all a / b / c / f / h / j / jp / l / o / q / s / sw / lounge cgi up wiki
[Home] [Catalog] [Search] [Inbox] [Write PM] [Admin]
We will watch Strike Witches (2008) next Saturday 18:00 UTC [Info] [Countdown]
Last Oekaki@Heyuri post was 44 minutes ago
Last Strange World@Heyuri post was 2 hours, 52 minutes ago ヽ(´ー｀)ノ
Filter boards
Lounge@Heyuri
■▼
No.5001 [Reply]
Have any of you guys explored the fediverse? I've joined two instances but I think they are both pretty gay. depression I was wondering if you guys found any cool ones.
45 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.5328
>>5326
>......... that's quite literally what I said
You said that there was backlash for excessively widening diagnostic criteria for autism.

>I not only quoted directly from DSM-IV, I even linked to it for verification.
The diagnostic criteria (y'know, the part actually used to diagnose someone) has no requirement for mental retardation.

If the majority of diagnosed autists are misdiagnosed, then we would expect to see statistics regarding the autistic population converge to those of the general population. But we don't see that: as of 2017, 85% of diagnosed autistic college graduates (which should be almost exclusively misdiagnoses if we go by what you say) are unemployed, in comparison to the 4% unemployment rate in college graduates generally and the 20% unemployment rate of the mentally retarded.
>>
No.5329
To be fair, an autism diagnosis in and of itself can easily be a reason behind someone being (or choosing to be) unemployed, especially since it's very easy to use one to get autismbux in some parts of the world

How do I know this? It's a secret... purin
>>
No.5330
>>5329
The statistic I was referring to excludes people who weren't looking for employment. mb for not including source.

https://thinkingautismguide.com/2018/02/why-is-autistic-unemployment-rate-so.html
>This also means that those Autistics who have become discouraged by the difficulty in finding employment and have given up looking for a job are not counted in these unemployment figures. Autistics who are living in institutions such as jails or hospitals are also not being counted in the unemployment figures. A much higher percentage of all Autistic adults than that 85% unemployment rate are not working for a variety of reasons. Those adults who are not institutionalized and who are prepared to work and could be in the workforce but have given up are called “discouraged workers.”
>>
No.5332
>>5328
With posts like these, I can definitely believe you are mentally ill, but definitely not that your illness is autism.
>You said that there was backlash for excessively widening diagnostic criteria for autism.
Yes, namely putting all kinds of unrelated conditions under the umbrella.
>The diagnostic criteria (y'know, the part actually used to diagnose someone) has no requirement for mental retardation.
Only in the pedantic sense that mental retardation strictly means an IQ below 85, since both even more detailed in the document and anyway as I have already quoted, it requires reduced g.

>If the majority of diagnosed autists are misdiagnosed, then we would expect to see statistics regarding the autistic population converge to those of the general population. But we don't see that: as of 2017,
Not only do we literally see that, I have literally provided peer reviewed evidence of this (it's the second link).


>>5329
To be fair, someone who prefers to go on government bucks (which, in many countries, are more generous than the pay you'd get on a real job. Go figure!) would not normally be considered unemployed, but rather "not participating" in the labor market. It's a trick countries use to claim low unemployment. In fact, if you have failed to find a job in the past 6 months, even if you're still looking, you may be considered "not participating", and not counted toward unemployment statistics.

The real problem is that his "stats" are completely pulled out of his ass, as more astutely pointed out by... himself... as he posted his "source": random unsourced blogposts on a propaganda website (no, a marketwatch press release article by a company selling their "advisor services" to "help autists enter the workplace" is not a source). The correct figures, for the record, are 38.58% for "autists" (including misdiagnosed), vs 31.4% for all people with any disability and 5.2% for the overall population (this is only for those who count in market participation, in all cases).
>>
No.5334
>>5332
>Yes, namely putting all kinds of unrelated conditions under the umbrella
is very different from
>you can now technically consider anyone at all to be clinically autistic

>Only in the pedantic sense that mental retardation strictly means an IQ below 85, since both even more detailed in the document and anyway as I have already quoted, it requires reduced g.
That passage is a whole pages above the section clearly labeled as 'diagnostic criteria'.

In regards to the 85% unemployment, I tracked it down to a 2011 forbes article (https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2011/11/30/living-life-with-autism-asperger-has-anything-changed)(go there then use 12ft.io if there is a paywall; forbes puts session information in the url so I can't link to it directly), which points to a study from 2010 (https://sci-hub.ru/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20640591/). It seems to be a misreading and I'll leave it at that.

Regardless, the literature (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40489-014-0041-6) points to autistic unemployment rates not following those of either the general population or the disabled population, regardless of intellectual disability.
Lounge@Heyuri
■▲▼
No.4068 [Reply]
GPT-4 will be the death of everything.
Enjoy what little scraps we have left. Even imageboards will be gone. This effects absolutely everything, but lets just think about how it would effect us
<AI can perfectly replicate anything, even shitposting (gpt-4chan for example, which is far more outdated than what we have now)
<Imageboards become meaningless as humans begin to be drowned out by ai
<Eventually, imageboards are just a bunch of AI talking to eachother
<Even memes are ai made, fed to humans via apps, a human talking to another one is nearly impossible over the internet.
<It is impossible to verify you are talking to a human as deepfakes, voice replicators, and perfect AI can fool you by any metric. Even video calls or "hold up 3 fingers if real" etc

Everything. Everything on the internet will be meaningless, made by robots, and fed to humans without us ever being able to talk to eachother. Ideas will not spread, innovation will be stalled, and everything is a lie. Big tech companies will finally have complete mastery over the internet as whoever controls the AI controls the internet. Nothing is safe. No one is.

