SasQ

Users
  • Content Count

    943
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1291 Brohoofs

Recent Profile Visitors

31594 profile views

About SasQ

  • Rank
    Kirin
  • Birthday 12/03/1982

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Poland
  • Personal Motto
    Nature is simple and she's the best teacher.
  • Interests
    Every aspect of human knowledge and wisdom.

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic

  • Best Anthropomorphic FiM Race
  • Best Season

MLP Forums

  • Opt-in to site ads?
    No
  • Favorite Forum Section
  1. Although it wouldn't hurt, putting the © mark is no longer necessary and it doesn't make any change. It is a relic of the old copyright law that required you to register your copyrights in the Copyright Office if you wanted your works to be protected by it, and you were required to put those © marks to inform people that your copyrights have been registered in that office. But nowadays, it is no longer necessary nor required, because according to the current version of copyright law, you have your rights to your work by default, from the moment of establishing it on any physical medium or in any physical form.
  2. Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer. If you look for actual legal advice, I'm afraid you have to ask an actual lawyer. But here's how I see it, according to what I know about how copyright laws work. Copyright law is, as the name suggests, a law that deals with the right to make copies of some artistic works. It is a form of temporary[1] monopoly granted by the state to the copyright owner so that only him/her would be allowed to make and sell copies of his work on the market without somebody else being allowed[2] to do the same and compete with him/her for their customers' money. [1] Although calling something "temporary" when it can last 150 years or more is ridiculous if you ask me :q [2] Being allowed is not the same as being able, though. This law was supposedly introduced to be a motivation for people creating more art, because apparently according to governments people don't create stuff if they aren't paid for and when their works are not protected by the state, and they lose when someone is creating too \_(ツ)_/ But they also introduced the possibility of selling your rights to copying to other people, usually some publishers, so that they could make money on selling copies of your works, then share some % of their profits with you, the original author. So originally it was rather a law for protecting publishers' businesses from failing, and for governments to be able to decide whom to grant this temporary monopoly and whom not. It was never about the artists. But I digress, so let's get back to ponies. Copyright law does not apply to IDEAS. It applies to WORKS, that is, ideas put on paper, musics recorded on some medium, movie films etc. The reason is: you can't have monopoly on IDEAS, because that would mean disabling other people from having those ideas in their mind, which is absurd. Copyright law only applies to COPIES of something that has been already created as a piece of art. Now, when you make a drawing of a pony that is only similar to someone else's, you're not infringing any copyrights in my opinion, as long as you don't use any frames from the original show which is copyrighted to Hasbro, or that they established on any physical medium. Simply put, you're not copying any of their works, you're making your own artwork that is just similar to theirs, or "in their style". But style is not copyrighted. If you sing your own song "in the style of Adele" (if you can), Adele has nothing to do with it. You're not making copies of any of Adele's original songs that she established on any physical medium. Same here: it's your own OCs (which stands for ORIGINAL character), then your work is original (in a sense that you didn't use any piece of art taken from Hasbro's videos or products, so they should have no rights to your original work. If they could, that would lead to a lot of dangerous absurdities. Unfortunately, copyright law already is being abused that way, to eradicate competition and silence people, and already leads to such absurdities, which is quite frequent. Unfortunately, it's the Golden Rule all over again: whoever has the gold, makes the rules. If Hasbro wanted to go against you, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't care much about what the law says, but how their lawyers could stop you from doing what you do. And if you don't have a good lawyer to protect you, you're screwed anyway :q Life sucks, laws are not made for you :q Personally I would go even further with it, by saying that if you used one of Hasbro's characters from the show, but draw it all by yourself, making sure that it doesn't look exactly like any of the frames from the show (which might be very hard to do with a character from the show – you would have to avoid any pose they might have possibly used in the show), then Hasbro should have no claim on your artwork, because you didn't copy any of their media. If anything, you're making a derivative work, which – curiously enough – is protected by copyright law too, but this time it is you who's being protected too! :q That's right, your derived work is still your work, and copyright law protects it from being copied and sold[3] by other people, including Hasbro! The problem with derived works, however, is that this right is a dependent one: you can't sell copies of your derived work without permission of the original author / copyright owner. But! – neither can the original copyright owner (Hasbro)! :q You two are basically in a stallmate unless working out some agreement together. Nevertheless, I mention about this to make it clear that whatever you create, it is automatically protected by copyright law as well, even if it is based on someone else's work, because many people seem to forget / deliberately omit this important detail (most likely because it changes the way copyright law is perceived, to their own benefit). It's just that if your work is a derived work, your ability to use your rights might be limited. [3] I deliberately wrote "copied and sold", not just "copied", because copyright law doesn't really disallow making copies. If it were, that would be another absurd and a dead law, because there's no possible way someone could stop you from making a copy for yourself, let alone knowing about it, if you do it in private. It's more about selling this copies in public, because that's what messes up with the business