Notices
Insert BS here A place to discuss anything you want

The AI-generated cat pictures thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 07:42 AM
  #24181  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

click to play

Old Apr 20, 2015 | 08:48 AM
  #24182  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
doesn't mean there was no plot, just means they were horrible movies.
I didn't say there was no plot, I said they were shitty movies. And furthermore, I'm ashamed that I didn't burn (with fire) my DVD copies of them before out 4 year old could discover them. He now prefers II and III to ESB and ROTJ, much to my horror.
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 09:16 AM
  #24183  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

im still trying to figure out the thought process of introducing a Michelle Tanner character.
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 10:17 AM
  #24184  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
im still trying to figure out the thought process of introducing a Michelle Tanner character.
Dunno.

Is the Force strong with her?



Also, I finally figured out why the trailer touched a special place in my heart.


This:



= this:




That had to be done on purpose.


Attached Thumbnails The AI-generated cat pictures thread-greatest-star-wars-characters-worst-0694eb25-d8e5-4cbf-8bfd-9128b07cf045.jpg   The AI-generated cat pictures thread-chewie-han-bike.jpg  
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 10:25 AM
  #24185  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

you'd like this too:

Into the Great Unknown - Wookieepedia, the Star Wars Wiki
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 10:33 AM
  #24186  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
To be honest, I just don't "get" fan-fiction, be it Star Wars, Galactica, or Pony.

Unrelated:

Attached Thumbnails The AI-generated cat pictures thread-demons.png  
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 10:36 AM
  #24187  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

because it's cute and clever?

is episode 7 not fanfiction?
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 05:51 PM
  #24188  
rleete's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,794
Total Cats: 1,342
From: Rochester, NY
Default

Attached Thumbnails The AI-generated cat pictures thread-mess.jpg  
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 06:03 PM
  #24189  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

whom seems incorrect in this usage.

The cat--he--is someone you do not wish to trifle.

the whom is referring back to the cat, not you/he.


"I'm not someone who you wish to trifle." or "dont **** with me."

would be better.
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 06:18 PM
  #24190  
rleete's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (21)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,794
Total Cats: 1,342
From: Rochester, NY
Default

Did you go to Southern Illinois University by any chance?
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 06:26 PM
  #24191  
EO2K's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (37)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,477
Total Cats: 1,924
From: Very NorCal
Default

Sky Pods Show Rise of New York Skyline - Video - NYTimes.com
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 06:54 PM
  #24192  
mgeoffriau's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,388
Total Cats: 474
From: Jackson, MS
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
whom seems incorrect in this usage.

The cat--he--is someone you do not wish to trifle.

the whom is referring back to the cat, not you/he.


"I'm not someone who you wish to trifle." or "dont **** with me."

would be better.
No, "whom" refers not to "I" (the cat) but to "someone".

Since the structure is "I am not someone," that means that "whom" is referring to the object of the sentence, and is therefore correct.
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 07:14 PM
  #24193  
aidandj's Avatar
SADFab Destructive Testing Engineer
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 18,643
Total Cats: 1,870
From: Beaverton, USA
Default

Old Apr 20, 2015 | 07:45 PM
  #24194  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default

Originally Posted by Braineack
whom seems incorrect in this usage.

The cat--he--is someone you do not wish to trifle.

the whom is referring back to the cat, not you/he.


"I'm not someone who you wish to trifle." or "dont **** with me."

would be better.

The cat is correct.

The cat is not someone with whom you should trifle.
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 07:47 PM
  #24195  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default







Attached Thumbnails The AI-generated cat pictures thread-truffe_noire_du_p%25c3%25a9rigord.jpg  
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 08:02 PM
  #24196  
triple88a's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,522
Total Cats: 1,830
From: Chicago, IL
Default

This is much cooler since the guy lands all over the place. Like on mountains and hills and ****.

Old Apr 20, 2015 | 08:05 PM
  #24197  
Braineack's Avatar
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Default

Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
No, "whom" refers not to "I" (the cat) but to "someone".

Since the structure is "I am not someone," that means that "whom" is referring to the object of the sentence, and is therefore correct.
yeah that makes sense.



dunce cap.


but I am someone who still thinks that I am correct.

Last edited by Braineack; Apr 20, 2015 at 08:44 PM.
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 08:42 PM
  #24198  
DNMakinson's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,030
Total Cats: 861
From: Seneca, SC
Default

Well, it's actually the object of the preposition. "with", hence the objective case.

A reverse case is when you say something like, "He is cross with whoever gets in his way". In that case, "whoever gets" is a noun clause, in which, "whoever" is the subject, "gets" is the verb, respectively of that clause; so use the nominative case, "whoever" instead of "whomever". The clause is the object of the preposition "with" in that instance.
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 09:33 PM
  #24199  
Full_Tilt_Boogie's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5,155
Total Cats: 409
From: Jacksonville, FL
Default

Name:  15vKIcu.jpg
Views: 60
Size:  472.3 KB
Old Apr 20, 2015 | 09:37 PM
  #24200  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default

Originally Posted by Full_Tilt_Boogie
Little things like that are precisely why I have a sandbox VM.



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:17 PM.