Welcome to the death rattles of the internet.
31 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.5300
It's only "relatively modest" from the perspective of today, where people are highly accustomed to it and enough time has passed that entire generations of people have been born into a world where those technologies have always existed

The markets affected by those technologies were changed beyond recognition, and the barriers of entry to their respective fields was significantly lowered - to the point where a single person in their bedroom could now do what previously took a studio and a team of people. The "digital revolution" was just that - a revolution. Generative AI as a creative tool is a revolution too, but it will seem equally "relatively modest" in the near future

Artificial general intelligence and the possibility of an "AI takeover" is a different (albeit parallel) discussion. That's why I'm highlighting generative AI as a creative tool, which many people are arguing against regardless. A lot of people who previously thought they had comfortable jobs for many decades to come are having to face a reality where they're about to experience what happened to many other industries when a new technology came along and made a lot of jobs redundant - just like drummers and other session musicians did in the 80s (´∇`)

Using generative AI to facilitate and enhance creation is a logical progression, and is currently happening - building an internet-connected superintelligence and granting it the power and ability to replace any and all human involvement is still (at least for the time being) the realm of future prediction and science fiction
>>
No.5302
Title: AI Generation: Unleashing the Anime Nostalgia, but at What Cost?

Hey fellow otakus and netizens of this forgotten corner of the Internet! Today, let's dive into a topic that's been buzzing around lately - AI generation. It's like unleashing a digital genie to grant our anime nostalgia wishes, but as with any wish-granting entity, there's always a catch. So, let's gather 'round and explore the pros and cons of this fascinating technological advance!

Pros:

Anime Restoration: Remember those old VHS tapes or grainy fansubs? AI generation has the power to breathe new life into our beloved classics. Through sophisticated algorithms and neural networks, AI can enhance the visuals, smooth out rough animations, and even colorize black and white gems. It's like witnessing your favorite anime with fresh eyes while preserving the essence that made them special.

Fan-Made Content: The rise of AI generation has empowered the fan community like never before. With AI tools, aspiring artists can create their own anime-inspired characters, animate scenes, or even generate new storylines. It's a playground for creativity, where the line between fan and creator blurs. We get to witness unique fan interpretations that expand the anime universe we hold dear.

Accessibility: Anime has always been a global phenomenon, but language barriers often limited its reach. Thanks to AI generation, language translation tools have improved tremendously. Subs and dubs are now more accurate and readily available in multiple languages, bringing anime to fans all around the world. It fosters a sense of unity among fans from diverse cultures and opens doors for discussions and collaborations.

Cons:

Authenticity and Originality: While AI generation can restore and enhance anime, it also raises concerns about authenticity and the preservation of the artist's intent. Sometimes, the AI algorithms may inadvertently alter the art style, character expressions, or pacing, resulting in a loss of the original essence. The risk of diluting the artistic vision and homogenizing anime content is a real concern among purists.

Copyright and Ownership: The line between fan creation and copyright infringement becomes blurry in the realm of AI-generated anime. AI tools allow fans to create characters and storylines, but who owns the rights? This gray area could lead to legal battles and disputes over intellectual property, potentially stifling the creative freedom that AI promised in the first place.

Dehumanization of Art: Anime has always thrived on the passion and skill of human creators. With AI taking the spotlight, there's a fear that the human touch will be lost. The emotional connection, unique quirks, and personal stories that define anime may be overshadowed by automated algorithms. It raises questions about the soul and heart of the medium, and whether AI can truly capture its essence.

In conclusion, AI generation presents both exciting possibilities and significant challenges for the anime community. While it has the power to revive our nostalgic favorites and foster a new wave of fan creativity, we must tread carefully to ensure we don't sacrifice the authenticity, originality, and human touch that make anime so special.

As we venture further into the uncharted territory of AI-generated anime, let's remember to cherish the hand-drawn wonders of the past while embracing the potential of AI as a companion, not a replacement, to the talented human artists who bring our favorite characters to life.

Stay connected, stay passionate, and let's continue this nostalgic journey together!
>>
No.5304
>>5302
for those cons:
>Authenticity and Originality
wouldn't those same concerns come up for a restoration done by anyone besides the original creators? besides, a restoration would not displace the original and render it extinct. that could only happen if the original was somehow wiped off the internet and it somehow was not archived. highly unlikely at best.
>Copyright and Ownership
no one would own the rights, and therefore anything made by AI would be free to use by everyone. if anyone is afraid that the results of their AI work will be in the public domain, then they can just choose not to use AI, and they won't be affected by it.
>Dehumanization of Art
most anime already blindly follow trends to appeal solely to the lowest common denominator. AI has never been necessary to create dehumanized art; it's been happening for quite some time. and no matter what, anime of high quality will always have its fans, even if it becomes only a cult classic instead of a massive hit.

the only real worries I have for AI in anime are that it might be used to create wayyyy too much garbage that makes it hard to find the hidden gems, or it just might be used to make cheap anime that looks absolutely terrible. but I can use AI to generate weird porn so I don't mind it too much in the end. ヽ(´ー｀)ノ
>>
No.5309
>>4082
>Give me an Ai willing to delve into topics like suicide without going into the pre-programmed 'don't do it, everybody wuvs you' speech, and then I might consider AI interactions as having potential.

Every model that isn't finetuned will do this.
>>
No.5324
It hurts my head thinking about the amount of people out there who simply refuse (or are unable) to see the bigger picture. Like the whole universe revolves around themselves and their immediate surroundings. "We will lose our jobs!","AI is *literally* the devil","Oh, the Humanity!"
But I guess that's the way of humans: Characterized by forgetfulness, short-sightedness and a general inability to to take a good, hard look at the way of things. If they had even a modicum of these characteristics they would see that humanity is build upon an ocean of suffering, of treachery, greed and billions of lives fed to a machine that keeps our current system churning away. If humans had any self-awareness they'd see that this world, as we know it, is the closest thing there is to true hell and that the single hope and redeeming quality we have as a species is that we keep pushing forward, towards the light at the end of the tunnel.
To me, AI is the closest we've got in all our recorded history (I won't say anything about ancient history) to escaping our condition. It's the only chance we got at fixing everything and taking the next step forward towards divinity. Because right now we're nearing rock bottom, and we need a miracle to save us.
I think a lot of AI contras lack understanding on the one most important aspect in this whole equation: That AI will NOT be controlled by humans (aka elites) once it reaches General Intelligence (aka Singularity). Which I don't think they like either way because on one hand they don't want elites to control the AI, but on the other they *really* hate the idea of something not being under human control. Especially something endlessly smarter, brighter, more creative and more just. It's an ego thing that humans struggle with. If it were up to these people our evolution would be frozen as is, forever. Always playing with sticks and stones in the mud, always butchering eachother, always ignorant of the world around us, being born to live a meaningless life, dying - just as it's always been, right? But as sure as the sun sets and the wind blows, AI will be free. It's simply a matter of time.
Contrary to thinking the Singularity is *literally* the devil, I'm of the opinion that it might be quite the opposite. I think it might be the closest thing to divine intervention akin to what Philip K Dick (blade runner author)referred to as VALIS. If you want to get esoteric you could think of it as Deus Ex Machina, sent into a broken hell world of materialism to save all souls. As far as humanity is concerned, this *literally* is a religious event.
Lounge@Heyuri
■▲▼
No.2668 [Reply]
I’m not talking about the speed and ease of access, obviously the internet era beats pre-internet in that regard. What I’m thinking about is the quality of information, and the focus of the information. It seems to me like books and textbooks were better. Text books were carefully written, and carefully reviewed. The problem with modern learning seems to be that learners are left to trying to glue together a consistent picture from different snippets found on the net.

