v1ech

Did read in your AMA from 3 years ago that you have lost contact to her. When and how did you find her again and what was your first contact like?

I suppose community is not garantuee for a different experience at all. At a psychadelic festival this summer, i saw a guy on a bad trip who actually jumped into a 5meters-bonfire and almost killed himself. He jumped in and lay on his back as if he sacrificed himself.

Friends of him actually cared for him and tryed everything to keep him from running in but he managed to release and run.

He`s going places!

Hi 2GD,
Having myself always felt deep love for Quake, as it being unique in every aspect, I kinda felt, that its impact on the esport scene was constantly slightly decreasing starting from when fatal1ty became a superstar.
While the scene is thankful for players like rapha, av3k, vo0, k1llsen, and lots of other pros, it still always felt to me like it never made the step from a hobbygame to a pro-game (in terms of infrastructure and so that it made sense for a pro to be fulltime-player).
On the other hand, CS, Dota or Starcraft have been pro-games with real dedicated professionals for over a decade now and they are still quite successful.
Why do you think did Quake never really establish as a real pro-game, requiring players to be fulltime-dedicated players?

This is so true and I dont even understand, why so called science-based sceptics act like this.
This is by far the best, most compatible and least ignorant or narrow-minded opinion anyone can have about that topic.

My background is also a scientific one. But my approach is that science exists, because we are far from having understood everything.
Because we already have stable models for subatomic structures, for the creation of the universe or the structure of a living cell, this does not mean that we are anywhere close having understood the human body. Countless procedures and treatments are based on empiric findings rather than microbiological models (so do alternative methods). And empiric findings and observations most of the time are the trigger for any further scientific analysis, not the other way around.

I fully agree on people being very skeptic about radical alternative treatments, which intentionally avoid classical medical treatments while lacking essential effectiveness-evidence. Such praxis is not legitimate.

But noone should criticize such methods being investigated in combination with the classical treatments.
Especially not, if it is already common medical sense, that e.g. psychological factors do have an enormous influence. Also the existence of the placebo-effect is a further proof for the existence of, lets call it nonphysiological influences in any humano-biological process, which are still to be quantified. Also a lots of chinese procedures are commonly accepted, even if the involved factors are yet to be quantified.

Sad to see that this so-called ignorance seems to rather be on the side of the onces who usually call it.