• 4 Posts
  • 130 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 28th, 2024

help-circle







  • Interesting, but means little without accreditation.

    EDIT: Also, why’s it all Java?

    EDIT2: Addressing the downvotes: If you really think that any employer these days is going to be happy with “Learned from a list on Github” on your resume then you’re sorely mistaken. It doesn’t matter if the courses match an accredited program. The accreditation is what matters because no accreditation = no diploma. Employers like diplomas.


  • Okay, here’s my take: that’s some good looking fog. Like on a scale of 1 to fog, that’s like heavy mist. But here’s the thing: every time I play a game with fog, I think to myself “I wish that wasn’t there.” If you’re going to use the fog, give it purpose. A great example of bad fog is Elden Ring. Example 1: Consecrated Snowfield. Boring garbage that only serves to hide how empty the area is. Example 2: Gravesite Plain in SOTE. Takes an already lackluster area and just makes it even moreso with a big wall of white.

    Ironically, Elden Ring also has an example of good fog: Mountaintop of the Giants, Frozen Lake. The fog is generated by Borealis and clears when you defeat him, meaning you’re not faced with a permanently boring area in a primarily visual medium. It adds a cinematic intro for the boss as well as an added layer of difficulty for the fight. This is fog with purpose and how it should be implemented.









  • Just read it. That is a very bad source. It does the same thing you did and just made unverified claims with no actual evidence. It also makes leaps in logic (e.g. “The word was meant to convey, at that time, the inferiority of Asian products to European products. By extension, Asians are also inferior to Europeans.”) It makes no mention of “rice boys” and so can’t support that claim either. In fact, while I’ve been doing your due diligence for the last hour, I haven’t found an appropriate historical source for any of this. Not on Google Scholar, not on Google proper, nor in my university’s library. The closest thing I’ve found for “rice boy” in particular is the dubious book of definitions that Wikipedia is using as a source for that claim. And the closest thing I’m finding for racist connotations of “rice burner” is from the book Far Eastern Tour which outlines its use in Korea by Canadians in reference to Korean support troops. Of course, the Oxford Dictionary has some information concerning the American etymology, but it is paywalled so I can’t access it.

    And how dare you accuse me of rewriting history when you won’t make the slightest effort to research it yourself. What a shameful display of hypocrisy.




  • You’re the one who made the claim so the onus is on you to provide a source. That’s literally the most basic thing a person learns in academia. You can’t claim that “facts are facts” without providing proof of those facts.

    Furthermore, you can hold Americocentric views without being American. That’s the whole purpose behind American cultural exports.