I have both and am writing up my winter off season program. Was curious if any of you have done the same with these two specific texts in mind.

Would it be possible for a language to have a conjunction corresponding to FFFF on a truth table?

For example, and corresponds to TFFF because a compound sentence involving it is only true if both clauses are true (i.e. the sky is blue and the ground is up is false because only one statement is true)

But back to the original quesiton: Would it be possible for there to exist in a language a conjunction corresponding to the logical contradiction?

I can see how its inverse (TTTT) could be possible: A conj B would mean A or B may or may not be true.

###Fallacies in Serial: #####Conjunction Fallacy, take 2

 

^(Edit, 1/28/15: This is a re-written overhaul of my original post, which went over like a lead canoe and received a lot of criticism which I have attempted to use constructively in making this a better read. If you're coming in new to this discussion and want to see where it started, I have preserved the original, unedited, as a comment on this post.)

Put yourselves in the shoes of detectives Ritz and MacGillivary. You've just interrogated Jay regarding Hae's murder. After confessing that his acquaintance Adnan killed Hae and that Jay himself helped bury Hae's body, Jay takes you to Hae's missing car, which she was driving when last seen alive. Which of these scenarios is more likely?

1. Jay was involved with Hae's murder

2. Jay and Adnan were both complicit in Hae's murder

I propose that by assuming the latter, R & MacV fell prey to conjunction fallacy.

 

Consider the following:

>I have a coin. I will flip it 30 times in a row. If you select one of the options below, and it winds up occurring unbroken in the set, I will pay you $100. Pick one:

>1. HTHHH

>2. THTHHH

>3. HTTTTT

Although the rational choice is HTHHH, a surprising amount of people will choose THTHHH because it looks more like what they expect a random series of coin flips to look like. Is is representative of their perception of a likely coin toss sequence. This, despite the fact that HTHHH is contained within THTHHH and has one less requirement to be met before you make bank. (Poor HTTTTT, though just as probable to occur as THTHHH, gets very little love -- but that's a fallacy for another day.)

 

To give another example, this one in a criminal investigation setting:

>Imagine that a witness reports seeing a vehicle flee a nighttime gas station robbery in which the clerk was shot dead. He states that he had only a quick glimpse but is reasonably sure the vehicle was a gray domestic minivan. How much weight should be placed on this description?

>This question has two parts. First, what is the probability the witness actually saw the offender’s vehicle? In major crime cases, especially those involving significant publicity, the public’s desire to help or become involved is high, but their information often proves unreliable. A generous assumption gives the witness a 75 percent chance of actually having seen the robber’s vehicle. Second, how accurate is his vehic

de bello gallico 6.36

>magna praeterea multitudo calonum, magna vis jumentorum quae in castris subsederant, facta potestate sequitur.

One of the problems I've had with build generators like logical increments and ChooseMyPC is that they don't take sales into account. You can use them to get a good idea of what you can get in your price range, but it's not a good idea to actually buy all the parts they suggest. These new parametric part lists make it so that you can click on a link to a build and it'll be the cheapest you can find those, or similar parts at any given moment.

I think it's time we start having a weekly thread where people can post and vote on builds using these parametric lists. That way, if someone wants to just come in and take a look, they could order all the parts at any moment and know they're getting a great deal.

I've been looking into many-valued logics for a little while (note: I do not have any understanding of mathematical logic beyond what is required to pass introductory programming courses) thanks to Minecraft, and I came across an article on T-norms that drew a distinction between "strong" and "weak" conjunctions in various logic systems, but it didn't really explain the significance of the dinstinction.

My question is: what distinguishes a "strong" conjunction from a "weak" one? What are the implications of this as far as logics are concerned?

Hi /r/logic,

The axiomatization I'm mainly familiar with for classical propositional logic uses modus ponens ({φ, (φ→ψ)} ⊢ ψ) along with the following three axiom schemas:

(φ→(ψ→φ))

((φ→(ψ→χ))→((φ→ψ)→(φ→χ)))

((~ψ→~φ)→((~ψ→φ)→φ))

I was wondering if anyone knows what the standard axiomatization of classical logic with just conjunction and negation (if there is a standard one) is, and, if you have a source for it, that'd be good too. I'm aware of the Sheffer axiomatization, but I'm wondering about one that has both conjunction and negation. Thanks!

