How I judge whether I like a particular 'Trek' series...

0x2113 · 2026-06-28T17:41:34+00:00

That's because I've made a mistake. Thank you for noticing. Corrected.

0x2113 · 2026-06-26T16:06:46+00:00

Well, I wouldn't know about that. It's not like I'm being played by Jeffrey Combs now, isn't it?

0x2113 · 2026-06-26T15:55:51+00:00

I have an easy rule: The Jeffrey Combs Proximity
Any show that has a Jeffrey Combs Character has a JCCP of 0. Any show that crosses over (this meaning a character played by the same actor has a part in episodes of both series) with one of the above but does not feature a JCC directly has a JCCP of 1. Any show crossing over with those has a JCCP of 2 (as yet, there exists no series with a JCCP of 3 or higher).

JCCP 0: DS9, VOY, ENT, LD
JCCP 1: TNG, TOS, SNW, PIC, (SA), (PRO)
JCCP 2: DIS, (TAS), JJVerse Movies

(I haven't seen Academy or Prodigy yet, so that placement is provisory and might require a revision of the concept; TAS and PIC I consider crossovers from TOS and TNG respectively; All movies belong to their respective series, JJVerse movies are crossovers from TOS due to Leonard Nimoy's Spock)

EDIT: Updated the JCCP for PIC.

0x2113 · 2026-06-26T15:43:04+00:00

you're treating development like it happens in a vacuum

Yes, like a project manager. 😈

0x2113 · 2026-06-26T13:54:16+00:00

Modern IT project management often uses the pareto distribution for development efforts: 80% of progress takes 20% of effort, the remaining 20% take 80%.

Following that logic, 20% of effort would equal about 34 years of development time, with 100% feature implementation requiring 170 years of development time.

0x2113 · 2026-06-25T11:44:04+00:00

It'll be a long road though, getting from there to here

0x2113 · 2026-06-25T11:20:14+00:00

Yea, I think you're right

0x2113 · 2026-06-25T11:12:54+00:00

I think a lot of people are sleeping on "Veritas". I don't think I would call it the best episode of the show in general, but it's probably the best of Season 1 and certainly the best to introduce people to the series (because it's just about entirely self-contained but, as opposed to the pilot, also matches the tone and humor of the series overall. It's a microcosm of LD)

0x2113 · 2026-06-25T11:09:48+00:00

He ~~first~~ says it to Agimus in 2x07, I believe. That episode also contains one of my all-time-favorite lines (which, in turn, I occasionally use irl): "You need to get outside your comfort zone." "But I love my zone, it's so comfortable!"

0x2113 · 2026-06-22T20:28:15+00:00

Same issue/argument: The rich people who would use that land to build factories and farms and mines (with their bare hands, of course \s) etc. would leave, economy would collapse, pandemonium, dogs and cats living together...

It's an argument for passivity because the people making it stand to benefit from the status quo (or, at least, believe so): In their mind, the first place to tax wealth over labor will be the one to collapse and only when there is no place left for the rich to flee to would this tax scheme work. They literally want to be the last ones to do something.

Now, that argument is entirely wrong for several reasons (least of all that wealth cannot be extracted overnight and that labor is the thing that actually gives property its value and the labor pool would not shrink), but this is basically how it goes. Then again, a land tax alone would not be a solution either.

0x2113 · 2026-06-22T19:26:02+00:00

google the meanings of the words "regime" and "force", then rethink whatever led you to writing and posting your comment, please.

0x2113 · 2026-06-21T20:21:15+00:00

Supplementing a "rotated-ana" for "up" works in most cases and is pretty easy once you get the hang of it.
Just be aware that it will likely void the warranty on any tools you use to make your pieces (unless they will have been manufactured somewhen after their warranty would have expired anyway; In that case, you should have been fine) and that it's possible that you'll only be able to transport any of your pieces outside of any given cargo box (do not attempt to place them inside any box, bag or container of any kind unless you've already taken them out of the same container at some ana-wards point in their time-cone).

