If you're a gamer, you'll want to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBzqOa9y02I

Not only does it capture PERFECTLY the emotions I have after completing a particularly engrossing game, but it also does a marvellous job of showcasing just why we, gamers, love the hobby we share. :)

That is all.

The webcomic in question can be found at: http://goblins.keenspot.com/

Be warned; this is a gritty, violent and often disturbing webcomic that deals with very mature themes. It is most definitely NOT for children.

And more importantly, do you enjoy seeing satirical spoofs of your favourite movies? If your answer to the above two questions is "Yes", check out this Flash animation from Newgrounds.

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/524391

Don't worry, Jake. I'm sure you can get her to engage in "kinky Earth sex" with a little time and patience. XD

This is what OKC listed for today's IceBreaker:

"We found a mystery match for you …and she likes bonk!"

... Bwuh? Seriously, OKC, how do you pick out these interests?? Do you just trawl through accounts looking for matching words? I'll stick to my usual methods of screening for matches, thank you. :P

P.S. Yes, I am aware of the sexual connotations for the word 'bonk'. But it's such a TRIVIAL thing to try to match somebody else with, not to mention it could easily be taken in a number of different contexts.

So, I've completed 4002 Match Questions, and OKC says that it has no more questions for me. It also says that it knows me "98.4%". (Translation: It probably also knows WAY more about me than it ever wants to know.)

Incidentally, OKC, your link to the Question Mod page is broken! Is that something you want me to report? Or you just never expected anyone to ever fill out that many questions and thus never created the page in the first place? ;)

While normally a congealed mass of silly, immature, or downright ludicrous ramblings and babbles, Cracked.com does occasionally come up with truly thought-provoking gems like this one:

http://www.cracked.com/article/192_6-insane-laws-well-need-in-future_p1

I'm not quite sure whether to be fascinated or repulsed by the vision of the future it presents; a dystopian society where every aspect of life from birth to death is rigidly controlled, and humanity is so far removed from the 'mundane' aspects of life that perhaps the so-called real world (or 'meatspace', as cyberpunk aficionados would term it) is of less importance than what transpires in cyberspace.

I'm just going to do some musing here on several topics touched on in that article, although I'd love to hear the thoughts of anybody else who's read the article!

<b>Mandatory Life Span Limits:</b>

This really has to do with the concept of easily obtainable human immortality, something which I think is feasible, but it has several major hurdles to overcome. While scientists HAVE discovered the process by which aging is caused, arresting this process only stops you from aging; it can't make you any younger. This means that until we reach a point where the technology is commonly available AND we can apply it to people who are still young/healthy enough that life would still be enjoyable, the vision of the article's writer of a world overflowing with old people is highly unlikely. It might sound incomprehensible to young people (even I have trouble really grasping the thought at times), but as your physical body begins to fail, you eventually do reach a point where you don't really want to live anymore. Arthritic joints and atrophied muscles mean you can no longer really partake in activities and hobbies you used to enjoy when you were younger, while fading senses means that sensual activities like eating, drinking, and sex lose their pleasure. Degenerative illnesses like dementia or senility might mean that even purely mental pursuits are beyond you, and soon you'll feel like you're just an observer on the sidelines of life, trapped in a body that can no longer take part. Would you really want to live like that? I've spoken to some really elderly people, and the overwhelming impression I got from them was that they were just WAITING to die.

So, while the thought of a society ruled by the old and experienced is a very intriguing one, I think it very unlikely that such an event will come to pass. But once we DO get to the point where people can apply for the immortality treatment in the prime of their lives, we'll have a very interesting scenario on our hands. The article's author is right; people DO need to die in order for society, and the wider environment, to keep functioning. The main issue here is the problem of basic resources; the Earth only has a limited amount of space, fresh water and raw materials for its inhabitants. We're already seeing several parts of the ecosystem strained to breaking point with our current population. It would be absolutely catastrophic if people stopped dying (save for accidents) and the population continued to grow unhindered.

Under such a scenario, the only feasible solution is to either impose a cap on reproduction, or to enforce mandatory life span limits. Such I doubt that anybody who's having such a great time being alive would consent to legally enforceable death, we will have to use a reproductive cap. Perhaps couples can only have children if another member of society decides they don't want to live anymore, or if the couple agrees to stop having the immortality treatments as a price for having children. I really can't see any other way around it.

