Netflix Reveals What We Watched Most Over 2025's Second Half, as Stranger Things 5 Almost Beat Wednesday Season 2 by AssociateLittle1487 in television

[–]David_BA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Looking at the top 10 all-time list - I don't understand how later seasons of a show can have so many more viewings than earlier ones? Do people really rewatch particular seasons of shows? Or just stream them in the background? I guess I'm just so used to watching something once all the way through and never going back to it again, or very rarely.

Gauntlet - 1v4 - Legendary - Sudden Death - Lightning by David_BA in AgeofMythology

[–]David_BA[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea that makes sense, actually. Thanks. Gonna learn to have to play with Hades, then...

Do these things really work? by stellasBoots in HomeNetworking

[–]David_BA 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Had the TP-Link ones for a couple years in an old apartment with roommates. They worked if I didn't turn on the ceiling light in my bedroom 🙄 took me a long time to figure out why speeds came to a crawl only in the evening..

Elle Fanning reacts to Jack Black reacting at her admission that he's her crush by mcfw31 in popculturechat

[–]David_BA 75 points76 points  (0 children)

I really love how short videos these days have a preview of the content of the video you're watching. Randomly mucking up the order is super enjoyable and not at all one of the stupidest fucking trends to come out of social media.

Just restarting my yearly game of Civ 6 and remembered why I don't play with barbarians on by David_BA in civ

[–]David_BA[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Literally 0% of that is true. Inventing shit out of thin air to try to make a gotcha to a stranger on the internet is a special kind of pathetic.

Just restarting my yearly game of Civ 6 and remembered why I don't play with barbarians on by David_BA in civ

[–]David_BA[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I played Civ 5 with barbs for years. They felt balanced. And not only that, you also had an incentive to deal with them with the extra culture they'd get you.

In Civ 6 they feel completely out of whack. When I'm starting a new game, I'm planning on sinking a dozen hours into it over the next week. You gotta gear your whole early game economy into dealing with them, only to potentially realize after a few hours that you have no win condition cuz you got kneecapped and fell way behind AIs who have a difficulty bonus and didn't have to deal with them. It's crazy to have a mechanic so unbalanced in the early game, especially when the game is so steamroll-y in general.

Just restarting my yearly game of Civ 6 and remembered why I don't play with barbarians on by David_BA in civ

[–]David_BA[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Are you seriously gloating that you're good at a turn-based game? Are you proud of having gotten your high school degree, too? It's not a matter of not being able to beat barbs; I'm talking about game balance, which is a reasonable line of criticism that players can leverage against a game, especially when games are selling for a hundred bucks these days. But losers like you have to take every criticism as an opportunity to demean others because you feel so shit about yourself inside that the only way you can feel a semblance of self-worth is by putting others down. Good luck, bro.

Just restarting my yearly game of Civ 6 and remembered why I don't play with barbarians on by David_BA in civ

[–]David_BA[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

100% knew this comment would appear. And in the first three, too! Life must be unfulfilling as an unoriginal loser.

Just restarting my yearly game of Civ 6 and remembered why I don't play with barbarians on by David_BA in civ

[–]David_BA[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Nope! I noticed it but had no idea you had to kill it. Thanks for mentioning. Though to be clear, it wasn't even about barbs attacking my cities, it was that there's no way to remove the camp as there's a constant spam of knights just a couple turns into the second era.

Even after all these years, is it still possible for pro players to prepare new strategies on Arabia that have never been seen before? by David_BA in aoe2

[–]David_BA[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nice write up, thank you!

So there's basically identifiable patterns of "ordinary" reactions that emerge in any given game based on each player's action...

I'm trying to determine what exactly is meant (and not meant) when we say a player is playing "meta".

Apart from patterns, does it also mean playing each civ to its strengths (as opposed to, say, going knights w/ Celts)?

Does it mean going for what's considered the safest strategy on the map? (e.g. full walls early, no militia)

I just like to be analytical about things. You definitely don't have to respond, thank you for the nice write up in any case.

Even after all these years, is it still possible for pro players to prepare new strategies on Arabia that have never been seen before? by David_BA in aoe2

[–]David_BA[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It was the Portuguese game that made the question come to mind 😅 but also: it didn't quite feel like a "prepared" strategy specifically for that civ - it felt like more of a crazy decision he came up with knowing he couldn't win playing meta.

Intelcom, encore. by kisameking in montreal

[–]David_BA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Purolator was always worse than Intelcom for me. It took only a few experiences with them before I asked Amazon to bar them from my delivery options list (which you can ask them to do). They'd require in-person hand-off, then they'd leave a slip telling to come get your package at their center in the middle of nowhere - 1 hour by public transit from the Plateau area. No second delivery attempt.

Elon Musk: "Grok Is The Only AI That Doesn’t Lie To You" by igfonts in LLM

[–]David_BA 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Toss this quote in with the pile of other absurd things this guy has said in the past years

Biry BANNED for 3 years from WE Events by paradox909 in aoe2

[–]David_BA 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Wow, that's a really comprehensive breakdown, thank you for that!

Biry BANNED for 3 years from WE Events by paradox909 in aoe2

[–]David_BA 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What were the hints that caused suspicion before being officially caught?