I keep seeing comments on this sub criticizing people’s warped perceptions of cognitive functions which seems to be largely attributed to inaccurate descriptions. Is there some kind of objective definition for each of the cognitive functions? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I get the impression widely popular descriptions are not accurate.

I also see a lot of comments explaining how a function works but am confused as to what these are based on. I guess I’d just like to be able to sort through misinformation regarding this theory

Edit: thanks for the resources! I appreciate it

The issue with end-game PvE content
Background and introduction

My friends and I love completing challenging end-game content. From doing Endless Tower in Ragnarok Online when we were teenagers to Mythic Raiding in World of Warcraft in our mid-twenties, for every game we have played extensively, we have always enjoyed reaping the rewards of being a top PvE player.

On September 28, 2021 we embarked on a new journey into New World with one goal in mind – to be the most accomplished PvE players on our server. To accomplish this, we grinded for over 16 hours per day to achieve the end game content as fast as possible and use that position to place ourselves in a manner that would allow us to be ready for whatever content came next.

Instead of detailing our path here, we will outline below what we have accomplished in the past 42 Days and 13 Hours of played (Screenshot #3) time and outline the issues regarding each point.

Issue #1 Expertise (previous HWM system) and crafted items:

To put it short, we like killing monsters. We do not enjoy searching for resources and crafting items but we do respect those that do as we believe the game should have multiple options for end-game farming and progression.

We have achieved 590 expertise on all items (yes, including all accessories, refer to Screenshot #1) and thus allowing us to drop 600 legendaries for all item slots; however, we believe that the reward system for players like us who enjoy PvE’ing instead of crafting is currently unbalanced. As explained in example #1 below, this issue has further exacerbated with the new patch and the additions of the Timeless Shards.

Example #1: Ring Expertise vs Crafted Rings

We have reached 590 expertise on Ring item slot and the rewards for this is that it allows us to drop 600 “named” legendary items from dungeons and named monsters in the Open World as well as dropping 600 “Old Ring” from Elite Chests on high-level zones. We first got 590 Expertise on Ring two weeks ago (well before the update for Timeless Shards), so it is safe to say that this has taken us approximately 30 days of hard-core elite farming and expedition running to achieve.

Now, I know of several players on our servers who play significantly less than we do and could craft a legendary accessory with less than 20 days of played time. With the addition of the Timeless Shards, they can now have an easier time crafting a legendary accessory with perfect rolls. Meanwhile, our te

If we have a set of sentences in predicate logic S: { ∀xFx, ∃yGy }, is this set equivalent to the conjunctive statement: ∀xFx ^ ∃yGy? If we assume all of the sentences of S to each be true, aren't we able to compose a conjunctive statement out of them?

If so, can we therefore negate a set such as S to yield ~∀xFx v ~∃yGy by using DeMorgan's law?

Introduction

From time to time I encounter people who seem to not see or understand the difference between not thinking a statement is true and thinking it is false. To make the difference clear, I will use the statement "At least one god exists", statement logic and set logic.

Basics

A statement is a sentence that has a truth value which is either true or false and is either atomic or logical connectives of other statements (negation, disjunction, conjunction, implication,...).

The law of excluded middle states that for every statement, either this statement or its negation is true.

The law of noncontradiction states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.

A set is a collection of elements. A set with no elements is called the empty set. If B is a set and x is an element of B, we say "x is in B". If every element of set A is also in set B, then A is described as being a subset of B. A partition of set S is a set of nonempty subsets of S, such that every element in S is in exactly one of these subsets. The complement A^(C) of a set A are the elements not in A. When all sets under consideration are considered to be subsets of a given set S, the complement of A is the set of elements in S that are not in A. Given a set S and a subset A of S, we can find/calculate A^(C), such that S = A ∪ A^(C).

Application

Let P be the set of all people and P ⊇ T := {p ∈ P | p thinks "At least one god exists" is true}^([1]). Applying the definition of a complement, we can calculate T^(C) by finding all the elements from P that are not in T => T^(C) = {p ∈ P | p doesn't think "At least one god exists" is true}^([2]). Let's further examine T^(C). It should be trivial that a person who thinks that "At least one god exists" is false isn't in T (see law of noncontradiction) and therefore is in T^(C). We therefore know that T^(C) ⊇ A := {p ∈ P | p thinks "At least one god exists" is false}.

