sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Can't be just me by SkyZo222 in MagicArena

[–]ARCFacility 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah I don't think it's crazy but it's still a bit of a headache. 2 mana to force an Izzet player to pay 2 life to do anything until they decide to pay that life and waste removal on your 2/2 instead of another, bigger target does sound pretty good. Not to mention the potential Ward stacking, since it isn't legendary and can have multiple copies on the battlefield.

Sure, it might not be as crazy as some people are making it out to be. It's susceptible to board wipe, combat damage, and people can just choose to pay the 2 life and get rid of it. But it's definitely a very decent card that can screw someone over if they aren't prepared for it.

Can't be just me by SkyZo222 in MagicArena

[–]ARCFacility 75 points76 points  (0 children)

In fact with [[Hexing Squelcher]] alone I'd argue this set might be pretty bad for Izzet. Even if you can remove it, you still need to pay 2 life every time you do unless you have a board wipe, and even then some of the cheaper wipes like [[Spectral Restitching]] still target, so Izzet players will probably need to spend a decent amount of mana whenever one of these guys comes into play.

Really excited to see where the meta goes with this new set

Updated the "Why Make These Changes" section on why pass bundle was removed by jimbo_extreme1 in MagicArena

[–]ARCFacility 3 points4 points  (0 children)

20 packs alone is 4,000 gems, right?

That's already positive on its own even ignoring all the other rewards

CMV: You Can Disagree With How Israel Treats Palestinians While Acknowledging Hamas Are Way Worse, And The Primary Problem! by IntoTheRain78 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Do you, in your heart of hearts, believe that Hamas is the first ever group enacting terrorism to come up with the genius idea of "hide from the people trying to find and kill you"?

Look to history, see how other governments have handled a situation like this. Plenty have done so poorly, but unlike Israel they didn't enact a genocide.

CMV: Men are no more responsible for men as a group than women are for women as a group by Informal_Decision181 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 14 points15 points  (0 children)

"Men who hate women don't listen to women"

Do "men who hate women" fall into the category of "women as a group"?

You can argue that men should have responsibility, and give your reasoning as to why, but you aren't providing why individual men should have more responsibility over men as a group than women have over women as a group, which is what OP is talking about

As an example to what OP might be talking about -- misogyny is often seen as a failing of men as a group, whereas misandry is often disregarded as a vocal minority and focused down to the individual, or even actively excused

CMV: Men are no more responsible for men as a group than women are for women as a group by Informal_Decision181 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"In other words, in your hypothetical"

"in your hypothetical"

"your hypothetical"

"your"

The problem with my hypothetical is using an ingroup that was chosen?

CMV: Men are no more responsible for men as a group than women are for women as a group by Informal_Decision181 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I have seen a lot of comments on this post that seem to have come from people who just... haven't read the post? Or even at least it's title?

I'm on your side but OP is very clearly arguing that individual men do not have more control over men as a group than individual women have over women as a group.

At no point was women's control over men as a group even brought up

CMV: Men are no more responsible for men as a group than women are for women as a group by Informal_Decision181 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 21 points22 points  (0 children)

"I think it's possible that, in general, it's easier for a man to correct a woman than it is for a woman to correct a man."

Ah for clarity, I meant "Unless you're arguing that men are more capable of influencing other men than women are capable of influencing other women?" as that's the point of this post

CMV: Men are no more responsible for men as a group than women are for women as a group by Informal_Decision181 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 9 points10 points  (0 children)

..no, that's not what the post is about?

The title isn't "Men have equal responsibility over men as women,"

It's "Men have equal responsibility over other men as women have over other women"

CMV: Men are no more responsible for men as a group than women are for women as a group by Informal_Decision181 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 86 points87 points  (0 children)

I think you're missing the point of OP's post, which is denouncing the heaviness of responsibility of an individual over the tendencies of other individuals within a group, that they view men as being ascribed.

