• 2 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • RTS games are currently in a big slump (nobody’s really making them, and the player base on the ones that exist has seriously dried up) because most people only like half the game.

    The people who love the micro end up going to MOBAs like League or Smite. The people who love the macro end up going to 4X/Grand Strategy like Stellaris or Crusader Kings. The market of people who equally enjoy both aspects is pretty small. Like, I’ll never buy a bag of Chex mix again, now that I know I can get a whole bag of just rye chips.

    To make the scene even more anemic, the skill cap right now is so high. I know several people (including me) who tried to get into Starcraft 2, only for their first random opponent to be a person with 20,000 APM who thinks a match lasting longer than two and a half minutes is a slog. It’s not even possible to learn from your mistakes when you get stomped that hard, that fast. But the single-player part does nothing to prepare you (other than maybe letting you figure out what the buttons do), and it’s going to happen just about every time (because the only people still playing are the people who have been playing for a decade or more).






  • If North Korea wants us to know something different, they could tell us themselves. Or, even better, let the people talk to foreign journalists without handlers and threats of repercussions.

    Otherwise, we’re forced to wonder about how weird it is that it seems like every news organization in the world is dead-set on spreading lies about this one, tiny, geopolitically insignificant country (and no, being able to launch toy rockets into the ocean once every couple of years does not make them geopolitically significant). Like, why did the BBC and RFA and Reuters and the AP and Al Jazeera all get together in a dark, smoky room and cook up a conspiracy to defame North Korea, of all countries? Why not, say, Thailand, or Malaysia, or Morocco, or something?


  • There is no ethical consumption under this system, and there’s absolutely no hope for it.

    The only thing we can do is set our own little moral lines so our hands feel a little cleaner, but it’s absolutely impossible to exist in this society while also caring about everything awful going on. There’s just too much of it. If I gave one dime to every cause that should be important to me (based on how I see myself), I would drain my bank account into the deep negatives. You absolutely must prioritize your time, money, and attention to a few specific things that you absolutely can’t sleep at night knowing you’ve supported.

    For example, global warming is totally fucked. There’s literally no way to not fuck up and strip away most of the planet’s biosphere, even if everyone woke up tomorrow and said “Shit, we have to go 0 carbon right now!” and accomplished it before lunchtime. It’s too late. We’re just fucked. The best case is we’re fucked well after I die, but even that’s not looking particularly likely. So there’s no point in me moderating my purchases around so-called “environmentally friendly” companies, because there’s no such thing and, if there were one, it wouldn’t matter.

    But LGBTQ people (like me) exist right now, and will continue to exist right up until we trigger the greenhouse gas cascade that turns Earth into Venus, and since I know we only have so much time left here, it’s very important to me to not support people who want to make sure LGBTQ people suffer as much as possible in the interim. Fortunately, the organizations that hate gay people are about as subtle as people who do CrossFit, so it’s easy to see them and not give them any money. Am I still giving money to crypto-facists who keep their mouths shut about it in public? Probably, but at least I’m kind of rewarding the behavior of “shutting the fuck up”.

    Meanwhile, I financially oppose WotC’s bullfuckery only insofar as it affects me, personally. If One D&D weren’t a giant tire fire that grows with every UA playtest release, I’d probably suck it up and buy it. But since they’re also trying to shoehorn their virtual tabletop with AI DMs as the exclusive method by which people play their game, like some kind of half-assed MMO, I won’t. Not because I can be assed to care about AI or anti-consumer practices, but because it’s obnoxious to me and not fun to me and costs me money for shit I won’t enjoy as much. I simply don’t have the energy to care about WotC’s happy relationship with the Pinkertons, if for no other reason than literally every major company in the world also pays the Pinkertons to do fucky shit all over the globe, and if I care about one company doing it, I have to care about all the other companies openly doing the same thing, and then I’d have to, like, start making my own soap and stuff. Which I just don’t have the energy to do.

    What it ultimately comes down to is this: honor is an expensive luxury that the vast majority of us simply cannot afford. Buy what you need to survive, spend the extra on whatever bread and circuses allow you to cope with the impending doom of society, and prioritize your moral focus on only a few things that loom the biggest in your mind, the ones that produce the largest amount of shame and guilt for supporting.

    Everything is going to produce some amount of guilt, because it’s all fucked. You just have to learn to set a guilt-filter in your brain, so guilt below a certain threshold doesn’t register anymore. There’s literally nothing to be done about it: Even death can’t absolve us of supporting oppression and environmental destruction. After you die, someone’s going to give shady religious conmen money from your deceased wallet to dig up a big rock, scribble some words on it, put you in an unnecessary coffin, bury you with heavy diesel equipment, tell lies about a bigot-god over your corpse, and then hire someone for minimum wage (at best; more likely, they’ll exploit an ethnic minority from another country to do it for pennies) to mow the grass on top of you for the rest of society’s existence. Or the other option, which involves exactly as many shady religious conmen, but switches out the long-term grass-mowing for a short, massive burst of fuel and carbon to turn you into ashes, the button for which is probably also being pressed by an oppressed wage slave making a few nickles an hour.