Assumption: T^(C) = A.

Then P = T ∪ A, but ∃ p ∈ P : p neither thinks "At least one god exists" is true, nor thinks it is false => T^(C) =/= A ∎

Conclusion

Not thinking a statement is true isn't equivalent to thinking it is false, meaning answering "No" to the question "Do you think 'At least one god exists' is true" isn't the same as thinking "At least one god exists" is false.

[1] Note: This is the same as answering "Yes" to the questio

Looking for the DRS Mega Post? Find it here

When You Wish Upon A Star - A Complete Guide to Computershare

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Useful Links Provided By Computershare

FAQ on Becoming a registered shareholder in US-listed companies through Computershare

For shareholders who need assistance with their account (e.g. logging in, password reset, etc.), please review FAQ, email or virtual assistant

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Part 2 is Here!

We’ve collated your questions for part 2, from clarifications in part 1 to additional ones we did not get around to asking and more! A big thanks to Paul and the team over at Computershare for working with us, they’ve been an absolute pleasure to work with.

Thanks to the community for asking such smart, well thought out questions as well.

You can find the full video here, on our new (non-monetised) Youtube Channel.

Youtube Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bo427AW0anw

Part 1 post link: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qmnan7/computershare_ama_part_1_video_link_with/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timestamp Directory

1. Broker vs Computershare
2. Sell Orders on Computershare
3. Broker Selling & Direct Registered Shares
4. Reporting on Direct Registered Shares
5. Book Entry vs Direct Stock Purchase Plan
6. Speed-Up the CS Verification Process
7. [Live Registration Counts](https://yout

Three years ago, I discovered the concept of FIRE which opened my eyes to the possibility of financial independence. While I was not naïve to the basics of personal finance, there were clearly opportunities for improvement and so I decided to apply myself to making changes. At the end of 2019, I started a tradition of completing an annual summary write-up which I found to be a useful tool for reflection and planning. In recognition of this year’s financial milestone, this write-up will combine the usual annual summary with additional detail about the journey to get to this point.

Advisory: This is a long post. For those who just want to see the numbers, you can see income/net worth in the 'Net Worth Update' section, and expenditure in the 'Maintaining a Savings Rate of 70%' section.

Net Worth Update:

I am pleased that I have now reached $1,040,247 net worth. The table below summarises my net worth journey.

https://preview.redd.it/2fqhkj6e41981.png?width=1489&format=png&auto=webp&s=6a6830dec957c48035207c5a4b4cb3da920c7048

Notes about the table:

• The net worth calculation is the sum of cash savings, shares, PPOR, mortgage, and superannuation.
• Base salary is presented as gross values and excludes the standard superannuation guarantee and overtime. I worked extensive overtime during the first few years of my career whilst living with my parents which explains the very high savings rate during this time.
• Base salary also excludes a salary packaging arrangement which allows $9,095 of salary to be tax-free (as general living expenses), and a further $2,500 of salary to be tax-free (as meal entertainment expenses).
• Dividend income is presented as gross values (amount paid out + franking credit).
• Cash savings were kept in a HISA pre-mortgage, and are now in an offset account against the mortgage.
• The share portfolio has the respective Dividend Reinvestment Plans (DRPs) switched on for all holdings.
• PPOR values are approximated using CommBank's property app.
• The 'L' values in Work History refer to position grades. The higher the 'L' value, the more senior the role.
• All values are recorded at the close of business on the last business day of the calendar year.

The Person:

• I'm 34, single, and don't have any dependents.
• I live in metropolitan Perth, Western Australia.
• I work in a tertiary public hospital in a senior position.
• I enjoy my work. For me, FIRE is about having the means to go to work purely because

On a recent PodcastUFO episode with Martin Willis, ex-CIA officer John Ramirez described a symposium that he was invited to by a colleague where government officials and members of the Invisible College were given a presentation on the hybridization of the human genome by non-human beings.