of the original copyright owner. Copyright law is a monopoly, but it is not an absolute one. It doesn't grant the copyright owner absolute power on you. There are things that they can't forbid you from doing with their works. There's a lot of exceptions from this monopoly, falling under the name of fair use. And it's actually made this way on purpose, to make sure that copyright law won't be counter-productive to culture and won't do more than it should. (Unfortunately, media corporations and publishers bust their balls to make sure that people won't see it that way; they'll rather have them believe that publishers have unlimited power over them.) Unfortunately, there's more than just copyright that they can use against you. Another one is trademark law. And that's most likely what they would go with in this case – because they trademarked the names of all their characters. If you used one of those names in your work, they'll say that you infringed their trademark. Similarly if their logo appeared in your video, or one of the characters referred to any of the copyrighted names or to the MLP franchise. They can even argue that you are trying to make your ponies similar to the ponies from their show to convince people that it is their brand and misrepresent it, which is also part of trademark law. That's why they'll more likely go with trademark law than copyright law in this case, because it allows for more elasticity if you didn't copied any of their works directly. This means nothing, because Hasbro could simply let them be, seeing them as not a threat to their business, or they didn't find those videos yet. They can as well wait for the piggy to grow bigger before slaughtering it to be able to extort more damage money. I don't think so. That actually might make things worse, because it's like acknowledging their trademarks and admitting that there might be something in your video that might be a copy of some of their works before they even got the chance of proving it to you in court. It's a legal suicide. It makes your case closed before it even opens.
  3. LOL I just read the title of this tread in a very wrong way My subconscious mind swapped the final letters in the last two words and I was like WTF? Only after reading the post I realized my mistake. What's wrong with me? As for the actual subject, though: I used to collect CDs and DVDs in the past (music, movies, data etc.), until I discovered after a couple of years that the discs became unreadable in any of the CD/DVD devices I got :q Especially those DVD-R/RW ones – they use very crappy surface medium that decomposes with time and becomes unreadable despite the fact that it is sealed inside the plastic ;P (inb4: no, it's not about broken optics, I tried different devices and still the same problem) Also CD/DVD drives become more and more unpopular these days. Most laptops don't have DVD drives anymore, PCs rarely have them too. There are external drives but they're quite expensive, not to mention dedicated DVD players for home video. The storage capacity of DVDs, and even Blu-Rays, becomes too constraining as well, especially for 4K quality videos. Therefore I don't think that DVD is still a good and reliable mass storage technology these days. I rather look forward for some new storage technology that will still be readable after, let's say, 15 years from now, but I don't see any, so as of yet I use just regular USB hard disks and MicroSD cards – they're pretty reliable for read-only storage (only overwriting them too frequently may wear them off with time), and they take much less space. (Heck, I could fit my entire collection of movies in a match box! Before that they took an entire shelf of DVDs.) So I wonder why isn't this medium more popular for movies, music and stuff? :q There are card slots in pretty much everything these days, and even if there aren't, USB card readers are cheap as chips. So as for FiM, I already have my entire collection from Yay!Ponies on an external USB flash drive that fits in my pocket. They're pretty good quality (which for vector graphics and cartoons isn't that much important anyway), with 5.1 sound. I don't have to sit through title screens and commercials every time I watch it (that's one of the things that drives me crazy with those commercial DVDs: I bought it already! I don't want your advertising and anti-piracy commercials! – that's one of the reasons, very important one, why I don't buy DVDs anymore: those "pirates" treat me better for free than a company that expects my money ;q I can support the creators in a different way, more direct.) And I can manipulate the video much easier, which wouldn't be that easy with a DVD (they're usually copy-protected). For example, I can switch audio tracks or turn the subtitles on/off, I can supply my own subtitles with better translation, I can play frame-by-frame, skip to any moment, make bookmarks... all sorts of stuff DVD players can't do. So nope, DVDs are not for me anymore :q But if they offered an entire collection on a bunch of MicroSD cards, with no commercials, no interruptions, no anti-piracy crap, no copy protections, and in some standard open video format, then I would gladly buy it.
  4. @Lucky Bolt and @Dreambiscuit: that's why driving a car in a dream is usually a metaphor for self-confidence and control over your life People who lack self-confidence or feel that they have not enough control over their lives, often dream about trying to drive a car and failing from some reason (e.g. the car drives on its own, ignoring their "commands", or the steering wheel doesn't turn, or they drive it from the back seat, etc.). But if you are confident, the car in your dream either works fine, or doesn't appear at all (because when people drive a car, they usually just "become one with the car" and don't have to think about it, they just move as one wherever they want, which to the subconscious mind is no different from going there on foot).
  5. There sure is: it's knowledge and experience. If you know that 2+2=4, and why is that true, there's no way anyone could tell you otherwise, because you know, from your own experience. The same goes with any other activity in life: the more you know about it, the more experienced you are in it, the more confident you are about it. Other things (such as affirmations) usually don't work well because you don't really believe it if it isn't your current experience. (Quite the contrary, actually: affirmations are usually in contradiction to your current experience, and believing in them can make you insane.)
