#Bought used broken fixed( Breaker/Technologic)

[justdesertbeats]

Just sticky note doodles

[wildlyminiaturesandwich]

🏠 Tiny Living Stuff Pack Review 🏠

Thank you to the EA Game Changer Program for providing me with the opportunity to play with Tiny Living Stuff early!

I didn’t have a lot of time to play around with this pack because I had some real life obligations during the early access time frame and the embargo time was once again at a ridiculous hour of the morning for me (don’t get me started on that mess), but here’s what I did learn about the new Tiny Living Stuff Pack.

I feel like I need to say straight away that this is my favourite stuff pack so far. The reason I feel the need to say that is because when I sat down to go through the notes I’d made during early access and type up this review, the more I got into it, the more it started to sound... aggressively ranty 😬

I was going to try to tone it down a bit, but honestly there are already so many reviews out there that gloss over the glaring bugs that I figured I might as well just leave it. It’s my honest opinion of the pack, and what’s the point of doing a review if I’m not giving my honest opinion, no matter how ranty? lol

I’m gonna put this under a cut, because spoilers.

— What I loved —

🏠 Create-a-Sim:

I’ve been saying for a long time we need more comfy casual clothing for our sims and with this pack we finally got some! LOOK AT THOSE JAMMIES!

To be honest, I wasn’t expecting any CAS items with this pack, but we got some amazing clothing that I will no doubt use on literally every sim I make lol

The hairs are good too, and more options are always appreciated, however I honestly feel like we already have different variations of most of them.

The best part about the hairs is that every single one of them has been made available for kids and toddlers! Apparently one of the gurus found a quick and cost effective way to convert hairs, so hopefully we’ll see this happen more and more with each future pack!

🏠  Buy Mode:

The Buy Mode objects are 100% the star of this pack for me. I don’t think there is a single thing in the buy catalogue of this pack that I didn’t absolutely adore! Some of the objects have issues — and I’ll get into that in a bit — but overall I love, love, LOVE the general concept of everything.

[click for larger]

The objects in this pack were based off the Scandinavian concept of Hygge and I really think they hit the nail on the head! Everything feels so cozy and comfy, with a little hint of Ikea to the furniture and I just... I can’t even really put into words how much I love it all. I honestly can’t remember a single previous pack (expansion, game or stuff) where I have loved every item in the buy catalogue, there’s usually always something that’s like “Meh” or “I don’t like this at all” to me, but the objects in this pack are 10/10.

I also love that they combined so many things. Like the murphy bed with the couch on the front (though I do wish we were also given that couch as a separate couch as well) and the TV unit that’s also a bookcase AND a stereo. And I really appreciate that they went back and redid some of the old book ends to make them functional bookcases. 

— What I didn’t love —

🏠 Create-A-Sim:

I say it with every pack and I’m going to continue to say it even if no one is listening...

WHERE ARE THE KIDS, TODDLERS AND ELDERS CAS ITEMS!?

I know the kids and toddlers got some hairs but that doesn’t make up for the serious lack of CAS content that every age range besides young adults has and it’s getting really hard to make unique sims when there isn’t enough content to choose from.

🏠 Build Mode:

For a pack dedicated to Tiny Living, I was really disappointed to see literally only one door in the build catalogue. ONE. I was expecting some small windows, maybe some sliding doors, but nope; just one door. Hell I would have even been happy to have less CAS stuff in exchange for some build stuff!

I get why they haven’t added bunk beds and spiral stairs yet, those are a lot of work and I’m ok with waiting until they perfect them BUT this would have been the perfect pack to add ladders. We already have ladders in game that are fully animated (pool and island living ladders) it really wouldn’t take that much work to make ladders work between floors. I HATE the idea of having to put stairs outside in tiny builds and ladders are the ultimate in space saving “technology"; I feel like the team really dropped the ball on that one.

🏠 Murphy Beds:

Listen, I love the concept of the murphy beds and the design of them looks really cool but I can’t see myself using them at all as they are currently.

I was almost immediately disappointed with them when I realised they were remote controlled. I know that it makes it easier for the Sims Team so they don’t have to work so hard to animate them, but I really wanted sims to pull them down by hand. The reason I wanted murphy beds in the game was because they would fit better with small apartments and homes of sims who don’t have a lot of money, and to me a remote controlled murphy bed sounds incredibly expensive. 

