Twilight Dirac

It would be great if we could form a Brony table top group, but I haven't had any success even organizing a Civilization V multiplayer game much less this.  For dnd, though, you can use roll20 to play together with friends online.  You would need a DM though.

Yeah, that's pretty much the issue I've been having with TI.

I don't suppose you live in Maryland?  We could get a game together then. 

How is Eclipse, by the way? A year or so ago I was looking at Twilight Imperium and Eclipse since they both looked somewhat similar, and ultimately I went with Twilight Imperium.

Pretty good.  It plays a lot faster than Twilight Imperium, has no BS cards like public execution, and lets you actually customize the loadout of your warships.  Its definitely worth giving a try.  Good luck finding other people to play it with, though. 

The game is currently half off on Steam.  Unfortunately, the user reviews are less than stellar.  Here is a quote from the first one:

"Oh... my... God. Is it really you? Commander Zigglepants?"

"Yeah. Heh. Nice to meet a fan."

"I can't believe it. I've always wanted to be a space pilot like you. You've done EVERYTHING. How did you get started?"

"Well, believe it or not my first job was doing delivery runs."

"Really? That must have been tedius."

"It was. And the pay was terrible. You'd accept a mission in one star system and do nothing but hop from star system to star system for an hour or more before accepting your tiny payment.

"Sounds pretty bad."

"Yeah. I only did that for a short time before I got into smuggling."

"Oh, cool. Sneaking into heavily armed facilities with illegal cargo? That sort of thing?"

"Exactly. Although you only do the sneaking at the end bit of your journey. The rest of it was just as dull as the deliveries. And even the sneaking was only fun the first few times. After that it became pretty routine. The pay was a lot better, though."

"So how did you become a famous bounty hunter?"

"I'm afriad the stories are exaggerated. I took my first contract at my local station. It told me to fly to a nearby star and hunt down a notorious pirate."

"Did you get him?"

"No. I showed up at the star and he wasn't there. I flew around scanning promising signals, but each one turned out to be a dud. To make it worse, it took about 10 minutes to fly between each signal and there wasn't much to do in the meantime. After a few hours of this, the contract expired."

"That's too bad."

"Yeah, the next few contracts turned out the same so at that point I gave up, bought a warrant scanner, and decided to go freelance."

"What does that mean?"

"Well, it means you sit in one place next to a navigation beacon or resource extraction point, and hope to catch pirates if they show up."

"Neat. How many did you catch?"

"None. It took me about an hour to pick up the scanner and fly to a promising system. Then I waited around for a few hours scanning ships but no pirates showed up. Well, a couple did... but none of them came out of supercruise. After a few nights of this, I decided to dump the stupid scanner into the sun. When I got home, I received a strange message. Someone wanted to hire me to carry some mystery cargo to a certain sector and wait for further instructions."

"Did you take the job?"

"Of course! It seemed like the first interesting thing that had happened to me as a space commander. Yeah, I accepted the job and headed out to the sector they named. Took a lot of time to get there. Then I started waiting for my contact."

"Who was it?"

"I dunno. He never showed. I waited around for a couple hours and eventually the mission expired. I did get to fight some pirates, ironically. It seems like they really wanted that cargo, whatever it was. They should have just asked. After waiting around for a few hours, I tossed it into the sun too. Hold on, I have a customer."

Commander Zigglepants turns away and talks into his headset.

"Hello, welcome to McSpaceport. Can I take your order? Combo #2? That will be 4,000 credits. First window, please." He turns back. "Sorry about that."

"No problem. So you work a drive-through window now?"

"This is WAY more fun. Trust me."

"You know what, I still think I want to be a space commander."

"Suit yourself... but can I offer a word of advice?"

"Please!"

"You're going to spend most of your time travelling and waiting around, so bring a video game to keep yourself entertained."

"Got it."

"...and make sure it's NOT Elite: Dangerous."

