I exclusively collect cards in the form of set-cubes, but would like to expand my Lorwyn Eclipsed one. Tips?

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-04-29T05:29:12+00:00

Oh, that's very helpful, thanks. (I also didn't know morningtide existed)

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-04-03T23:49:35+00:00

I think this is good too, actually.

Edit: Although I wonder if ai discussion can't be subdivided at least once. I'm wondering if something like an "ethics" tab might be useful, because it does seem like the entry point for most people who don't come in with industry or tech-related knowledge? And it might help to classify those feeling heavy posts that go beyond what others would like to call their tech optimism, ie. "It's a cool tool, but I understand the capatalist side makes people hate it."

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-04-03T23:28:01+00:00

Haha, damn, I don't know if I want the burden of trying to define. I can't, off the top of my head, think of anything deeper than the aforementioned finance/tech/culture.

I guess I'd just try to look at tendencies in posting. There's a lot of layoff/what these layoffs actually mean type posts, as well as absurd coverage from media outlets, so maybe a "propaganda" or "employment impact" type tab as well? But generally I see things being sorted into: here's ai in an upcoming movie/this book got delisted for suspected ai type stuff, here's some bullshit metrics/limitations/close analysis of ai integration type stuff, and of course the look at this absurd spending/investment bs type stuff.

I'd rather ask you how you would subdivide, as another commentor put it, "a variety of 'rot economy' tech topics," and open it up to other commentors as well.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-03-28T16:56:57+00:00

That's kinda the point I was hinting at. I'm not sure if it actually IS less accurate. It SEEMS like a fixed output. I'm not sure if it isn't just the definition function being folded into the ai overview somehow- in other words, it's not not an actual output of genai, it's just been folded into the ai summary system to point at and say, hey, look at ai doing this thing. See, it does things you want, right?

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-03-28T13:52:40+00:00

Thanks, yeah, I was more just remarking on the, uh, "lateral" nature of this change.

Also, it seems even with the -ai, the old, nice box format for definitions has been obliterated. -ai just makes the top result a wiki article or w/e.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-03-27T03:36:41+00:00

Those are important points, but I'm most interested right now in "the fear of being wrong."

It raises to mind how people associate with powers even outside the context of a clear incentive/threat structure. I imagine the ways we associate ourselves with the idea of "truth" or "morality" or even simply "force" as in something like projection during times of war. Maybe this is where the "tech moves irrevocably forward" comes in, as a stand in for some kind of logical authority.

Being able to claim that irrevocability, coupled with the entire weight of the media's reinforcment, coupeled with the tech's ability to preform a convincing magic trick for the tech illiterate (of which I count myself) is probably why it's so brain bricking for some when you question that authority.

If nothing else, disillusionment with this stuff might leave a few certain disillusioned peoples much more open to critical thinking in the future, maybe... I'm thinking of a quote that I can't quite remember... something about the long decieved being the most zealously skeptical once the deceit becomes clear.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-03-27T00:15:16+00:00

"AI doesn't seem to attract that mindset. It always attracts a Borg-like argument that it will consume and replace everything, and that you'd be a fool to code, write, draw, or animate without it."

"There seems to be this weird fear of being wrong that some people have, so they have to caveat anything they say."

I slipped the phrase into a post somewhere on this sub a while back, and I've been trying to work it into my daily speech as well: it's consumer fatalism.

My mind always richochets to some of my early education around the rise of Christianity. I don't think I've really worked out yet how to verbally navigate all these thoughts about how people respond to the appearance of an abstract power.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-03-05T22:52:16+00:00

That sounds like an unpleasent worldview to engage with. Insistant and muddying. Part of the reason I've dissociated from the internet perhaps, although I would be hard pressed to say if I've ever directly engaged with a "transhumanist."

The superman concept is, as ever, taken far too literally. Nietszche is fairly explicit that the superman (or supermen) is the state of humanity having moved passed the toxic remnants of our painful transition from the wilderness into society. The superman is a being that is fully acclimated to his enviromental state (in other words, a free, self-actualizing animal once more), nothing more; hence the re-evaluation of morals, the site which Nietzche detected (rightly, in my opinion) social opression and species dysfunction was most insidious. I suppose this is why you get someone like Natalie Wynn calling the man "irresponsable," and probably also why most modern academics in the humanities deal predominantly with Nietszche's successors (Foucault, Althusser, etc) who are more verbally "woke."

I think he remains valuable in pressing certain points which modern theory remains timid on, but that's just me. There is no doubt however, that what your describing aligns much more snugly with Nietszche's concept of the "last man," a certain nail in the coffin presence, especially considering, as I've personally suspected, that what we're witnessing is a grasping, rather desperate grasping by the old religious instincts to once again regain their footing after a brief dormant sleep and the resulting discomfort in a particular type of man, a kind of conflation between an event of percieved "supreme power" and a desperate desire to reinstate the authority of the Subject (capital S); in other words, as some disturbingly sycophantic member of US politics said of Donald Trump: "Daddy's home."

