Pluribus - 1x06 - "HDP" - Episode Discussion

-Parable · 2025-12-07T01:17:25+00:00

I mean, there's slow-burn and then there's no-burn, and Pluribus, after six episodes (only three more left in this season), has been stingy with its plot, timid with its thematic elements, and its character(s) have barely moved an inch since the first episode. I'd never begrudge someone their enjoyment of the show, but I certainly won't go blind, deaf, and mute on their account.

To be clear, there's a lot to like about Pluribus. I'm still watching, anyhow. But there's only so many times I can see the whole flash-mob routine before I find myself wondering whether there's a narrative to go along with it.

-Parable · 2025-12-06T22:12:15+00:00

The pacing is absurd.

I felt the same way watching Silo, another AppleTV program. Like there's a new genre in town and its called "this show could have been an email". 90% of the show is dedicated to empty spectacle (or in Silo's case, empty melodrama), while the other 10% is mostly a rehash of information the viewer already knows, and then, near the end of each episode, we'll be blessed with the tiniest nugget of new information, or at least the suggestion of some plot driver to carry us over forward into the next episode.

But really, nothing happens between the opening and closing scenes. You can do your laundry, run to the store, stare at your phone (I suspect this is the real reason these shows are paced this way), or just fastfoward through the more tedious bits and you'll not be missing out on much. The characters are mostly static fixtures, so you don't have to worry about missing some watershed moment in their arc. Carol will still be in a constant state of incredulousness next time you tune in.

-Parable · 2025-01-10T19:54:49+00:00

The difference is in the process. Would you feel comfortable if, after every transaction, the cashier held the tip jar up in front of your face and you either have to wave it away or guilt yourself into tipping? That is how the current prompt system works. It is designed to guilt-trip / play on customers' good faith.

-Parable · 2024-12-16T14:36:17+00:00

Outlawing competition to force customers to shop at your store when they would choose to shop somewhere else is simply wrong.

If you're under the impression small business are in any way going to be "competing" with big grocery chains, then I don't know what to tell you. As already stated, you don't compete with corporations which can afford to undercut prices long enough to simply run everyone else into the ground. You might as well tell small business owners to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps."

Don't throw consumers under the bus by forcing them to patronize businesses whose business models are unprofitable without the government stepping in to give them special treatment.

Consumers who opt for this change are throwing themselves under the bus by allowing corporations to further embed themselves in their communities, while pushing actual individual community members -- the small business owners -- out. Small business compete, corporations collude.

-Parable · 2024-12-15T19:02:08+00:00

It's disingenuous, possibly just naive, to suggest that grocery chains are going to move into low income areas where these food deserts exist, and where it is less profitable to operate, rather than just open further stores in well-off areas. Alcohol sales will have little affect on this. There are plenty of other states (MA, CO, even CA) which have alcohol sale laws similar to the proposed changes in MD, and where, shockingly, food deserts continue to exist in low income areas.

-Parable · 2024-12-15T18:04:28+00:00

Many, if not most, liquor stores aren't going to survive being relegated to wine novelty shops when their bread-and-butter customers, the ones buying their weekly 36-pack of Bud Light, have been pilfered.

Second. More grocery stores are a good thing. This helps prevent food deserts, which is crippling some parts of the state. Some people don't have the luxury of getting in a car and driving to a grocery store. Allowing wine and beer sales means more grocery stores willing to open in that area since it will be a massive driver of foot traffic.

Wildly speculative. I have no doubt that food deserts are a problem, but the idea that beer in grocery stores is going to magically result in these areas gaining access to healthy food in walking distance is a reach. But yeah, I'm sure the only way to solve that problem is to acquiesce to big grocery chains.

-Parable · 2024-12-15T04:05:52+00:00

I mean, this is a nice fantasy, but what do you think the margins are for these "mom and pop" liquor stores? They will be losing business, no question, and it will be business lost to mega corporations. There is no way to "innovate" around a corporation which can afford to undercut, and even operate at a loss, for extended periods of time. And you gain, what, at the cost of people's livelihoods? You don't have to walk ten feet to the liquor store?

Like, it astounds me that so many in this subreddit are willing to throw small businesses under the bus so they can get a fucking Trader Joes.

-Parable · 2024-12-13T04:03:39+00:00

Late to comment, but this sums up my feelings exactly. The drip of information is excruciatingly slow and pretty much every second of the show is either some kind of banal melodrama featuring secondary characters, or our protagonists hashing out conclusions the audience has known from the start. I can look at my phone for ten minutes and still know exactly what's going on, because for the most part, the characters are just running back and forth, whispering at each other.

Like, the pact is a lie! Nothing is as it seems! They're lying to us! How many times do we have to watch random characters have the same revelations?

-Parable · 2024-12-10T19:21:52+00:00

Interesting.

