« first day (748 days earlier)      last day (3065 days later) » 

Dangit @James, we almost made it to 24 hours!
Why would I want that?
You guys are slacking off.
I've been busy with the podcast. Someone has to keep chat going
You only had to render 2 more hours... I don't know why anyone would want it to go 24 hours without any chatting, but it was something to try for.
@James "If you had a business, you would find it very difficult to fire loyal but underperforming employees." Huh?
Oh, misread it.
The first podcast has officially been posted :)
Subscribe!
18:56
what did you end up using for recording?
@AndyD273 VSee to teleconference, OBS for video recording, Audacity for audio recording.
cool
@James I got MEDIATOR (INFP-T), and a picture of a shoeless hippie dancing around with a flower.
@NexTerren That seems pretty accurate. I can picture you in a grass skirt.
...I don't want to but I can.
@James Well I can picture you in a goatee and glasses, so there.
18:58
Well played sir.
So what did James get?
@NexTerren Debater (ENTP-A)
I always suspected that DaaaahWhoosh was Canadian... What makes a good man go neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
Apparently I don't care about other's feelings and like people based on how competent they are.
Go forth and youtube the podcast has been posted: youtube.com/channel/UCar5xDnyEGKpjpFKxRRoKzw?view_as=public
8
I know for certain I got something different when I started college... can't remember what it was, though.
19:01
I've pretty consistently been ENTP so far as I can remember.
Your Youtube message got one of the fancy empty stars...
@NexTerren Chat owner powers ftw.
Didn't you notice my name is all slanty?
So when are we going to make the next one? @james @NexTerren
@Green Now that we have the technical stuff sorted out I think we can pretty easily generate 1 a month or so. Thoughts?
19:14
@James I'd say no more frequently than every two weeks (just because of the amount of work involved) but every month seems good to me.
I'd like to get Monica on the show. That'd be a fascinating conversation, if she was willing.
Agreed, I like inviting guests.
I'm highly inclined to go back and watch the show for a second time, just because I like it that much.
We may also want to consider smaller, more frequent shows that address just a single question or small set of questions. 1.5 hours is a lot of material to digest.
I'm listening right now, background noise at work.
Maybe a 10 or 15 minute segment.
I was thinking about length too...but I don't want to cut out conversation...its what we are good at.
something to ponder for sure.
19:19
15-45, depending on how the banter is going
it doesn't really have to be a fixed length, just until you run out of stuff to say
and if it gets to long, split it in half
@AndyD273 We could always do this...not a bad idea, release 45 minutes of an hour and a half show every 2 weeks (if that's how it works out)
@Green I feel 10-15 mins an episode is too short, myself. A podcast should be more something to listen on a city commute, or over a lunch break, less something to watch during a commercial break. :P
@AndyD273 ...the dreaded "to be continued" sign at the end of the show.
@NexTerren For a pure audio podcast, sure. Longer shows are well adapted to commuting, running, etc, etc, etc.
But for a video production, 10 to 15 is a good length for watching.
@Green I mean how much is lost cutting the video out? They don't get to see... like... the screenshot of our website? A picture of Golum?
@Green Sorta. But if there is a natural break in between subjects then it doesn't have to be a cliffhanger.
Even if you do end up splitting it up in the middle of a section, just have the host say "We'll continue this next time"
19:24
@Green I mean I think the video certain adds, but i don't see why we should limit the length based on it being a video unless we drastically begin engaging the visual medium.
@NexTerren For the pilot, I don't think anything would be lost by losing the video.
True...
Also I'd argue that TV has been 22 mins/44 mins for a long time (removing commercials), so you can easily go over 10 - 15 mins for video.
@NexTerren ha! :) I'm advocating for a variety of lengths ranging from 10 minutes to 1.5 hours. I think there's utility in all those lengths.
I feel like we should keep it that way too
19:25
@Green Ah, gotcha.
Question for chat about a WBing question.