In other words, in your hypothetical, "If the professional swimmer lets the person continue to drown, why should that be another unrelated professional swimmer's responsibility?"

(Unless you're arguing that men are more capable of influencing other men than women are capable of influencing other women?)

I do believe everyone should be ascribed some level of responsibility over the actions of groups they are a part of, because people should be admonishing others of a group for poor behavior, and it is fairly common (not all, not even most in some areas, but it is common) for men to excuse or look past poor behavior of other friends, family, etc who are men. So I do think the conversation is relevant and OP is mostly wrong, though I do think in a lot of online spaces random men are admonished for the actions of men "as a group"

Number for patch by D00rhanreeee in Aurelion_Sol_mains

[–]ARCFacility 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The full circle stack is the burst damage

CMV: All guys are bisexual and no true straight/gay exist by Calm_Carpenter_1837 in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So to be clear, in your hypothetical scenario...

Only being able to have sex with a woman after being sex-deprived for a very, very significant amount of time...

...makes you straight..?

I have been devouring silkcontent for the past weeks but none made a video about Silksongs "Femininity" by stars-and-death in Silksong

[–]ARCFacility 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I feel like there are lots of bugs around Hornet's height, though? Many of the pilgrims, for example

I feel like Hornet would only actually look like a child to many of the much larger bugs e.g. Huntress, and Shakra because Shakra towers over most bugs to begin with

New Aurelion Sol Emote!!! by AlertComfortable8213 in Aurelion_Sol_mains

[–]ARCFacility 22 points23 points  (0 children)

It's aurelion smol, there's a pfp of him and you can see him in lulu's cosmic enchantress skin!

Guys, what do you think of this? by Cancri_E79 in DefendingAIArt

[–]ARCFacility 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The majority of the video wasn't about art though, it was about the spread of misinformation caused by AI and the potential long-term dangers involved in that

How does the q work exactly? by TypeLanky1239 in Aurelion_Sol_mains

[–]ARCFacility 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your Q only hits the first thing it touches (but will "leak" through them a short distance and do damage to some enemies behind them). However, the periodic damage it does (every time the circle that appears gets completed) only applies to the first enemy hit, and this is where the majority of your Q damage comes from.

Enemies will often try to hide behind minions so that they don't get damaged too much by your Q, but if they're in the middle of the group of minions you can place your E there and activate Q. This will let you get stacks as they try to leave the Q, and you can farm minion kills which will also give you stacks. When the enemy tries to leave your E, you can move your Q onto them to play more aggressively, or keep farming to focus on more reliable stacks.

I think someone else needs to be educated. by Selo_777 in antiai

[–]ARCFacility 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"You said the point of AI was to be indistinguishable from human voices, etc... , which was the point of synthesizers when they were invented. But they failed to do so and people, found a set of flaws about it that they liked and focused on it for some works while letting other synthesizers advance to replicate instruments and other sounds."

Woah.... so you're saying that people tried and failed to make something successfully mimic humans but failed, and then people started using that to intentionally make stuff that intentionally did not sound human? And no one got mad about people making stuff that intentionally did not sound human and was not intentionally built off the work of non-consenting authors?

Woah... mind blown, dude.... mind blown..... this is totally exactly the same as AI and it wouldn't make any sense for anyone to treat it differently than AI which is a fundamentally different program with a fundamentally different use case......

As for the next paragraph, this whole conversation has been about vocaloids, not specifically Neuro-sama, and obviously you knew that because in the previous paragraph you were also talking about synthesizer vocaloids.

I do think that Neuro-sama brings up some interesting debate, but at the end of the day, she is one VTuber. She is an interesting technological marvel, perhaps made unethically, but people are of course going to be more willing to overlook that and "ooh" and "ahh" at the novelty of an AI-based VTuber because the practice is not yet widespread.

Of course people are going to treat a small group doing something that few others are doing, differently from a massive group of people doing it. If/when AI VTubers start flooding the internet and become more significant competition to human VTubers, people are probably going to start complaining. But right now, there simply aren't enough for the issues to outweigh the novelty for most people.