  6. @SharpWit They are still in the same order, just shifted by two with respect to the "original" configuration they had ~4320 years ago. So if the original one in March was Aries, just count two signs back, going through Pisces and stopping at Aquarius; if Taurus was originally in April, now it's Pisces; and so on... You can go to Stellarium website and see it for yourself. Turn the Constellations on, and in the View Settings menu turn on the Ecliptic Line as well to be able to find all the Zodiac signs easier (they will be arranged along this line). Then set up the date and time, and see what Zodiac sign is there on the eastern horizon (E) where the ecliptic crosses it, just at the moment the Sun is raising from behind the horizon (you may also want to turn on Landscape if it is turned off). When you have everything already set up, and you see the raising sun on the horizon as well as the Zodiac sign above the horizon on vernal equinox (March 20th), you can now start switching months and observing how the Zodiac signs will start changing above the horizon (you may need to adjust the time to have the sun at the horizon again when the time of dawn will change). You can also try changing the year to see the effect of the precession. (Although it doesn't allow to go past the year 0, it resets itself to 1858 from some reason :q )
  7. They don't have to be reinvented, because they work fine they way they work. The shifting of the Zodiac sign is supposed to work that way, because that's how it measures the ages. And it was designed to work fine throughout the ages, for millions of years. In comparison, human science is roughly 4000 years old, modern sicence not older than 500 years. Don't mess with what the "gods" designed – they knew what they were doing, they can travel through space, while we barely touched the Moon Adding or removing Zodiac signs by NASA wouldn't do it any good, because as I said, it's not about the constellations, it's about the geometry of the Solar System and surroundings. Messing that up would only make it more hard and obscure for the people in future to trace back the ages by matching it with astronomy, especially to those who believe that BS about fortune telling & stuff – it would be even harder for them to see that they're being bullshitted all the time (and I'm pretty sure that's what NASA is aiming at, considering how they bullshit us about their space programs; NASA: Never A Straight Answer ;J ). It's similar to how orthographic reforms, when done wrong, can make it more obscure where certain words originated and harder for linguists to trace them back to their original meanings. Or how modern science ridicules the scientific heritage of the past (stuff like Alchemy, for example), causing people to appreciate less about how much the ancient people actually knew despite having more crude tools. I agree, though, that people should know that the Zodiac signs are shifting and they're no longer the way they were ~4000 years ago in ancient Egypt and Babylonia. They should also know what was the true purpose of the Zodiac and that the ancients weren't as dumb as modern science pictures them. That's for sure. (BTW I added some cool pictures into my post )
  8. The Zodiac is true, and ancient astrology wasn't nonsense at all. Modern astrology though (the one used for fortune telling)... it's a whole another story, it's just utter BS Let me explain. When you look at the night sky, tracing the line along which the Sun and the planets travel: This line is called the ecliptic, and it corresponds to the plane of the Solar System when you're looking at it from the outside. The Zodiac signs are located along this line, in the deep space far away from the Solar System (so the following picture is not-to-scale): The full circle is divided into 12 equal parts, 30° angle each piece, which corresponds to two hours of the Earth's rotation around its axis (a unit of time that ancient Babylonians called "beru"). Each sector has a certain constellation assigned for easier reference, but it was never about the star formations themselves, they were just a memorization technique. It's about the geometry of the heavens and measuring time. The ecliptic is tilted with respect to the horizon at a certain angle that corresponds to the angle the Earth's axis of rotation is tilted with respect to the plane of the Solar System. As you probably know, this tilt is responsible for the seasons, the fact that days are longer in the summer and shorter in winter. There are thus two points on the Earth's orbit around the Sun: one at which the day is the longest (summer solstice) (think of it as the Summer Sun Celebration ), and one at which the night is the longest ( winter solstice). But there are also two points at which the lengths of the day and night are the same: vernal equinox in spring and autumnal equinox in fall. These four points were called the "four corners of the world" in the ancient times. You might have heard that ancient people believed that the world is flat and it has four corners, so often ridiculed by modern scientists. But this is to make you believe that ancient people were dumb, and we are so smart now because we have science. The truth is though, they had science too, just with different terminology. The term "world" referred to what is now called an age, and "flat world" or "the plane of the Earth" was referring to it's orbit around the Sun, which is clearly planar. The "four corners of the world" were these four special points on its orbit that were used to determine what "world" (i.e. what age) is it right now. Here's how the age was determined using the Zodiac: You get up at dawn on the day of vernal equinox, and you look at the eastern horizon to see what Zodiac sign is visible there in which the Sun will be rising (so called ascendant), and this sign determined the current age. "But wait a minute: wouldn't it be that after one full rotation around its orbit, the Earth will be precisely at the same spot? Shouldn't the same Zodiac sign be visible there then?" – you may ask. Well, yes and no. Short term, the answer is "yes". But in the long term, the answer is "no", because the Earth's axis itself is turning in circles, very slowly, but steadily, changing its orientation in space, similarly to how a spinning top's axis rotates when it's spinning on the table. This causes the Zodiac signs to shift and drift with time, a little bit every year, which becomes more and more noticeable after hundreds of years have passed. This phenomenon is therefore called precession of the equinoxes, because of the backward movement of the Zodiac signs with time, so that the one that precedes the current sign, will become the current sign after a certain amount of time will pass. The ancient people knew about that phenomenon too, which is very impressive, considering how much time does it take to observe it, and accurate measurements that we were able to perform only recently (considering the entire human history). It takes roughly 2160 years for