@NexTerren Also, the shorter lengths will decrease our turn-around time.
I currently like the video at the moment because I don't know your voices well enough yet to pick out who is who by voice alone. I can look at the video and see who's talking. And if no one is talking then it's whoosh. After a few episodes it'll probably be less of a problem.
If we get good at this, we can get setup in less than 10 minutes, talk for 15 to 20 (trim out the stuff we don't want to broadcast) then upload the Audio-video for processing.
I want to attempt to introduce a species based on a quote that's always stuck with me since I first heard it. However the species, by implication of the quote, would be so drastically different from humans on a mental/brain chemistry level, I'm not sure where to begin.
Like figuring out how they think, act... what civilizations might look like with them, etc.
@NexTerren What was the quote?
19:27
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison, the Federalist #51
So angels then?
Well, not literal angels.
That's going to require a really specific definition of "angel".
Well I'm goign 100% with the metaphoric implication, not actual divine beings.
I think that by definition, an angel can't be 3+1 dimentional like humans
But if you just want winged humanoids...
19:29
Basically creatures so different from us on a brain chemistry level (even if their physical bodies might look human from the outside) that governments, for both external security, internal security, and to combat internal selfish desires among the internal struggles... wouldn't have a functional purpose. The concept of needing a government would just be alien to them.
Nah, human all except their brains, @AndyD273.
Like I feel like that'd be an incredibly interesting species in a setting, but I don't know how to approach it.
So a species that has a will to strive toward something better, but without any selfishness
I kinda think they'd have to be immortal
How would you get over the evolutionary requirement to be selfish or at least self-interested?
James Madison was arguing that people are flawed and selfish and generally morally compromised, making governments necessary. 'Angels' is just used metaphorically in the quote.
@Green I dunno. Biology, chemistry, and meteorology have never been my strong suits. I was more curious about what the culture would possibly be like. The easy concept is 'pleasant humans' but like... their brains would have to be wired so totally different than our own it's baffling to think about.
@NexTerren They would definitely have blue-orange morality then.
...Add geography to that list for those 'alternate Earth' geography questions. I always feel so helpless reading those. <_<
@Green blue-orange morality?
The only way that I can see to get around the requirement to be selfish is to be immortal and possibly eternal, to the point where there isn't really a need to do thing for themselves or their descendants at the expense of others, because there is always time to put others first.
@NexTerren Yeah, for normal humans, you have good and evil. This requires a certain set of world view axioms. If you substitute in a completely different set of world-view axioms, you get a different set of morals. To convey this, the term blue-orange morality was created.
I'd probably nominate it as most likely to be referred to philosophy SE
@Green Okay, hm, yeah, I kind of gathered that from the link.
Think Philosophy SE would be fine with it?
Cuz if they would that might be a good place to start to wrap my brain around it...
My favorite example is that normal humans consider nukes to be really bad. However, if you're immortal/eternal then nukes aren't all that bad. Eve Online players shoot each other with nukes for fun!
19:37
@NexTerren can you find me the link for the lotr meme
...Philosophy Stack Exchange is kind of quiet. I'm spoiled by WB's activity level.
@NexTerren That was almost as long as the movies..
@AndyD273 And arguably even better than the movies.
at the very least it was funnier.
Okay, but say I want to break down figuring out this race (especially the culture/individual interaction) to a series of scope-appropriate questions for World Building. What do you guys think the questions would be?
19:42
That's true
I'm not sure how to even ask good questions in light of where I'm standing. Or what question should be asked first.
1
Q: The first podcast has been posted!