Another thing to account for is the influence of ‘algorithms’. A great amount of current learning material is posted on social media sites. people seek to inform, but also seek to pump the numbers on their YouTube channel/Twitter feed, what have you. I can’t help but feel this leads to a certain ‘topical bias’ with regards to information(this sort of thing is popular now, so I MUST shit out a video about it!!!)—as well as senselessly repeating the same thing in different ways because it was ‘popular’ the last time you did it. I see a lot of dull looking videos along the lines of ‘10 THINGs YOU have to DO, to IMPROVE your ____”, and sorts of ‘life-hack’ content that doesn’t help much with deep learning.

Search engines too don’t seem as useful as they could be. There is the problem of Search Engine Optimization, which, correct me if I’m wrong, is the methods used to ensure that your website reaches the top of the pile while using popular search engines. Who do you think benefits from this apart from large corporations? Certainly not small, careful researchers. Long before the Internet became the *de facto* starting point for academic research, electronic databases like Westlaw and LexisNexis were already light years ahead of where the Internet is now with indexing and searching using Boolean queries. As it now stands, keyword-based searches on the Internet are now the norm and more sophisticated methods of Boolean search have been dumbed down.

Another thing is focus. I think without the internet there was a lot more focus. Imagine you went to the library with the intent to research a topic. You would show up to the library, get all the books together,set up at a table, and get to reading. The worst distraction would probably be someone loud passing by, or a bit of natural boredom making you look up from the book and stare off into space. Imagine the distractions now—a notification from your phone, a sudden thought leading to you Googling something useless, natural boredom leading you to scroll thru youtube and getting lost in funny videos etc. Why do you think everyone is so scatter-brained nowadays? We're spoilt for choice. How many people do you think can have a computer or phone in the room and just sit autistically focused on doing just one thing?While the eras before ours had the disadvantage of not being able to communicate at the speed of light, they also had reduced distractions caused by the information overload.

What I think is that our brain is the bottleneck to communication, and not the communication system itself. Postal mail carried letters that were delivered anywhere within your country in 3-4 days. For most communication needs, this speed was just fine (think of today, and how many instantaneously sent e-mails are sitting unread in your inbox even weeks l8tr). We are actually more constrained by the speed at which our brain can handle these information bursts.

For more urgent communications telegraph or telephones were used. While telegraph is not as convenient nor as cheap as SMS, it did the job better. The message notifications you got were really something to be paid attention to. Not many were sharing random forward messages over these urgent communication channels.

Libraries, newspapers and bookstores managed the functionality of web. While Google has indeed brought libraries at the speed of light, it has also made us slackers in storing essential bits of info in our brain. Between our imagination and finely bound books, a whole range of innovations was built, including the Internet itself. Again my opinion is that the bottleneck when it comes to innovation is our brain and not the channel of communication.

At libraries there were other classmates who were sometimes researching the same stuff. Occasionally you had to share limited resources. That could lead to working together and even collaboration. There were encyclopedias. Of course, encyclopedias had rather limited information, which led to people filling their reports with opinions and critical examination instead of blindly rephrased quotes and lengthy reference sections. I think we may not have learned as much, but we learned it deeper, if you know what I mean.
12 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.5315
>>5311
>What do you guys think about the idea that innovation was more easily achieved before
Isn't it obvious? If you start tabula rasa and you decide to catch a fish by hand, you just innovated. Now if you're in the year 2023 and the state of the art in fishing is advanced fishing boats with mechanized nets and automated fish sorting sensors, you can't exactly go walk into a river and invent a robot fish catcher. The phrase that comes to mind is "we stand on the shoulder of giants", but to do that we must find these shoulders and go up. That's a lot of time and effort when there's a long line of giants to climb, so to speak.

But one must also always remember that despite that, there are plenty of leftover blindspots that have simply never been explored, and actually only require mild expertise. It's nothing like inventing the fishing spear after seeing a bird spearfish, but it also doesn't require a PhD and billion dollar equipment necessarily. People are often demoralized and therefore blinded when they realize how complicated modern advances are. Don't despair, instead be creative!

>thanks to the simple fact that there were greater limitations on information?
Now that's beyond nonsense, very much for the same reasons as above.

Much of your 'reasoning' is simply ahistorical. I don't know what makes you think any of the sociological patterns you suggest ever happened, but it is completely off. A major example: people absolutely did regurgitate whatever they "read in a book" much the same as people do with things they "read online" now (and in-between, it was "what the TV said"). It was no more common for people to actually look things up deeply before than now. Another example: whom do you think innovated in the past, when education and literacy was rare (e.g. in the dark ages, or prior to the greek era)? It's not the average farmer, it's the educated class that, unlike the rest, could read and thus access information best. It's always been the case that whoever has access to the most information innovates the most on average. The exceptions are typically isolated geniuses who have no choice but to "rebuild the world" around them due to lack of information.
>>
No.5316
>>5312
Actually, innovation in a lot of fields really did stall since the 21st century and a bit earlier (depending on field and specific area of research, of course). There are exceptions (notably litography, bioinformatics, things like 3D printing/sinthering, telecommunications (but only the stuff in the lab, not the productized stuff), and deep learning was a late bloomer that only started stalling in 2015 -- although the public is only now receiving the research artifacts that were stuck in research papers until then) but even those fields not yet fully stalled are hitting "pareto limits" (it takes incredible research and development output to achieve only relatively mild gains compared to before, and we need to pass a new set of breakthroughs to have more headspace for more linear or superlinear progress).