Oh but don’t worry, because apparently the remote control is invisible?

Now, the version of the game that the Gurus were using for the stream didn’t have invisible remotes BUT they use a dev build of the game that isn’t the same as ours, and many other Game Changers are also saying its invisible for them too, so I dunno what happened but that’s just one of the things that needs to be fixed.

The other issue, which is the biggest deal breaker for me, is that the damn things constantly break! And I do mean CONSTANTLY. You know how when you buy a cheap stereo or sink it’ll last a few days/uses before it breaks? Yeh, not the case for the murphy beds. They break instantly, and they break often.

I was REALLY looking forward to murphy beds being added to the game and I thought if there’s one thing I need to do above all else with this pack, it’s test out those glorious murphy beds! Well... I managed to play for roughly three sim days and here’s what happened during that time:

Bed 1 (never used before) got stuck on first use and squashed Sim 1

Bed 1 got stuck on second attempt and killed Sim 1

Bed 1 got stuck on third attempt and squashed Sim 2

Bought brand new bed

Bed 2 pulled down without issue for Sim 2

Bed 2 broke at 11pm while Sim 2 was sleeping and squashed Sim 2

Sim 2 refused to sleep for 3 hours out of fear while Sim 3 was able to sleep in broken, sparking bed for that time without issue because they weren’t in it when it squashed Sim 2

Sim 2 repaired bed while Sim 3 continued to sleep

After 3 hours Sim 2 went back to sleep and Bed 2 broke again almost immediately

Bought brand new bed. Again.

Bed 3 got stuck on first attempt and squashed Sim 2

Bed 3 got stuck on second attempt and squashed Sim 3

Bed 3 pulled down without issue on third attempt for Sim 3

Sims 2 and 3 slept for another 2 hours before Bed 3 started sparking again but didn’t squash them

Woke Sim 2 up to repair bed and immediately sent Sim 2 back to bed (the fear moodlet only happens if they get squashed but the bed can break without squashing them apparently?)

Bed 3 broke again 3.5 hours later and squashed both Sim 2 and 3

I rage quit.

For the so-called “Hero” object of this pack, this is just unacceptable. The percentage for breakage REALLY needs to be turned down because in my opinion they’re not usable as they are.

And even if it weren’t for all the bugs, I probably still wouldn’t use them in tiny homes because I don’t think they’re space saving at all. They take up exactly the same amount of space as normal beds do; 6 tiles. You can’t put anything in front of them or around them if you want them to be functional on both sides, and you can’t even put dangling lights above them because I guess, realistically, the bed would hit them on the way down?

It’s especially annoying with the murphy bed that has the couch attached. It would have been really nice to add a small coffee table or ottoman in front of it but you can’t because then your sims won’t be able to use the bed. I really wish they had have made at least the little round coffee table and the ottoman from this pack inventory-able. Sims could have them out during the day, and throw them in their inventory when they need to use the bed at night, then place them back down in the morning when they wake up.

I think it’s this aspect — not being able to put things around/in front of the murphy beds — that actually annoys the most; the bugs will probably be fixed eventually but I can’t see this ever changing. I spent most of the three days we had for early access trying to work out how to fit a murphy bed into a 32 tile micro home without having it just sitting in the middle of an empty room and let me tell you, it’s not worth the frustration.

— The Verdict —

🏠 7/10 Would go Tiny again

As I said, this is my favourite stuff pack so far and I will get a lot of use out of the CAS and Buy stuff, but because of all the things I mentioned above I can’t give it a 10/10.

I do love the content of this pack, but right now I’m getting kind of fed up with the issues that keep happening with every pack lately. It’s all stuff that should have been caught by QA testing, stuff that is glaringly obvious to the average player, and stuff that would have only taken two minutes of gameplay to find out was a problem. I don’t know who tests these packs, but whoever it is needs to step up their game in a big way.

Overall I really do love the pack, but some major aspects fell a little flat for me. And the fact that that’s not at all a surprise, and that this feeling of “I like it, but...” has become the norm with new packs is really quite sad.

