I needed this explanation for “L’Engle”:

References A Wrinkle In Time by Madeleine L’Engle. Characters cross great distances by “tessering”, moving via a tesseract through a higher dimension which essentially brings the two ends of the journey together from the perspective of the traveler. The image shows the two ends of the gap being brought together, with the gap apparently crumpled in between them.

I agree that Hitler should have been assassinated. Therefore, I am as much of a hero as those who tried.

Similar to the arbitrarily defined density of other stuff in the same orbit. We need to draw lines somewhere to impose categories on nature.

I asked myself, for a moment or two, what a “foil bomb” is. And why would the police do that to Gaga, or to a farm plot at her concert?

It can bother people who believe in omnipotent deities.

Such a FLOTUS. It’s all lies and empty promises, coated in idle boasting. What a fucking loser.

I believe we (as in, people) all have a responsibility to hold each other accountable. But we can also only do so much, and inserting yourself into a toxic community …

Me too, both. That we have responsibility for others and that we are not obliged to put ourselves at harms risk.

But this is a particularly shitty, maybe wicked problem. There are three groups: A bullies B, and C could stop A, but isn’t bothered by anyone. Now, is C obliged to pick a fight with A, or is B just in bad luck to be born as a B?

I think here, it is very easy to have strong opinions, while very hard to formulate a concise moral argument. Things get muddier/harder the more we factor reality in.

There always is. Everything in life is only temporary …

What a Flotus. Only a real Flotus would be concerned about that sufficiently to make a public Flotus out of himself like that.

Makes sense, thanks for your insight!

I experienced the problems you mention and guess my question is answered now :)

However, here’s how I deal with it, my workaround:

On an empty board,

• if playing against black, I use -2. She is likely to get sacrificed, so I opt to replace the card worst case
• if playing against red or haste, I use +1. She might still be killed, but dealing 5 damage is some effort and requires one or two cards or actions for the opponent usually.

Against flying creatures, she offers some protection by giving reach. Ground creatures are usually tougher than birds, which can prevent further attacks. Or fail, if the reach blocker is removed.

In a creature disadvantage, I keep her in hand unless I desperately want to “super”-draw a creature instead.

The downsides are real, but kind of manageable. Maybe it depends on the rest of the deck, if flashing creatures is important enough. I thought of using that 4 mana blue enchantment, but that’s even more expensive (unless lucky in start hand).

You’re right, I think this whole post is about “Giving creatures flash”. If that’s my actual goal, is there a better way in MTG Arena Historic?

Fair point, thanks. I feel even if she gets removed by a spell right away, that’s okay, because we just traded one card each. If she soaks up damage by immediately dying from an attack, that’s like getting 5 HP for 3 mana, which I consider an okish deal. That could be said for any PW. Your point still stands though.

A debate between people who read the source and others who project preconceived narratives onto facts. Before this sadly popular meme, I thought the latter was a misdeed of climate “skeptics”. It’s quite painful to see how long-lived this meme is. It makes us look as bad and post-factual as the opposition. What do we do about this? Accept it as human nature? In consequence, stop blaming “skeptics”, and people who rather believe what they want and don’t look up, because we do exactly the same? I think we can and should do better, hence my effort here.

The core point people make and take away from this meme is “It’s not us, it’s them!”. Meaning, consumer emissions don’t matter, because corporate emissions are so much bigger.

And in exactly this core point, this meme is misleading. Because “our” emissions are included in “their” emissions (that’s what phase scope 3 is about). It’s like a child blaming their parents that they spend so much on food, while living off their purchases.

Probably, yes. Which means, this post is quite misleading.

Carbon majors is about fossil fuel producers. Drilling oil, mining coal. This is the first misleadioning: Big and popular companies like Apple are not covered. They also count whole national sectors as one producer, like “China (coal)”. Not what the average reader might think when reading “company”. Misleading.

Further, the report includes IIRC 3rd phase emissions. Meaning emissions caused by end consumers using the product. Meaning you burning coal to use electricity, or fuel to run your car.

That doesn’t mean these companies (producers, sectors) are guilt-free. But we should hate them for the right reasons, of which there are plenty.

Outstanding quality comment! Great example and all. Have a nice day

“The day starts at night” sounds silly because it seems to be a contradiction. But really, how else could it be?

Either, day starts at day … but then it was already day. Or, day starts at night … unless we come up with additional entities like dusk or dawn.

And since we haven’t introduced them yet, day has to start at night, as a necessity.

Of course the actual silly thing is that it’s still night right after day has started.

Confirmed. At first I was confused about the comments. Good idea, an obvious opportunity!

“Denmark made clear that they absolutely have eggs”, said a news person in German. Which is absolutely funny, because eggs and balls is the same word here.

“Dänemark hat klar gemacht, dass sie durchaus Eier haben.”

I heard that early childhood (first weeks, months, maybe years) are vital for development of emotional intelligence. Neglect could lead to life-long struggles. So I’m happy to hear you favor the idea to stay and care. Good for you, you both, and all of us.

burning teslas owned by random people when it seems it would be easier to burn this fucking nazi asshole?

Because simply in practical terms, it’s the other way around. There’s a Tesla right next door, but only one Musk somewhere, probably not where you are. And mostly, one has personal bodyguards, while the others just sit on the road.

Offering a slight damper / correction:

This is about two things (design and ownership), which are correlated, but not identical.

Malicious design can be things like:

• Algorithms to keep people engaged
• UIs to confuse users (luring them to purchases, or making ‘cancel’ hard to access)
• Using intermediate currencies to make it harder to assert value
• …

Obviously, these patterns and practices can also be applied to a FOSS instance you own. There is less incentive to do so if the profit motive is removed - which makes a huge difference.

These design patterns are fundamentally about making user numbers go up. Attract more users, keep them on your platform longer, make them leave less. And a portion of user guidance mixed in. None of that is inherently evil, to some degree even desireable, and to some extent unavoidable to offer a functional service.

Some users may expect a feed like lemmy to browse indefinitely, since they find it inconvenient to have to click to go to the ‘next page’. And because they got used to this feature elsewhere. Others already see this as a dark pattern.

I just wanted to highlight how some of the malicious stuff may still be present in the fediverse, without any company involved. Here, we’re kind of in charge on both sides: Each is responsible for their own user agency (like controlling your online hours, or what sites you visit), and collectively to decide what user experience we want to shape (which might include controverse patterns).

I spent way too many words on this. Mostly I agree with you! And overall, users will encounter far less malicious patterns on FOSS.

[Edit: Formatting]