>It wasn’t a conference, it was more of a one day symposium at a hotel. It was unclassified. It was hard for me to believe it was unclassified and I was able to enter, as I stated, with my cell phone, no ID whatsoever, no badges, completely open inside this conference room. It was not a SCIF.

>And to hear what I heard, I said “okay, there’s something to this story.” They relayed it to the fact that it went back to after World War II, for this hybrid story. They didn’t present any evidence. So when they say I don’t have evidence, I agree with you. I don’t have any evidence. All I have is these two top officials saying that the CIA has been interested in the hybridization of humans and have discovered alien DNA in the human genome. That’s what they told me.

>So if I get permission to use their names — they’re still alive — if I get permission to use their names then that offers another avenue for researchers to actually knock on their doors and ring their phones and say “hey, where’s the evidence? How do you know this yourself, that they told me and others in that room about alien DNA?”

>So that’s where I’m at right now. In conjunction with that, I wanted to get my medical records from the CIA. That’s a separate process, it’s not a FOIA process for employees, or former employees of the CIA. We go through different internal channels where we can self-identify as CIA officers because I have a secret number, as I’ve said it’s not 007, but there is a number that they can look up and actually say “yeah, this guy is CIA.”

>So I requested my medical records. I’m still waiting on them. They’ve acknowledged receiving my request, and I’m just still waiting on them to deliver, to me, my medical records. I want to see what my medical records might say about any high strangeness the CIA found.

Martin mentions people get hung up on John talking about the hybrid story, and asks him to clear up whether hybridization started happening in the 1940’s forward or if that’s when they discovered something.

>That’s when the government discovered that the human genome contained alien DNA.

Martin then asks how would we know it was alie

I've heard my parents say it a million times. Literally my entire life when I made singular suggestions, I was always met with the Diversify argument.

The USA reads at a 7th grade level. That's 12-13 year Olds. I believe through simple programming, MSM could have had a profound impact on society in the marketing of ETFs.

This is total speculation hence the flair, but the thought is legitimate. It would justify the rise in popularity of ETFs.

Hedgies pushed diversification, not precision. They sold a fallacy of accuracy while simultaneously executing singular trades with malicious intent that has now brought the US financial system to collapse (for like the third time.. Just in my lifetime).

...

Side note: Good example of accuracy vs. precision: A field goal kicker in football is accurate if they make five 50 yard field goals in a row. A field goal kicker is precise if they hit the left goal post 5 times in a row from 50 yards.

Now imagine the Ryan Cohen is the kicker, GME is the ball and this is 5D chess and not football. Boom. Flawless comparison and logic. ...

Practical, financially conscious and risk adverse (oh, the irony) Americans bought into this accuracy plan in the form of etfs, 401ks, pension plans, etc. It's the classic passive-income "set-it and forget-it" pitch. People didn't have the access to the information to offer other options, so, this is what everyone did. Luckily we have 'better' access to information today. Impeccable timing actually, some may call it precise.... Lol this is ridiculous, but I'm almost done.

The more capital in these markets, the more play money for the hedgies. Generations of Americans fed into this crap.

Problem is, there's only one "idiosyncratic risk" to the market that could cause a "black swan" event and we are just sitting in the stands watching the game.

The only diversifying I'll be doing is post-MOASS and it will be in conjunction with ape philanthropy.

If you made it this far, thanks for reading my fellow ape. I hope this 'article' is grounded in more fact than something on a MSM publication.

Buy. Hodl. DRS. I'm excited to watch the rest of the game with you, my fellow shit slingers. 💩🙈🙉🙊

Today's research will be based on insider buying activity. I've been collecting the financial data from sources like Nasdaq for the last 1-2 months, and then aggregated it for all public US companies. As a result, we found the top 5 tickers where the insiders have been trading the most actively.

I published a similar post about half a year ago, and since then all the shares of the mentioned companies have significantly grown. This may act as a basis for serious consideration of this metric for the investment process!

Let's think about it from the logical perspective - the people inside the company know far more than any analysts, any kind of trader, and any investor, because they're right at the coalface on what's going on - they can see what there will be in the future, if their pipeline is full of work, if the new contracts are about to be signed, etc. They don't always get it right, of course, but you can easily use this data metric in conjunction with your investment strategy - you can get an extra weight to the trade if the insiders are actively buying before you bought. I think that the more deals you see from the group of insiders - the stronger the signal.

