>0.0
>.0
What did the terminator mean by this?
>>70443768
No injuries either
jews, babies, and blacks don't count as full people
>>70443786
Wonder if the kneecapping at the asylum counts as a 0.5
>>70443831
Probably more like 0.25
reminder that "the terminator never terminates anyone because hes the sidekick for a little kid" was the beginning of the death of the franchise, thanks cameron
>>70443831
i would assume a single kneecapping would be .25, as victim is still mobile (crawling) double kneecap would be .50
>>70443768
It's a surprised emote
>ywn be a T-800
In case he killed a nigger
NO SURVIVORS
>>70443768
No children or animals
Skynet just used floats.
>>70443768
Casualties and fatalities are closely related, but not quite the same. Casualties may include serious, non life-threatening injuries, as well as fatalities themselves, depending on the context.
So for one example, perhaps the terminator's program counts minor injuries (a leg wound) as .3 casualties, major, non-life-threatening injuries as .7 casualties (a badly broken arm), and one fatality as 1.0 casualties. Or maybe all non-life threatening injuries are 0.5 casualties each. In either case you could fuck up a bunch of people, not kill any of them, and rack up 1.0+ casualties.
>>70443923
Kek
All integers are implicitly .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 (imagine infinite 0's here)
>>70443768
blacks are 2/3 humans that is .66
>>70444016
Thats not an integer thats a floating point value.
>>70443978
>Casualties may include serious, non life-threatening injuries, as well as fatalities themselves
it'd still be a whole number count you fucking moron
>>70443903
>doesn't understand the irony of a Terminator programmed to protect rather than kill
>ignores the numerous deaths caused by the T-1000, the other Terminator
>>70444016
fun fact: they're all also (x-1).99999...
Any of you dumb brainy smarties want to explain why this is wrong in a way a glorious stooptard masterrace can understand.
>>70444241
>dumb brainy smarties
glorious stooptard masterrace
>>70444241
It means there have been no human casualties you muscle dummy.
>>70444164
Spotted the brainlet. Anyone can make up an arbitrary convention for what we're discussing, using real numbers. I suggested two.
And yes, we could even restrict ourselves to a whole-number convention, as you suggested. But if we do that for everything, then that floating first decimal place becomes superfluous. It's almost as if the dedicated kill-bot is sophisticated enough to quantify injuries and kills on a gradient!
>>70444660
>words mean what's convenient for me for this particular situation
spotted the philosotard
>It's almost as if the dedicated kill-bot is sophisticated enough to quantify injuries and kills on a gradient!
but not sophisticated enough that it has to display it on a HUD in english to keep track of it instead of simply some internal value? The entire thing is superflous, so is the decimal precision.
>it's a /tv/ is racist episode
in case he killed him
>>70443768
due to his coding/programming all numbers display the tenths digit, but the program that measures the amount of human casualties is only calculated in whole numbers
rate my headcanon
>>70443786
casualty means injury you fuckfaggot
>>70445168
does terminator use AVG in your headcanon?
>>70443812
You forgot about women.
>>70444221
>reprogramming a terminator to follow a kids orders
ah yes, very good idea and not a cop out so arnie can be more family friendly
>>70444951
>gets soundly refuted
>can't actually un-fuck himself so he fumbles out a general complaint about the language in the refutation, without actually picking a spot or a single word that he really believes is wrong, or bullshit, or trickery (there isn't one)
>proceeds to complain that the fictional robot's POV should look like something else instead of artistically suggesting robot-vision to an audience, because then maybe his argument will work
>>70445244
>ah yes, very good idea and not a cop out so arnie can be more family friendly
>i'm just going to ignore the entire narrative set out in the movie and shoout FAMILY FRIENDLY at any counter arguments because I'm as simplistic as my statements
The only child here is you.
>>70445286
>claims to soundly refute someone when he has just been shown his arguments are wrong
>can't respond to the criticism and thinks he can greentext it away without refuting anything
stay buttmad
>>70445088
>>70445664
I took care of you, point-by-point, in what was already written. You did not do the same. The greentext was not "just" snark (although there was of course some of that, for rhetorical effect to buttress the facts), but points out why the reasons that you think you're right, are actually wrong. Therefore, this last post of yours amounts to a "nuh-uh" and an admission that you didn't read and understand my greentext.
To repeat, let's not lose sight of the argument, the central point about which I am right, and you are wrong: it is reasonable to suppose, based on what the film depicts, that the terminator has some sort of non-integer, decimal representation of non-fatal casualties. Your rude insistence that not only is it a whole-number count, but more importantly that /that's the only thing that makes any sense/, is clearly false, most importantly since other representations are possible, as I've indicated. You are wrong, and I win the argument. I invite you to persist in being wrong if that's what you want.