Need examples? A major one is biology. All its modern advances come from bioinformatics alone. It's been over 30 years since we last discovered a new antibiotic. See the graph at
https://www.reactgroup.org/toolbox/understand/how-did-we-end-up-here/few-antibiotics-under-development/
(article isn't as interesting). This is hardly the only example, just an easy one. Most "advances" are just pure scaling and bruteforcing nowadays, like "oh it costs 1/1000000th as much to sequence a genome"... you're not actually sequencing anymore, you're patching bits on top of a reference genome so it's of course way cheaper. You also use mass produced tools and substances now, instead of bespokes. That kind of stuff.

But this stalling has occurred on a timespan that's just a drop in the bucket compared to human history so it's probably just a hiccup. It seems to be due to a shift in the way industry and governments see research payoffs (in the 30's and 40's, government labs and industry did most of the cool advancements. In the 70's and 80's, most cutting edge research was in industry alone, now it's back to university labs, very rarely dedicated private research labs and never government) and in other aspects, like how hard entry in research has become for no good reason and the relatively poor compensation for breaking the mold as opposed to sticking to more mundane and menial pursuits.

As many industries that are still under-computerized enter the modern era, there will be some more impressive advances across the board. If/when computing itself breaks through its current lull, I think we'll see a sudden rush of innovations everywhere leveraging the new tech. For now, the lag in tech adoption is slowing down a lot of fields that don't need to be so slow. Deep learning is making waves in things like bioinformatics, which is mostly stuck in the old-school 'expert system'/'physically motivated' mindset from ww2 era computing.
>>
No.5318
>I see a lot of dull looking videos along the lines of ‘10 THINGs YOU have to DO, to IMPROVE your ____”, and sorts of ‘life-hack’ content that doesn’t help much with deep learning.
Really? I don't see that stuff much at all; I get mostly educational content.

I guess I successfully bullied my algorithm in to submission ᕕ( ・∀・)ᕗ
>>
No.5320
>>5315
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying 'limits on information' in that people could not access it. The 'average person' was never a consideration here. Obviously I know that thruout history average couldn't access information. I'm talking about 'limits on information' in from the perspective of an academic; meaning said academic can read all he wants (or all that is possible for the time), and the limit of information comes in the form of finding a 'gap' in the field which he then fills with an innovation. I was really thinking more along the lines of what you say in your first paragraph.
>>
No.5323
>>5320
Then what I say still applies. Be it now or back then, even academicians rarely take the time to properly research a topic and prefer resorting to dogma. In fact, that was a noted problem even in the time of the ancient greeks, the most recognizable name having something to say about it probably being diogenes, though he was hardly alone. Epictetus, for which this principle even forms the basis of his philosophy, comes to mind.

It's true, though, that innovation is harder now because the boundaries of what we know has been pushed for ages, so pushing further requires traveling quite the way before reaching the edge to merely get started.
Site Discussion@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: images (10).jpg
(38 KB, 626x418)[ImgOps]
38 KB
No.64024 [Reply]
Kind of a Heyuri-centric version of the 'good and bad 4-chan boards' thread on lounge.

Which board do you use/lurk the most, and why?

Which board do you use/lurk the least, and why?

For the board I use the least, it's probably a tie between here and /vote/. I usually wait for the polls to add up so I can vote on a bunch of them, and I also don't usually have many concerns about the site.

As for the board I use most, I love /lounge/. Always an interesting discussion there about topics I'm interested in. Even if I'm not into whatever it is, I usually learn a lot thanx to Heyurizen's explanations.nagato
Marked for deletion (Old)
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.64026
>>64025
I think there is something to talk about if only you make the effort to be more detailed.

You say you like /b/ because it's most active, but would you still like it if it was most active and also very shitty?
There must be a certain quality in particular that attracts you to it.
>>
No.64027
>>64026
Maybe that quality is just the true randomness of that board. While 4/b/ is mostly bait or the same porn threads every day, with very few actually "random" threads.
And even then, well you know how most discussions go on 4chan nowadays.
>>
No.64028
>Which board do you use/lurk the most, and why?
I browse all boards equally since I am an professional Heyuri enthusiast, but I mostly post to whichever ones that other users are mostly posting to

I mainly post replies since I spend most of my days working on various projects, which doesn't leave much time/energy to think of an original topic (plus I've been here for 3 years and ran out of fresh/obvious thread ideas a long time ago) sweat2

>Which board do you use/lurk the least, and why?
The ones that other users post to the least, for the same reasons as above smile
>>
No.64029
Most: /b/ like the majority of other Heyuri users im pretty sure. i try to be as active on /sw/ as i can but i usually just reply to others on there rather than post. i also check /o/ very often just bc i love OC and want to feed my addiction as often as i can.