Below you can find the top 5 companies:

1. Liberty Media Corporation ($LSXMA) - the company is engaged in providing a subscription-based satellite radio service. It transmits music, sports, entertainment, comedy, talk, news, traffic and weather channels, as well as infotainment services.

https://preview.redd.it/coso48f0u7081.png?width=1189&format=png&auto=webp&s=ed846ba4f8a48372602f7989bb89ad1b2e52e9e3

2. Agile Therapeutics ($AGRX) - is a women's healthcare company to fulfill the unmet health needs of women. Its product candidates are designed to provide women with contraceptive options.

https://preview.redd.it/5bwswch3u7081.png?width=1193&format=png&auto=webp&s=466117157ab0045a3e70d4b8d4294b7a50b7d95e

3. Sirius XM ($SIRI) - the holding is now composed of two businesses: SiriusXM and Pandora. SiriusXM transmits music, talk shows, sports, and news via its two satellite radio networks, primarily to consumers in vehicles who pay a subscription fee. Pandora is a streaming music platform that offers an ad-supported radio option

There are so many posts on the sub of either someone asking if anyone is attracted to trans men, or someone saying they're dating a trans men, which get brigaded by people saying that's called bisexual.

To preface, I am a gay man who has been attracted to two trans men in my short 18 years, because I have conceptually only ever known them as a man, one literally has prominent facial hair.

So where does the difference lay between me and the people at AskGayBros who's only idea of being gay is whether there's a piece of flesh between their legs? In the fact that being gay is about so much more than just genital attraction. Being gay is to love men full stop. I can not feel any attraction to a woman. I do not feel at all comfortable with doing traditionally romantic things with a woman. Holding a woman's hand, buying her flowers on Valentines day, and going on a date with her are entirely foreign concepts to me (despite having done them) which I can not enjoy. The thought of domesticity with a woman is full of dread. But with a man? With a man the sun shines; my hand holding the hand of another man feels like that's what my hand was made for. Going on a date with a man, having intimate conversation and shared laughter fills me with both a giddy nervousness and a genuine love for my situation. I can envision myself waking up in the morning next to a husband, getting ready for work, then unwinding with him in the evening.

And the man being trans has nothing to do with any of that. There are trans men infinitely more "masculine" than plenty of cis gay men, and if I'm attracted to those cis men, why would I not be attracted to a trans man who I would have no idea was trans unless he told me? The simple matter is that humans can pretty much get base sexual arousal from something they're not personally attracted to, as some weirdo was yelling about here a few weeks ago. Straight men can be, on a base level, turned on by men and vice versa for all combinations. But that doesn't make those men bisexual or gay, because biological instinct aside they'll probably not have any romantic or deep feeling towards men anyways. Just because their body is reacting slightly that way does not mean they emotionally or consciously want that. At that point then, sexual orientation is, in conjunction with genital preferences (as some people do have that), about a deeper emotional feeling.

Which is where AskGayBros just does not get it. To them a trans man who looks li

What I mean is does the existential quantifier ("there exists") have the same relationship to disjunction ("or") as sigma summation has to addition? Similarly does the universal quantifier have the same relationshop to conjunction ("and") as capital Pi denoting a product over a set has to multiplication?

I've toyed with thinking of quantifiers in this way, and all the obscure seeming formal rewrite rules for existential quantifiers work just the same as you would expect form thinking of them as conjunction and disjunction respectively over some specified set---which is nice because it makes the rewrite rules of the quantifiers just a straightforward extension of boolean rules.

My only reservation is that I never have seen quantifiers discussed in this way other than passing mention on wikipedia of a alternative notation for the universal quantifier of a big "vee" with a dummy variable specified as a member of a set ( just like summation or product notation). So are they the same? Why aren't they framed this way when they are introduced? Is there a problem with thinking of quantifiers in this way?

Hey Folks-

This is something of a "rough draft" for Kibbles' Guide to Kibbles' Content (a silly thing I promised a while back for the Kickstarter). This will walk through the basics of Psion, some of the nice starter builds for it, and some of the keystone features to consider. I'm starting with Psion because I think it sometimes has a reputation for being more complicated than it really is, there's just a few mechanics it uses that are more obvious in play then they are in to read, and it also has a wide range of flexibility.