 

The thing is, having played Eve Online, I can believe that a space based MMO could certainly turn out this way.  What is everybody else's experience with this game?  Is it really this dull?

I have all manner of exotic boargames including:

Twilight Imperium

Settlers of Catan

Hyperborea

Power Grid

Ascending Empires

Eclipse

Axis & Allies

Civilization

I also play several minis games including:

Warhammer 40k

Warhammer Fantasy

X-Wing

And also RPGs like DnD.  The latest version, 5e, is fantastic, but I still enjoy 3.5e and Pathfinder.

Sadly, I just moved and haven't found a good gaming group for DnD or anything else for that matter.  I don't suppose any Brony's who are into tabletop gaming live in the Washington D.C. / Baltimore area?

Stellaris, Divinity Original Sin 2 and the upcoming Deus Ex are all looking really good.

I might be willing to pick this game up if I could find a group to play with.  Anyone interested in forming a Brony Elite Dangerous group?

On 1/12/2016 at 11:06 PM, SunBurn said:

And nothing on the melting ice mass either? Let's not forget about water's enthalpy of fusion. That's the amount of heat that is absorbed or released when a substance goes from solid to liquid or vise-versa. The source states water's enthalpy of fusion to be 334.774 J/g, equivalent to 334.774 kJ/kg. So if you're going to melt 1 kg of ice at 0ºC, it's going to take 334.774 kJ of heat to turn ice to liquid water at 0ºC. Only afterwards can heat start to raise the water's temperature. If we round the specific heat of water to 4.2 kJ/(kg*K) (Source), the same heat needed to melt 1 kg of ice without raising the temperature could raise the temperature of the same mass of water by 79.7ºC (143.5ºF). So yeah, that's a lot of heat being absorbed when ice melts and in a relatively compact and lightweight package.

There has been a lot of back an forth when it comes to sea ice.  Ice has been melting in the arctic, but there has been considerable sea ice expansion in the antarctic.  And this doesn't explain why sea ice is only having an effect now while the current warming trend has going on for nearly a century.  And if the effect is so obvious then why did all the IPCC models miss it?  The enthalpy of fusion isn't exactly a thermodynamic secret.  At the end of the day you can come up with an endless number of excuses for why the models don't work, but the only course of action is to fix them and see if you can make a reasonable projection out a decade or so once the fixes have been incorporated, and repeat the process until the models work.

On 1/12/2016 at 9:24 PM, Dinos4Ever said:

Warming hasn't slowed down, not at all. Just because it still gets cold now and then doesn't mean the warming trend hasn't stopped. In fact, the thermometer has read that it's getting warmer every year. 2014 was the warmest year on record, 2015 is projected to have been even warmer.  

I think you misunderstand.  It's not so much that the warming has stopped, it's that the rate of change in temperature has decreased when its supposed to be increasing.  If you look at the graph on the previous page you will notice warming increases at a rate of 0.1 Celsius / Decade (let us abbreviate this as C/D) between the 1980 - 2000 period.  The models predicted an increase of in the rate of change of temperature to 0.25 C/D, but if you look at the temperature measurements for the last decade you might be getting a rate of 0.02 C/D at the most, its actually kind of hard to read from the graph.  So while climate models predict an acceleration in warmth of a factor of 2.5X, observations are yielding a reduction in 80%.  And I have actually seen models where the temperature accelerates by a factor of 4 in the present day / near future (not this graph though).  You will still break temperature records because the temperature is still going up, but it is going up very slowly now as compared to both the past few decades and the models.

It's kind of like a comparing a car that is slowing from 50 mph to 5 mph to a car that is accelerating from 50 mph to 125 mph.  In both cases the total distance being covered by the cars increases in time, but there is obviously a huge difference in terms of physical ramifications between the two.  You really ought to be able to distinguish between the two cases if you are constructing that kind of detailed description of their motion.  The global warming models have predicted the later case while we have wound up with the former.