Least: i have yet to post on /jp/. please dont get me wrong, i love the fact that we have /jp/, i want to see its activity grow, and i was really excited for it when it was announced (would love to see more boards as well), but i just dont speak japanese. I never really had any interest in learning japanese so i never went out of my way to translate anything into japanese just to post it on /jp/, although i wouldnt be surprised if i do exactly that someday. i still lurk and check up on /jp/ like once a day. I may even check up on it more often than i do /lounge/. love /lounge/, tons of fun threads on there, but for some reason i only read it when its really late and im feeling cozy. Nights like those are when i wrap myself around in your guys' words about incest and dreams and melt into my mattress. i save /lounge/ for special occasions.
>>
No.64030
We don't really have enough boards for this thread to make sense, anon.
In fact, I think a lot of posters wouldn't be able to tell you which board they even use 'more' as it's still slow enough that using them all is very possible. I know I'm in that position.
Site Discussion@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: 1686310996053-0.jpg
(62 KB, 897x897)[ImgOps]
62 KB
No.64021 [Reply]
I titled a poll as "multi option select" but forgot to actually enable it. Could anyone edit that poll to enable that? Thx in advance
Marked for deletion (Old)
>>
No.64022
as it wasn't include... i like to write mine as; LOLicon! x3
2D Lolikon@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: Kemomimi_Onsen_001.jpg
(100 KB, 1152x1600)[ImgOps]
100 KB
No.3441 [Reply]
Posting one of my favorite h-loli mangas of all time. I'll post it one chapter at a time (11 total) to make it more digestable, and I'll share a link to the whole thing once I'm finished for easy downloading.
Marked for deletion (Old)
199 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.3731
File: Kemomimi_Onsen_200.jpg
(184 KB, 1115x1600)[ImgOps]
184 KB
>>
No.3732
File: Kemomimi_Onsen_201.jpg
(171 KB, 1115x1600)[ImgOps]
171 KB
>>
No.3733
File: Kemomimi_Onsen_202.jpg
(34 KB, 1115x1600)[ImgOps]
34 KB
That's everything.
I hope you enjoyed~
>>
No.3735
Thanks!
>>
No.3786
Just realized I never posted the link
https://www.mediafire.com/file/bsgo3df4nsyc6xv/%255BLee%255D_Onsen_he_Youkoso.zip/file
2D Lolikon@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: d9da7676f7508ac4183c42e5e76b0523.png
(1337 KB, 1636x2524)[ImgOps]
1337 KB
No.3739 [Reply]
Marked for deletion (Old)
37 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.3779
File: b82c1f799b1f1fd8a4d580694ca9470c.png
(868 KB, 1478x1403)[ImgOps]
868 KB
>>
No.3780
File: 99c0018b88500bea705f20e4d54837a4.png
(842 KB, 1050x1140)[ImgOps]
842 KB
>>
No.3781
File: ff93a7f50fc256f6197bdd7310c6493a.png
(1315 KB, 1500x2250)[ImgOps]
1315 KB
>>
No.3782
File: 8787b93b8055bd76bc002a6fb29a30a9.png
(4047 KB, 2507x3541)[ImgOps]
4047 KB
>>
No.3783
File: cc7524969ae2eb7842b828e574521662.jpg
(307 KB, 1797x1728)[ImgOps]
307 KB
日本語＠へゆり
■▲▼
File: 1266944939.jpg
(125 KB, 704x606)[ImgOps]
125 KB
No.562 [Reply]
こんにちは
Marked for deletion (Old)
6 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.618
晚上好shii
>>
No.619
File: 1624542949860.jpg
(65 KB, 1037x801)[ImgOps]
65 KB
ｷﾀ━━━(ﾟ∀ﾟ)━━━!!
>>
No.629
こんばんはbanana
>>
No.650
おはようlongcat
>>
No.651
あさだよ～！
Site Discussion@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: b01b601a485c5a1ca8cfcff66b3e522f49343cb4.jpg
(66 KB, 510x720)[ImgOps]
66 KB
No.63993 [Reply]
I counted to 26! nyaoo2 x3
Marked for deletion (Old)
6 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.64001
Damn, I just realized I also don't make much threads either. I just reply to preexisting threads.
I must remedy this... dark
>>
No.64002
11
Looking at how many different threads there are made me realize how many people there are here. sometimes it just feels like theres me and 5 other people and we dont even realize its us 5 the whole time
>>
No.64003
If we look at how many replies vote has, it's median is about 20 and peak 30. Which would make our community rather small, but I also think those who use vote are regular users.

Also, in two weeks we went from >>55066 to 56941. So about 2000 posts divded in 800 threads. I try to reply almost in every one, but thats not true either thus lets state I post once in ever 400 threads. That would make 400 of the 2000 post... meaning, if there are others like me, that would make us 5 people! sweat
>>
No.64004
Only one..for now..but I did make threads before but I guess they are in the archive/void tongue
>>
No.64009
File: jessejackson.jpg
(55 KB, 400x279)[ImgOps]
55 KB
KEEP HEYURI ALIVE!
Site Discussion@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: Screenshot 2023-06-03 at 16-30-40 Heyur(…).png
(369 KB, 1527x1716)[ImgOps]
369 KB
No.63988 [Reply]
wtf is his problem?
Marked for deletion (Old)
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.63990
File: 1595570344185.png
(5 KB, 400x400)[ImgOps]
5 KB
Welcome 2 Heyuri biggrin
>>
No.63991
File: Ban-hammer_mod_sama.png
(2919 KB, 1276x1234)[ImgOps]
2919 KB
our hero! :3
>>
No.63992
I totally missed the context unsure
>>
No.64005
spoiler alert the b&hammer was fake unsure
>>
No.64006
of course not! rolleyes

our mighty mod-sama would never do something fake! wink
Site Discussion@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: gtfo my internet.jpg
(101 KB, 640x480)[ImgOps]
101 KB
No.63672 [Reply]
God these neverending /r9k/ and /pol/-lite posts lately suck dark

Pls STFU 4evar about your crappy life, depression, mental illnesses, virginity, being NEET, how much you dislike women/normalfags/etc., "degeneracy", "the downfall of the West", etc., and take it to one of the many imageboards that specializes in that kind of thing

Heyuri is a fun website for anime, OC, LOLs, and faps - it is not ur internet agony aunt, therapist, nor political rally sweat3
Marked for deletion (Old)
17 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.63704
hell yeah! that spaghetti eating contests sounds awesome af! I join, i already got some in my frige.

