@netstack's banner p

netstack

Texas is freedom land

6 followers   follows 3 users  
joined 2022 September 05 17:27:40 UTC

				

User ID: 647

netstack

Texas is freedom land

6 followers   follows 3 users   joined 2022 September 05 17:27:40 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 647

Nah, you can put it here whenever. Monday is just when the thread gets refreshed. A lot of the engagement happens on Friday/Saturday as people check in from the Fun Thread.

I don't think I'd call it a cliffhanger.

I find this concept fascinating, the setting is cool, and what I've seen of the gameplay looks deliciously complex. As someone who works in R&D it's strangely satisfying to see equipment designed by random rolls.

If it were $20, I'd totally try it. Or even if they'd chosen to make it look less ugly than Xenonauts. I don't normally care about visuals, but wow.

Ah well. Back to another HOI4 run.

Wait, are you suggesting that Obergefell derived from making Bad People Afraid? Or just that it was the end which proved such means would be tolerated?

Seconding Avocado.

I haven’t seen anyone argue that gas needs to stay below X $/gallon. Or $/barrel, since that’s insulated from actual gas pump and heating bill prices already. What shows up in the news is the clearing price for what is basically a fixed quantity demanded.

“I can’t believe it cost $80 to fill up my truck.”
“I can barely afford the kids’ school supplies.”
“Why are a dozen eggs so expensive?”

The big exception is rent control, where the normal supply and demand rules are already incredibly distorted. Then people start throwing around hard caps.

As for actually answering your question—the only winning move is not to play. Reneging on a popular promise is suicide. A politician ought not to make ones he thinks are stupid or immoral. He should run on a positive platform that just happens to deprioritize or counter the popular thing; it’s much easier to be ignored than be told you’re a dumb idiot.

Compare the mainstream Democrat response to “defund the police.” The low hanging fruit (body cams, diversity statements) gets picked. The expensive and counterproductive stuff is less likely outside of areas which made it a single issue.

Damn, tell us how you really feel.

I’m not attacking your credibility—anybody who plays Shadow Empire is clearly looking for something Endless * doesn’t offer—but there’s more to games than depth.

Oh, I had a good time with ES2 back when it came out, mostly for multiplayer. Some of my friends swore by EL instead, though I never really joined in to that. Great presentations and theme. I still use Cravers as shorthand for any militarist bug-aliens in other games.

Study 1: “Children of Homosexuals More Apt to Become Homosexual and Experience Parental Molestation: Surveys Over Three Decades”, published in Marriage and Family Review, 2017. Paywalled, but available via sci-hub.

  • Abstract consists only of throwing shade at another researcher for not acknowledging them.
  • Most of the references are either 1) their previous work or 2) said author’s non-rebuttals.
  • It doesn’t seem like they actually collected any new data since 1996?
  • Obvious issues with causation.
  • n = 17

Study 2: “Denial and Discovery of Harm for Children with Same-Sex Parents”, unpublished (?), 2016.

  • Starts with a very reassuring blast at “the secular propaganda” of “harm denial”
  • I’m sure the Catholic Church supplies ironclad evidence against—
  • nah, they just assume it “creates obstacles in the normal development of children”
  • Cites four categories:
    • Sullins found a 2.4 risk ratio for “emotional distress” among 582 children.
    • Cameron (the guy from your first study) apparently churned out a lot of studies finding exactly what he expected. Also, he and Regnerus were totally oppressed and basically martyred for the cause.
    • Regnerus and Sullins found that lesbian women abuse their children more. No sample size.
    • “Dozens” of adults have come forward saying that their lesbian parents were awful.
  • Concludes that the vibes Catholic teaching must have been correct.

Overall: Nah. To the point where I’m not actually convinced you read these before posting them.

Yeah.

My girlfriend and I were watching the MST3K episode Werewolf. At the end, the bots are singing along to make fun of the dramatic credits music. One of the punchlines was "Tusk!"

When I played the original song for her, the music video apparently involved a 70s marching band in centurion uniforms.

Not quite a bare link, but still, I'm going to have to ask you to flesh it out.

It follows therefore that in proportion as quantity accumulates, the lot of the labourer, be his quality high or low, must grow worse.

I....don't think that follows?

Inflation happens due to collective action. It doesn't matter what you teach a given man; there's nothing in it for him personally. Central bankers (or the politicians who appoint them) are much more insulated from their actual decision.

Okay, but the margin is what matters.