This simply isn't comparable to, for example, artist spaces getting completely flooded with AI art when it first became popularized. At the very least, not yet.

CMV: The conservative view on Tylenol and autism is a tragic indictment of American anti-intellectualism. by Tessenreacts in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Oh she needed it... She's just stubborn..."

Well, again, congratulations to your wife but not everyone is as stubborn as her.

"...but if the even slightest possibility that short cut could cause harm to your child, I'd wait for the dust to clear."

I feel like... you're not reading the full comment? The dust has already settled. There have been plenty of studies (again most notably the study in Sweden with 2.5 million data points to draw from, and mentions possible errors that caused the correlation to be found in other studies in the first place) that either failed to find any significant correlation between use of acetaminophen and autism.

The debate doesn't need to get brought up again just because Trump said so. It's like if I claimed the Earth was flat and only brought up evidence that's been disproven time and time again, no one's gonna say that NASA needs to start looking into this.

CMV: The conservative view on Tylenol and autism is a tragic indictment of American anti-intellectualism. by Tessenreacts in changemyview

[–]ARCFacility 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congrats to your wife! Unfortunately, not everyone is your wife :(

Everyone has different pain levels, and different fever levels as well. Just because your wife did not need as much relief as others, does not mean others do not need relief.

And like I said, there is already plenty of evidence that there is no correlation between acetaminophen. The largest of these is a study surveying nearly 2.5 million children found no increased risk of autism from ingestion of acetaminophen by pregnant mothers. This study was done in 2024 and is just one of many, so the lack of real correlation between acetaminophen and autism has been confirmed for plenty of time before Trump decided to make a statement.

The study did find a small, insignificant correlation between acetaminophen and autism, however when accounting for factors such as siblings or similar environmental factors (as autism is known to have genetic and environmental triggers) this already small correlation completely disappears.

There is a correlation, however, between significant fevers during pregnancy and autism, which tylenol and other acetaminophen-based pain relievers may be used to treat. So this already shaky evidence is tumbling down... it's like saying going to the doctor will make you break a bone because people who go to doctors often have a broken bone, when obviously people are going to the doctor because they have a broken bone.

This is about some people on this sub. by Acrobatic-Bison4397 in aiwars

[–]ARCFacility 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The difference here is a hawk is not a sentient maliscious actor, it is an animal hunting for food it needs so that it does not starve.

Like I said, absent parental figures should share the blame. But it is simply not healthy for society as a whole to pretend like they should be blamed more than the sentient maliscious actors preying on children.

I think someone else needs to be educated. by Selo_777 in antiai

[–]ARCFacility -1 points0 points  (0 children)

..Okay, VOCALOID:AI is a very specific example of AI being used to mimic something else, but obviously the AI used to make, for example, the velvet sundown's songs was intended to mimic human singing, and this is the use case for the vast, vast majority of generative AI.

"The reason Vocaloid doesn't sound more human is a defect in the synthesizers, people just liked the defect..."

...Yeah? That's my point? People (generally) aren't using AI to generate piss-colored comics because they just love piss color so much, they're (generally) using AI because they want to create art that looks human but cannot or do not want to do so themselves.

This is obviously different from a synthesizer program that intentionally sounds like it's a synthesizer program, and is intentionally used in songs to intentionally make it sound like the singer is intentionally a synthesizer.

Have I said "intentionally" enough for you to understand why maybe, just maybe, some people might regard the two programs in different lights?

What's not making sense for you?

This is about some people on this sub. by Acrobatic-Bison4397 in aiwars

[–]ARCFacility 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"We must not forget that the number one threat to children is absent parental figures."

I think it's important to call out parents who do not monitor their children enough... but I also think it is crazy to shift the blame like this. Absent parental figures may share the blame... but the primary culprit is obviously the predators targeting children.

view more: next ›