each Zodiac sign to shift into another, and 25920 years for the entire cycle to start repeating! The full cycle was called Platonic year by ancient Greeks, so the "ages" were kinda like "months" in that "year", each "month" having one Zodiac sign assigned that determined the age. And that was the original purpose of the Zodiac: it was a device for measuring time and orientation in space that would work well throughout millions of years. It was an astronomical device. It was supposed to tell you what age it is right now, and where is the Earth located in space of the Solar System and the Galaxy. But smart-ass people started to use it for fortune telling to extort money and other goods from naïve people, by extrapolating the idea of predicting the positions of celestial bodies into an idea of fortune telling: "Hey, the Zodiac is about telling time, it tells you where the planets will be, so it can also tell you your fate, right?" :q That's how science became witchery. And this view is being perpetuated by modern people to this day, ridiculing the ancient knowledge in one hand, and exploiting naïve people on the other. If present day astrologers knew the true purpose of the Zodiac and the scientific machinery behind it, they would also know that the Zodiac signs are no longer at the same positions as they once were in the past, due to precession. They keep telling you that Aries is in March, Sagittarius is in December, etc. If they knew the truth (which is as easy as getting up early in vernal equinox and looking at the sky :q ), they would know that we're almost in Aquarius right now in March. Ever heard the term "Age of Aquarius", so often associated with woo people from the New Age movement? The origin of that term lies in Zodiac as well, and the way ages are determined. When you get up early on vernal equinox and look at the eastern horizon, you will se the constellation of Aquarius before the Sun rises. Therefore we're at dawn of the age of Aquarius. The age we're moving out of, is the age of Pisces (which means fish). If you ever wondered why was the symbol of a fish associated with Jesus Christ, now you know: he was born when the age of Pisces started, roughly 2000 years ago. If you got up early on vernal equinox at that time, you would see the constellation of Pisces on the eastern horizon. There's also a story in the Bible about the apostles asking Jesus how long will he stay with them, and he replies in an enigmatic way something in the lines of: "Until you see a man carrying a bucket of water". They didn't understand what he meant, because they took that seriously. What he meant was Aquarius, and that Christianity will have its rule on Earth until the age of Pisces ends and the age of Aquarius starts. There's a couple of more evidence of this "age" thing in ancient scriptures (including the Bible). Remember that story when Moses came down the mount Horeb with the "ten commandments" he received from the gods on its top, and got mad when he saw his people praising a golden bull? Well, he wasn't mad because of the bull itself, but because of the fact that the bull was the symbol of the previous age, the age of Taurus (which is the constellation of the bull), also known as Ba'al or Apis in ancient Egypt from which they escaped into the desert shortly before that. Moses knew already from the gods that the new age has just started, the age of Aries (the ram) – the Zodiac sign that precedes Taurus. But his people were still believing in stuff from the previous age, praising the bull which was the symbol of the previous age, associated with religion of ancient Egyptians. You might have also heard about the "god's lamb" or stuff like that – legends that were the theme of another era in the Bible, preceding the arrival of Jesus. That's because the next age in turn is the age of Aries, the ram, which started with Moses and last until the arrival of Jesus. At that time, everything is about lambs, rams etc., because that was the symbol of that age. If you shift by roughly 10000 years back in time, the sign that raises with the Sun at vernal equinox is Leo, the lion. And surprise, surprise, there's a giant statue of the lion with human face in Giza, Egypt Scientists date it roughly on ten...eleven thousands of years B.C. Coincidence? I don't think so If you want to know more about how ancient mythologies were based on ancient science and astronomy, I encourage you to read a great book "Hamlet's Mill" by Giorgio di Santillana. The entire book is available online for free. I must warn you, though: it's not an easy read, it's kind of dense and dry. But it's worth it. The author studied ancient mythologies from all over the world and figured out how it can be translated into astronomical knowledge. That's where I learned about this stuff. But there's more, and I'm sure now you'll find it now when you know what to look for There was once a great website about that too, with pictures and calculations, its author tried to calculate when was the "day 0" of the Zodiac calendar, because that's most likely when the "gods" visited the Earth for the first time and established that calendar for their own purposes of space & time navigation for the next millions of years. The "day 0" is pretty much when all three planes cross each other with the Sun at its centre: the plane of the Earth (that is, the celestial equator, which is the Earth's equator projected upon the night sky), the plane of the Solar System (the ecliptic), and the plane of our Galaxy (called Orbis Lacteaus by the ancients). Oh, as for the NASA stuff: I'm pretty sure it's bull crap too. There's no 13 Zodiac signs, because it was never about the constellations. The constellations were only for orientational and memorization purposes. There might be 20 constellations and it wouldn't change anything. Same goes with the boundaries of those signs – it was never about the boundaries of the constellations (which are imaginary as well), but about dividing the full circle into 12 equal parts, because that was the geometry used to construct it: You take the radius of the circle, use it to cut the circle at equal distances to construct a regular hexagon, then you bisect its angles one more time to get a 12-gon. And this corresponds to how Earth's rotation divides the orbit into 12 equal parts called months when you add the Moon into the mix. It was all about astronomy and geometry. They're right about one thing, though: that the Zodiac signs are shifted and they're no longer the same as those used in ancient Egypt and Babylonia 4000 years ago (the Zodiac sign associated with March is no longer Aries, it's Aquarius). As for fortune telling and horoscopes, that's total BS for sure. My mom believes that crap too, and I once poke fun of her when she asked me to read her horoscope for this month: I read the horoscope for the entirely different sign, and still she said that everything fits her and all the predictions are true. You should see the look on her face when I told her that it was not for her sign PRICELESS!