The Basics of Psion

The first thing to understand about the Psionics of the Psion is that the class works something akin to a Warlock. It can be thought of as a "short rest caster", and is equivalent to a full caster, but works in a somewhat different way. Just as a Warlock might use Eldritch Blast to be consistently useful, and than can use their spells to supplement their Eldritch Blast damage (with Hex, Darkness, or Shadow of Moil for example) or to toss out some big effects (a Fiend Warlock dropping a Fireball for example), Psion shares a very similar model, but with a few key differences. They will, typically speaking, use the Psionic Power most turns, and then spend their Psi Points either further empowering those powers, or to cast spells through "alternate effects" of the Disciplines they select. The main difference is that they have a lot more flexibility in how they use both of their powers and points, though in exchange they give up a little bit of the consistent reliable damage.

Psionic Powers & Psionic Mastery

The most important thing about a Psion will always be your Psionic Powers. You can think of them like your cantrips or weapon attacks. They are designed to be something you can use every turn reliably and effectively, but also be something you'll feel good about using every turn. While a Wizard might use Firebolt when they have no better option, for a Psion using your Power should often be your first choice, not your last choice. Let's walk through some of the details on them:

• Why are powers better than cantrips? While a power does the same damage as a cantrip on the surface, they all come with a useful "rider" effect, meaning that in addition to doing damage, they will typically do something else. Sort of like Vicious Mockery, but if Vicious Mockery also did high damage for a cantrip. This is because they aren't balanced against classical cantrips, but more against something like Eldritch Bl

Do your worst!

Since so many of the of the functions overlap between mixer and DAW, how do I use one and not the other? How do they work together?

Welcome to our thirty-second* installment of Cool Query Friday. The format will be: (1) description of what we're doing (2) walk though of each step (3) application in the wild.

* One of you were kind enough to inform me that this is actually the thirty-third CQF as I accidentally counted the 14th CQF twice. We'll keep the broken numbering scheme for posterity's sake.

CVE-2021-44228

Yesterday, a vulnerability in a popular Java library, Log4j, was published along with proof-of-concept exploit code. The vulnerability has been given the designation CVE-2021-44228 and is colloquially being called "Log4Shell" by several security researchers. The CVE impacts all unpatched versions of Log4j from 2.0-beta9 to 2.14. Current recommendations are to patch Log4j to version 2.15.0-rc2 or higher.

The Log4j library is often included or bundled with third-party software packages and very commonly used in conjunction with Apache Struts.

When exploited, the Log4j vulnerability will allow Remote Code Execution (RCE). This becomes extremely problematic as things like Apache Struts are, most commonly, internet facing.

More details can be found here:

• CSA-211096 Log4j2 Vulnerability "Log4Shell" (CVE-2021-44228) US-1 | US-2 | EU-1 | US-GOV-1 (Made public for all customers via Support Portal)
• CSA-211099 Technical Information on Log4j 2 Vulnerability CVE-2021-44228 and Mitigation Strategies (Intel customers see Reports & Feeds)
• CrowdStrike Tech Alert
• CrowdStrike Trending Vulnerability Alert
• NVD CVE
• Apache Notification
• [LunaSec Write-up](https://www.lunasec.io/docs/blog/log4j

At this time of this post, the edit should be available sometime within the next 24 hours. The link will work, so feel free to keep trying. As usual, there will also be torrent files that can be used as well. Version 2 is a *big* update to this project.

Download link to all my Star Wars edits: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1K5OrqSYqkYgzLaVmdJRItUfW7DrpdGNA?usp=sharing

---

***This is Version 2 of this fan edit.***

Running time is about 138 minutes.

Special features:

Italian Language Audio track

German Language Audio track

Fan Editors’ Commentary track

Alternate Audio track without added ‘Knights of Ren’ dialogue

Chapter stops

Subtitles (English, Spanish, French, Italian, Dutch, Portuguese, German)

Synopsis: Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker gets an overhaul to serve as a conclusion to the Star Wars saga. Pacing, character journeys, and story continuity are improved via an unprecedented fan editing collaboration. A layer of polish and care applied to a relentlessly fast-paced film. Subtle character tweaks. And a few new surprises.