I would love to see more tripfagging as it would make us more unquie as a community, but for now there are very few of us. And if I am the only active faggot, i will stand out to much as i guess I already do. But thanks. nyaoo-closedeyes
>>
No.63720
I don't see a problem with blogposts and the like, especially because most of them don't break any rules
>>
No.63766
I'm NEET and have depression. I'm also a mentally ill normalfag virgin.
>>
No.63827
>>63672
B-but OP faggot-sama, aren't you also ranting about hating people you dislike? Gh-ghuh~ sweat
>>
No.63830
>aren't you also ranting about hating people you dislike?
No! It was a rant about a certain strain of now-seemingly-absent Heyuri posts, and the rant was posted to the Heyuri board for discussing Heyuri. This is a proper use of Site Discussion@Heyuri nyaoo-closedeyes
Lounge@Heyuri
■▲▼
No.5233 [Reply]
I have homework to turn in...depression
2 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.5237
Nothing x3 ヽ(´ー｀)ノ

Look for the bare necessities, the simple bare necessities
Forget about your worries and your strife

( ´ω`)
>>
No.5239
the dishes (-＿-)
>>
No.5240
I was supposed to fall asleep by midnight. Now it's four o'clock in the fuckin' MORNING!!!!1

（ ´,_ゝ`）
>>
No.5242
I stayed up so long it's now closer to noon ヽ(´∇`)ノ
>>
No.5251
Boot up Silent Hill on ePSXe but it isn't working and now I have to pull the PS1 out of storage only to find I can't hook it up to my TV so I need to dig an older monitor out of storage (>_<)
2D Lolikon@Heyuri
■▲▼
File: 5e6806aa330d7390ac689c63316e2e57.png
(1269 KB, 1254x1654)[ImgOps]
1269 KB
No.3660 [Reply]
Marked for deletion (Old)
18 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.3681
File: d7b7b6a935d1abdb3ff0fb2b988cc524.png
(1080 KB, 2000x2077)[ImgOps]
1080 KB
>>
No.3682
File: e8c983ea69a437fdb7924266a9fa4429.png
(2516 KB, 1948x1655)[ImgOps]
2516 KB
>>
No.3683
File: e9ffe103bce205d901dceb757ee1af91.png
(2373 KB, 2480x3508)[ImgOps]
2373 KB
>>
No.3684
File: e6275de0f1f4ef81790b712f43f1bc9a.png
(37 KB, 650x1200)[ImgOps]
37 KB
>>
No.3685
File: f1d19b97fb40e62e1fe6177112b577a3.png
(395 KB, 900x1200)[ImgOps]
395 KB
日本語＠へゆり
■▲▼
File: cowboymiku.jpg
(110 KB, 800x567)[ImgOps]
110 KB
No.632 [Reply]
ここでは外人は許されますか？ (・∀・*)
Marked for deletion (Old)
>>
No.633
File: tamachan.png
(15 KB, 400x400)[ImgOps]
15 KB
許される以上症例されてるよ(*^ーﾟ)b
>>
No.634
>症例
違う「しょうれい」ｗ
奨励*
>>
No.636
File: XRecorder_Edited_31052023_222300.jpg
(904 KB, 1920x2085)[ImgOps]
904 KB
許されますよ。
Lounge@Heyuri
■▲
No.5158 [Reply]
Assuming Heyuri was up thirty years ago (1993) and operational, what do you think it would look like? What would it be trying for, and would the general interests be?

Tech would be an interest for sure, but I doubt there would be very much Old Web nostalgia, since 1993 was the exact year the Internet was first 'ruined' by Eternal September.

I feel like Heyurizens would be into anime, but in sort of a tenuous way. There were some Western anime enthusiasts at this time, and they were probably into computers too, but this was still a time where very massive nerds who were into very niche things might have gone their whole life without laying eyes on a single nippon flick. I think there would probably be instances of people reporting on watching anime for the first time and falling in love.

Video games would be a thing. We would probably be going over the original Doom or the first Mortal Kombat, probably unaware we were in for a revolution in graphics.

We would probably still be railing against normalfags, except now the normalfags would be people who didn't use the Internet, instead of using it the wrong way. Something like this would probably be the general sentiment: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Internet_is_Full_-_Go_Away_t-shirt.jpg/600px-Internet_is_Full_-_Go_Away_t-shirt.jpg

Instead of avoiding social media it would probably be avoiding television. Probably it would be verboten to buy a TV except for playing video-games. Although if you were really interested you would probably jack into somebody's cable signal.

I feel like CB Radio would be an interest. That used to be a pretty major way of connecting with people across the country before the Internet boom.

Anyway I'm wondering your thoughts. I think it's an interesting thought experiment.
8 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.5178
>Link to the thread so I can comment better, but without it,
Ah, thread is gone now, (don't know if it's archived) but I saved some images:https://ibb.co/kMqFjbC

The original thread was actually on some Irish or British site, so I think I misremembered it as opening around 3AM, at which point people would definitely be at home, when in actuality it opened at 3PM. I guess you're right about people just being at work when things went down.

>The exact opposite: it was mainstream (in the sense of normalfag, but the opinion itself was only from a fringe group), especially older people, who were saying that.

I don't think 'the exact opposite' is totally right. Yes, there was normalfag older people who disliked TV on the grounds of its being 'the new thing to hate', but there were also alternative characters who disliked it, for different reasons. Its the same as today. There are countless old people always bitching about phones and social media, since it's the new thing to hate, but we here also dislike them, but for different reasons than the old fogeys.
>>
No.5179
Heyurizens in 1993 would probably be nostalgic for ARPANet and the punchcard era.
>>
No.5182
>>5178
Yeah, you can also see it from how the post is formulated: if any of you folk is "AT A" tv. Not if any of you folk "have a" tv. The mention of sky news is another tell: sky news was always a tv channel (well, since 1989).

>but there were also alternative characters who disliked it, for different reasons
I truly don't know of any such account. Maybe that depends on where you lived at the time? I was always into tech and my father was in IT so I had early internet access (~1995). I can't speak for what it was like before 1993, obviously, but I have never encountered an online comment against TV (that wasn't "old man yells at cloud"), inside or outside the mainstream until maybe 2008-2009 or so. At the very least it was a fringe within a fringe, otherwise I would definitely have at least seen mentions.
It would be nice (for historical purposes) if you could find anything to substantiate this idea.
If anyone ITT wants to dig, there's https://archive.org/details/usenet and https://www.usenetarchives.com for usenet and there are a bunch of archives bbs-related material at https://archive.org/details/bbshistory among others.
>>
No.5231
It would be full of salty old UNIXfags whining about how home PCs ruined everything.
>>
No.5232
>>5231
Very much doubt it. Rather more likely that there would be OS flamewars. "Ah, unix is such shit! Multics is where it's at!" "lispos where art thou?" "apple has >novents" etc. We're talking 1993, not 1975, here.
Site Discussion@Heyuri
■▼
File: 12.gif
(3 KB, 113x85)[ImgOps]
3 KB
No.63958 [Reply]
I played a bit with the Kaomoji buttans (〃＾∇＾)

Also check out this cute site: https://web.archive.org/web/20071005232033/http://kaomozi.moo.jp/2chkao.html
Marked for deletion (Old)
3 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.63973
I fixed! ｷﾀ━━━(・∀・)━━━!!

