >>/46305/
I mean they invented the term homosexuality.

 >>/46306/
Oh thats what you meant. I was looking at your post and wondering what the hell are you talking about lmao. 
Well I heard it was invented (along with the term "heterosexuality") because of the developing view it's a psychical disorder. In the end it seems that didnt help the case much.

 >>/46319/
That too but there was a growing movement that claimed it was inherit in some people and unchangeable and that it should be accepted, the same with trannies which is why they made a tranny pass, thus inventing trannies.

Chen 007 png
(965.09 KB, 783x810)

EVERY TIME I GO TO MY LOCAL TOWN IT GETS WORSE!!! AHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!! I swear, more than half of the people I saw in the shop today had an arm tattoo, even middle aged people, It's ridiculous, they are everywhere. The town is becoming infested with poor people.... There was only a very small habitable area in this state or even in Australia to begin with but now even that is shrinking. Normal people are an endangered species now, they should really set up a reserve and give us a safe and tattooed freak free place to live in peace.

 >>/46325/
Well at least on the internet you can only see tattooed people if they upload their photos, and even then, they can be avoided easily.
It's clearly a very emotional problem for you and bothering you, so I won't ask why.

 >>/46325/
Maybe it's done on purpose? Liek someone or something wants that type of person populating that town

 >>/46334/
It's because the town is growing so much, it has probably doubled in size since 10 years ago and it's poor people from other areas that are moving in. But also it seems to be societal, 10 years ago arm tattoos were relatively rear even among poor people, people generally got tattoos on shoulders and other places that were hidden so that they could get jobs and such but now employers don't care about that so they get tattoos on there forearms as well. We really are turning into a dystopian cyberpunk world in every way.

 >>/46338/
Tattoos are getting mainstream all kinds of people get them from all kinds of subcultures. Here it was very typical for all kinds of rock/metal music related people, various thugs (liek bouncers), grills with loose-morale, and convicts (many gypsies and in relation to those other gypsies) to get tattoos. Now everyone and their granma gets sewed all over.
I don't mind tattoos, some of them looks good (even lot of tattoos can be aesthetic but there is always a point when it becomes either ridiculous, or disgusting). I find people who do them on a whim or out of fashion stupid. Tattoos should mean something, and you need to have that mindset to wear that "content" on your skin. I understand for example why various gangs do that, or it's place in criminal circles. Or the totemistic nature how men of old sometimes used them.

 >>/46338/
> poor people
Tatoos are expensive, are they not?

 >>/46344/
I hate them, they all look bad, all they are good at is telling the public that that person is an idiot.

 >>/46347/
Not really, probably between $100-$1000(I don't know), so well within the poor person's budget.

 >>/46347/
Even "back then" quality work had it's cost, but there always were "this guy made this tattoo for me for two beers because he's a pal" tpyes, as the cheapest solutions. With normies on the market as target audience, I don't think it is a cheap NERP.

I mean in the West I guess it's relatively cheap. And I always considered it mainly useless spending, so for me even the not too high cost would seem overpriced.

Amazon released a trailer for their Lord of the Rings series. Judging by the comments it has not gone down well.

It's basically what I expected it would be ever since it was announced. I'm not surprised, I don't see how anybody could be, I don't see how the people that are spending the millions of dollars that have gone into this show could not have expected this. It's going to flop and flop badly and it's going to deserve it.

Having said all that, they probably would have got away with it if they had not tried to piggy back of the LOTR brand and had made their own world and IP and filled it with whatever they want, some people would still think it's silly but as it would not be connected to LOTR they would have watched it and not complained that much about it. They shot themselves in the foot here.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=v7v1hIkYH24

 >>/46467/
The mysterious they want to make a racism issue out of it, saying the commenters who quote Tolkien has racial motivation to booger on the product.
But I can only see one neger there, so I don't get it.

 >>/46471/
Everyone that disagrees with them is racist pretty much.
There are two black people in the video, the 'wood elf' that you see shooting the bow and there is a black dwarf woman as well that you see very briefly in that clip.

 >>/46467/
> I don't see how the people that are spending the millions of dollars that have gone into this show could not have expected this. It's going to flop and flop badly and it's going to deserve it.

I guess you are wrong - show will be profitable (at least in terms of view count, I don't know how they measure profits from subscription media services in terms of single series).

You overestimate consumers, they don't care and would watch anything that is actively advertised in media on popular platforms. Only thing you need is to start a hype and publish thing on platform that everyone use, and people will consume content, even if it is low quality. Some people will think that show is bad but still subscribe to Amazon and watch next one. I think even if those companies would make videos that has nothing but black screen and silence, people would still watch them and discuss - the only requirement is putting "Amazon" (or "Netflix") logo on it and displaying on all media channels. Not enough viewers? Just buy more advertising from tiktok celebrities, and view count will go up.

Same thing happens in other spheres of society, from industrial tools to food production. Manufacturer reputation is nothing nowadays, you can make any shit if you are big one and it would be still sold in millions. Even if some bad happens with your product, people forgot about it in days and still buy more.

