Machoopi

Consider the person you were when you did those things and consider the person you are now. I hurt people when I was younger, but that was an entirely different person than who I am today. That person was hurting and was in a place where they wanted to lash out. It's understandable and relatable, but that doesn't mean it was OK. People lash out and harm others when they are hurting themselves. I don't want to remove responsibility, but I do want to say that if you are NOT the same person you were then, then you absolutely took responsibility and grew into a more caring and less harmful person. Forgiving the old you, the one that hurt people, is just reminding yourself that you've changed and reminding yourself that you still remember that part of yourself so that you will not become that again. Forgiveness is not about saying "what I did was OK", it's about saying "I have grown to become someone who would not do those things anymore".

There really isn't any other option than to forgive yourself. Think about it. If you don't forgive yourself then you're not accomplishing anything. You're not growing by dwelling on the past, you're not being a better person by ruminating on the bad things you did. All you're doing is causing yourself pain. You will never change what happened by continuing to hurt yourself over it, and you're not going to suddenly become a better person just because you're hurting yourself. Hopefully you've learned your lesson and you've already grown. Continuing to let those memories harm you today, if you have grown, is just preventing you from being happy and thus preventing you from sharing your happiness with others. It's in everyone's best interest that you learn from your mistakes, grow from them, and then move on (which does not mean forgetting them, it just means not letting yourself suffer).

I think people tend to act strangely about the word forgiveness. They act as if forgiveness means entirely forgetting that something happened. That's not what forgiveness is. Forgiveness is not letting past behaviors inform your current behaviors. Forgiving someone else who hurt you means giving them the opportunity to hurt you again, expecting that they wont. Likewise, forgiving yourself means trusting that you are no longer the person who will do those harmful things. It NEVER means forgetting that they happened. It just means that you trust that they wont happen again.

So no.. you can't change the past, but whoever you were in the past is not who you are now, so my best advice is to acknowledge that these are two distinct people and stop holding one accountable for the actions of the other. If you've learned nothing from your past.. and you are still repeating the same behavior.. well, that's a different story. That doesn't sound like the case here though.

I'm responding to this mostly because of the first part of your comment. I like it a lot. I'm kind of curious what people think about this idea though.

You mention that it's one of the greatest creations of humanity, and I'd take that three steps further (or three steps back depending on how you look at it). I think music is not a creation, but a discovery. I think music as we know it, with composition and notation and such, is more like math than it is something we inherently invented. I see language as music, or music as language, and I think nature employs music everywhere. From animals growling at eachother, to birds singing, to dogs barking. All of these things are sounds arranged in a way that conveys meaning. Humans have discovered the mathematics behind music.. we've found ways to illicit emotion with combinations and sequences of tones, but I don't think it's something we invented. I think music is something that exists innately in the universe.

Even without air and without sound, I think we'd find an analog to what we consider music. Something like pushing vibrations through matter and creating harmony and melody in that.

Anyway, just a fun little thought that you triggered. Appreciate your comment!

there were also only 11 people on the team that made the game. I know game dev teams were much smaller then, but even so that's ridiculous considering how innovative and well received that game was.

you're not wasting your time if you're having fun.

I do think that you might be making it a bit harder to get better, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. If you're having fun playing this way, then this is how you should play the game.

The reason it might be delaying you getting better is because starting at around Platinum you have to start incorporating some more universal skills into your gameplay to advance. Things like defense, anti-air, space control, etc. Prior to Platinum, you can kind of just advance by learning a couple of combos and waiting for your opponent to make a big mistake (like randomly throwing out a DP, or heavy attack for not good reason). The higher you advance in rank, the more skills you'll need to learn that can be applied to any character you play, so it'll make you better universally. That said, learning those things can sometimes feel more like work than fun.. so don't do it just because you feel like you have to. Wait until you're ready / want to play the game in that way.

You're the one out here saying that everyone is gaslighting us with absolutely 0 evidence as to why that's the case. Your entire reason for saying that Nasa and Boeing are gaslighting us is that you just decided they are. That's it. Your "legitimate concern" involves all of the people that actually have inside information actively lying to us. WTF do you expect people here to think? Oh yeah, this dude on the internet is right because HE surely knows more than anyone with first hand information.

I think the explanation for flood myths that I gravitate towards is that humans need water to survive, and so they tend to settle down near large sources of water. Large sources of water tend to flood from time to time. Prior to modern history where we can transport things around pretty readily, living in areas that can flood was pretty damn common. Also, not every culture on Earth has a great flood myth, just a great deal of them. Probably just the ones that have had a massive flood experience in their history. Hell, in my lifetime alone there have been several flood events in my own country that, were the world not so connected, might have seemed to the people experiencing it that it was a flood that spanned the globe.