If you have questions about Tiny Living Stuff, feel free to drop an ask in my box, anon will be on right up until the release 😊

[mylazystudentconnoisseurblr-blog]

Laptop Repair In Hyderabad

Get your Lenovo Laptop screen repair fast anywhere in Hyderabad with the Laptop Screen Man. I am a PhD student at Imperial College London, and my department bought me a Thinkpad T470 earlier in 2017. When I first powered it on, the monitor was not working. Nothing. Black. I was a bit disappointed to see that my new business laptop had not even been tested before being delivered, but I was not too worried: the laptop was bought together with a On-Site service-Next Business Day Response warranty upgrade, meaning that Lenovo is supposed to come and fix any problem within one business day.

Disconnect the video cable from the back of the LCD. Though the laptop I photographed here has the connector on the very bottom, most laptops have the connector near the center. If so, keep in mind that the portion of the cable running down the screen is usually stuck on the back of the screen with some mild adhesive. Just gently pull the cables away from the screen. You usually must remove tape that's securing the video connector to the back of the screen as well. When you get to the point of actually pulling the video cable out of the screen connector, it should unplug with little force.

our service center is provide doorstep service for your lenovo desktops. our experienced filed service engineers can solved desktop motherboard problems, data recovery, operating system installation, heat problems, ram problems, dusty problems and others.

We are most popular Computer service center for laptops and desktops repair service in all over Hyderabad city. We are a specialized for acer laptop and desktop repair service. Our very dedicated service engineers have a good service knowledge and provide prefect customer coordination and maintain the correct timeline. This are all features we have to topper in the Hyderabad, especially in Ameerpet and Kondapur locations.

Should you consider replacing the screen, yourself? Probably not. First of all, it's still expensive. I checked with ScreenTek (a company that sells replacement laptop screens) and discovered that a replacement for my Lenovo X60 tablet screen (which fortunately isn't broken) would cost $435. And that doesn't include labor.

When it comes to Lenovo laptops, the screens are particularly for their smooth finish and stylish design. But unfortunately, the surface of these displays is not up to the mark. Just recently, we have had a case where a bit of grass put a scratch on the surface. What is even more unfortunate is that there is not screen repair technology, it all falls down to one move; which is to replace it.

DAY 29. The technician finally comes to change my display. And here starts one of the funny parts of the story. While the guy is replacing the display, I notice that he's installing a glossy display instead of a matte one (like the original one). WHAT THE  Now, if you are a bit into computers and technology forums you know how glossy displays can be actual deal-breaker for some people (including me). And this guy was installing one without even asking nor noticing! Yes, it took one month to send the fucking wrong display. So I make him notice and…long story short: Lenovo has to send a new display. But at least, for sure, this time it will arrive in one business day! Right? My ass.

The ETA keeps being postponed. In the meantime I call Lenovo about 6 times, but nobody seems to be able to do anything, nor let me talk to someone with higher decision-making power. For example, the decision to simply send me a fucking new laptop, as I've been requesting for more than a month. Nothing to do, Lenovo's support is a stonewall. Same story for emails (many emails).

Great response & service I got from these Om Computer System, Chinchwad East. my Dell laptop has some OS issue, so I have visited this service center, Their service was very good as they sorted out the issue & done the service perfectly on time. They have charged me 350 for the service and Installed OS, Now my laptop was working well, I am so satisfied with their service.

Suraj computer is the best IT solution provider in the laptop repair in dwarka, cartridge refilling, printer repair,Motherboard Repair,Computer AMC,Computer have awarded the best cartridge refiller by the HP in Dwarka, and our all team members took the free training from the HP cartridge refilling center Hydrabad. HP is the big name in cartridge word and he provides all type of printers with multifunctional and after that refill all toner Toner Refilling in Dwarka is also in very demand now because most customers use the Laserjet cartridge toner which gives the maximum pages in printout and save lots of money.

[random2908]

Here’s a story about science/academia actually working the way it should.

Once upon a time, about a decade ago, I was a grad student. My lab partner (a few years my senior) and I had spent a solid two years trying to put together our sample-generating apparatus and get it to work, and having it not work, and having to disassemble it and change something and put it back together (a process which took months each time), and... Two years. Two years and we could finally generate samples to do experiments on. Two years, and I was now halfway through grad school, and he was almost done, and we hadn’t produced a result--hadn’t even produced a sample--in two years. In fact, I hadn’t produced anything yet up to this point, because assembling this thing had been my very first assignment when I joined this lab.