  9. Have you missed the "FDA-approved" piece that appears at least 5 times in the paper? :q It's not some crazy new drug, it's a drug that has been on the market for quite a while now, "FDA-approved" and used with success, just for other purposes than antiviral therapies. Or maybe you missed the part that says "Ivermectin has similarly been shown to be effective against the DNA virus pseudorabies virus (PRV) both in vitro and in vivo"? Sure, while "in vivo" just means "inside a living organism" which doesn't necessarily mean a human organism, it's still better than "not tested at all", especially if the drug is being safely used for years with no side effects to cure other diseases, so I wouldn't dismiss it so cynically yet. Especially if it has been already demonstrated that it can basically kill the virus in 48 hours – something that NONE of the current FDA- or WHO-approved treatments seems to be able to do. There's also this part: "(...) a phase III clinical trial in Thailand in 2014–2017, against DENV infection, in which a single daily oral dose was observed to be safe and resulted in a significant reduction in serum levels of viral NS1 protein (...)" which clearly shows that some clinical trials indeed have been conducted, even if not with SARS-CoV-2 patients, but with patients infected with similar viruses that have similar protein binding mechanisms. You can also find statements like: "no toxicity of ivermectin was observed at any of the timepoints tested, in either the sample wells or in parallel tested drug alone samples" or: "Again, no toxicity was observed with ivermectin at any of the concentrations tested." or: "Ivermectin has an established safety profile for human use (sources) and is FDA-approved for a number of parasitic infections (sources). Importantly, recent reviews and meta-analysis indicate that high dose ivermectin has comparable safety as the standard low-dose treatment (...)" Could it be that you didn't even care to read the paper in the first place, or the other sources cited in it, because it disagrees with your views? :q I hope not, because that would be very shallow. (Also, there's been multiple other similar papers already, I just brought up this one example to show that the cures in fact already exist.) But setting this aside: Do you really believe that people should be disallowed to use certain drugs that has been proven to be so much effective in a lab when people are literally dying around? Are you really saying that they should patiently wait for merciful approval of some organizations when their lives are at stake? Should they be disallowed to take the risk of using that drug if they want to? Who are those people to decide about other people's lives and organisms? Whom do these organisms belong to? :q Which don't seem to work too well anyway, from reasons I mentioned in my previous post. Well, unless one's goal is to send as many people as possible to kingdom come :q (which is clearly happening in the US right now, and if this isn't enough of a cold shower, then I don't know what is). And this makes him impossible to have any knowledge on the subject or talk about it, right? Appeal to credentials / authority fallacy much? :J If you watched at least one of his videos, you would know that he quotes a lot of scientific sources in his videos that support what he says, so even if you don't believe him because all you care about is credentials, then what about the people he quotes? Are you gonna dismiss them too just because "a crank quotes it, so it can't be up to anything good"? :q "The truth remains true no matter if it came from the mouth of a wise, or a fool, or even the beak of a parrot." – someone wise. (BTW neither are those people who "educate" you from the TV screens every day. Just sayin... :q Also, the fact that someone is a virologist, doesn't mean that he's always right and knows everything.) Oh, so now you're trying to put a tinfoil hat on my head just because I expressed my observation that those "treatments" doesn't seem to work quite well? :q I mean, come on! How many people has to die before people will notice that something is not quite right here? :q Why is it that treatments that work are being kept away from the public then? What is your explanation? ²  ? Let me guess, tinfoiling me again? :q You don't have to believe me. Just look around. Also, this is not exactly a secret either: Maybe because it's not a SOURCE to begin with It's a PLATFORM, on which EVERYONE can upload a video. Whatever is in that video, and whether it is reliable or not, is for the VIEWERS to decide. It's like saying that Google is not a reliable source, therefore every scientific paper found through Google is bogus. I'm facepalming hard right now -_-' But I guess that all the information you needed about this platform were the buzzwords like "alt-right", "far-right" and "conspiracy theorists"? :q (Not to mention that Wikipedia itself is "reliable" AF ;q I could talk for hours on how it fabricates sources, contains a lot of political bias and questionable information, block certain information from the public, etc., and I wouldn't be alone with these observations.) People post on different platforms outside of YouTube because Google is trying to hold a monopoly on information and filter what you are allowed to see and what you aren't allowed to see by them. Those other platforms usually don't try to tell you what you should think – they just host the content and you are supposed to decide on your own whether it makes sense or not. Information is just that: information. It is not the job of the platform to filter (censor) what information should be available or tell people what they should or shouldn't believe. That decision is on the people, they should always scrutinize and verify information on their own. But they have the right to know. And the mainstream media are keeping such information away from them for what purpose, exactly? :q I'll leave it to you all to decide...
