General Questions Thread

[teachopvutru]

What's the average memory blocks does a memory save of a gamecube game takes up?

I'm trying to decide a memory card for my Wii, and then buy some used gamecube games. I hear that the 251 (16MB) is good enough for most people, but that certain games, especially sport games, take up a lot of memory blocks (I have no interest in sport games though).

251 should probably good for my purpose, but I need some assurance .

[Whitemoon648]

When and where is the anime expo/convention this year? I so want to go .

[Sephi]

Originally Posted by Whitemoon648

When and where is the anime expo/convention this year? I so want to go .

A quick google led me to animenewsnetwork. Which had the following info

Originally Posted by animenewsnetwork

Anaheim, California (April 10, 2008) — Attendees registered as guests within
the official Anime Expo® 2008 Hotel Room Blocks will be able to access the
24-hour complimentary shuttle service which will provide transportation from
all official convention hotels to this year's Anime Expo® 2008 held from
July 3-6, 2008 at the Los Angeles Convention Center in Los Angeles, CA.
More information can be found on the website www.anime-expo.org

Link to the article

[tripperazn]

Originally Posted by tiachopvutru

What's the average memory blocks does a memory save of a gamecube game takes up?

I'm trying to decide a memory card for my Wii, and then buy some used gamecube games. I hear that the 251 (16MB) is good enough for most people, but that certain games, especially sport games, take up a lot of memory blocks (I have no interest in sport games though).

251 should probably good for my purpose, but I need some assurance .

A 251 will suit you perfectly fine for most GC games (not sure about Wii). The memory card included with the system has like a fraction of the slots, but that was enough for me until I got Animal Crossing (which is huge).

To answer your question, it's highly variable, but it's rare to see a game take up more than single or low double digit slots for saves. Most people only got the 251 so they could take pictures in SSBM.

[Whitemoon648]

Originally Posted by Sephi

A quick google led me to animenewsnetwork. Which had the following info



Link to the article

Oh cool. ty for the answer.

[teachopvutru]

Originally Posted by tripperazn

A 251 will suit you perfectly fine for most GC games (not sure about Wii). The memory card included with the system has like a fraction of the slots, but that was enough for me until I got Animal Crossing (which is huge).

To answer your question, it's highly variable, but it's rare to see a game take up more than single or low double digit slots for saves. Most people only got the 251 so they could take pictures in SSBM.

Oh okay, my only intention to buying a memory card is to save games anyway. But, Animal Crossing is also one of the games I intent to play. Do you know how much the game save of Animal Crossing take up?

It looks like the 251 serves my purpose. Thank you for the reply.

[Comrade]

Here's a silly question for those who know "stuff" about Japan.

Can the word "Kisaragi" be used as a family name?
For example Ayame Kisaragi.

Don't ask why.

[[DOT].L]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Here's a silly question for those who know "stuff" about Japan.

Can the word "Kisaragi" be used as a family name?
For example Ayame Kisaragi.

Don't ask why.

Yes. [plug for word count]

[Spectacular_Insanity]

Can anyone explain the difference to be among the XviD, h264, and .mkv file formats for videos? I can't seem to find a clear explanation of the pros and cons of each, anywhere. Thanks.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Spectacular_Insanity

Can anyone explain the difference to be among the XviD, h264, and .mkv file formats for videos? I can't seem to find a clear explanation of the pros and cons of each, anywhere. Thanks.

MKV doesn't belong with XviD and H.264. MKV is a file container format, and can be compared with AVI, OGM, and to a certain extent MP4. "Container" is really a good descriptor for what it does - it contains the video and audio streams. I can take a video encoded in XviD and move it between AVI, OGM, and MKV formats without ever re-encoding the video - it would look the exact same on all three. The difference is in the features that each format supports. AVI is incredibly old and has problems supporting some of the newer codec formats, such as audio that is encoded in AAC as opposed to MP3, or video that is encoded in H.264 instead of XviD or DivX. AVI also can't hold subtitles within itself, whereas MKV can (AVIs require the subtitle to be a separate file in order for softsubs to work). As a result of this MKV is gaining popularity.

