|
|
On April 20 2017 23:25 mishimaBeef wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2017 23:24 Eridanus wrote:On April 20 2017 23:21 mishimaBeef wrote:On April 20 2017 23:19 Eridanus wrote:
I see no point in trying until you explain to me how it can be that a tree falling in a forest can make a sound when there is no one around to hear it. That's a metaphysical issue, mine is an epistemological one. No. They are identical. We would also disagree on the tree example. You would say there is no sound. At least, I am convinced of that. I see no point in progressing until you can explain to me how you describe why you think a tree will always make a sound, regardless of human perception. The correct analogy would be what is the definition of sound no? I am asking how we define cheating if we cannot perceive alternative states or processes in the subject. Similarly, we define sound because we perceive something different.
Sound isn't just a human word. It is a physical phenomenon that is quite well defined, independent of human language or perceptions.
See, that is your problem. Your world view is completely fucked up. It is incapable of getting at truths. I don't see how I can convince you that dark matter exists. How would I be able to get you to change your mind on cheating?
This exactly is why rationality is essential for morality.
|
On April 20 2017 23:05 mishimaBeef wrote:
100m sprinting is a live event. You can detect the testosterone.
You can't detect the OS and HW settings of someone halfway across the globe.
You can pretty much only detect the testosterone or other PED use when someone fucks up and pulls a stupid. The vast majority of people get away with PED usage from LONG periods of time and either never get caught, or only get caught years down the road. Look at Lance. Look at the numerous people such as Flanagan and Goucher being upgraded to silver after the silver medalist at the 07' WC and 08' Olympics was caught with frozen sample retests years later.
On April 20 2017 23:06 mishimaBeef wrote:
Guys cheating is only a concept because we can detect it. Or am I wrong? If it was impossible to detect Testosterone boosting, what stops people from using it when their only goal is to WIN?
Wut.
So you're arguing that it's okay to "cheat" if it's impossible to know you are cheating? Any cheating is theoretically detectable. There is a chance, albeit incredibly small, that if you're using illegal hotkey settings I, or some other player, could somehow see you through the window and notice your hotkeys aren't an allowable configuration.
So, since no form of cheating is completely undetectable then your argument rests on a threshold of detectability. Is it cheating if you have a 1 in 10 chance of catching it? What about a 1 in 10,000? 1 in a billion?
Equally problematic with this idea is that things could change from being cheating or not cheating depending on your behavior. In other words, by what you suggested it would not be cheating to change HK because nobody would know. However, if you started streaming yourself playing, it would suddenly become cheating because no people could see that your inputs didn't properly correlate. Gets pretty bizarre if one act can simultaneously be cheating and not be cheating no?
what stops people from using it when their only goal is to WIN?
What would stop you from stealing a million dollars from your well to do neigh-boor if there existed a perfect crime and there was NO chance of you ever being caught?
|
Sigh...
Yes, sound is a physical phenomenon *that we can detect*. Similar to how someone using Test Booster would have a physical phenomenon present in their blood *that we can detect*.
So, you haven't explained to me how cheating can be a concept if there is no way to detect an alternative state or process. If we had no way of detecting with certainty that Test Boosters were present in someone's blood then there is really no basis for declaring the intake of test boosters to be cheating. At least people that want to WIN above all else instead of being NOBLE will not give a damn.
|
On April 20 2017 23:09 fabiano wrote:
In my opinion, BW should not be changed to fit SC2 players demands, nor anything else than hosting and graphics update.
Does a complain about no option to change controls from a person that never played BW/SC2 hold more value than a complain about the same thing from a person that played more of SC2 than Brood War?
|
On April 20 2017 23:26 Apoteosis wrote:
I like BW but I hate its toxic community that complains about everything.
Actually there is a term that describes accurately the trascendent discussions that plague the BW forums nowadays: it is called "byzantine discussion".
So, in other words, you dislike when people disagree with you.
|
I'm an oldschool vet that is used to the classic keybinds but I don't really care if custom keybinds are in the game. It's been years since I have played this game but now I have a mouse that has extra buttons on the side. I have found it convenient to put a few hard to reach hotkeys on the side of my mouse button. like, for zerg, having O, U, L, easily reachable on the mouse makes a pretty big difference.
What I am wondering is, how is what I am doing any different than having custom hotkeys? also, i am really surprised at how many people don't like the custom hotkeys. are people really that disgruntled that they want new players to experience the exact same struggle that we had to years ago? i'm not an amazing player but i'm not complete shit either. custom hotkeys don't make that much of a difference in the skill of a player. the newbs still get crushed just as easily whether they are using custom or classic hotkeys. PTR had custom hotkeys and it's not like there were was a massive influx of new skilled players. no, custom hotkeys didn't make a difference at all. 95% of ptr players were absolutely terrible. let the players keep their custom hotkeys. the game is hard enough. give people a break.
|
You mix too many scenarios in your discussion. Who cares about streaming and who is stupid enough to stream their competitive setup and get exposed?
|
And yes at some point we can safely say that 1/1B is pretty much 0 chance. Sure, someone could barge into your door and observe you were pressing the wrong keys during your competitive tournament match online. Likely? No. That's why I say it is undetectable for remote players.
|
On April 20 2017 23:30 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2017 23:26 Apoteosis wrote:
I like BW but I hate its toxic community that complains about everything.