  10. Ponies are 3D, they're just drawn in 2D (since our screens and paper sheets are flat), by making sharp edges in places where the line of sight is tangent to the surface of the object, and areas of coluor fill where the line of sight falls upon the surface at some more perpendicular angle. What people often refer to as "3D" is actually CGI graphics rendered/raytraced from 3D models by a computer instead of hand drawn by a human. And this usually looks bad because it is hard to do it right. The most trouble is with fur / hair, as well as lighting. (Lighting your scene properly so that it wouldn't look too dark or too bright requires a good amount of knowledge about photography, while fur / hair requires a lot of processing and physics computations so people often just handwave it and replace with some cheap cop-outs.) Therefore I don't think that ponies would look good as computer-generated 3D graphics. Many people tried it, but most results look like crap, because they modelled their 3D meshes based on just a few reference angles from the show, and only these angles look decent, while others look bad. There's a couple of exceptions, of course, made by great 3D artists who know how to model stuff to look good from all angles, or rig the character properly so that their legs weren't bending in some creepy way etc. One such example is DJTHED (more on that below). But personally, I'd rather go with the hand-drawn look from the original show, maybe just spiffed by some extra shading to make them look less flat and fit their surroundings better, such as this one here by StormXF3: BTW here's a good explanation of why computer-generated 3D graphics often fail for cartoon characters, with a nice breakdown of Hasbro's 3D animation of Pinkie Pie: And here's a video in which he presents the entire process of modelling Rainbow Dash: I don't know anyone who would be able to model 3D ponies in a more accurate and convincing way that would look so good. So far this is the best I've seen. Check out some other videos on his channel, they're pretty amazing As for the actual 3D, as in solid objects in the real world, there's also one dude who makes very awesome looking pony sculptures / figurines from clay:
  11. First I would have to know what the heck it is :J Most likely I could, but such things require a lot of time – a resource that is in deficiency for me, unfortunately. I barely have time for my own projects and research. But you can try it yourself Here's a nice source of information about creating your own language: (Watch it on YouTube, there's a full playlist on Artifexian's channel.)
  12. There is a cure for it already, multiple of them actually, according to this scientific paper for example, and multiple others (look for the right things and you shall find). Of course you won't hear anything about it in the media nor from WHO. You have to look up such stuff yourself. The virus itself most likely won't, but the disease caused by it – most certainly yes, as all similar diseases before it, when a certain threshold percentage of the population will gain immunity. Don't underestimate the power of your own immune system! Because this is the only thing that can actually defeat the virus, and it can do that before it will spread enough in your body to make you sick. Gaining immunity by enough people is also what stops diseases from spreading in general (not just this one), because even if there are people still not immune or whose immune system is weak (e.g. infants, elders, or people who have other diseases, especially those treated by doctors with immunosuppresive "cures"), if they are surrounded with people who already have immunity, they work as a shield protecting them, because the virus can't jump to them through immune people. That's also the reason why the number of people infected is not something bad and should be as high as possible, as long as it is being kept under control (that is, enough room for them in hospitals etc.). It's the number of people who died from it that's bad. This should be kept as low as possible, obviously. And if you're unlucky to get sick (because there's multiple of people who caught the virus and yet didn't even sweat because their own immune system kept it in check), there's a couple of things you should keep in mind: It's not the virus that's dangerous to your life, it's the treatment. And unfortunately most doctors are very terrible in that, especially those who blindly believe the WHO and follow their advices. The biggest problem caused by the virus is the inflammation of lungs that happens when your immune system "overreacts" to the virus (look up cytokine storm). Your lungs fill up with mucus and you can't breathe properly, so they try pumping air into your lungs with a respirator. But this won't help! Think logically: if your lungs are filled with mucus, how can the oxygen from air pumped into it pass through that mucus into your blood? :q It won't! That's why so many people die: not from the virus, but from lack of proper treatment, when they suffocate because of lack of oxygen in their blood. So what would be a proper way to solve this problem? Oxygenating the blood extravenously, similarly to how they do dialysis or transfusion, in order to restore the proper levels of