But, now we had samples! We quickly bought a piece of equipment to do experiments on them, and--

(Important digression)

The thing you have to understand about physics is that a lot of it is pretty well solved theoretically/mathematically. Or if it’s not, it at least can be if someone puts in the effort. If you’re an experimentalist, like me, all you have to do is ask a theorist to collaborate with you, or maybe you can even do it yourself, and you solve some equations (or write a program to solve some equations), crunch the math, and, there it is. You have your answer already, before you’ve even done the experiment. All you have to do now is check it experimentally to make sure you did the math right, and it can now go in the “known” column.

This leads to both a lot of hubris and a lot of intellectual laziness among physicists. It completely shorts out the scientific method, rendering it irrelevant. You don’t even need a hypothesis if you come in already certain of your answer. But if you come in certain of your answer and you get a different answer, there’s pressure to either massage your data until you have the “right” answer or to say your equipment must be broken and spend months or years trying to fix it. And usually your equipment is broken, or your experiment wasn’t done carefully, or occasionally the math wasn’t done carefully (or was too approximate)--usually that’s all the problem is, usually that’s the right approach.

So most of the time, physicists--particularly experimental physicists--don’t set out to discover something, they set out to demonstrate an already-described thing that just hasn’t been seen/done yet. Like glorified engineers--engineers who understand quantum mechanics and only half care about building something practical. They start out knowing what the answer will be, and then do everything they can to reach that answer.

(end digression)

--so we finally had samples to work with, and the piece of equipment we’d bought to do something with them, but we were somewhat limited in what we could do because we only had the one piece of equipment. Nonetheless, we came up with a whole bunch of potential thing and tried the first few of them out in turn. My lab partner, being senior to me, got to be first author on the first thing, and I got to be first author on the second.

The first thing was pretty prosaic, sort of “what happens if, oh I guess it kind of looks like this other completely different phenomenon that’s actually related.” But that second thing was, we set out to demonstrate a [scientific concept that hadn’t previously been demonstrated, that was pretty neat and related to some concepts that were currently trendy, but probably of very limited practicality].

We knew what the answer should look like, more or less--that is, what the sample should do under those conditions. We tried to do what we thought would be necessary to reach that answer. We got something that more or less looked like the answer we were looking for--that is, the sample appeared to do what we expected it to do if it were acting according to [scientific concept that hadn’t previously been demonstrated]. Yay, we demonstrated the [scientific concept that hadn’t previously been demonstrated], very exciting, time to publish!

So I wrote up the paper, and we submitted it to Physical Review Letters, which is the journal to get published in in physics. (We submitted my lab partner’s paper to PRL, too, which I suspected was a waste of time because it wasn’t exciting enough. Sure enough we were told it was good science but not that interesting and it was pushed down to PR[subdiscipline], which is respectable but not impressive. But that’s how it goes, you aim high so that when you miss you still hit something.) They reviewed it and sent back two reports.

Referee A said this was pretty cool! Here are some small errors and a long list of (mostly easy) questions you didn’t satisfactorily answer, and just fix those but this is pretty cool, definitely worthy of being published in PRL.

Referee B’s review was very short. It said we could not have done what we’d claimed to have done, because the technology does not exist to do it, and certainly that piece of equipment we’d bought would be insufficient. Although it would be really interesting if someone demonstrated [scientific concept that hadn’t previously been demonstrated], Referee B was pretty sure that other people had already tried and come up short because their equipment was lacking. And since our equipment was clearly also lacking, and so we’d not actually demonstrated anything, our paper was bunk and was not worth publishing.

So the editor wrote back that he couldn’t publish our paper. But the journal’s rules were in case of a tie you’re allowed to ask for a tie-breaker. Especially in this case where Referee A’s review was so glowing and long and helpful, and Referee B’s review was so perfunctory, we asked that Referee B be ignored and that we get a new referee instead. (We also fixed all the things Referee A wanted fixed.) So the journal provided us with a Referee C.