Actually there is a term that describes accurately the trascendent discussions that plague the BW forums nowadays: it is called "byzantine discussion". So, in other words, you dislike when people disagree with you.
I have similar thoughts about it and it's not about agreeing/disagreeing at all, but about how quickly people are willing to go into condescending tone acting like superior beings with the ultimate argument being "go play SC2, you don't belong here"
|
On April 20 2017 23:25 mishimaBeef wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2017 23:24 Eridanus wrote:On April 20 2017 23:21 mishimaBeef wrote:On April 20 2017 23:19 Eridanus wrote:
I see no point in trying until you explain to me how it can be that a tree falling in a forest can make a sound when there is no one around to hear it. That's a metaphysical issue, mine is an epistemological one. No. They are identical. We would also disagree on the tree example. You would say there is no sound. At least, I am convinced of that. I see no point in progressing until you can explain to me how you describe why you think a tree will always make a sound, regardless of human perception. The correct analogy would be what is the definition of sound no? I am asking how we define cheating if we cannot perceive alternative states or processes in the subject. Similarly, we define sound because we perceive something different.
Ehm...no.
Sound is a mechanical wave of pressure and displacement traveling through a given media. It has nothing at all to do with how we percieve it. Just like cheating is knowingly and willingly breaking the agreed upon rules for how the game shall be played.
|
On April 20 2017 23:30 mishimaBeef wrote:
Sigh...
Yes, sound is a physical phenomenon *that we can detect*. Similar to how someone using Test Booster would have a physical phenomenon present in their blood *that we can detect*.
So, you haven't explained to me how cheating can be a concept if there is no way to detect an alternative state or process. If we had no way of detecting with certainty that Test Boosters were present in someone's blood then there is really no basis for declaring the intake of test boosters to be cheating. At least people that want to WIN above all else instead of being NOBLE will not give a damn.
We don't ban steroids because we can detect them. We ban them so we don't have to force everyone that wants to do sports in any competitive context, from amateur best of your college to Olympics, to be loaded up with 10x to 20x the anabolic activity than would be normal for a male. And then we enforce it and call it cheating out of fairness.
You either dispute the existence of a reality, the existence of fairness, or you are trolling.
|
On April 20 2017 23:34 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2017 23:25 mishimaBeef wrote:On April 20 2017 23:24 Eridanus wrote:On April 20 2017 23:21 mishimaBeef wrote:On April 20 2017 23:19 Eridanus wrote:
I see no point in trying until you explain to me how it can be that a tree falling in a forest can make a sound when there is no one around to hear it. That's a metaphysical issue, mine is an epistemological one. No. They are identical. We would also disagree on the tree example. You would say there is no sound. At least, I am convinced of that. I see no point in progressing until you can explain to me how you describe why you think a tree will always make a sound, regardless of human perception. The correct analogy would be what is the definition of sound no? I am asking how we define cheating if we cannot perceive alternative states or processes in the subject. Similarly, we define sound because we perceive something different. Ehm...no. Sound is a mechanical wave of pressure and displacement traveling through a given media. It has nothing at all to do with how we percieve it. Just like cheating is knowingly and willingly breaking the agreed upon rules for how the game shall be played.
Are you seriously going to tell me that your inner ear or whatever isn't *perceiving* a wave? And that your brain makes sense of it?
|
On April 20 2017 23:34 Eridanus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2017 23:30 mishimaBeef wrote:
Sigh...
Yes, sound is a physical phenomenon *that we can detect*. Similar to how someone using Test Booster would have a physical phenomenon present in their blood *that we can detect*.
So, you haven't explained to me how cheating can be a concept if there is no way to detect an alternative state or process. If we had no way of detecting with certainty that Test Boosters were present in someone's blood then there is really no basis for declaring the intake of test boosters to be cheating. At least people that want to WIN above all else instead of being NOBLE will not give a damn. We don't ban steroids because we can detect them. We ban them so we don't have to force everyone that wants to do sports in any competitive context, from amateur best of your college to Olympics, to be loaded up with 10x to 20x the anabolic activity than would be normal for a male. And then we enforce it and call it cheating out of fairness. You either dispute the existence of a reality, the existence of fairness, or you are trolling.
We are *able to* ban steroids because we can detect them. If we couldn't detect them, we couldn't ban them.
|
Well, right now they are banned and the ban is not enforceable.