Special Thanks:

Everyone at OriginalTrilogy.com who contributed, including:

poppasketti (voice, audio and visual FX)

jonh (visual FX)

skenera (visual FX)

NeverarGreat (visual FX)

Movies Remastered (visual FX, ideas, various)

kewlfish (visual FX)

Luka Frik (visual FX)

DominicCobb (clips provided)

Sir Ridley (visual FX)

axlanian (KoR voice project)

krausfadr (KoR voice project)

RogueLeader (voice and audio work)

sherlockpotter (audio work)

ChainsawAsh (DTS encode)

snooker (visual FX)

ThisIsCreation (vocal work)

CaptainFaraday (audio work)

IlFanEditore (Italian language audio track)

KetchupGore (German language audio track)

Burbin (English, Spanish, and French subtitles)

||FanEditore (Italian subtitles)

nevertellmetheodds (Dutch, German subtitles)

ChernobylLiquidator86 (Portuguese subtitles)

LILLIAN02230 (audio work)

21C Peasant (visual FX)

Chase Adams (3PO dialogue)

Cinefy (music mockups)

sade1212 (video help, audio work)

idir_hh (video help)

Octorox (video help)

mrbenjamino (audio work)

bbghost (audio work)

MaláStrana (help proofreading French subtitles)

Cuts and Additions (changes for Version 2 indicated with asterisks):

- Overall color correction using LUTs provided by skenera

- Added a new opening crawl, thanks to Sir Ridley:

Epis

Hey everyone,

after 3 years of using and approx. one year of using daily in kinda high amounts (30-60GPD) I finally kicked the sludge. I tried to kick it 2 times prior with little to no withdrawal symptoms but quickly hopped on it again since my brain told me: "Yo, quitting was not that bad so you are not really addicted. Just go slow this time. Max 2 times a week". I guess my love for fairy tails is still strong in me... Yeah it used daily again 3 days after that lol.

After this relapse I used alot again peaking at 60-80 grams for a very short while (maybe 2 weeks) and also felt lost, depressed and motivationless again. At some point I realized how much this bullcrap plantpowder cost me. No libido whatsoever, brainfog, no motivation, heigthended depression and anxiety. I was just sitting around taking kratom for 5 minutes of slight euphoria and then hours of feeling like shit and berating myself for using, rince and repeat, only watching stupid Youtube-videos wasting my f****** life away. I was not motivated to do ANYTHING but sitting around and wasting my time. No training, no meditation, no DJ-ing, no music, no gaming, no reading. Essentially all my hobbies were dead. And man this sucks so much to see your old self falling appaert from a incredible numb and apathetic Point of view. I once was a person embracing change, doing new stuff, working on myself, progressing to beat my depression and BOOM kratom entered the chat and set me back in so many ways.

I changed so much in those 3 years. It is crazy. And only for the worst...

I dont't need to tell you guys how great it is in the beginning. It was a wonder weapon against depression and anxiety but as soon as I started to use higher and higher amounts to get high it morphed from a crutch into a hurdle. It started to controll my life. Most days I would only eat one meal so the food would not lessen the kratom high. And the crazy thing about this is I DID NOT realize I was addicted to this shit. When I think back I am just baffeled about my stupidity and the power of my brain to rationlize my behaviour. Opioids ARE sneaky. I know this for a fact now.

With peak consumption also my depression and anxiety peaked. I have problems with those things anyway but I am pretty sure kratom made it way way worse. Never in my past I had to be six week on sick leave because I cant handle everyday life...

After giving myself alot of time to think about all that slowly but surely I relized all that I wrote abov

For context I'm a Refuse Driver (Garbage man) & today I was on food waste. After I'd tipped I was checking the wagon for any defects when I spotted a lone pea balanced on the lifts.

I said "hey look, an escaPEA"

No one near me but it didn't half make me laugh for a good hour or so!

Edit: I can't believe how much this has blown up. Thank you everyone I've had a blast reading through the replies 😂

Warning: long post written by a complete idiot ahead!