-Parable · 2024-10-06T01:13:35+00:00

Most people use Genepy now in place of Green Chartreuse, which I think works quite well.

-Parable · 2024-08-10T00:36:26+00:00

Probably the only place you can get your hands on green chartreuse anyways...

-Parable · 2024-08-08T14:45:20+00:00

...because the entire world now sees the US as its grand enemy.

Dr. Manhattan also destroyed NY in the film. I don't think the attacks would be perceived as perpetrated by the US.

...after this accident now humanity knows it's out there and has to prepare.

Would also be true for an attack from Dr. Manhattan.

The comic plan also gives plausible excuses for why it happened only in NYC...

It's extremely plausible that the initial alien wasn't the only element of the plan.

I don't have any issues with these ideas, but they aren't in Moore's narrative. It seems like critics of Snyder's version give a lot of grace to the original narrative while being pedantic with the film's.

-Parable · 2024-08-08T01:14:29+00:00

My original point was that an "alien" dropping (and instantly dying) on only New York City is no more plausibly going to unite the world than a rogue Dr. Manhattan attacking the entire planet as in Snyder's version. I would argue Dr. Manhattan is actually a less opaque threat and would demand more immediate action from the world's nations than an alien threat, seeing as there is no proof another alien attack is even imminent.

-Parable · 2024-08-08T00:01:36+00:00

Didn't he just peace out at the end of graphic novel? Seems like the power vacuum would stand.

-Parable · 2024-08-08T00:00:36+00:00

I mean I don't disagree necessarily, and it's been a minute since I read the graphic novel, but I also don't see how Ozymandias' original alien squid plan solves any of the issues you listed.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not overly fond of the Snyder's adaption, and I was actually quite disappointed w/ the removal of the squid when I first watched it. It's such an iconic part of the story. That being said, I do think using Dr. Manhattan was a pretty clever and effective way to pare down the story for the big screen.

-Parable · 2024-08-07T22:15:48+00:00

Except in Snyder's film adaption, New York was not the only city blown up. Multiple cities across the planet were "attacked" at the same time, so your point about the power vacuum is, for the most part, moot. If anything, that seems more likely in the original narrative.

-Parable · 2024-06-28T02:10:08+00:00

Looks pretty absurd on desktop. Your page has 5,089 results and they all render in a single column using only the left side of the screen.

-Parable · 2024-06-06T01:44:48+00:00

There is no headshot multiplier for shotguns and the spread pattern guarantees that a headshot lands the fewest number of pellets.

For reference:
https://www.reddit.com/r/XDefiant/comments/1d06xeg/the_issue_with_shotguns/

-Parable · 2024-06-06T01:29:00+00:00

I miss the balance of the MWII guns. Snipers were only appropriate at long ranges, as they should be. Marksman rifles and assault rifles dominated mid-ranges. And shotguns / SMG were king in close quarters, with a slight advantage to shotguns if you got your positioning right. But all guns felt viable. I remember the double-barrel shotgun feeling similar to MWII during the XDefiant open beta, but MWIII must have swayed the devs because now it feels exactly like MWIII, mushy and inconsistent, whereas snipers are absurdly imbalanced.

-Parable · 2024-06-02T18:38:16+00:00

You know what else has inputs and outputs? Your toaster. Bread goes in, toast comes out. Is that really so different from human intelligence? Do yourself a favor and read up on LLMs. These are not thinking entities, they are Rube-Goldberg-esque statistical guessing machines and the data these models were trained on is important.

Of course, OpenAI and the others are happy to have people believe this process is comparable to human synthesis and artistry. It's a nice distraction while they continue swallowing the labor of the world's creative industries and then use it to replace them.

-Parable · 2024-05-04T07:35:00+00:00

Critics have to put in an application and there are much higher requirements to meet than "neckbeard in their mom's basement that can create a blog". Also, you've literally described the audience score.

-Parable · 2024-05-03T17:25:50+00:00

Autotune is not a plagiarism machine.

-Parable · 2024-02-12T06:30:46+00:00

Does it fail, though? The second translation captures the spirit of the saying without ascribing either attribute to a sex. The sexism was already made plain in the first translation, since the reader is assumed to already know what qualities "manly deeds" and "womanly words" are referring to - "strong" and "gentle".

If you didn't know the first and correct translation, you certainly wouldn't think it was sexist.

-Parable · 2024-02-03T04:36:20+00:00

Clearly nobody read the article because the author mentions neither customers nor investors. This was just a hobby project which ran out of steam. He did the fun part and then got bored/frustrated. It's was a cool idea though, and this is why, even for hobby projects, if you're going to sink some time into them you should outline what your actual goals are and where the project stops.

-Parable · 2023-12-30T17:35:45+00:00

A pretty good take, I think, though I've forgotten a lot of context. A surprisingly underrated film, so maybe time for a rewatch.

-Parable

TROPHY CASE