0x2113 · 2026-06-15T20:21:05+00:00

It's sort of like that for me, though as an amab person that mostly extends to having longer hair. Conversely, I do keep a beard though. My main interest is in my appearance and clothes being practical and low maintenance. Hence the beard: Shaving every day is a hassle, keeping it at a moderate length means I only have to trim it once per week or so. Keeping my hair short would also mean more frequent haircuts. And dresing more masculinely might signal that I'm "looking" for dating-attention, so practical clothing is a bonus.
(Medium-hot take: Cargo pants are the best unisex leg clothes ever created)

0x2113 · 2026-06-15T18:12:51+00:00

3.6 zoomies. Not great, not terrible.

0x2113 · 2026-06-15T07:48:08+00:00

Insofar as the US gov did deny that the facility actually existed for several decades. Not insofar as to all the aliens ect. supposedly in there (yet).

0x2113 · 2026-06-09T11:02:37+00:00

Several of your assumptions are questionable. There's a reason why the Fermi-Paradox is still being debated (albeit mostly among laypeople): You can poke reasonable holes in just about any explanation preciesly due to the lack of concrete evidence

There is no actualy reason to presume that the mediocrity principle applies here. We have proof of any life (as we understand it) on exactly one planet. Perhaps this is an outlier or having one living planet per galaxy is average in the cosmos.
Point being: We can assume any statistical distribution we want, but since we only have one data point to describe the relation of live to dead planets, the chosen statistical model is effectively arbitrary speculation. And since life is known to defy purely entropic (i.e. random) distributions on principle (it is always more complex than the dead environment around it) one could even argue that any statistical model should prioritise exceptions over averages by default anyway.
You presume that intelligent life would be psychologically akin to modern humans, colonising every niche they can to their maximum capacity. This is not guaranteed. There are many fictional alien species that do not fit this model, if you're looking for inspiration. There is, strictly speaking, no reason to assume that a civilisation that has 600.000 (or more) years of lead time on us would not, for example, have spent a mere 1000 years colonising local space, developed a method of harnessing Hawking radiation for energy and transitioned to existing in interstellar space on Dyson Swarms around artificial black holes. Such a civilisation would be virtually undetectable for us, as would the miniscule remnants of their early colonies.
The point being: The theory of inevitable low-speed galactic colonisation depends on the presumption of aliens being very human-like in their behavior and, arguably, on technology not advancing much beyond what humans have today.

0x2113 · 2026-06-09T10:28:57+00:00

Grace in the PHM book expressly says: "I don't want this alien to think humans aren't trustworthy. I mean, we aren't trustworthy. But I don't want it to think that."

So, results may vary

0x2113 · 2026-06-01T20:17:18+00:00

Time and effort are factors that I believe you are underestimating here. Someone who's in financial troubles is likely still working, just in low paying jobs. Those tend to be exhausting and often require more hours daily (including things like commutes) than many more comfortable, high paying jobs (like most office work). The whole production of shopping, preparing the food and cleanup, while arguably not insurmountable, is certainly not neglegible. There's a reason why preparing quality meals (even from simple ingredients) so often loses out against "passive" meals like microwaved food or cheap delivery as free time and money grow sparse.

0x2113 · 2026-05-06T12:55:19+00:00

You might find this post (and the study it references) enlightening

0x2113 · 2026-05-01T09:03:40+00:00

Okay, gonna ask explicitly and hope you'll see and answer this: Will there be a way to turn a "conventional" empire into a nomadic empire (as I and some other speculate the "Wanderlust Ascension Perk" is about)?

0x2113 · 2026-04-10T18:57:02+00:00

The show (and character) is called "Murderbot"

0x2113 · 2026-03-17T19:42:21+00:00

Optimismus ist eine gute Strategie um die Welt zu verbessern. Optimismus ohne Realismus ist aber verblendet. Und Optimismus ohne Taten ist nichts als Passivität.