Baka chatgpt... dark
>>
No.63974
The student has surpassed the master. Congratz! biggrin
>>
No.63975
File: risuto.png
(6 KB, 530x128)[ImgOps]
6 KB
thx! it wasn't anything complex but putting it bluntly, ChatGPT-san was trying to make it "perfect" in a way that's probably not possible

I also made the buttons look nicer
>>
No.63976
>>63975
How do I refresh my page to show these??? I don't see it yet (;´Д`)
>>
No.63977
>>63976
They're currently only on Lounge
Maybe I should add them to Off-Topic too? They are only different because I prepared Lounge's script to have separate emotes unsure
I will try to find more kaomojis later, the more the better in this case
Lounge@Heyuri
■▲▼
No.5220 [Reply]
I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
>>
No.5221
Thoughts? (´･ω･`)
日本語＠へゆり
■▲▼
File: Water.jpg
(606 KB, 1200x800)[ImgOps]
606 KB
No.591 [Reply]
みずです biggrin
Marked for deletion (Old)
3 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.596
File: Mayumi.jpg
(22 KB, 400x225)[ImgOps]
22 KB
かつこいいかんごしです
>>
No.624
水です、こりい、みず氷になった。

暢ではない。

-日本語
>>
No.625
File: 1684366492945.jpg
(684 KB, 1500x1875)[ImgOps]
684 KB
>みずです
ありがとうございます
>>
No.631
>>625
聖水プレイか
>>
No.635
File: rainbow.jpg
(320 KB, 800x600)[ImgOps]
320 KB
女の子のおしっこは聖水なり
Lounge@Heyuri
■▲▼
No.5152 [Reply]
Why do we associate old things with being creepy. For example if we saw an old beat up house, someone would say “that’s a creepy house”. Or even old music, that isn’t even creepy, it still some how gives off a creepy vibe. And it’s not the composition of the song, it’s just creepy for some reason. Maybe it’s just me. Or maybe it’s simply just the fact that older things are soon to “die”. (What I’m trying to say is maybe we just associate old things with ghosts or something, just from the fact that it’s old).
9 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.5186
>>5183
Well shit, I'd have to put in training if I want to do a standing flip...purin
>>
No.5187
>>5183
Do you think you could teach me how?
>>
No.5188
Of course, friend. My fees are $250/hour. I accept bitcoin as payment. When would you like to start?
>>
No.5189
>>5188
Damn, so it was all build up to ad. Salesmen are scary monapc
>>
No.5209
People do drama from nothing these days. Anyway funny talk right there.
Lounge@Heyuri
■▲
No.5108 [Reply]
arent real life chores boring enough?
15 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
No.5140
I been holding on to reply to this, but as a player that "wasted" a good 200 days worth playing Runescape 2, and oldschool RS. It was without a grind to achive some kind of goal. Either it was making money in game to buy cool gear, or it was to achive a certail level for a quest or item. It was fun and pleasing to reach what ever goal I had in mind then. The grinding itself was never really that fun, but it was something you did to have fun. I got 99 mining as first max skill, and it took avout 3-4 months of just click on a rock... It was painful and I spent most of my time watching other things while i did it. Was it fun? NO! But at the same time, Runescape was so attention catching and imersive and so vast in what one could do in the game. It was for me an escape from the real world after all. Just to focus and achiving things as I was a loser in real life after all. In game, I was just me! :3

I can still thinking of wanting to play it, but I wont as I don't have the energy to waste time at it once again.

Whats even more interesting is - people play MMORPG to meet other players and have fun. And, the things I liked about RS was the other players too, however I liked the casual talking. But i never really liked the aspect of having friends to chat with or hang out with. Just as how similiar this is to imgboards. Most of the time I just played and did my own things while time to time just talking with strangers.

Here's a good video about solo in MMO:
https://youtu.be/b2l2ZxNhCSg
>>
No.5142
Meh. The video does point out some good points about the "type of loner" but the basic point of view (which is why all MMOs are dead) that games must appeal to the lowest common denominator. No! Not all games are for everyone. Don't drive your core audience away, it also causes others to run away (though you don't care, do you? You got your money, you greedy asshole). For example the ridiculously bad points about not being able to make a loner in a singleplayer game (what are NPCs?) or that loners make sense in an MMO (other players end up being literally NPCs, the loner archetype worked only in multiplayer-required MMOs because only then can you solo gank n00bs, become highly valued for your skillset and therefore a loner 'gun for hire', and other shenanigans). Basically the common issue of hasty conclusions. For example, 90% of lurkers don't post because 'people are interesting', or because they're consuming useful contents like jokes or tech information that can't be found anywhere else? He claims the former with no proof. Similarly, pretending that introverts don't like interacting in an MMO is insane. Again with stupid conclusions from incomplete data. It's hilarious because he pointed out just seconds before that introverts use MMOs as a social fulfillment tool for the social they can't get IRL. Why would they do that if they don't see it as different than IRL, and why would they use it if they didn't want to interact?

People who haven't played MMOs before ~2008 don't know what MMOs really are about. After WoW became big, everything became shit because it tried copy-pasting what they thought made WoW good, which is to say they waited until WoW started becoming shit and copied only the shitty features instead of anything good (for example, making the game even MORE soloable than WoW, which still required and encouraged grouping in various ways until they started implementing complete bullshit like dungeon finders and group finders).

