People are going to do the laziest thing possible. More at 11.

dork stop.

In the megaman II manual, the section where it explains how to enter save codes (its like a matrix where you fill in the bubbles), it had an example code, which gave you all the boss items.

Take my money, ebussy.

Started doing PT for an injury I sustained in my 20’s, and then largely ignored. Its made a huge difference. Probably going to quit one of my business (sell my stake) and take a lower paying role so I can focus on building up my vanilla operation. In my 20’s I focused on living in a manner consistent with my values. In my 30s I thought I could “get ahead” and took a corporate job, then started my own company. Now in my 40’s, its time to get back to my roots while I can still push it physically.

Often secret codes hidden in the manual

You should check the link I posted. Honolulu has a crapton of brutalism, so I wouldn’t associate it necessarily with any political movement.

I think where brutalism exists now is more a function of when an area was being developed, and it just happens that those areas underwent substantial development while brutalism was en vogue (late 50’s - late 1970s).

Honolulu has a bunch of brutalism, along with a bunch of other architectural movements

https://thinktechhawaii.com/more-tropical-brutalism-humane-architecture/

I had to screen grab it, but there is actually a brutalist bhudist temple in Chinatown in Honolulu

It actually started in France in the 1940s

I get it. You care immensely about Rorschach. But please, go actually read the thread we’re in. Go re-read our conversation.

We’re not having a conversation about Rorschach being good or evil. Only you are discussing that and you are doing it alone.

We’re having a conversation about whether or not insisting that things can only be analyzed along a “good versus evil” axis, be it implicitly as the comic engages in the fallacy, or explicitly, as you engage in the fallacy; that the insistence that things have to be analyzed along a good versus evil axis is inherently reductionist: Rorschach being good or evil isn’t a part of our conversation, in-spite of your (reductionist) efforts to make that the conversation.

The entire point was to demonstrate that you don’t have to accept reductionist framing to do media analysis. Even if the creator of that media rely on such simplistic analysis, you can reject that, and assert a more nuanced view, which I showed you by giving some analysis that didn’t rely on a simplistic good versus evil framing. Thinking of the world as “good versus evil”, especially in a piece of content as nuanced as The Watchmen, its reductionist to the point of ruining the meaning of the story. Its a framing not even worth engaging with, because those who insist on doing so are either children with no perspective, or media/ literature illiterate, or religious fanatics.

The Watchmen isn’t a fantastic piece of literature because its a battle of good versus evil; its a fantastic because it is its exactly not a battle of good versus evil, and all parts of the story evoke this theme. Its messy, and its complicated, and no one is wholly pure while no-one else is purely tainted. The Watchmen stood out as a piece of literature precisely because it broke comics out of the extraordinarily linear trope of good-versus-evil, and allowed characters to be much more like the real life, where they are flawed, but redeemable; where morality is subjective and dependent on the position of the observer.

If you insist in agreeing with the comic we’re analyzing: Its like you genuinely didn’t understand The Watchmen or why it matters as a piece of content. Because its also clear that the author of the comic also didn’t genuinely understand The Watchmen.

I’ve got 3 copies. And I’ve pirated the moving comic version.

Thanks though.

And good luck to you, I hope you learn to read (and comprehend what words mean), for the sake of your kids.

I take it all back. I think you might actually be illiterate.

deleted by creator

Bruh you are just like, a getting whooshed machine?

your remix of the comic in and of itself is reductionist.

Yes, that is what I told you, because you needed it explained. I made a comic mocking you for doing the thing. Then I had to make an entire comment explaining it to you. Thank you for FINALLY catching up. It took you several hours to finally get that you were being whooshed, but at least you’ve finally landed.

And the point of making the remix is to highlight the point that the comic, and yourself are being reductionist in the same way: The edit is making fun of the fact that you are doing the exact thing I’m being critical of… But instead of pushing back on the critique of the comic (which I maintain as reductionist), you actually engaged in the act of being reductionist, which again, thanks, because this has been hilarious.

When the artist themselves attributes a word like ‘good’ or ‘bad’ to the description of their character, to the very essence behind their creation — you are not allowed to simply say that they are wrong.

Finally something substantive.

No. The artist (or creator of any kind really) has no say in how someone else wants to interpret their work. They can ask you to interpret it this way, or that way, but its truly not up to them. How people choose to consume something is up to them. The act of artistic expression is always a joint exercise between both the creator and the interpreter of that creation. You, as an artist, don’t get to choose how your work is interpreted or received. You can advocate or hope its received and taken to mean something, but that does mean it actually does.

I think a better way to criticize media is instead of thinking characters as good or evil, ask, “are they effective?”, and in this sense, I consider Rorschach to be an effective character. They aren’t there to be good or evil, they’re there to be a reflective surface for the world they find themselves in, and in this way they are an effective character.

And if an artist misses what they are doing with their own work, and they do ALL the time, I don’t need to agree with them.

I mean I appreciate you participating in at least that you’re continuing to demonstrate, if not media illiteracy, actual illiteracy.

My remix of the comic was done to demonstrate the same obtuseness of the comic, which is exactly the point I’m making. Good versus evil, and the idea that one is a right interpretation and the other is wrong, is exceptionally reductionist. And you, and I really have to say thank you for this, you playing the part of just parroting that exceptionally reductionist logic, for which, I really can’t thank you enough.

Not only have you did we get to experience a worked example, we got to live out a meta-version of the comic itself. And we could not have done it without your media illiteracy or reductionist mindset. 10/10. No notes.

Who is insisting that narrative elements should fit into a good/evil dichotomy here?

The interlocutor in the comic who is asking the other party in the comic to distill Rorschach role to “Good guy/ Bad guy”, then penalizing when they hesitantly give what the interlocutor has presupposed as the “wrong” answer, as they write down the point “media illiterate”.

I mean, the comics right there. Did you look at it before replying?

The “Gee thanks I’m cured” theory of social change.

I wouldn’t speculate trying to split out anything regarding covid. I would treat it as a singular event.