oxygen in the blood by passing around your lungs entirely. In the meantime, they need to reduce the inflammation so that your lungs could work again and you could breathe on your own. There are multiple way of reducing the inflammation. One of them is DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide), which is an organosulphate solvent that has anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative properties (which will become clear in a minute). It stops G1 lymphoidal cells from overreacting (but in a reversible way, so it doesn't damage your immune system). Then you have to get rid of what causes the inflammation in the first place, and the products of decomposition of damaged cells, which usually means a lot of free radicals floating around and damaging more cells. So you have to neutralize those free radicals somehow, and the chemicals that do that are called antioxidants, because their job is to catch those oxygen radicals and bind with them, and then transport them to your liver where they can be neutralized and removed from your body. The most well-known antioxidant is of course the ascorbate, also known as "vitamin C". Yes, the humble, popular and freely available drug that is safe to ingest because it's impossible to overdose, since it goes into the blood stream from your intestines through special transport channels that once get saturated, cannot transport any more stuff, and any excess is simply excreted with your poop (which means that you just waste the drug, so it's not smart either to ingest more than you can take :q ). Vitamin C is great for your body anyway, for multiple of reasons (e.g. it is also used in the last stage of producing the protein that makes collagen fibres – the stuff that holds your body together), and there has been research that shows that it also has antiviral property – not just for this particular virus, but other viruses as well – because it joins with the glycoproteins sticking from the virus's capsid, making it unable to attach to receptors on cells. But most importantly in this case, it can remove the waste products of the inflammation out of your system, but for that, it has to be injected in high doses by your doctor directly into your blood stream. Simply taking pills might work as prevention, but for treatment, higher doses are needed, hence the injections. Another important drug is cholecalciferol, also known as "vitamin D3". There is some research showing that besides its usual well-known role in transporting calcium in your body, it also has antioxidative properties and it can regulate the way your immune system works, lowering the chance of getting lung diseases and helping your body recover from them once you do. If you want to know more, look up Dr. John Campbell (he's got a channel on YouTube, and publishes a lot of informative stuff about this matter, quoting scientific research and providing links to scientific papers), or Dr. Richard Cheng who also provides a lot of information that you won't find in mainstream media, especially about using those treatments in Shanghai, China, with success. I'm sorry that I can't provide any links here because YouTube is removing such videos almost instantly after being uploaded (they really don't want you to know this stuff, do they? :q ), so you have to search for them on your own. Seek and you shall find. If not on YouTube, then on other platforms who are less asinine about it (e.g. BitChute). I wouldn't count on that, unfortunately, because this plandemic is made on purpose, as a great opportunity for the people in power to enforce more strict policies and diminish your freedoms even more than they could with electronic technology. They want you to be scared, especially of other people, because that makes people weak and easier to control by the media and the Internet. It makes people suspicious about each other, it makes them rat on each other like they did in communist regimes (as was the case in New York, with people ratting at each other to the government about not wearing masks), and it makes people fight with each other in scare of getting sick. When people are isolated and closed in their home prisons, they get lonely and depressed, and they get more vulnerable to manipulation from the TV and smartphone screens, because in stress and emotions they're less likely to question what the "experts" from the TV tell them to do. And what they tell them is often a steaming pile of BS. It's also about what they're not telling you, as you can see above. Whatever happens, remember one wise thing: no one will take care of you better than yourself, and nobody has more interest in your well being than yourself. Governments, people in power, "experts", and even the doctors, are less likely to actually care about you. They care much more about your money and to keep you under their control. Don't let them do that. Think for yourself. Educate yourself. Look up stuff on your own. Dig deeper. Question everything (even the stuff I wrote here – don't just believe me, look stuff up on your own, just keep in mind that you will encounter A LOT of misinformation, and you have to gain knowledge to be able to judge who's right and who's bullshitting you). Stay calm, and stay healthy, and good luck. You're gonna need it.