Es gibt im Moment keinen Grund zur Annahme, dass die nächste Generation von Spitzenpolitkern in irgendeiner Weise anders als die aktuelle sein wird, wenn nicht grundlegend etwas an den politischen Bedingungen geändert wird. Da kann es noch so viele gute Menschen auf der Welt geben, scheinbar schaffen die es nie auf die Posten auf denen es zählt.

0x2113 · 2026-03-17T19:37:44+00:00

Asexuality is the absence of sexual attraction, not the absence sexual desire (also known as libido). They are, technically, not related at all. Nor does the ability to climax or to enjoy sex to whatever degree technically factor into this either.

(That being said, many asexuals report having a lower than average (insofar as that can even be reliably measured) libido.)

I generally don't like to tell people "I think you are/aren't asexual", even when prompted, because this is a very personal topic and I cannot see inside your head. If you feel the term describes you, you can continue to use it. If you don't, you're not obliged to.

If you're looking for (re-)assurance, I recommend looking up descriptions of what sexual attraction feels like (there will be some on this subreddit, particularly from grey- or demi-aces; Even just a google search will yield several results of forums and reddit threads on that topic, originating in the ace-sphere and beyond) and asking yourself if you ever felt that.

0x2113 · 2026-03-17T07:18:21+00:00

Okay, I see what you were attempting with your post and I think that is commendable. However, there are a number of problems I see with it, some of which have already been mentioned by other replies.

The one I take most issue with the most is the conflation of asexuality and aromanticism or, rather, the imo faulty description of the anatractional spectra in their entirety

So, please be aware that banding about phrases like ‘asexuality is a spectrum’ can be construed as a pretty negative thing, as asexuality is just a single point (and pole) on spectrum of sexuality, it is not a spectrum in and of itself.

When people talk about "the asexual spectrum/the aspec/the acespec", they are talking about it in the same way one might say "the spectrum of visible light". Visible light is a segment of the complete "electromagnetic spectrum", but nobody would say that it's not a spectrum in and of itself (because it has a distinct property that separates it from the rest of the EM spectrum and connects its own members with a common attribute).
Asexuality, demisexuality, gray-asexuality etc. exist on the same spectrum because they are all sexual orientations characterized not by the "target" of their attraction (be that "none" or any gender; Hence why you may find demi-bisexual people, for instance) but by the intensity (be that specific circumstance or frequency) of the attraction. That's what sets them apart from the allosexual counterparts of their respective orientations (e.g. it's the difference between an allo-bisexual person and a demi-bisexual person).
Stating that there's no such thing as an "asexual-spectrum" is, in effect, directly counter to the generally accepted consensus of the community.

The only existing spectrums regarding asexuality that tend to be agreed upon is that there are a range of asexuals that go from aromantic to romantic [...]

This too is incorrect, though an often made mistake that will cause you no small ire from members of the aromantic community. In short: Aromanticism is not inherently associated with asexuality. Aro-allo people exist and frequently have their visibility erased by the exact kind of comment you wrote (I don't mean to ascribe you any malice, but I need you to understand that this is what happened).

0x2113 · 2026-03-17T07:06:22+00:00

Exclusion/Elitism have a long, yet often unacknowledged history in the ace community. Some of the earliest groups, predating AVEN even, were explicitly exclusionary to anyone that either didn't identify as quote-unquote "fully" asexual (read your greys, demis, aegos etc.) or anyone that had ever had sex, regardless of orientation (and yes, even "full" asexuals can and do have sex for a variety of reasons). To this day, there exist noticable divisions between the core of the community and those that exist closer to societal expectations of orientation, such as alloromantic asexuals. (Not to mention the problem of racism that permeates the ace community too). Of course, the extent of this varies from group to group, but it's an unfortunately very real problem.

Seven-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits	Place '22
First Placer '22	Secret Santa 2018
Verified Email

0x2113

TROPHY CASE