> LOTR brand

Most of viewers don't know what LOTR is except "oh is it that old movie about hair-legged little men with good CGI, yes?".

 >>/46467/
 >>/46476/
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing was a part of the marketing campaign. If not it's sure they're exploiting it. Scandals help to build up the hype.

 >>/46476/
I guess they would measure success by the number of people that will be brought in to subscribe to their service.

> You overestimate consumers, they don't care and would watch anything that is actively advertised in media on popular platforms.
Normally I would say that is true but there does seem to be a massive backlash to this.

I'm not sure how the modern market works in regard to streaming services. I just did some research on costs, it cost them $715m to make the first season($465m for the show, $250m for the rights), it cost $13 a month for an Amazon subscription which means that they need 55 million people to subscribe break even. Assuming every single penny goes straight to LOTR which it would not and not taking into account people that already have the service or families that share the service. But still, that's actually much more feasible than I thought it would be, providing it works that way which I am sure it's not and the other issues I mentioned probably skew this even more. 

But I don't know how normal people view it and how much they care, people that are not into LOTR probably won't bother paying a subscription to watch it and they angered all the people that do like it, you would assume they would not buy a subscription on principle even it was to laugh at it. So maybe it will not flop as badly as I thought but I still don't see it doing well.

> Most of viewers don't know what LOTR is except "oh is it that old movie about hair-legged little men with good CGI, yes?".
While that may be true of the younger generation and some women, I would say pretty much every man over 25 would know what it is and would have watched it(well up to 70years old maybe).

 >>/46478/
They probably have other ways to monetize upon the show. And/or gain elsewhere thanks for the show. And/or gain other non-monetary advantages.
For example a successful big title could help Amazon stocks go up, or lessen a fall. Even if just a little tiny bit, the sum gained or saved could be enough to make that investment into the show worth it.
Or I dunno, they sellin mugs or t-shirts on the side. And buy it on Blue-Ray or whatever is the popular data storage medium. With director commentary and cut scenes.

 >>/46478/
> I guess they would measure success by the number of people that will be brought in to subscribe to their service.

There also must be some criteria like amount of current users (who still subscribed each month) and viewers count (for ads). It may be hard to estimate how single show influences first one, but I guess Amazon has complex KPI algorithms for this (it must be).

> but there does seem to be a massive backlash to this.

Is it? It is hard to say how much audience of youtube comments and imageboard users are intersected with subscribers, and how large is silent part of subscribers. There were plenty of backlashes about movies, netflix adaptation even became widespread meme, but netflix still exists without problems. I know few Witcher fans who criticized every bit of that series but still watched it.

> I would say pretty much every man over 25 would know what it is and would have watched it(well up to 70years old maybe).

But do these people know anything about LOTR except from movies? When you don't know anything about Tolkien universe and don't care about it, you wouldn't care much about any perversion that is made to script. Authors may put marvel comics crossover into LOTR and it would be ok for audience that just want some video for evening with beer.

Camouflage is a Mirage

Here

https://youtube.com/watch?v=qtqP_gA0rXA

 >>/46486/
No it's not and I am not watching that. 

Idiot.

[Moe] Lucky☆Star -... jpg
(543.2 KB, 1920x1080)

I don't even care about what Amazon does any more. New Line cinema is producing a Lord of the Rings Anime. They are irrelevant now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings:_The_War_of_the_Rohirrim

 >>/46490/
See? Life is good. If you are into animay that is.

The rights are weird regarding this. It seems that New Line Cinema has the rights to make Movies but Amazon has the rights to TV so that is why they can both make media at the same time.

But even more interestingly, Amazon does not have the rights to the Simmirilion or anything like that. They only have the rights to the LOTR trilogy and the Hobbit(plus the appendices in the LOTR). So they are basically making this all up using what they can get from the trilogy, they can't actually use anything else, even material which is actually much more relevant to the time period they are setting this in.

 >>/46485/
> But do these people know anything about LOTR except from movies? When you don't know anything about Tolkien universe and don't care about it, you wouldn't care much about any perversion that is made to script. Authors may put marvel comics crossover into LOTR and it would be ok for audience that just want some video for evening with beer.

I never read the books apart from the hobbit either. Even if they never read the books the movies have created what people's idea of a LOTR movie should be, and black elves and dwarves and Galadriel fighting in armour go against that, as will the general Marvel action scenes and Game of Thrones type perversions that are bound to be apart of this(though the average person is pretty degenerate now so they might not care about that). Because it's such a huge franchise I don't think there are many people that don't have a view of what the world should be apart from people that never cared for that genre in the first place who are not really going to care about this one either for that same reason.

 >>/46492/
Life is not good, Russia has not invaded Ukraine yet.

 >>/46493/
So Amazon creating a "fan" fiction, or an alternate background, alternate timeline/universe, story that loosely based on Tolien's work?