On 1/12/2016 at 9:24 PM, Dinos4Ever said:

Decidedly the opposite. The UK and Australia have next to no mass shootings, yet also have super strict gun control laws.

They also have a distinctly different culture along with different sets of problems (immigration / drug trade / etc).  You really want to compare like with like, hence UK to the much more similar Switzerland or Texas to California, etc.  In the U.S., cities with heavy gun control such as Detroit and Chicago are notorious hotbeds for violent crime, while mass shootings have an annoying habit of manifesting in gun free zones such as schools and universities, or places were people may simply be expected not to have guns, such as churches.

On 1/12/2016 at 9:24 PM, Dinos4Ever said:

Republic President Dwight D. Eisenhower didn't seem to think so. Interestingly, we also had one of the nations greatest economic times while he was president.

I tend not to overestimate the influence of individual presidents on the economy.  He was riding the tail end of the post WW2 boom,  I credit that rather than his opinions on tax code.

On 1/12/2016 at 9:24 PM, Dinos4Ever said:

 Well, at least they're putting up solar panels in stead of banning them.

I think if nothing else everybody in this thread can agree that the people banning the solar panels for "sucking up the sun" are idiots.  Fortunately this is limited to a single municipality. 

On 1/12/2016 at 9:24 PM, Dinos4Ever said:

Also, because I don't think you quite understood my original post, I was considering many different parts of the future, including economic, societal, and geographic possibilities. Things like economic collapse, worsening in radicalism, China's growing economy, the way Europe tends to operate in general. 

I was starting to suspect this.  I apologize if my comments on this point got out of hand.

On 1/12/2016 at 9:41 PM, SunBurn said:

What about sea water temperatures and the loss of ice mass? Just looking at atmospheric temperatures isn't going to cut it.

It is true that the oceans have a considerably greater heat capacity than the atmosphere and that should be investigated.  But you need both a good model of heat transfer into the ocean, and a good set of temperature data to compare it against.  Modeling can be done easily enough, but I don't know if there is a data set comprehensive enough to evaluate the oceans in this way.  The oceans depths are a difficult place to take experimental measurements.  Ocean surface measurements are already incorporated into the atmospheric measurements everybody uses to evaluate global warming, but it may be difficult to get enough instrumentation into deep water in enough places to get the kind of data needed for these comparisons.  And without the ability to gather this kind of data I wouldn't trust a model because their is nothing good for the modeler to compare the model against (and I don't trust the surface models in any event).  Still I assume somebody would be attempting this in some form, so maybe there is data out there that can be found.

I'd invest in better tech. For all those numerical models, the physical evidence points the other way. Keep in mind, for the most part, models only present the theoretical, while the physical represents the actual.

Those aren't my models, those are the models used by the IPCC.  You should be able to find similar traces in chapter 9 of the IPCC 4th assessment report.  The black line is an average of those models.  The dotted green and blue lines are surface/sea and satellite temperature measurements respectively.  As you can see, the IPCC models were predicting an acceleration in the warming trend observed for the period 1980 - 2000 at the beginning of the 21st century.  What happened instead is that the warming has mostly halted.  There is all sorts of debate on why this is or if the warming really has halted for the past decade, but when you predict increases in the rate of warming and you instead get decreases, it looks kind of bad.

It is apparent that these models don't work.  The physics needs to be re-evaluated, new climate projections need to be made and the whole thing tested again.  Until this sort of test takes, the models have not been validated and the hypothesis they are attempting to prove remains dubious.  Until these projections can  reproduce data, it would be unwise to base our actions on anthropogenic global warming, because our underlying understanding of the issue at hand is incorrect.

Well, less mass shootings would be a bit idealistic, I know, but I can dream, right?

Perhaps these shootings are a result of excess gun control, as they tend to occur in places where the population has been systemically been stripped of all weapons and will provide no resistance against a would be mass murderer.  More to the point though, it seems largely irrelevant to much of the rest of your post, which was about global warming related doom.