There are a ton of better posts about Vim than this one by more experienced, more knowledgeable people. There is nothing specific or actionable in this post, and in fact, is mostly not about Vim. I'm merely just sharing my story as a complete beginner. I feel like it may encourage some of you who are curious about Vim, but maybe you're a bit intimidated, as I was. I still am, but I'm starting to gain some real confidence.

Part 1: My perspective before trying Vim

I started programming when I was 8 years old using Microsoft Visual Basic 3.0. This was basically a WYSIWYG editor that let you double-click on controls that you've placed on a Windows Form, then it'd pop open a text editor that let you write code for that control. Other than programming, I'd hang out in random chatrooms and play a bunch of games, but I always used a mouse and I taught myself how to type. This was also when I wasn't quite fluent in English and had issues reading, so reading the .chm help files not only taught me how to code, but I also practiced my English comprehension skills.

I eventually got into C and C++ because I was fascinated with hacking PC games. In this era, I was using Microsoft Visual C++ 6 (back before it was called "Visual Studio") and felt like it was a great tool.

Fast forward a bit, I got into Java and ended up using, of all things, Notepad. I learned Java in highschool and we had super old Windows machines and we were forced to use floppy disks. The teacher forced us to use Notepad as our editor and save/compile/run everything from floppies so that it would intentionally be painfully slow. This developed a skill in my brain for essentially acting as a human compiler; I was able to detect and fix syntax and logical errors before the javac compiler could finish. But I always thought "it would be nice to have something like Visual C++, but for Java."

Then I learned about Eclipse. Big, heavy, slow, Eclipse, but it had all the crazy features (and then some) of Visual C++. It was a thick IDE, for sure. I used it for both Java and C/C++ while in college, but not the entire time. In college, I'd say about 75% of my code was in C, 20% was in C++, and 5% was in Java.

Then I learned about Intelli-J and the entire JetBrains suite of products. I felt like it was the best of both words: lighter weight and much faster than Eclipse, lots of wizards and auto-magic stuff like the Microsoft IDEs, plus it was comp

It really does, I swear!

"Alert! Long range sensors picking up active energy signature. Identification in progress..." MILF immediate warning quickly caused a commotion. Escort fleet changed formation at once, forming a frontal barrier in front of the "Deliverance". Automated defense systems and smaller crafts prepared for engagement. "Identification complete. Orbital station in the upper atmosphere of the planet. Allegiance:..."

"...Ursakan. Imperial scum." scorn in Yukimura's voice was denser than osmium. Not only the emblem of a big, open maw and two clawed paws, but also quick scan of the structure has proven his statement. Alien space station loomed in the skies above the greenish landscape, slowly turning around in one place. "The fleet that was sent to exterminate our species belongs to them. They have already spotted us and likely preparing for battle. There is no time to wait - we must attack!"

"Understood. Ava, Donald - prepare our forces. We can't allow this thing to interfere with our plans." ordered Sebastian, turning on the tactical table.

"Aye-aye, sur!"

"Leav' this to me."

When two commanders left to conduct their duties, Yukimura again spoke with the Supreme Commander.

"All of the data on these xenos is uploaded. All of my men and women are briefed and ready. But I have to ask to add a new objective into our strategy."

"You need prisoners, right?" leader of the arkship wasn't happy to hear it. He was acutely aware of what "Beholder" did with captured aliens. Even the worst dictators and torturers of humanity's dark past weren't as gruesomely creative as operatives of that organization. And considering how long they were hunting uninvited visitors, "Beholder" got awfully good at it.

"Yes. Bring me everyone and everything that is sentient and not gunned down." Yukimura very menacingly adjusted his gloves, malevolent fire burned in deep eyes of Mankind's defender. "I will squeeze every last drop of information out of their worthless carcasses."

"You are brutal."

"Someone has to be. Do your part. For the good of us all."

Quick approach to the target has shown that it wasn't heavily defended. This was an outpost type, not a military citadel. Pictures of the surface has shown a small town, connected to it via ground-based spaceport. Assumption was made that it was a minor mining or agricultural colony.

Ursakan defense fleet consisted of ten Sweeper-class corvettes, five Fist-class frigates and one Just-class destroyer. They formed a battle-position resembl