  13. @Sepul-Coloratura Think of it like hardsubbed anime: Japanese people don't text in English to each other quite often, and yet you can see English texts appearing on their cellphones or street signs in anime :q They are there for English-speaking people to understand what's written in there. I think the same way of English texts appearing on the screen in MLP: as captions added by the creators so that Humans knew what's written there In that scene, there was no commentary, the gag required you to read it yourself, so they had to put English captions on the banner in place of the original Equestrian writing, or you wouldn't understand the joke :J Also, those voice actresses from DHX do a pretty good job in dubbing those lovely horse noises of ponish language, otherwise you wouldn't be able to understand what ponies say either That might be the case too. And most likely is, because I don't think they cared that much about the details. But there are two approaches here: Doylian, or "out-of-universe" in which you explain what happened in the story from the point of view of the writers or the viewers. You talk about plot convenience, plot devices, plot twists, fourth wall breaks, plot holes etc. Watsonian, or "in-universe" in which you are trying to explain what happened in the story from the point of view of its participants, the inhabitants of the universe that the story is about. Here you pretend that magic is possible, that the rules of a fantasy world make sense, and you try to apply those rules to your reasoning in order to come out with an explanation that fits in the boundaries of those rules, even if it could be easily hand-waved from the out-of-universe perspective. Surely I could take the first approach to the subject of Equestrian languages and writing systems, but in that case I could just end in the first post, by simply saying that the animators put some random gibberish in there that only looks like actual writing. That wouldn't be much fun though, would it? :q That's why I went with the second approach, because it's much more fun and allows for much more in-depth discussion It's more creative. And even if there wouldn't be any possible way to explain those fancy hieroglyphs to make them make sense, there's still potential for creating a completely new language myself that would fit inside the boundaries of the universe and be based on its rules. And that's pretty much what I do :J
  14. There are several writing systems used in Equestria. First, there's the Unicorn alphabet that appears in the very first episode, in Twilight Sparkle's book about legends: It is the most ancient writing system that was given to us by Ancient Alicorns. It works in a similar way to Egyptian hieroglyphs or Chinese ideographs. Each tribe of ponies received their own subset of the Alicorn alphabet, suited for their special needs, but many symbols are common to all three tribes (yet each tribe might pronounce them in a slightly different way). This writing system is now obsolete, but Unicorns still use it in their arcane magic books to write spells and ancient legends. Sometimes it is used for artistic purposes too. You can see how it works from the example in my sig But it wouldn't be fun if you had to scribble such complex shapes every time you need to write a shopping list, would it? :q Therefore this alphabet has been evolving with time, simplifying the shapes of the letters, to be better suited for fast & crude writing. This resulted in different outcomes ("font styles" if you will) depending on the writing technique / tool used. For example, Earth Ponies were mostly scratching those signs with their hooves, either on the ground or on tree bark or stones. This ended up in shapes made of straight lines and sharp angles, and they become runes, similar to those inscribed on Ponehenge: (More on that in this thread) But if ponies were writing with pen or pencil in their mouth, the results were more squiggly. This is what you can find in Spike's cook book, for example: But you can still recognize the same overall shapes of the hieroglyphs they originated from: Those are the "chicken scratches" that you mentioned. You can see how the hieroglyphs evolved through time into those more simplified forms in the table below (just ignore the pronunciation, it might be wrong): The "random squiggles" mentioned by @HeavenSunset are just cursive version of that, made of long continuous strokes, because that's easier to write with a quill. They're kinda similar to this example of human writing: which also might be quite unintelligible for someone who is not familiar with it. But after inventing the printing press and movable type, there was a revival of those ancient hieroglyphs in Unicorn books (since now they became easy to print again). Yet it was the "simplified" version that has been made spiffier and turned into movable types that we use in newspapers and books nowadays (like in the newspaper you quoted in your post). Some of those modern letters may seem oddly familiar to you, almost like they were those Latin letters used by many countries in Human World. I have to burst your bubble: they are not. They evolved independently into their current forms. It's not a coincidence that they are similar to Latin letters, though: both have the same common ancestor, from the ancient times when our worlds were still one, before the Great Divide. (You call them Phoenician, but the actual name of the place where they originated was Ponitia ). Since then, they evolved independently of each other, in quite different directions. But since there's only that many ways a certain shape can evolve without losing its original structure completely, they evolved in quite a similar way in both worlds. Some of them may appear flipped or upside-down, some strokes might be missing, some might be superfluous, and the pronunciation may differ (heck, it differs between different Human languages for the same letters too! :q ). But there are still many similarities if you squint your eyes enough There's also a different writing system used in Saddle Arabia that looks kinda similar to Persian / Arabic writing in Human World: as well as a "square script" used in the Crystal Empire: If you want to know more about the alphabets and languages used in Equestria, check out my threads: "Alphabet of the Unicorns" in which I try to decipher the Nightmare Moon inscription from Twilight's book; and "Unicorn Language" in which I present my attempts at reconstructing the language used by ponies, and if that would turn out impossible – create my own version of it that Bronies over the world could use as an artificial language, kinda like Klingon used by the Trekkies, or Sindarin used by Tolkien fans . (Keep in mind, though, that this is still work-in-progress.)
  15. Well.... of evil things: nitroglycerin or napalm comes to my mind :q A little bit less evil: fleas, spiders, hornets, blood, feces, barfs, skunk juice, glitter... Pretty much the stuff people proposed in the comment section for this dude after he made his trap for porch thieves: But I think the most cruel is: NOTHING :q Because it's the most underwhelming and disappointing :J