 >>/46493/
> what people's idea of a LOTR movie should be, and black elves and dwarves and Galadriel fighting in armour go against that
I remember Gimli saying dwarf women looks the same as dwarf men, so there are details about the background that's given.

 >>/46494/
Kind of. It seems they are making a story based on the backstory given in the Trilogy.

 >>/46495/
Yes. I heard that humans can't actually tell the difference between Genders which would imply all dwarven women look like dwarf men and all of them have beards. Honestly I can understand why they would not do that and I don't hold it against them...

 >>/46496/
Do dwarfs obtained the secret of a razor blade? Because some could decide to shave.
In one of the M.A.G.U.S. novels (the Hungarian pnp rpg I was writing about) a dwarf elder left the ancestral lands (caves) with his clan due to a spat with some other elder, shaved his beard and vowed he won't regrow it until the issue is solved. He shaved his beard for centuries. An honorary title of clan elders is "venerable-beard" which use is quite mandatory, making the situation more ironic.

ZZC 1303 png
(342.86 KB, 1024x707)

Damn it. I forgot to make a thread to celebrate the bombing of Darwin. Well anyway, yesterday was the day that Darwin got bombed. Sorry for being late.

 >>/46499/
What was in Darwin?

 >>/46500/
Australians.

 >>/46501/
Are Australians strategic resource?

BBVA-OpenMind-Materia... jpg
(409.77 KB, 570x569)

 >>/46500/
> What was in Darwin?

Large storage of strategic evolution theory resources.

This past week more izraeli surface-to-surface missiles from the direction of golan, this time targeting the area of town called zakiya, south of damascus. "Material damages"

 >>/46510/
Wrong thread
Ignore

82cdd8d2517e72201108a... jpg
(118.7 KB, 900x652)

d4627f8c30b1bf9714177... jpg
(4.83 MB, 4000x2390)

I don't like Soviet/Russian/Ukrainian they look bad. I don't like round tank shapes like the round turret in Soviet tanks but I also don;t like the look of Soviet ERA, it looks sloppy, like they just haphazardly throw it on as an afterthought and you can even see gaps in it and all the variants look the same and the tanks of different nations look the same(which is particularly annoying in this current war) Armata at least looks better but that is not even in this war yet and probably never will be. Even Chinese tanks look better, the newer ones are more angular and look like they have modern western tank armour(even thought they are descendents of Soviet tanks of course).

 >>/47023/
I think they're pretty cool, the cold era tanks. THere's a military base near me where they use T-72 as a monument near the entrance and I think its nice. 
Armata looks weird, when I look at it I think of a person with a slightly deformed face. Ofc looks is secondary in warfare.

ZZC 0455 jpg
(1.57 MB, 1800x1186)

 >>/47026/
It looks weird but for different reasons. The hull is too big and the turret too small. But I think it does look better than Soviet tanks.

 >>/46512/
> Ignore
No.

 >>/47023/
 >>/47026/
I think T-34 has an ok look, then suddenly it took a down turn, then when they arrived to T-80 series small details change enough to make it ok again. T-90 is close to "kinda cool", but Armata I don't like.

ariete jpg
(40.7 KB, 620x342)

challenger2 jpg
(2.32 MB, 4064x2704)

k2 jpg
(1.28 MB, 1918x1279)

leclerc jpg
(513.78 KB, 2088x1395)

 >>/47023/
> I also don;t like the look of Soviet ERA, it looks sloppy, like they just haphazardly throw it on as an afterthought and you can even see gaps

It depends on modification. Some T-72 clearly had bad ERA placement that was often criticized, but other mods had better.

> and all the variants look the same and the tanks of different nations look the same

Same can be said for western-style tanks too. You may say that not all western tanks are same, but for unprepared observer they are different only in small details.

 >>/47053/
K2 looks the most aggressive, therefore the best, from that three.
But yeah, your point is valid. Slap Abrams and Leopard next to them, those will be fairly similar too.

CDHLVABA7QI6VMBU3Z64F... jpg
(2.92 MB, 3351x2074)

China has a cooler looking base in Djibouti than Russia does(heh) and they have cooler looking APCs as well. China has also gone for the rear turret forward Engine option, Ukraine did that too in their new BTR variant. It means that troops in the vehicle can exit through the rear rather than the sides, side doors are very small and awkward and not as safe to exit from when under fire, it's one of the reasons that you often see people riding on the outside of BTRs instead of in them. But, the advantage of the rearward engine is that the gun turret can then be placed forwards this has a few beneficial effects but one of them is useful in urban combat like in Mariupol. Because the gun is mounted forwards the BTR can creep forwards around a building, fire and then roll backwards. A rear turreted vehicle would take longer to do that and it would expose much more of the vehicle.

Anyway, this base was in an article I read about the security deal the Chinese just made with the Solomon Islands, it means that China has influence over Guadalcanal and one day might set up a base there, where Japan and the US had to fight for it China might get it without a fight at all.

 >>/47268/
They can creep in reverse. Not turn the corner just peek from the corner of the building, showing the side of the vehicle, and roll forward if needed.