I'm hesitant to believe that any apocalyptic writing in ancient manuscripts is a real apocalyptic event and not either an exaggeration of something much smaller scale, or the general sort of fear mongering that we see all over the place today. So far, nobody who has prophesized an apocalyptic event in human history has been correct.

lol the microwave. "Mash X for 3 hours!" I don't even know if you could fail that sequence, but it was easily the longest mashing of a button in gaming history. It really worked to sell the pain that Snake was feeling in that moment too.

I used to have a lot of issues with anxiety and worrying like you're describing. I went to see several therapists about it and at this point I feel like I'm more optimistic than most of the people I've ever met. A complete 180 happened, but it did take quite a while to get there. I'm just going to say one part of what helped me in a big way, ultimately though this process was a long one and it did take professional help, so I don't expect you to read it and suddenly shift mindsets. It may be worth considering seeing a therapist yourself if this is debilitating in your every day life. That's generally the point where it's considered an issue of mental health, as it's preventing you from living the happy life you deserve.

Whenever I start to get into a worry loop, the thing that tends to get me out is to answer all of my worries with "so what?" then go on to explain to myself what would actually happen if the thing I'm worrying about occurred. It sounds absurd at first because in the moment that we're worrying, everything feels like a massively big deal. The reason it's not absurd though is because usually the things we're worrying about aren't even that bad; our brains are just doing this weird sort of hype-man routine for our worries that are making them seem WAY worse than they are.

Say you're worried about going on a date and you're fear is that you'll do something stupid and ruin the whole situation or embarrass yourself. Ask yourself "so what?" what would be the end result here? Say you ruin your date, say something stupid, and completely embarrass yourself.. well.. now you're back to where you were before the date. Is it really that bad to have a single embarrassing event? Not really, we all do it. Everyone has done it in their lives and a single event doesn't define you. So the end result of this horrible thing you've been dwelling on for hours/days is that you'd be in the same spot you were before the date, with a slightly embarrassing new memory. Surely that's not as bad as the stress that you've been causing yourself in worrying about it, is it?

Say you're worried about something a bit worse.. say you're worried that someone close to you is going to get in an accident because they are going on a long road trip over the weekend. Ask yourself "so what?" would that be a terrible thing to happen? absolutely. That's not the point of the question though. The point is you can acknowledge that this could happen any time someone steps into their car, and the chances that it's going to happen are so small that the stress of worrying about it is almost certainly far worse than the reality of what's going to happen. No amount of worrying about it is going to prepare you for something terrible like this and if it does happen, you will be no better off handling it because you stressed about it.

So I guess the point here is that most things you worry about are probably not that bad if they do happen, but the actual stress you're causing yourself worrying about everything is doing a lot of damage. Bad things WILL happen in your life and worrying about them will not change whether or not you can handle them. TBH though, you're probably much, much more capable of handling bad situations than your worry-brain is letting you believe. When these things do come up, you will be able to over come them. Why? Because it's almost impossible for you to experience something that thousands / millions of other people have not already experienced and gotten through. You're just as capable as anyone else.

As for seeing the bad side of everything? Truly, there isn't a bad side to everything. Many people create bad sides to things because they worry or because they have anxiety. Most events and things that happen to us are completely neutral. Are you seeing actual bad sides to things or are you making up bad sides to things / anticipating bad things despite not knowing with any amount of certainty that they will actually happen? It may be that you're just creating bad out of nothing, and maybe it'd help to start questioning whether or not this is the case. There certainly are bad things in the world, but for the most part.. things just happen and they aren't good or bad.

Liquid Ocelot from MGS 4. This is the culmination of several games, and it's a fist fight between Snake and Ocelot. The game takes you through the fighting style of the previous games and plays the theme songs to accompany them. The first game where snake gets some serious hand to hand skills is in MGS3, and that game just so happens to have one of the most ridiculous (and amazing) theme songs in the series. The moment that theme song started playing I practically jumped out of my seat. Was an amazing experience.

It's absolutely not the best boss fight in terms of gameplay though, that's more of a story fight than a mechanics fight.

Outside of the storymode fight above, I'd say the first time you fight the giant monkey in Sekiro. Motherfucker took me like 100 tries to beat and I had fun every time, then.. when you think you finally won, the bitch picks up his own severed head and goes berserk mode. AMAZING.

There's a pretty glaring flaw here. The risk of seeding the skies with these things is that the more you put in the sky, the more risk there is of one crashing. They don't seem to be doing anything worthwhile atm. Even if it's information gathering, there are other methods of doing this that don't risk handing over advanced technology. I don't think China would risk sending revolutionary advanced drones into US airspace, knowing that this could potentially lead to US getting the same technology. If it were a show of force, they wouldn't need to do it on repeat like it's been happening either. They could just demonstrate the tech a single time in front of an audience and then send some private messaging to US military leaders. Why would they do it repeatedly without actually accomplishing anything of note?

If this is Chinese tech, then they're doing some absolutely bonkers shit with it. Hell, at this point, I think if this is Chinese tech, they'd just up and claim that's the case publicly. The news is already out that these things exist and it has been made public, if China was capable of making these things and sending them out as frivolously as they are, then it would be an absolute show of force to say "hey those are ours".