Referee C’s review was also short. It said that [scientific concept] was not a real concept, it was a misunderstanding by people who don’t understand theory/philosophy very well. Therefore the premise of our paper was ridiculous and we should not be published.

Well. There were previous theory papers talking about [scientific concept], and we’d talked to a number of colleagues about it, including at least two well-regarded theorists. So clearly Referee C’s opinion on the matter was not the scientific consensus, we wrote back to the editor. We asked for an appeal, and for the editor to weigh in.

The editor said they were unfamiliar with the details of [scientific concept], and being unfamiliar they found the statement “this isn’t a real thing, this is a theoretical misunderstanding” compelling. (Even though both Referee A and Referee B thought it was a real thing.) So, we were rejected completely and thrown out of Physical Review.

A couple weeks later, my lab partner found a theory paper that more or less simulated the experiment we’d done, but from a perspective that ignored the possibility of [scientific concept] coming into play, like, just didn’t even mention that whole family of concepts in the entire paper. Which seemed intellectually irresponsible to us, but, the theoretical results perfectly matched out experimental results. Even details like the nature of the almost-patterning of the noise in our results matched. When we thought we were demonstrating [scientific concept] we ignored as just being noise because [scientific concept] ought to have resulted in a noisy signal due to [concept]--that was how we knew we got it right. But this paper’s simulation-produced noise looked specifically like our noise.

So I rewrote the paper from scratch.

The previous paper had been:

1) Intro: we set out to demonstrate [scientific concept] 2) Methods: this is what you need to demonstrate [scientific concept] so this is what we did 3) Results: ooh pretty, it looks just like what you’d expect from a demonstration of [scientific concept] 4) Conclusion: we demonstrated [scientific concept], isn’t that cool?

Because that’s how physics papers are written. You know what you’re trying to do, and then you do it, and if you fail you keep trying until you get it right, and then you’ve done it, and you publish.

But my new paper was:

1) Intro: [sample] + [equipment we bought] is a very versatile combination that you can do lots of experiments with 2) Method: here is an experiment we did 3) Results: ooh pretty 4) Discussion: you know what’s interesting? our results look a lot like the results you’d get from [scientific concept]. Cool, huh? Wouldn’t that be exciting? But maybe our equipment isn’t fancy enough to achieve [scientific concept]. But oh look, our results look identical to this one obscure theory paper we dug up, even down to the noise, wow, what are the odds. But that theory paper is limited because it doesn’t even address the possibility of [scientific concept] happening. And honestly those two possibilities look almost the same as each other [using the sort of detection methods that are common/easy in our field] even though the underlying causes are completely different. So-- 5) Conclusion: inconclusive, but either it’s [scientific concept] which would be so cool, or we completely matched this obscure theory paper to a degree we wouldn’t have thought possible. But those two things look practically the same, and it might even be possible to have a hybrid of the two, so, inconclusive.

Which is way the hell more intellectually honest. It never even occurred to me that the previous paper was intellectually dishonest because that’s how all physics papers are written. But it is. Even if it were all correct and flawless, it’s still intellectually dishonest to write your paper in such a leading way.

Anyway, we resubmitted to the big European physics journal, the referee there was like “this is the most intellectually honest paper I’ve ever seen, and kudos to you for digging up a paper as obscure as that theory paper to try to find alternate explanations for your results when I, the referee, personally would have assumed it was obviously the much cooler [scientific concept which definitely exists]. I mean, I think you probably got [scientific concept] to work, but wow, that’s so diligent of you to admit there’s another possibility. Publish right away, wow.”

And thus I learned a valuable lesson about science, and intellectual pursuit in general, that I feel most physicists never bother to learn. And I learned it because the review process worked more or less the way it’s supposed to and my paper got rejected.

[justdesertbeats]

SHOO ANONS! *yeets them into the sea*

@professional-shitpost

You heft the anons over your head and cast them overboard, along with their air horn. Before they hit the water though, they seem to... vanish in a flash of green light. The arrow is also gone. Now floating on the surface of the water is a chunk of metal, a chunk of plastic and four pieces of mysterious material.

Time passes once again and we are now at two places, one where Faith has reached the Paradise shape tree, and the other where Behemoth appears to be looking over a map of sorts, you can only interact with one or the other.