84%?   They pay less now than they did under President Eisenhower! Under Eisenhower (a conservative, mind you), they paid 90% income tax!

A tad excessive, isn't it?  I think paying 40% of everything you earned is more than fair.  Its not there fault the government is unable to properly manage the money they give it. 

And China is actually doing more to move towards green energy than we are. That's odd, ain't it?   

Just because China erects a few solar panels does not mean they treat their environment well:

Good stewards of the environment China is not. 

Also, it's not an ideology, it's science. The difference is you can prove it. 

Increased gun control, aggressive tax codes, restrictions on capitalism and emulating European countries are not science, they are public policy positions typically consistent with a left/liberal ideology.  The only policies you mentioned that would have a direct impact of global warming if it were true would be green energy and population control.  Perhaps this was just your version of an ideal society, but they way it presented makes it appear that it is necessary to adopt all these positions to avert our climate apocalypse.

If I had to pick a favorite Final Fantasy, well it would be Final Fantasy 6.  But if I had to pick a second favorite it would be either Final Fantasy 7 or Final Fantasy Tactics depending on how I was feeling at the time.  Sure early 3D graphics haven't aged very well, a Cloud can be kind of a flat character at times, but overall FF7 is a solid an enjoyable experience.  You got an interesting story, and interesting setting, a fun adventure, one of the better character customization systems of the series (materia) and an engaging if simplistic combat engine (but there all kind of simplistic save Tactics and its spinoffs).  I enjoyed this game and its cool fantasy cyberpunk setting up until the very end, where I proceeded to lose the save game files .  I think the game is largely deserving of its reputation.  A well made old game is still a good game.

Then when you look at FF9 which has almost every visual improvement over FF7  and is one of the best looking games on the PS1 you realize that FF7 didn't age so great.

Unfortunately, the PS1 hardware could barely run FF9 and some of the load times, especially for combat, were downright atrocious.   Also, whoever designed the FF9 playable character art must have been suffering from a brain aneurysm at the time, because those designs are downright ugly.  The settings and backdrops are downright gorgeous though, I will give FF9 that.  Its just a shame the graphics weren't attached to a better game.

I still love the game and I will probably play the original again before the remake comes out, but I can definitely understand how today's youth won't give the original a chance. Not every game from that era is Ocarina of Time.

Personally I think FF7 is more deserving of its praise than Ocarina of Time, which I actually found kind of dull.  I never felt Zelda made a good transition to 3D, and there are better 3D incarnations in any event (Windwaker, Twilight Princes, Majora's Mask if you have access to an emulator or something that gives you saved states). 

I mean, as outlandish as this sounds, we could build insulated arcologies where the climate and atmosphere within can be maintained and controlled artificially. Sounds like something out of sci-fi, I admit, but at least it's an idea for how we can live.

This is a valiant effort my friend, but perhaps you should not take the claim that we will be suffering the apocalypse within a time span of 55 years at face value, rather than proposing solutions to surviving said apocalypse, as cool as they may be.  Barring completely unforeseen circumstances, our ecosystem will be around for a very long time, and us with it.

At the rate we're going, like this:    No ice caps, severe flooding, massive overpopulation, little rainforest left as the Amazon is obliterated to clear room for the agriculture necessary to feed a population of nearly 10 billion. Massive extinctions occur, leading to the collapse of entire ecosystems. Elephants and rhinos are extinct, lions, other big cats, and most of the greater apes are considered critically endangered, many are already extinct. Fishing stocks have plummeted, and entire landmasses are now created from garbage. Because of the melted ice caps, land has now shrunk, pushing us to live in more high rises. Our cities probably will look like this: 

Or alternatively:

The numerical models these apocalyptic prophecies are loosely based on turn out to be false and the quality of living continues to improve thanks to advancing technology, globalization and the continued expansion of the internet.  Using language translation technology built into telecommunications software, all the people of the world become connected, diminishing violence and warfare.