The difference between H.264 and XviD is in how they handle video. Both are video codecs, and there are many other video codecs available as well. The way that the video codec works is by compressing each frame of video. Depending on the designated settings, more detail can be saved (resulting in larger filesize) or details can be dropped (resulting in a lower filesize, but with worse-looking video). If you've worked with images, think of it in terms of the JPEG format. With JPEG you can determine the quality, which is really determining how much detail should be saved. Better quality results in a larger filesize, and vice versa. A video is really just a bunch of images, and the codecs compress each frame in the video (at 29.95 frames per second, that's quite a number of frames to compress).

H.264 uses a stronger compression algorithm than XviD. The end result is that the file size is cut down more than with XviD; put another way, the video quality will be better than an XviD video of the same file size. However, because H.264 uses a stronger algorithm, a more powerful computer will be required in order to decode the video quickly. This is why people with older computers who have problems with jumpy video are told to use the XviD videos instead of H.264 - XviD offers worse quality, but it doesn't require as much processing power as does H.264-coded video. H.264 will also take longer to encode than XviD.

It's worth noting that H.264 isn't a magical cure for quality. If your source video is pretty low-quality to begin with it isn't going to look any better by using H.264. One would expect that using H.264 over XviD would result in less quality loss, but there will still be some quality loss. This is because both H.264 and XviD are lossy video codecs - that is, in the compression process they also throw away some of the detail from the video.

[LiberLibri]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Can the word "Kisaragi" be used as a family name?
For example Ayame Kisaragi.

Yes, but note that it is very rare. According to the statistics, only 8 families use this name in Japan. In most cases it is associated with February, not a family name. (I guess the ancestor of the 8 families had something related to Feb.)

[anti-random]

The Bali nine

We live in an era that is vastly different to any that has come before. We live in an era of freedom, an era of equality, an era where all human life is held as sacred. And yet in such humane times, 3 young Australians are facing execution, their names, Myuran Sukumaran, Scott Rush and Andrew Chan. In April of 2005 they along with 6 other Australians were caught in Bali smuggling drugs from Australian airports. The media as I daresay you are all aware has named them the Bali 9.

These young men are scarcely out of childhood. Myuran Sukumaran is aged no more than 26, Andrew Chan just a mere 24 and Scott Rush still more a child than a man at 22. And yet for all their youth they are being victimized and persecuted. And for such a slight and trivial crime as smuggling heroin. After all, they only wanted to bring some 8 kg of Heroin into Bali. They are facing death, when all that they wanted was to provide Bali communities with some 32, 000 doses of a drug that is virtually safe, aside from, of course from a few harmful side affects. It is grotesquely unfair that they should suffer such an unhappy and final fate as death, when all they wished was to corrupt the lives of a few thousand Indonesians. As Scott Rush himself once said “everyone likes a bit of adventure now and then." Should these ill-used, undeserving youths really die for what they did?
Should they really die for such small crime?
Yes, they should.

Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and Scott Rush are criminals of the worst kind. They destroy thousands of lives for no more than a few dollars. Many, who have argued for their death, have avoided use of their names, in an attempt to dehumanize them. But I shall do no such thing. To dehumanize Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and Scott Rush is a travesty to all living creatures. For what animal would so carelessly aim to corrupt so many of their own kind. What animal would ruin so many of their own for just a few pieces of paper. Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and Scott Rush are aberrations of life itself. To dehumanize these monsters would be almost as wrong and vile to life as their own actions were.

But it may be that the more innocent of us remain oblivious of the nature of the taint that these men attempted to inflict upon their hapless victims. Perhaps they do not know of the way heroin-users’ veins collapse. Perhaps they do not know of the abscesses formed in the use of heroin. Perhaps they do not of the Bacterial infections that come in its wake, or the deadly infections of the heart, or the even more fatal diseases, like HIV aids or hepatitis that have no known cure. Perhaps they do not know of these all too deadly symptoms, but I doubt even they do not know of that far worse condition known as the addiction. That condition that reduces a functional and proud human to a state of such weakened dependence and feebleness that has no parallel in all the world. Those who are the addicts of such a drug as heroin, are no more than mere puppets to be pulled along by the strings by their puppeteers, the drug dealers. And it is the drug dealers that these creatures are supplying. These abominations are turning innocents into victims of disease far worse than any natural.