Every man, woman and child starts out at the zero lower bound. Some of them will get the opportunity to divert and take a nonzero policy. It’s reasonable to “teach” those specific people whether doing so is a good idea, even though their current decision is the zero bound.

“Teach men not to inflate” is silly not because of the lower bound, but because of the upper. Most men will never have the opportunity to steer the Federal Reserve. “Teach economists not to inflate” is more defensible, and “teach (or tell) the chairman not to inflate” is just normal politics.

Most men will have the opportunity to commit a rape. They won’t, because they’ve been taught that it’s immoral and/or will be punished. That seems like the correct mechanism to me.

Pretty sure they did that, ages ago, and moved on to more elaborate simulations. By the time they’re doing photon bullshit, they clearly have enough delta-V to leave their local volume.

I don’t think the 3body game was farming out intellectual labor. They were using it more like one of those plays about the life of Jesus.

I’ve got a long running thirst to play Ars Magica. I am wildly underqualified to play it, let alone DM ST, but wizarrrrrddddddds

I understand you’re going for hyperbole, but try to avoid caricaturing the positions you’re arguing against.

I don’t follow.

Holding Americans hostage doesn’t seem like it would reassure anyone.

Works for me :)

Hey. Please stop backseat moderating.

You were warned last week for a sneering one-liner. I suppose this comment drips with slightly less disdain, but it makes up for it with vagueness. If you aren’t going to put any effort into your disapproval, don’t share it at all.

  1. Don't put words in others' mouths.

  2. Especially when they aren't even involved. Did you reply in the wrong subthread?

I did a double-take when I scrolled past this; it felt like I was getting a window into an alternate universe. I genuinely do not understand how you could come to this conclusion.

Forget birth rates--imagine that Corona II kills 50% of the population. The government collapses. Survivors are left scavenging a wasteland of empty houses; surely no one is wasting time mopping the Colosseum. How long do you think it would take to start getting tourists again?

Within 50 years of being depopulated by the Black Death, Florence was firmly established as a cultural center. The Papal States in general were flourishing. Unbelievable wealth and power was flowing into the region as the Renaissance was in full swing. In addition to the arts, this was a time of enthusiastic study of the classics, including the Greek and Roman artifacts which suffused the region.

The world is smaller today. Denser. It's also more resilient to catastrophes and to political shifts. If the legacy of the Romans survived the tumult of European history, it'll survive whatever puny year-over-year decline arises from a generation or two having fewer kids. Maybe the next generation will actually be able to afford a house.

I’m going to jump in, mod hat on, to say that I specifically appreciate the contrarianism.

Policy debates should not be one-sided. If an issue comes up in the CW thread, it probably isn’t one-sided. There is nothing wrong with presenting positions which would otherwise be ignored. Steelman at will.

In fact, users simply love to ask for defenses of facially unpopular opinions. Sometimes this is rhetorical bait. Other times it’s an attempt to get around the “look what those people did!” rule. And there are times it’s genuine, because this community really is unusually fond of sensemaking.

But.

There is one glaring, obvious risk of playing the devil’s advocate. People may think you’re actually, wholeheartedly helping out the devil. And he’s not known for acting in good faith.

A lot of people are convinced that you will say anything to score points for Your Team, whatever that may be. I’m not sure that you can disabuse them of this notion, but I’d love to see it.

Best of luck.

Eh, that’s the motte-and-bailey, isn’t it?

a worldview in which trans women are just perverted men intentionally trying to prey on women and destroy them,

gets watered down to

You can't say that the rapist isn't a pervert,

No shit, the convicted rapist of this example is a pervert grasping at any opportunity to keep hurting women. His credibility went out the window because of the crime.

Is the least sympathetic rapist representative of the broader category of trans people? Keep in mind that many of them are aggressively disinterested in sex, perhaps on account of the long-running hormone therapies. Are the dreaded trans youth all rapists, desperate for an excuse?

I don’t think so. You’re making the same judgment as the woman who, after a bad date, concludes that men are scum. Not all men. Not all transwomen.


Side note: I agree with you that YouTube videos, especially those made by your opponents, are incredibly unappealing. No matter how succinct and reasonable it is, the argument would be better served by a text document. And there is zero incentive for wannabe documentarians to make their work short.

“Hamas” Humza

You want to elaborate on that? For someone with no knowledge of UK politics, it sounds like either a terrible scandal or a lazy smear. Which is it?