On the other hand, it's possible that we turn things around, become a beacon of Utopian ideals, and the ideas that started in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Germany spread to the rest of the world. We stabilize our population growth, adopt 100% green energy, increase value on education, and utilize stricter gun laws. We reign in capitalism to make it become more like it was under Eisenhower, and make sure the rich pull their weight. We enact massive conservation efforts, and are able to clone some of the animals that went extinct because of us. North Korea blows themselves up with a nuke by accident, and the Middle East bands together against radicalism. The U.S. sees the error of its way, makes voting an inalienable right, and we're colonizing Mars out of scientific curiosity rather than desperate necessity. But, that's probably more naive than anything. 

I guess the climate apocalypse is punishment for the sin of not being more like Scandinavia.  And we need more gun control?  I didn't realize firearms caused radiative forcing.  Oh and we need less capitalism and an even more aggressive tax code because the rich paying 85% of Uncle Sam's expenses isn't enough.  Naturally its the U.S. that must see the error of its ways and not, say, countries like China which show a complete disregard for their enviroment.  

Funny how the world as we know it will supposedly end unless people choose to convert to your ideology.

Well its good you found a group to play with, that often is the hardest part to getting a game of D&D going.

Be aware that D&D players are ingenious, trope aware bastards that will take the game off the rails at every opportunity.  Make sure you have some contingency plans when things start to get crazy.

So this is it then? I'm the one on this thread that thinks humanity is not rotten to the core, stupid, in anyway deserves mass extinction, and will not suffer that fate?

We're here, we just weren't around last weekend.  It looks like Malinter and Sunburn have you covered in any event.   As Sunburn has already pointed out, peak oil appears to be a fallacy.  Google yourself global proven oil reserves and you should find a plot something like this

As you can see, the oil available to the global economy is actually going up. And oil isn't the be all end all of energy production in any event.  Properly matured nuclear fission technology would make the internal combustion engine look positively archaic, and when we crack nuclear fusion we will be sitting pretty energy wise for a very long time.  In the interim there are plenty advances in green energy and more efficient fossil fuel technology to see us to a nice gradual transition of oil until we make the big leap to nuclear energy.

As far as other natural resources, ever hear of the Simon-Ehrlich wager?  Ehrlich predicted humanity would soon run out of resources because of over population and overuse. A man named Simon challenged Ehrlich to a bet based on his predictions.  They picked the commodities copper, tungsten, nickel, chromium and tin.  If the commodity prices rose between 1980 and 1990, Simon would pay Ehrlich the difference based the initial and final commodity prices, and if the prices fell Ehrlich would pay Simon.  As it turned out, Simon was right as the prices fell for all five commodities and he won the bet.  Its a neat little demonstration that the cost of most commodities are being pushed downward.  Human resourcefulness always seems to overcome the inherent scarcity of natural resources.

As for global politics, well that never looks pretty.  But consider that during the 20th century we had overcome two world wars, the nuclear scare with the Cold War, the horrors of both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, this century is looking positively tame in comparison.  I mean what are we dealing with now, ISIS?  That's it?  Don't get me wrong, they're evil jerks and all, but I will take them over having to deal with the Nazis any day of the week.  We are not going to need to break out the nukes to deal with ISIS.  It doesn't even appear that the locals like them.  They may very well be put down by the regional Middle Eastern powers without any intervention on our part.

And that brings us to the last Horseman of the Apocalypse, Global Warming.  So here is my 2070 prediction:  In 2070 Anthropogenic Global Warming will share the same fate as the much maligned Luminiferous Aether, an ill conceived hypothesis enjoying considerable support that stubbornly refused to be reconciled with measurement no matter how hard we tried.  I will not miss its passing.

I nuked London in Civilization V after England denounced me.  I was getting sick of that crap.