And yet so many civil libertarians all about Australia protest so loudly in defense of these filth. They attest to doctrines of mercy and humanity, of freedom and human rights. Yet their very protests show their inhumanity and their call for compassion, shows no more than their brutality. To show any leniency upon these three, would be the highest cruelty that we can inflict upon their victims. It is true perhaps that there are no victims as their evil plans have failed, yet there are thousands out there who could have suffered at their hands, and millions of others who suffer anyway at the hands of other monsters who are akin in to them in all their vice.

But Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and Scott Rush did not only try to degrade the willing. These great adventurers are not so close minded as that. For why target the only those who are weak, when there is another market that can be targeted. Children are the world's most valuable resource and its best hope for the future (John Fitzgerald Kennedy). So why would those who make their livelihood on drugs ignore them. Sow the seeds of corruption while they are innocent, and garner the results when they are grown. Recent studies have shown that about 1% of children under the age of 12 has taken heroin at least once in the past year.

How can the Australian government alongside all those libertarian organizations condone the destruction of such innocence and yet so hypocritically attempt to create a facade of compassion around their actions. By their actions these libertarians and officials are showing themselves to be staunch supporters of the Heroin industry.
For to protect such monstrosities as these men, or even to offer any aid at all, is to actively persecute and show a cruelty that lacks any description, to those who are the true victims, whilst encouraging those who have ruined them to continue in their vile practises.

But I do not think it possible to convince you of these truths, nor do I think you ought to be convinced, unless I present to you the story of one such victim. The boy that you see before you is a victim of heroin. His name is Gor and he was first given the drug when he was just 13 years of age. He was given it by friends of his, equally young, behind his school’s library. There he and his friends smoked it every lunch time and at every opportunity they had available. They bought the drug from a drug dealer, who was supplied by those of the likes of Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and Scott Rush. They were all already very poor, but they were addicted and so when they used all of their own money up, they began stealing money from their parents. Gor’s addiction eventually led him to bring a ruin upon his family that they never recovered from. His parents died penniless on the streets, with them their newborn child, just an infant, yet dead already from starvation. His mother’s milk had long ago dried up, as a result of her famine. Gor was the sole survivor, alone and penniless and yet still addicted he turned his every effort upon his lust for heroin. Fortunately at that time an institution of benevolence, took pity upon him and attempted his rehabilitation. For six months after he lived a productive life as a newspaper columnist, but he had already had too much of the drugs. He was shot dead by policemen, holding a knife to a young woman’s throat demanding money. He was only 22.

Such is the cause that the Australian government and the libertarians champion. Such is the degradation that they wish to inflict upon children. So much for their justice and compassion and love of humanity.

But there are others who are opposed to the death penalty upon very different grounds, these men and women argue, with much reason, that a lifetime in prison is far worse a punishment than death. For death takes but a moment, whilst life imprisonment is as good as eternity. They are right. But such a sentence whilst far harsher than perhaps death, is also far less wise. However noble the virtues of justice and vengeance may be, it cannot be the principle factor of such a decision. Far more significant are fact and practicality. None here, as far as I am aware has been faced with death, neither has any here ever faced the prospect of a life spent in jail. But can any of us deny the terror that is inspired when our own deaths are imagined? Our fear of imprisonment pales in contrast with that undeniable terror. Perhaps in retrospect after long years with no freedom we would feel differently, but that is of no consequence.

The Death penalty’s most important consequence and reason of existence is its deterrence effect. That death- inspired terror is the most powerful weapon against the trafficking and trade of harmful drugs. That is the greatest reason, even more so than any noble principles of justice, why these monsters must die. They must die, so that their pathetic and poisonous lives can result in some small good.

But as to the possibility of any good resulting from their continued existence I shall say only this. I shall say only that I do not hesitate to believe that there is not a single doubt in the minds of any who would believe themselves to be good, that these men are amongst the most vile upon this Earth. Neither do I hold any uncertainty, that none who possess the slightest fraction of intelligence holds the faintest idea pertaining to the rehabilitation of such worthless filth. Your intelligence is too great to filled with such nonsense as the redemption of such criminals, who hold nothing sacred and everything in contempt. Such men if ever freed would flee back to their lives of vice, and endanger so many who would have otherwise been safe. Is it wrong to trade the lives of these scum, so that others may have a fulfilling and productive life?