    BUT, there’s always the possibility that I’m wrong, and that things aren’t eternally and irrevokably fucked forever. As a hedge against that, I do two things: I stay employed and budget my money (so I won’t be the guy standing naked in a cornfield waiting for whatever apocalypse or second-coming that doesn’t happen, thus making myself well and truly fucked), and I vote in every single election I ever hear about, from the Presidential election to the August special election to replace the town dogcatcher.










  • This question should keep you up at night

    I’m sorry. The question that keeps me up at night is “How are people able to just decide to believe something with no (or less than no) practical evidence?”. Just because a lot of people have managed it, even people who are very evidence-based in every other part of their life, doesn’t mean I can just do it. I’d literally have to think less about the implications of such a thing on the everyday world. I’d have to stop asking questions (like: “Does God help anyone? If so, how does he choose? If not, why pray?”, and no, “we just can’t understand him” is not an answer I can just choose to believe because I like it).

    So yeah, this is obviously a “me” problem, since everyone else on this instance seems to intuitively grasp the idea that one can actually come to a valid, reality-based conclusion that God exists and I’m the “2010 New Atheist” for not being able to get on board.



  • I apologize for being a little annoyed right now. I feel like I’m being moderated for defending myself against their escalation.

    The top level comment from the mod was not aggressive or accusatory.

    My response to that top level comment was measured and nuanced, with specific examples of real events and an analysis of the mindset behind those events.

    Their reply to me included all caps, excessive punctuation, extremely bad-faith arguments (the actual religious views of every single one of the names they dropped are incredibly complicated, not just “was Christian”; again, one member of that esteemed list literally believed he could turn lead into gold with magic), and that’s assuming calling the question of critical thinking outdated and childish (“2010 New Atheist”) is not an aggressive escalation.

    Furthermore, you told me to disengage, and then the mod continued to engage. I’d appreciate it if they received a similar request, because right now it feels like you’re holding my arms behind my back while they get to keep punching me.


  • you honestly believe EVERY SINGLE RELIGIOUS PERSON EVER has no critical thinking skills?

    I honestly believe the ones that matter certainly don’t. The ones who are paying the church’s bills and showing up to their pep rallies every week are very clearly not spending any time thinking about it.

    The LGBTQIA+ pastors that started a socialist christian church in Kentucky?

    Who? Let me know when they start affecting actual government policy, or even just going on TV and saying “We condemn those other Christians who say gay people should be shot in the back of the head.” That’s what we’ve been demanding from Muslims since 2001, why are you special?

    MLK? Malcom X? Johann Bernoulli, Blaise Pascal, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz,

    Blah blah blah, fallacious appeal to authority, blah blah blah. Name-dropping is not “critical thinking”, and you really shouldn’t have included a literal, straight-up alchemist in that list if you were trying to use it to make a point.

    all of whom are some of the most important mathematicians in history and were religious, all couldn’t think for themselves?

    MLK and Malcom X were mathematicians? TIL.

    Immanuel Kant, famous influential philosopher, no critical thinking.

    So what I’m hearing you say here is: “If smart people believe in magic sky fairy, magic sky fairy must be logical to believe in,” which is about the level of discourse I’d expect from someone unfamiliar with the concept of critical thinking. Thanks for being an object lesson.


  • Can we please move beyond this 2010 New Atheism view that every religious leader/person is stupid and unable to critically think?

    Why? They clearly choose not to apply that ability to a big part of their lives. In this specific case under discussion, their entire career requires not applying any critical thinking. Their paycheck depends on their ability to convince other people of things that are not and can never be supported by any actual evidence.

    It’s the reason that crowd is so susceptible, as a trend, to con men, malicious misinformation, and developing entire belief systems off a Facebook meme that pairs one politician’s face with a fake quote or a quote from a totally different politician. They’re trained, often from birth, that evidence is not necessary in the process of deciding what you want to believe; in fact, that evidence is often the bad guy (in that it opposes “faith”).

    So, no. We’ll drop the characterization if and only if it stops being relevant to our day-to-day lives in America. It’s not the atheists who are saying they think I should get the death penalty (DeSantis’s preacher), that I should be shot in the back of the head (Texas Baptist Church), that God should kill me slowly (Pure Words Baptist Church), and that I should be hunted with dogs (governor of SC).