There was also this old game called Master of Orion 2 were I routinely blew up planets using the Stellar Converter: 

Fun times that was.

I had an old project where I was making a RPG in RPG Maker XP but that has been suspended indefinitely.

I have recently been experimenting around in Unity.  I want to make a multiplayer strategy game, but I am becoming frustrated because I cannot find a good tutorial on how to go about doing this.  All the multiplayer tutorials are focused around built in 2d and 3d character controllers, and I can't so much as figure how to pass some text data between clients using the information from these tutorials, despite being able to replicate Quill's results in his multiplayer FPS tutorial.  If anyone has some real good multiplayer or networking experience with Unity, I would greatly appreciate it if they PMed me on this topic.

South Park ran out of ideas years ago.  Early seasons contained brilliant satire and many old episodes are classics.  But as the years went by the series devolved into nothing but toilet humor, shock humor and pop culture references.  These elements were always present, but they used to be backed by brilliant writing, now that that is gone what has remained has become unpleasant to watch.

Nothing last forever.  There was a time when the Simpsons was actually good.  But you can't just run a show forever and expect it to remain good.  It is long past time to retire South Park.

I don't get the whole 0 divded by 0 thing...

 

Isn't the answer just 0?

No.  In the case of 0/0, every scalar number is a solution.  Basically in division you are searching for a number that when multiplied by the denominator will give you back the numerator.  For example:

6/3 = 2 because 3*2 = 6

But in the case of 0/0, 0*anything = 0 so not only is 0 a solution, but so is 1, 10, 10,000, etc. That is why the answer is usually given as undefined.  

I don't get the whole 0 divded by 0 thing...

 

Isn't the answer just 0?

No.  In the case of 0/0, every scalar number is a solution.  Basically in division you are searching for a number that when multiplied by the denominator will give you back the numerator.  For example:

6/3 = 2 because 3*2 = 6

But in the case of 0/0, 0*anything = 0 so not only is 0 a solution, but so is 1, 10, 10,000, etc. That is why the answer is usually given as undefined.  

I want to have a triangle who's interior angles add up to be (10π/9).

Draw your triangle on the surface of a sphere.  With the right radius the angles will add up to 10*pi/9. 

Buy either a high end wi-fi hub and connect that directly to the modem to boost the signal, or you can now purchase Wi-fi signal repeaters which you can place between the PS4 and the modem to get a stronger signal.

I didn't see any power cord. By the way that device has multiple variations, all of which work. 

Really?

Without careful examination, there are any number of ways this device could be drawing power.  The power cord on the left.  Batteries:  while what the youtuber claims the device does would be difficult with batteries, what is actually shown could readily be achieved.  It also could just be a normal fuel consuming electric generator.

Engineers who have the qualification already looked at this design and deemed it legitimate. You can also put into question the relative reliability of any authority's opinion. That too, can be scrutinized, changed for shady reasons, etc..

Many a charlatan has claimed that engineers or other experts have deemed their perpetual motion engines legitimate, yet none ever seem to enter mass production.  

Magnetic fields retain their energy as long as the object emitting them retains it's shape. These fields are indeed heat and friction proof, however the materials tied to them are not. So it is possible to have continuous motion using magnetism as long as there is an external force acting on it. In the case of both engines I showed there is such a force. The first is mechanical/electric and the second just works for some baffling reason. The fridge is obviously leaking energy, it just harnesses the lost energy and uses it. Of course a tiny amount cannot be recaptured, that is the way things are.

Magnetic fields do not retain there energy if they are used to do work.  The magnetic field present within an inductor (really spellcheck, your flagging inductor) in an electric circuit will diminish and eventually vanish if the inductor is providing power to another circuit element.   The magnetic field can be replenished by forcing an electric current through it, but it requires just as much electric power to build the field back up within the inductor as the inductor yields when discharged, so the only thing the magnetic field can do is temporarily store a finite amount of energy (or transport it in the case of electromagnetic waves), it cannot be used to produce energy from nothing.

