|
Real Lies - Dream On[^]
Two weeks ago, I was out with some friends on one of their bachelor party.
Boat, food, laser gaming, booze, pizza and... Music! (it was every bit as awesome as it sounds)
Motel Mozaïque was in town (Rotterdam), which is a festival where bands play throughout various clubs in the city and you can see them all with just a single ticket.
After two less than enjoyable bands and one that was quite enjoyable we stumbled upon a long line for the club we wanted to enter, so we hit the bar instead and decided to leave Motel Mozaïque for what it is.
Until the end of the night, when the line was gone, we entered, and we witnessed the electronic duo known as Real Lies.
No one knew Real Lies and we were all pleasantly surprised.
They're an electronic duo who sound very British (and indeed, they're from London), especially Underworld comes to mind.
I can't find much about them, except that they've recently released their second album and this track is from that album.
They still sounded awesome the next day, when I was sober, so SOTW 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Dave Brubeck Quartet for me this morning. Take Five!
|
|
|
|
|
>64
Some days the dragon wins. Suck it up.
|
|
|
|
|
High five!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can hear The Orb in it too.
Coincidentally, Little Fluffy Clouds was one of my favorite tracks for a long time
Not sure if it's been in the SOTW though, we're talking like 16 years ago... 👴
LiSa sounds like she's on some anime soundtrack I know, and indeed, she sings in Girls Dead Monster from Angel Beats!.
I'm not sure if she's in the anime or only on CD though.
They've even been featured in the SOTW The Lounge[^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nice one, although I've never played Ocarina of Time.
Only one I've ever played is the very first and Link to the Past.
I do love me some Gerudo Valley music though 
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is now my soundtrack for the day
|
|
|
|
|
|
The first chill song, and I'm in love! Fantastic! Thanks! Looking forward to the rest as I sit here making out an email!
|
|
|
|
|
Hello World,
I want to take this opportunity to address cryptic crosswords[^] that we frequently play on the site. Recently I saw a discussion about the puzzles. Some members were debating the ethics of using tools to assist with the game.
I have keenly[^] paid attention to the psychiatric research[^] being done around this topic. There are other papers published on the subject, same conclusion.
Using anagram solvers or word association tools is irrelevant.
The research around cryptic crosswords involves divergent thinking[^] and bisociation[^]. Using tools does not give any advantage at all, and it can be proven. The "game" is to find the logic, tools only give a speed advantage.
Deal with it.
Cryptographic Cheaters always win. --Alan Mathison Turing (he never said this, but I wish he did)
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I tend to struggle enough just trying to decipher the clue. All the diverging bisociations are quite challenging enough as it is.  Anagrams muddy the water even more. (As an aside, I'm coming to suspect that ~73.639% of all English words can be a cryptic anagram indicator.)
Therefore, if I suspect the clue is an anagram, rather than expend more effort trying to rescramble the letters into a different word, quite possibly rather esoteric in and of itself, I "cheat" with an anagram solver - and quite shamelessly I might add.
|
|
|
|
|
FreedMalloc wrote: quite shamelessly I might add
That's why I posted about this topic. I'd like to see more people participate, there is no shame in using tools for code breaking[^]. It's great to find talent.
Use all the the tools at your disposal, ignore the losers. It's nothing but background noise, make yourself shine above the others.
We want to see you win, faster and better than the background noise.
|
|
|
|
|
I have in the past been fairly convinced the answer is an anagram and either I simply can't "get it" or don't have time. In that scenario, if I use an anagram solver, I haven't posted my solution as it definitely feels like cheating...
modified 6-May-22 4:22am.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I'm coming to suspect that ~73.639% of all English words can be a cryptic anagram indicator.
You're not far off! Here's a list[^], many of which can also be transformed into adverbs, participles, or whatever, which will also do. And a favorite trick of devious setters is using an anagram indicator that is actually the definition, just to throw you off.
|
|
|
|
|
The types of tools you mention, I can (partly) agree with. The thing with the CP CCC OTD is that time does matter - it's essentially a race to find the solution, and as you say, anagram solvers can give a speed advantage. Personally, if I'm sure the answer is an anagram I prefer to avoid the anagram solvers and work it out myself.
There's a tool I use occasionally when I can't solve a clue (either on CP or the newspaper) when I am too impatient to wait for the answer. You put in the clue, it gives you the answer. (Generally speaking, anyway; not so much for the little-used words that sometimes feature on CP). It requires zero thought or analysis, and if I've used that tool, I would never claim the answer as my own. (When completing a newspaper crossword, I use a forward slash to cross off numbers I solve; a backslash to those I've resorted to cheating on! ... and that's just for my own "consumption").
The same site - which I won't name here - also has a clue generator. You put in the solution word, it gives you a selection of known clues. I have occasionally used that too in relation to CP answers; and have found the exact same clue as was used by the setter on CP. Co-incidence? Possibly... 
|
|
|
|
|
That looks an interesting site Derek
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming “Wow! What a Ride!" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
While I have never used an anagram tool, I do use Google to search for synonyms.
|
|
|
|
|
I've used an online thesaurus for that.
|
|
|
|
|
I run an old app (a single exe file) and got an error:
Component 'MSCOMCT2.OCX' or one of its dependencies not
correctly registered: a file is missing or invalid.
is there any way to figure out the cause? finding this MSCOMCT2.OCX can resolve the issue?
diligent hands rule....
modified 5-May-22 23:37pm.
|
|
|
|
|
That was a common controls library that came with older versions of Office 32-bit.
There is no equivalent for 64-bit Windows or Office. It's just not used anymore.
You might be able to find a copy of it online somewhere, but beware. Files like that usually come with an additional "payload" that you'll regret using.
You'll have to put the file in Windows\SysWow64, then register it by opening a CMD Prompt and typing:
regsvr C:\Windows\SysWow64\MSCOMCT2.OCX
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