The way pro athletes use them make the PED's in their blood, under the current testing prodecure, NOT detectable in almost all cases.
And even if it was always detectable, that is not why they are banned. We try to detect them because they are banned. They aren't banned because we can detect them. We can detect glucose levels much easier. But glucose isn't banned. I don't get this reasoning at all.
I the same way, murder is illegal, and not all murderers are caught. Should murder become legal, then?
Are you seriously going to tell me that your inner ear or whatever isn't *perceiving* a wave?
Sound is there regardless of the perception. Testosterone is there regardless of the HPLC MS. Cheating is there regardless of anti Blizzard antihack measure.
|
On April 20 2017 23:30 mishimaBeef wrote:
Sigh...
Yes, sound is a physical phenomenon *that we can detect*. Similar to how someone using Test Booster would have a physical phenomenon present in their blood *that we can detect*.
So, you haven't explained to me how cheating can be a concept if there is no way to detect an alternative state or process. If we had no way of detecting with certainty that Test Boosters were present in someone's blood then there is really no basis for declaring the intake of test boosters to be cheating. At least people that want to WIN above all else instead of being NOBLE will not give a damn.
Again no.
You cannot detect someone using PEDs on their own. You can only detect someone using PEDs if:
1) They fuck up and dose way to close to a competition
2) You send anonymous testers to their house at a given point (this still fails 99% of the time cause microdosing)
Number 1 would be like using unregistered keybinds at a tournament in plain sight.
Number 2 would be like a random checker showing up to your house unannounced to see if you're using keybinds. Just like with drugs, it's absolutely physically possible to detect. It just rarely happens.
|
whoa I hadn't visited the thread in a few hours and now we're talking about murder and steroids
wtf
|
On April 20 2017 23:26 Apoteosis wrote:
I like BW but I hate its toxic community that complains about everything.
Actually there is a term that describes accurately the trascendent discussions that plague the BW forums nowadays: it is called "byzantine discussion".
I don't hate the community but they can be pretty ridiculous.
"I have a wife and kid and I'm 30 so using the P key is too hard!!" Fucking lol dude. Get over it or wait for the likely hotkeys implementation in remaster.
"UGH SOMETHING IS WEIRD 1.16 was WAY better!" Play with the settings dude god damn 1.16 was unplayable as fuck unless you still had winxp going. Someone literally had to make something as fantastic as shield battery and multple launchers because the game was so unplayable. Right now you can log in and see more games available than in the last 10 years. Come on now lol
|
That's what happens when someone comes along, wants to argue that cheating should only be punished as cheating if you get caught, but refuses to outright admit this, and then bends reality and world view to the extreme, when put under scrutiny.
It is annoying and dishonest debating that derails the complete thread.
|
On April 20 2017 23:41 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2017 23:26 Apoteosis wrote:
I like BW but I hate its toxic community that complains about everything.
Actually there is a term that describes accurately the trascendent discussions that plague the BW forums nowadays: it is called "byzantine discussion". I don't hate the community but they can be pretty ridiculous. "I have a wife and kid and I'm 30 so using the P key is too hard!!" Fucking lol dude. Get over it or wait for the likely hotkeys implementation in remaster. "UGH SOMETHING IS WEIRD 1.16 was WAY better!" Play with the settings dude god damn 1.16 was unplayable as fuck unless you still had winxp going. Someone literally had to make something as fantastic as shield battery and multple launchers because the game was so unplayable. Right now you can log in and see more games available than in the last 10 years. Come on now lol
I'll be honest, I'm totally fine with hotkey changing.
That said, you're argument and agitation comes from failing to understand the gripe against hotkeys. You see it as veteran BW players not wanting hotkeys to change because "EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE THE SAME AND WE CAN'T CHANGE ANYTHING OR MAKE IT ANY EASIERE OH GOD NO!"
But for the people that are anti hotkey, they see it as a serious change to the game. If I told you that SC2 medivacs were now going to have speed with no upgrade and double the HP, I imagine you wouldn't be thrilled about the change. Why? Because it's a drastic change to the fundamental gameplay. Many of the veterans that are opposed to hotkeys feel the same way about hotkey changes: that it would dramatically and fundamentally alter the game.
You may disagree with them about the impact of hotkeys, but being dismissive of the argument like you are isn't really fair nor likely to lead to productive discussion.
|
On April 20 2017 23:42 Eridanus wrote:
That's what happens when someone comes along, wants to argue that cheating should only be punished as cheating if you get caught, but refuses to outright admit this, and then bends reality and world view to the extreme, when put under scrutiny.
It is annoying and dishonest debating that derails the complete thread.
Actually I don't mind it. It' fun having these discussions. It does derail the thread, but honestly all we'd been talking about the last 10 pages is the same tired old HK argument that we've had probably 10 times or so now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