 I'm sorry, didn't show you the right example to what I was talking about. This right one here is an example of an open equation drawing energy from the earth's magnetic field.

Is that a power cord on the left?  I think it is.  This sort of device needs independent reproduction before it can be taken seriously.  And you cannot draw energy from the Earth's magnetic field because it is not time varying and will therefore not drive an inductive device.   As I mentioned before, these sorts of experiments have already been done to death.  If you are going to try and break the laws of physics as we know them, you are going to have to tread new ground which probably involves leaving the dining room.

Seems like I should have clarified. Commodity prices may be down which is in turn good for anyone looking to burn coal but that can be painful for those looking to mine the stuff to sell. Please be reminded that commodity prices strictly reflect supply and demand. The actual cost of manufacturing coal is something else entirely. The difference between the commodity price and the levelized cost make up the margin of profitability of coal. As linked in the article previously, coal is becoming more costly to mine and now shown by you, the coal prices outside of Australia are at an all-time low. That's squeezing the profit margin for the coal mining industry from both sides! Having digged into that... Is it just me, or is Coal Mining really showing a negative profit in the table? (Source). Another article from the New York Times:

That doesn't make coal any harder to use, it simply means nobody wants to bother with coal.  Probably a combinations of pollution and regulations.  Its dirt cheap though if cheap is the route you want to go.

Are you really about to write off a 17-fold increase over 7 years as insignificant? Global installations was a meager 2.6 Gigawatts back in 2006. This growth could be exponential so there will be increasingly more and more people be they in the household or in industry willing to cough up that dough. Solar is just getting started.

Be careful with large percentage increases over small numbers.  Even with these exponential increases, we still haven't broken 1% of total power generation in the U.S.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_the_United_States

Well, coal doesn't appear to be one of them. According to the Washington Post:

The commodity prices of coal have actually been plummeting:  https://www.quandl.com/collections/markets/coal.  When it comes to coal, price is usually not the problem, but the fact that it is both dirty and inflexible.

It will take some time before solar, wind and energy storage (more likely from some improved battery technology rather than fuel cells) get cheap enough together to provide all the power needs all on their own. Should solar energy become cheap enough to start building with redundancy for affordable curtailment, well, they're going to displace quite a bit of fossil fuel use, especially during the day time. Should the same also happen for energy storage where it becomes affordable to bulk up a little more, it's pretty much game set and match.

The problem is these sources of energy are rather diffuse.  You need to blanket enormous areas with solar cells, so you are looking at either massive desert facilities or a cheap and efficient organic photovoltaic  you can just start papering buildings with.  Otherwise it is going to remain a supplemental technology.

Laws of nature... didn't we make those up? Why not learn how these laws are affected by things we don't understand yet. There's always more than meets the eye. These perpetual motion generators are actually open equations. They draw energy from some place which we are in the dark of. All we do understand is that there is energy being drawn from somewhere else, just not where that else is. This happens a lot in science. Wasn't electricity back then considered as uncontrollable as the weather? It all started with a certain machine that worked without any any reason for it to work. Probably it took a small bit before understanding could catch up.  

I highly doubt that youtuber you linked to was able to pull energy out of some kind of otherwise unknown energy hyperspace using a couple of magnets.  What was actually demonstrated was just a brushless motor.  These sorts of machines were thoroughly investigated well over a century ago (minus the brushless part, that needs electronic controls to work).  If someone actually made a working perpetual motion engine, you would know instantly because it is up there with building a function warp drive (which is actually more permissible under the laws of physics than perpetual energy) in terms of revolutionary technology.

This topic title is kind of misleading.  As soon as I saw I thought to myself: What do things like smartphones and 3d printers not count or something?  What the title should really be asking is:  Why are we still using predominantly fossil fuels?  So lets run done the most promising candidates for power generation.