JamesEpisode 1 is now available for all your nerd complaints! ;) Please let us know what you think here, in chat or in the comments. Thanks to Green, DaaaaWhoosh, Nex and Art for making it all possible. The Factory Floor YouTube Channel

Hmm. Well, you can't ask how they would react to situations because that would be opinion based.
You might do well to start a chart like the alignment chart, and place on there what you think they'd feel toward different events
I was THINKING for the first question I'd ask "how would society be with an absence of government and the absence for a need of government?" but that feels way too wide. And I'm having trouble making it less wide. ...And it also feels opinion based? I think? WBing and opinion based always feels like trying to hold Jello.
Yeah, why I always vote to leave those questions alone. If the person is looking for opinions, let the people that want to participate give them opinions.
Anyway...
19:48
@TrEs-2b I remembered you!
Excellent
Maybe start by looking at why we need a government, and then you can look at ways to remove those things
Saw the podcast, looked great!
@TrEs-2b And I'm sorry about the one answer you gave to one of my questions. I think I was the only person who upvoted you...
On other did
I don't even know why it was so downvoted! on the bright side it was still a rep gain for me
19:50
@AndyD273 Well the big three I thought of in relation to the quote were protection from external violence, protection from internal violence, and setting internal disputes of self-driven interest.
@TrEs-2b Like seriously. I could see a couple tossed your way and no upvotes, but... they seriously put you in the ground. I don't get it.
Even the answer that ignored your point that they can understand it got a better reception
Oh, a hive mind, or at least a strongly telepathic race.
Every human is alone inside their own head.
2
@NexTerren Defining population size will matter a lot in this question. How 100M individuals behave is very different than 100 individuals.
The only things that you know about me are the things that leak out through my deeds and words.
An average person is good, people are wild, panicky animals
19:56
@Green Right, I guess I should introduce that. I was even having trouble defining a technology level in my question (since technology affects culture, and culture technology) since the progress of technology would be so alien as compared to our own.
@NexTerren I think if you decide on these angel's biology, you'll get their motivations to act pretty quickly from that. With motivations, you'll get what kinds of technology they favor. From favored tech, you can map out it's evolution.
Or, I'd be really interested in taking a shot at modeling that evolution, if you are especially keen on it.
I have a feeling the question is too broad, keep in mind that species does not equal culture
I've been reading up a lot on system evolution recently so I'd very much like to try.
@Green see?! Evolution is the coolest!
^(imagine a dorky slur voice)^
OK, so protection from external violence; Either there are no external threats, or if there is an external threat every member selflessly works together to remove it without needing to be told to. Internal threats aren't a problem if everyone knows what everyone else is thinking through telepathy or whatever. People who are mentally ill or distressed would be noticed and helped right away.
20:00
@TrEs-2b Amen! It's that nice mix between predictable and unpredictable. It's a simple question of "In general, will this capability make something survive better over another individual who doesn't have this capability?"
@James by the way, how often is the podcast going to be?
@TrEs-2b We were discussing that earlier. About every month is the expected frequency right now
@Green some of the best answers I have seen on this site; Anatomically correct Griffin and Medusa, they were long, detailed, the perfect answers
The former even hit the word limit on their answer
@TrEs-2b I wrote a agent based simulation for one question. What happens in a species with three genders (basically humans but where lesbians can have children together without male involvement).
hmm, interesting concept
might steal that one ;D
20:03
@TrEs-2b Turns out that the population is highly sensitive to initial conditions if there aren't any population limiters such as war or disease.
In just a few generations, I saw discrepencies of up to 50% more of one gender than the other two. That's never a good thing.
12
A: Mating Habits and Social Structures of a Three Gender Species

GreenThis is a really interesting species to think about. Since the problem isn't easily done in the mind, I did some agent-based modeling to see what would happen. A more extensive write-up of that question can be found on WorldBuilding's blog on Medium.com. My primary finding was that the ratio o...