The deaths of Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and Scott Rush will result in no ill or loss in the future prospects of any man or woman, but will instead bring nothing but good. A good which their deaths would so effectively produce, that even all their ill-doings and wickedness, might be negated. Executing these men is not only the most benevolent action to soothe the sorrows of their victims, but also the kindest punishment to these men themselves. Executing Myuran Sukumaran, Andrew Chan and Scott Rush, will allow them to make the positive contribution to humanity that they were so unable to make in life.

There is no way to deny these poor men and women their own part in their downfall. It was a choice and once made it will be forever upon their conscience. Yet these people whether in a moment of temporary weakness, or from life long sorrow or even just idle curiosity did harm to none but themselves. Yes, they were weak. Yes, they were foolish. Yes, they brought their doom upon themselves. But it is these men who are responsible. For a man or woman is at liberty to destroy their own life, but for someone to destroy another’s is wrong.

I do not hesitate to believe that there is not a single doubt in the minds of any who would believe themselves to be good, that these men are amongst the most vile upon this Earth. Neither do I hold any uncertainty, that none who possess the slightest fraction of intelligence holds the faintest idea pertaining to the rehabilitation of such worthless filth. Your intelligence is too great to filled with such nonsense as the redemption of such criminals, who hold nothing sacred and everything in contempt. Such men if ever freed would flee back to their lives of vice, and endanger so many who would have otherwise been safe. The callous words of Scott Rush also complement all that I have just said. Does a man who calls the degradation of children “a bit of an adventure”, truly sound as though he his sorry for what he has done, or as one too corrupt too see his own treatment as anything but unjust.

This is an speech that my friend said for English. I thought it was pretty good and chucked it up on the forums. What do you think? Seriously. I thought it was pretty goos stance.

[Aoie_Emesai]

Originally Posted by anti-random

The Bali nine



This is an speech that my friend said for English. I thought it was pretty good and chucked it up on the forums. What do you think? Seriously. I thought it was pretty goos stance.

I thought it was sorta Okay. The intro was quite good, introducing the audiences to the topic at hand. Though for the body I think he over did it with way too much information. It was like blah, blah, blah, just get to the point. Though I did see that he kept a stance that made the author (your friend) in a partial perspective in which you are suppose to do and made only some personal judgements that still pretained to the topic.

If i were the teacher i'd give him a good grade, but I would say from my own personal opinion, too long. It's good to be descriptive, but don't bore your audience with more information than needed.

English isn't my speciality ^^

[anti-random]

Man i can't believe i missed spelled good. What the hell is "goos"? Anyway I should have said what do you think about the topic in general.

[kayote]

is there a thred on Banksy?

he is this graffiti artist who's work is amazing.

hear is the address if anyone wants to check it out.

http://www.banksy.co.uk/menu.html

[Aoie_Emesai]

Originally Posted by anti-random

Man i can't believe i missed spelled good. What the hell is "goos"? Anyway I should have said what do you think about the topic in general.

It's ok. Did the teacher give you freedom of any topic or you had a few from that you had to choose?

If you did have the choice of any topic, i'm not exactly sure why your friend chose "The Bali nine" heroine smuggling topic other than it pretaining to Australia. The topic doesn't really interest me much but i would say it's a decent topic to choose. 7/10 ^^

[-KarumA-]

okay here goes another one for me =P
you have photgraps that are made with a 180 degree turn so that the photo is very long and you have for example a beautifull city view or landscape views, what are those kind of pictures called?

[NoSanninWa]

If the photo is wider than tall, it is called landscape. If it is taller than wide, it is called portrait.

[Sephi]

Something somewhat random.

Situation:
Your driving in a somewhat crowded city, you are not speeding and driving at the speed that is allowed. Suddenly a playing child jumps from behind a parked car. It was impossible to foresee something like this coming. You have the choice of:

1. hit the breaks and still hit the child (not enough time to stop).
2. Try evade him.

Say you did #2. And you hit a parked car on the other side of the street when trying to evade the child.

No one injured. And only the cars damaged. Who is going to be held responsible for the damage? The parents of the child or you who tried to evade the child and hit a car in the process?

[xris]

Originally Posted by -KarumA-

you have photgraps that are made with a 180 degree turn so that the photo is very long and you have for example a beautifull city view or landscape views, what are those kind of pictures called?

Panoramic, see Panorama, Panoramic photography.