Fossil Fuels:  Fossil fuels are cheap, reliable, flexible and are supported by a fully matured global industrial and commercial infrastructure. Fossil fuels are always going to be an option that will be both reliable and within the budget, making them to go to source of energy for most businesses and other organizations.  They emit pollution, but that pollution can be filtered by another set of matured technology to minimize the impact on the enviroment.

Solar Power:  Everybody loves solar power, but nobody will put their money where their mouth is. Photovoltaics in particular can readily be purchased on the open market for both consumer and industrial use, and people can readily obtain a solar power system for the home if they are willing to cough up the dough.  Few are.  The fact of the matter is solar power is incredibly diffuse, with a peak irradiance at the Earth's surface of 1 kW/m^2 or 1 kW per 3 x 3 ft square for the metrically challenged.  This means that to run a 4 kW AC unit on a clear day with a 100% conversion efficiency 4 square meters or 36 square feet are required.  Now add in the fact the solar panels are going to be at most 20% efficient for mass produced units thus required 5 times the area, and the fact you aren't always going to have clear skies, and the fact you need a system to handle interruptions in sunlight and you see the problem.  Solar power still has its uses because you can power remote low power consumption facilities that are not connected to the power grid, but it is unlikely this will replace fossil fuels.

Wind Power:  Take the problems with solar, now at an assortment of mechanical and maintenance problems thanks to moving parts and make it more difficult to acquire and use at the consumer level and you have wind power.

Tidal Power:  Take wind power, restrict it to coastlines which tend to be prime real estate, and make it impossible to use at the consumer end, and you have tidal power.  Yea, not looking good.

Hydroelectric Power:  Provides abundant clean energy.  But you better have a river to dam or you are out of luck.

Geothermal Power:  Provides abundant dirty energy.  But you better have a geothermally active region to build the thing on or you are out of luck.  Almost like crappier hydroelectric energy in a sense.

Hydrogen Fuel Cells:  Needs hydrogen.  This can be obtained from fossil fuels or electrolysis, but the later process requires more energy than the fuel cell will yield, making the fuel cell into a battery rather than a power source.

Nuclear Energy:  Provides massive amounts of power from very little fuel by accessing a regime of physics that gives orders of magnitude more power than can be obtained from chemical reactions or mechanical energy, and gives off a small amount of high level waste.  Special precautions need to be taken to handle waste and radiation hazards, but otherwise there is no reason this technology cannot utterly surpass fossil fuels given proper time, technological development and investment.  Sadly, it is held back by fear.

Perpetual Motion Engines:  Provides unlimited energy at no cost, but their operation violates the laws of nature as modern science currently understands them.  Useful if you happen to be transported to an alternate reality where the Law of Conservation of  Energy no longer applies, otherwise you sell them to the elderly as a scam to get rich before you are prosecuted for fraud.

I tried to play Worms, installed Dosbox and other Programs and it just didnt worked. I got the intro sequence to work, and that was it.   Now you tell me a good Pc can play it ( or atleast a newer Version of Windows, but i doubt it that just installing Windows 10 would help...so i assume you mean a new pc i guess )...was does this cost, like almost 1000 dollars ?

Any PC should be able to run a DOS game.  Granted, it does take a little technical know how to get the DOS emulator or Windows compatibility mode to work correctly.

 Alternatively, you can often purchase DOS games of gog.com.  They bundle the game with a self running executable that starts Dosbox up with all the correct instructions to get the game running automatically with zero problems.  I purchased Ultima 7 off gog.com, which has got to be the single most temperamental game ever made in terms of getting the DOS settings correct, and I was able to run it the first time no problem.  Granted you have to purchase the game again, but its cheap, you get a permanent internet account that can access the game from anywhere, and the game can still run on the local hard drive DRM free without a client, so it is an amazing deal.  I absolutely love gog.com for this reason.