@Green So M + F = M or F, F + F = M or F?
Or...
Clicks
Oh. Huh. That's a lot more complex.
So, A+B=C, A+C=B, B+C=A. B and C are fetus carriers. A just donates genetic material.
But I guess B and C also can donate material.
@NexTerren you mean B and C can also donate material. Yours implies you are talking about what B and C can do other than donate.
@NexTerren True, they do but only one of them gets pregnant from each "coupling".
20:11
@TrEs-2b So I double-checked, triple-checked, and quadrupled-checked what I said, saying to myself "...Maybe it does read that way?" but I'm still not seeing the ambiguity as compared to your version. :P
@NexTerren it's one of those stupid English grammar rules that make no sense and are un-noticeable. Give me a minute, I'll check one of my language books to see if I can find the rule
("You often spend time exploring unrealistic and impractical yet intriguing ideas." Why yes, yes I do. (Taken from the 16 Personalities quiz.))
@Green AGREEE!
Oh, speaking of odd grammar rules (in this case an unwritten one), I found this interesting: i.imgur.com/0KHDp42.png
@NexTerren I've seen that one, tested it and love that it works! I don't even know that I do it, I just do it!
20:15
("You often contemplate the reasons for human existence." And, all the weird alt-humans that might exist too).
@TrEs-2b Apparently it works better for Canadians, best for British citizens, but it's inconsistent for Americans.
Yes!
Canada rules, even if our prime minister is a sexy idiot
@TrEs-2b no no, your last prime minister was an idiot, this one is sexy
Did you here that he wants change the anthem!
For ''In all our sons command'' into ''In all our command''
@James Troudeau is pretty awesome. Harper can burn in toxic sludge for all eternity.
And I'm not Canadian.
20:19
1. it sounds dumb
2. it makes no grammatical sense
3. it throws off the wholes anthems rhythm
4. it doesn't need to change!
@TrEs-2b Why does he want the change?
@TrEs-2b Yeah but in his defense the US is hogging all the crazy lately and he is feeling left out.
INFP-A. In times past it's been INTP.
@NexTerren I'm... I'm beginning to fear he may be an SJW
I've also gotten ENTP on especially good days.
20:21
@TrEs-2b OH. Because it's "son" instead of "gender neutral word?"
@James Millions of Canadians (which is more impressive in Canada) sent him angry letters
@TrEs-2b Angry Canadian letter: "Could you consider not doing this, 'eh? We'd appreciate it, thanks!"
@NexTerren Yeah, hopefully he drags himself out of this trench and back to his farm to lead us in important ways
...we haven't made fun of Canadians lately.
@James I feel like making fun of them for being too nice is virtually not making fun of them.
20:23
I feel that Canadians hate Americans waaaaay more than Americans hate Canadians, am I right on this?
@NexTerren It's their secret defense
We don't really hate canadians
I mean some hockey fans might
"He's a trait I feel is admirable! I'm going to say that you're the embodiment of that trait! That'll show you!"
but in large part I would assert that americans just don't really care about Canadians or think about them.
I... don't think Americans generally hate Canada? Exceptions to every rule, but... Either we just don't care, or we like Canada.
@TrEs-2b Canada and America: i.imgur.com/vlPvDMr.gif
Yeah, wait until we pull another 1812 on you.
@NexTerren which slide comes first?
20:26
@TrEs-2b I'm pretty sure if you attacked New York City again the druggies in the streets alone would overwhelm you.
@TrEs-2b "I feel bad for you." "I don't think about you at all." The second is a comeback at the other guy.
As in "I think poorly of you." "Well you're not even worth thinking about."
(Joke, so we're clear. I don't hate Canada. :P)
K
Canada is the best except when we're burning down capitals, enslaving foreigners to build railroads, selling asbestos or forcing assimilation by residential schools
:D
@TrEs-2b See? You're more like the US than you want to admit.
The only thing I hate about Canada is Newfoundland & Labrador

2 separate names
2 separate provincial governments
2 separate landmasses
1 province, for the love of all that is holy!
@NexTerren but you can't deny that our border disputes are a lot more entertaining and less violent
@TrEs-2b Less violent... I'll give you that. Entertaining depends on what you find entertaining. :P
Like the Pearl Harbor dispute is certainly fascinating.
Hans isle is definitely entertaining as is Machias Seal Island. Whiskey and Lighthouses are our only involvement in these
something I noticed in the podcast that bothered me was that only Green answers the question; what worlds would you want to be involved with in worldbuilding stack exchange
he goes on about the cloth eating sock moster then you guys just, move on
20:40
@TrEs-2b What time is that?
Time on the video I mean.
towards the end, just a sec gotta pull it up
Yeah that was sort of meant to be a follow up question for him based on the answer before it, but in retrospect that would have been a good question for everyone.
oh, okay I must have heard the question wrong
Okay, good. I was worried that I ignored James.
@James I think that should be an actual question thought, seems like a good one.
20:49
I apparently have annotations off on the video and can't find the switch to turn them back on. Help, gents?
Press the little gear, an switch for annotations should be on top
the gear is on the left of the fullscreen option for youtube
Gear only gives me Autoplay, Speed, and Quality. Hm.
I wonder why...
Sometimes it refuses to give me speed or autoplay, youtube problems.
Ew. Oh well.
@NexTerren Click on your name/image in the upper right hand corner.
20:54
Remember, those problems do not matter, what matters is that negetive content is taken down!
Go to settings and then select playback from the navigation pane
26,747 likes vs 868,853 dislikes on the Youtube Heroes Video, thats over 90% hatred ratio!
0
Q: Series of worlds?

TrEs-2bThe recent Great Lakes Earth Series has made me wonder, should questions, that share no common name, about a world be linked on meta? unlike arguments on Planet of the Aves Series and Anatomically Correct Series have pointed out, question such as these lack a common feature and begs the question.

@James It appears turned on there.
well it appears you broke the internet again then...
20:59
Like Kim Kardashion but for real and not fake
@NexTerren Go to 1:16:19
 
2 hours later…
22:43
My most upvoted meta answer is now a jocular one explaining why TV Tropes is a waste of time.
I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Also, I got my second Yearling badge!
Now, back to your regular scheduled chat programming.

« first day (748 days earlier)      last day (3065 days later) »