I don't think this is the case. I think there's too few good reasons that these would be as prevalent and as widespread as they are if they were Chinese. I think it was going to be ANY country's technology, it would be some sort of top-secret US tech. I don't actually think that's the case, but I'd buy that over China.

This is what people say when they fall too hard into confirmation bias land. Most people here have done their research and most of the community that's done its research has come to different conclusions. Thinking that everyone is going to come to the same conclusion as you is just egotistical garbage and you may as well be saying "I'm right, shut up". This is what every conspiracy theorist out there does. They say "if you researched it like I have, then you'd agree with me" while providing no actual logical or empirical reason to agree with them. It's because these theories operate entirely on confirmation bias. Leave room for error, my dude. No matter how right you think you are, there's always a chance you're completely wrong.

Doesn't matter, imo. What matters is how you treat those people and how you treat yourself. Some people use sex as a coping mechanism for their own personal issues and that can be dangerous. Some people though just do it because it's fun, and I don't see any issue with that. I think the key when it comes to sex in general is to treat it with the respect it deserves and make sure you're not using it as a form of medication or self-harm. There's a lot of good that can come from exploring sexuality, you just have to proceed with a fair amount of caution.

but if you aren't here... then WHO MADE THIS POST!? (spooky ghost music).

Interesting perspective. I don't agree with you, but that's OK. I do find it odd though when people say things like this as though they are absolutely 100% certain in their conclusions. It seems like certainty itself is something that comes from the ego, and any claim to know for certain something that can't be proven (even then, I'm not sure that what we consider to be proof is actually proof of anything) seems like it couldn't come from anywhere BUT the ego. After all, without proof, what makes your certainty any more or less meaningful than the certainty of everyone else who similarly doesn't have proof?

I'm rambling. Anyway. I think this is an interesting concept, but I think it could be said in a less abrasive way.

a lot of people are just saying whiff punish. I'll give it a longer explanation.

If they keep doing this move, you want to stay just outside of range of the move. When people say "shimmy" they mean to stand just far enough away that it wont hit you, then move forward and back so that they geif thinks you're moving in range. If you time that right, they'll try to cr. MK you and you'll be out of range. As soon as you see the animation start, you can hit them with your own cr. MK or MP or whatever has enough range to hit them.

As for Lariet, idk really. If they see you jumping they can do Lariet, but if you can punish their cr. MK kick then you have less reason to jump in. Jumping is always dangerous because most characters have a pretty easy response to it. If the only way you know how to get in is jumping, you're gonna have a bad time. That's one of the many reasons it's so important to learn to punish people without jumping. When the opponent has to focus more on countering your ground game, it makes jumping an option again (but still a risky one) because they are no longer just waiting for your to jump. Instead they have to worry about defending against your ground game, which makes it much harder to react with an AA.

Hopefully that was a bit of an ELI 5 version. I don't know where you're at skill-wise, but whiff punishing, even knowing what it means, was a mystery to me in terms of execution until like.. 5 or 6 months ago (after years of playing fighting games and never actually having it click).

My experience with this game is that it was pretty easy for 85% of the game, then stupidly difficult for the last 15%. The game is not too bad for the most part, but there's a random point where for no good reason everything gets just insanely hard. You should be able to get decent enough at the game by that point though to where you'll know HOW to beat it, it's just very hard.

"I’m trying to move forward and onward with my life and don’t feel like dwelling on the past."

if this is the case, then you maybe should just consider it a stubbed toe and move on. I don't think that every action or thing that happens needs to have some sort of deeper meaning. Sometimes, a stubbed toe should just be a stubbed toe.

A lot of us grow up to think that anything we do for ourselves is inherently bad. I think it's a lot to do with being brought up around jealous people. People who see themselves as ugly or unsuccessful who are reminded of these things when other people aren't the same way. It leads to the mindset that being confident in yourself and appreciating your own value feels wrong. I don't know if this is your situation, but I do think it's exceedingly common.

Vanity isn't thinking you're beautiful or admiring your own appearance. Vanity requires something detrimental. It means prizing your own appearance in such a way that it is actively harmful to those around you or to yourself. If you find yourself beautiful, that's a good thing. If you admire your own body or the way you look, that's a good thing. Just don't put yourself above others or think you deserve more as a result, and you aren't going to be acting vainly.

Likewise.. what is excessive? You've got a hobby. There's nothing excessive about taking selfies or sharing your own happiness. I think it's wild that some people in this community think otherwise. It's like they think that everyone who takes a selfie or posts on social media is the exact same as the influencers who tell fake stories and disrupt public spaces. You can participate in social media and share your own happiness, just don't do it in a way that is harmful. It's the same as anything else in life. Be mindful of what your doing and figure out if it's actually doing harm or not. Nothing you said makes me think it's harmful. It sounds to me like you're just fighting a stigma, and that's not really fair if it's something you enjoy doing.