<b>Genetic Screening/Designer Babies:</b>

While I am strongly against the idea of forbidding people with genetic disorders to reproduce, I also see the practical benefits of genetic screening to ensure that one's offspring won't possess traits that could be harmful to their health and well-being. I only support using this technology to screen for genetic disorders which present a risk to the child's health though; I don't believe in allowing parents to specify what kind of eye colour, height, intelligence, athletic ability etc. their child has. Besides, that might open the doors to creating near-total homogeneity in a particular society, something that would not only be stagnating, but also potentially dangerous to the long-term survival of a species. Genetic diversity is important in ensuring that no single disease or similar attack can wipe out an entire species.

<b>Manufactured Children:</b>

Of all the issues covered in the article, this is the one that rattles me the most. The thought of creating a child purely in a test-tube, without even using sperm or eggs from donors, is aberrant, even abhorrent to me. A child should have a pair of biological parents, at the very least, even if they end up being adopted by different parents/orphanages/wards of the state. It would at least give them a sense of grounding, being able to trace their lineage back through history.

<b>Sex Laws of the Future/Rights for AI:</b>

I'll start by saying straight off that if an AI is intelligent enough to be aware of its own existence, to think and question rationally, and to make educated choices, it should be accorded all rights (and responsibilities) available to humans. The same goes for any animals that achieve (or are engineered until they achieve) human-level intelligence.

As a strong proponent of freedom of speech, I was quite appalled to hear of the Christopher Handley case cited in the article. It was a victimless crime; no real people or animals were harmed in the making of the the artwork, and it sets a dangerous precedent. What about authors who write about criminal activities (terrorism, child abuse, rape) as part of their stories? Can they, or the people who read them, be charged just because some people happen to be offended by them? If so, there's a certain newspaper in Denmark that released some inflammatory comics that I'd like to draw your attention to...

Working off that concept, I feel that any activity conducted in a VR environment, no matter how twisted or depraved I may find them, as long as the user never intends to act them out in real life, is fair game. For that matter, even in real life, as long as all participants in an activity are informed, consenting individuals, whether they're humans or AI, whatever they choose to do behind closed doors is nobody's concern but theirs.

<b>Cloning:</b>

I feel that the issue of cloning is highly oversensationalised. Natural clones happen in the real world all the time; they're called identical twins. And as any set of identical twins will tell you, they're each their own person, with their own thoughts and hopes and dreams. The idea that cloning somebody will create an exact copy of a person is laughable.

That said, I am opposed to the idea of cloning another copy of yourself simply to harvest their organs. Why do that, when it would be a lot simpler and easier simply to just grow the necessary organs in a lab instead? That's what I feel cloning technology should be focused on, rather than all this hype about messing with the sanctity of life.

---

Phew! That's the longest journal entry I've ever written here! Again, if anybody has any thoughts they'd like to add, I'd love to hear them! :)

Barkspawn. That's AWESOME! XD

Five minutes of uncontrollable laughter later...

OK, yeah... I have to agree with Tycho here. I'm not sure I like the direction that gaming is taking with micropayments. I remember the days when you went to the store and bought a game, and it contained the full and final product (barring any patches to fix undetected bugs, of course). These days it seems like developers are deliberately holding back some content, just to force people to buy them later. And it's a growing trend.

Now, I'm usually on the developer's side here. I work in the IT industry. I know how TIGHT budgets can get. I usually don't begrudge them trying to make some extra money, but can't you at least include a premium product that includes ALL the content up front? The micropayments method very much makes us feel like we're getting sold an incomplete bill of goods first-up. (Blizzard, take note for Starcraft 2!) I grant a little more leeway to stuff that's purely cosmetic (like those hats in Team Fortress 2), but when the items in question is actual PLAYABLE content; new quests, new areas to explore, new NPCs with whom to interact... That's when I start to get grouchy.

Today I came across what is probably the ULTIMATE argument for the importance of using proper spelling, grammar, capitalisation and punctuation while on the Internet. Observe!

"There is a HUGE difference in meaning between the following two sentences:

'I helped my uncle, Jack, off a horse.'

'I helped my uncle jack off a horse.'"

Q.E.D.

Thought #1: ... What the hell? Did the site get hacked?

Thought #2: Oh, Geocities is closing today?

Thought #3: ... Man, looking at this old-school style of HTML brings back memories... From 1995.

Thought #4: *realising I've almost doubled in age since then* ... Gods, I'm old...

Thought #5: Oh well. At least the comic's still good.

Ohhh, XKCD... You mixed bag of joy and sorrow.

Soo... I just took The Virgin Test, and I scored 76%, better than 95% of all takers on the test. O.o Also, I'm better at picking out whether a particular girl is a virgin or not.

Don't worry, ladies. I promise to use this power only for good! ;)