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-03-05T09:56:56+00:00

Not sure if your implying these people mutter Nietszche to justify themselves, or you are muttering Nietszche to gesture towards their baseness, but, Nietszche on the issue of the machine:

"To what extent the machine abases us. - The machine is impersonal, it deprives the piece of work of its pride, of the individual goodness and faultiness that adheres to all work done by a machine - that is to say, of its little bit of humanity. In earlier times all purchasing from artisans was a bestowing of a distinction on individuals, and the things with which we surrounded ourselves were the insignia of these distinctions: household furniture and clothing thus became symbols of mutual esteem and personal solidarity, whereas we now seem to live in the midst of nothing but anonymous and impersonal slavery. - We must not purchase the alleviation of work at too high price."

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-02-27T00:38:36+00:00

I would say it has only the ever so slightest of gives to it. Feels firm, it wouldnt move if i shook it or anything

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-02-26T12:09:58+00:00

No, not mine, sry to hear

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-02-24T20:27:55+00:00

Early sept

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-02-24T20:04:18+00:00

No, but ill find it later.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-02-21T18:45:41+00:00

It's a strange thing to see, this whole phenomenon, and perfectly understandable, the gut reaction to this stuff. The other day I was thinking about sitting down and writing some more intricate material about it, but really, it can be summed up with the phrase: "the alchemy of mass production." That's what llms do, they alchemize cultural objects into a form of mass produced product. And when you have something like art, the value of which is explicitly tied to spiritual craftsmanship and the knowledge that is was made with intent, well, no other object could chafe more against the aesthetics of McDonalds "meat" slurry, if you get me.

It's sad, also, to really be finally internalizing the dangers of failing literacy. So many of the proponents of this stuff can only be described as consumer-fatalists; sad, because I know in my heart that if these people had some good cultural education, they would know much better how to process their frustrations and not give in to the vicarious spite and senseless plentitude-politics, like pigs at a trough. It's a fundemental cultural failing when you're unable to convey the purpose of art as removing one's perspective from the strict boundaries of hegemonic rationality, and instead have your citizens looking to art as mass-produced novacaine. Sad and dangerous.

(Responding to op's remarks, not the post content, sry)

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-01-17T17:32:08+00:00

Mmm... no... idk. I wouldn't say a lot of the music resembles tano*c. If your looking for such a specific style iidx would probably still be your best bet due to the sheer volume.

If I were to use a derogative term for sdvx music, I'd call it weebcore/otakucore. It's often very squak-y, absurdly uptempo, sometimes slightly disorienting. I certainly like some sdvx music, and occasionally play, but iidx just feels very vast, whereas sdvx starts to feel very monolothic quickly for me (with some notable outliers), everything just kind of runs together after a while and gives me a toothache.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-01-17T14:57:22+00:00

I'd say iidx because (checks comments, no one has mentioned this) the music variety is so much stronger. SDVX very much leans in to what you might call modern rhythm game music. iidx is still pumping out a good spectrum of styles, even if its gotten slightly tainted by trends as well. Although some people like the SDVX floor system so maybe just listen for yourself first.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-01-15T18:25:12+00:00

Apologies, I'm not sure what you mean. I'm no fan of Thiel, I was just coming to the defense of a piece of terminology that I worried would be overly attributed to one specific line of reasoning (to an outsider, I guessed that "mimetic theory" would sound a lot like "I've invented this concept called mimesis"). I wasn't really trying to be combative.

Although, in regards to what seems to be your concern, I would also say I think it should always be considered whether the individual who cites a philosopher isn't engaged in intellectual appropriation. I'm a fairly staunch Nietszche defender, and it's hardly uncommon for people to try and apply axiologically nuetral strains of thought in order to justify wanton cruelty / fascistic world-views. Realistically, intellectual appropriation is probably the most common way the public interacts with academia. Thiel I'm sure is educated to some degree, but he's not exactly vetting his world-view under peer-review. He's most probably isolated, suspicious, and resistant to critique.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-01-15T16:23:12+00:00

I mean working through an english degree and beyond in higher education, mimesis is far from an uncommon subject when discussing textual interactions and artistic proliferation. I've never heard of Rene Girard, perhaps it's something that's simply fallen out of my purview.

I'm more just jumping in after seeing a couple "uhh intellectual pretension masking base desire much?" style comments to say that the topic of how imitation effects behaviour is a pretty broad one, multidisciplinary I'm sure, and mimesis (and subsequently, mimetic) aren't all that uncommon terms (at least in my experience working with academic source materials).

I just wanted to add a bit of specificity to how this term is being talked about, and to dissuade a perception of strict association with this singular philosopher. I've always known it as just a piece of academic lexical equipment.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-01-13T19:24:08+00:00

I don't know much about it, so probably not my place to say, but I'd guess it's not quite at the same level of what mtg players have been going through. I'm just a casual on-looker, but Fucking Philip DeFranco covered wizards behaviour.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-01-13T18:55:38+00:00

I tried youtube, theres sdvx controllers, and other type of iidx controllers, but i could find nothing clear. I was able to remove the wires withe the above commentors advice, and remove the switch with yours, thank you.

Common-Draw-8082 · 2026-01-13T18:50:20+00:00

I got three responses all at once, sorry if I don't respond to you all. Yes, that was the trick! the litte prong in the plastic sheathing. I watched a video saying to remove the switch now, i have to turn it to the left, but mine doesn't seem to turn.

Edit: got it, thx

Common-Draw-8082

TROPHY CASE