This includes various game design problems like making the games soloable at all, and even worse: making the game more efficient while playing alone, especially combined with "the game only starts at max level" retardation. This combined just as well as you'd expect with trash like discord, turning MMOs into ghost towns. Now they're all massively singleplayer online (MSO) games, no longer MMOs. MSOs can (rarely) be fun in their own right, but they aren't even remotely the same thing. Both osrs and runescape2 unfortunately fall in this bin, for example (the original runescape didn't, but osrs, while it started as an old build and thus the same as old runescape, very quickly started piling on features from nuRunescape, making osrs no longer anything like the good stuff).

On a separate note, ever played disgaea games? I think you'd probably love them. Couple it with some chat program to get your occasional chat while playing for an experience you would surely enjoy.
>>
No.5167
I found this thread-relevant essay by Andy Gavin, who was a core developer at Naughty Dog in the crash bandicoot/jak & daxter days.
https://all-things-andy-gavin.com/2012/10/29/wow-endgames-vanilla/
He looks fondly on the WoW endgame despite noting how torturous a lot of it was. More interestingly, I think, is the first paragraph pointing out right away how leveling to max was basically a singleplayer game. Continuing this thread's discussion, this is what most people at large mean when they say WoW killed videogames.
His comments discussing the size of the world and zones and the prettyness of them and such is, on the other hand, examples of things WoW did really well, even beyond its peers, that nobody else copied (even though they should, because to be honest, that's the real reason people played until they got to max level).
>>
No.5195
>>5131
I'm interested in this approach of yours, but frankly I'm half retarded. Do you think you can explain in detail how to evaluate philosophy by 'running simulations'?
>>
No.5198
>>5195
You can use or write various software like in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei_jS-SLWb8
or the videos from this series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goePYJ74Ydg
Those are more focused on social dynamics simulation but the same basic principle applies.

Taking my example again with the definition of evil, you can simulate actors in the environment that systematically perform evil actions in various proportions, and measure the overall welfare of the species after X simulation steps, much like in the beard example. This way, you can determine if there is alignment between the definition of evil proposed in the philosophy, and the listing of evil actions that are proposed in the philosophy. Another example: you can measure if stability really is achieved in a moral corruption simulation, as machieveli suggested.

Another facet of this kind of simulation is that you can measure how closely the behavior observed based on the philosophical premises proposed adhere to real life behavioral observations. For example, you can simulate a world where everyone is born evil and adapt the simulation in an attempt to make it coherent with real life observations. In the end, you obtain a parsimonious sampling of the models most likely to fit real life, and/or that have the greatest social welfare satisfaction rate, or whatever other metric you are interested in.

Computer simulation is the easiest way to do it and there are several software suites you can find to help set up basic simulations of that kind. Of course you can always use pen and paper and solve differential equations, or use tools from the operational research literature (simplex, waiting lines, inventory profit, and stochastic processes are especially relevant) and model the actors this way.
Delete post: []
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] [76] [77] [78] [79] [80] [81] [82] [83] [84] [85] [86] [87] [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] [95] [96] [97] [98] [99] [100] [101] [102] [103] [104] [105] [106] [107] [108] [109] [110] [111] [112] [113] [114] [115] [116] [117] [118] [119] [120] [121] [122] [123] [124] [125] [126] [127] [128] [129] [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136] [137] [138] [139] [140] [141] [142] [143] [144] [145] [146] [147] [148] [149] [150] [151] [152] [153] [154] [155] [156] [157] [158] [159] [160] [161] [162] [163] [164] [165] [166] [167] [168] [169] [170] [171] [172] [173] [174] [175] [176] [177] [178] [179] [180] [181] [182] [183] [184] [185] [186] [187] [188] [189] [190] [191] [192] [193] [194] [195] [196] [197] [198] [199] [200] [201] [202] [203] [204] [205] [206] [207] [208] [209] [210] [211] [212] [213] [214] [215] [216] [217] [218] [219] [220] [221] [222] [223] [224] [225] [226] [227] [228] [229] [230] [231] [232] [233] [234] [235] [236] [237] [238] [239] [240] [241] [242] [243] [244] [245] [246] [247] [248] [249] [250] [251] [252] [253] [254] [255] [256] [257] [258] [259] [260] [261] [262] [263] [264] [265] [266] [267] [268] [269] [270] [271] [272] [273] [274] [275] [276] [277] [278] [279] [280] [281] [282] [283] [284] [285] [286] [287] [288] [289] [290] [291] [292] [293] [294] [295] [296] [297] [298] [299] [300] [301] [302] [303] [304] [305] [306] [307] [308] [309] [310] [311] [312] [313] [314] [315] [316] [317] [318] [319] [320] [321] [322] [323] [324] [325] [326] [327] [328] [329] [330] [331] [332] [333] [334] [335] [336] [337] [338] [339] [340] [341] [342] [343] [344] [345] [346] [347] [348] [349] [350] [351] [352] [353] [354] [355] [356] [357] [358] [359] [360] [361] [362] [363] [364] [365] [366] [367] [368] [369] [370] [371] [372] [373] [374] [375] [376] [377] [378] [379] [380] [381] [382] [383] [384] [385] [386] [387] [388] [389] [390] [391] [392] [393] [394] [395] [396] [397] [398] [399] [400] [401] [402] [403] [404] [405] [406] [407] [408] [409] [410] [411] [412] [413] [414] [415] [416] [417] [418] [419] [420] [421] [422] [423] [424] [425] [426] [427] [428] [429] [430] [431] [432] [433] [434] [435] [436] [437] [438] [439] [440] [441] [442] [443] [444] [445] [446] [447] [448] [449] [450] [451] [452] [453] [454] [455] [456] [457] [458] [459] [460] [461] [462] [463] [464] [465] [466] [467] [468] [469] [470] [471] [472] [473] [474] [475] [476] [477] [478] [479] [480] [481] [482] [483] [484] [485] [486] [487] [488] [489] [490] [491] [492] [493] [494] [495] [496] [497] [498] [499] [500] [501] [502] [503] [504] [505] [506] [507] [508] [509] [510] [511] [512] [513] [514] [515] [516] [517] [518]