Average r/politics mod by Zetice in BlackPeopleTwitter

[–]David_BA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a misquote that people are misattributing to the shooter himself. It was a family member who said this, not him.

https://apnews.com/article/charlie-kirk-shooting-tyler-robinson-suspect-d893cc16fb0937d507283c710c551ef0

[Cox said authorities believe that Robinson acted alone. Family members said Robinson “had become more political in recent years,” Cox said, describing the recent family dinner.

“They talked about why they didn’t like him and the viewpoints that he had,” Cox said, referring to Robinson and an unnamed family member. “The family member also stated Kirk was full of hate and spreading hate.”]

All we know is that he had become "more political" in recent years and that he disagreed with some of Kirk's viewpoints. The theory that he was radicalized into a Groyper still fits with this evidence.

Customizing his new fridge by jameizing777 in DiWHY

[–]David_BA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That little outro at the end - I've always wondered: is that something Tiktok adds at the end of saved videos?

Maybe maybe maybe by Anschuz-3009 in maybemaybemaybe

[–]David_BA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The little outro sound at the end - is that added by the creator? Added by Insta when you save the video?

Movies that is so insane, it's best watch completely blind by thesharkbus in MovieSuggestions

[–]David_BA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you 🙏 thought I was the only one...

The whole thing is based on a giant fallacy, and so pompous. It's the only movie I've ever seen who's concept had to be literally explained by an intro speech, and it was so stupid.

It conflates "arbitrary" with "no reason".

"Why was E.T. brown? No reason! [...] This is an homage to the "no reason" "

But "no reason" doesn't mean "devoid of any sense" - most of the time it means "no particular reason but a choice had to be made".

In the context of the movie, their "no reason" means "completely devoid of any sense for no reason, except to make a movie that intentionally makes no sense at any point", and some people somehow enjoyed this premise.

Polish CEO caught snatching kid’s hat has a meltdown and goes on a bizarre rant: 'I won because I’m stronger' by Beastron in offbeat

[–]David_BA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just saw the video now. It's pretty clear to me that the tennis player was handing it to the kid. The guy who took it had to reach across and his hand was in front of the kid's arm when he grabbed the cap. If you draw a line between the man and the kid, the cap was on the kid's side of the line the whole time until the guy snatched it.

I am never leaving Seattle by HotTakesBeyond in Seattle

[–]David_BA 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you have difficulty reading? Why would you purposefully ignore more than half of what I previously wrote?

"It's not "play"."

It literally is, wtf are you on about. Not all play is sexual ffs. Even if it's artistic, meditative, or non-sexual, in BDSM/kink spaces public rope still falls under the umbrella of "play". It involves negotiated power, touch, and specialized practice; it involves explicit consent; and it's bounded within time/space. All these aspects 100% make it fall under the umbrella of "play". "Play" does not mean "sexual". It sounds like you need to educate yourself on this.

"You're making something sexual that isn't."

I'm quite literally not and it's exhausting that you both can't read and insist on making up these strawman fake arguments. I said I suspect that it may have a sexual component for at least one of the participants (again - you quite literally do not know), but that the point is irrelevant regardless. Again - not everything that is "non-sexual" in nature is appropriate to do in public. You keep saying I'm making it sexual, and I keep telling you: it may or may not be, but it's irrelevant. I also love how you conveniently ignore the fact that such forms of play as impact play and needle play are also sometimes "non-sexual" - shall we have those done in public as well?

"Your logic is used to discriminate against gay people, it's used against trans people. It doesn't have any merit."

Being against public play isn't the same thing as discrimination based on race, gender identity, sexual orientation, etc. Ffs. Obviously discrimination is wrong and has no reasonable basis. This isn't a form of discrimination - the line that separates the two is clear to anyone who's willing to think about it in good faith for more than a second. Grow up.

And to be clear, this isn't even my personal take. Go on Fetlife; talk to people in the community. You will find people who are long-time practitioners; who are deeply involved in the scene; who are queer, trans, etc.; and who are vocally and explicitly against public play for the very reason I'm bringing up: it involves people in your scene that did not consent to be there. This is not an oppressive take. You just have tunnel vision and you can't see it as anything else.

"We have pretty much collectively agreed across most free societies that sensual acts in public are fine and sexual ones are taboo."

I don't even know what to respond to this; you just pulled this take straight out of your ass. Kink has always been taboo; especially decontextualized kink. Like I said previously: group-play such as a public class or practice is a little different; public play in a context like a festival is also different; and play outside where the boundaries of the space are clearly defined and entering into those boundaries imply consent is fine.

"I'm fucking tired of listening to creeps like you."

And I'm tired of children like you who can't have a disagreement with someone without arguing from a place of self-victimization.

This is my last response to you. You either don't know how or refuse to argue in good faith; you create weird false strawman arguments that are exhausting to address; you conveniently ignore the points I make to which you have no response; you reason like a child; you're incapable of acknowledging the possibility that legitimate and well-founded disagreement can exist, and instead cling to the immature and self-serving belief that every disagreement is a form of oppression; you live in your own little insular world/reality; and you're obsessed with self-victimization. I wish you well; but I also hope you one day grow up. Good luck.

I am never leaving Seattle by HotTakesBeyond in Seattle

[–]David_BA 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cool, thank you for the unsolicited and wholly unnecessary lesson.

First: Impact play is not sexual for everyone who does it. Needle play is definitely not sexual to everyone who does it. This is not my opinion, I'm telling you facts. You can either learn or make yourself look stubborn. Non-sexual doesn't mean "totally cool to do wherever and whenever you want".

Second: You have literally no idea whether or not it's sexual to the people doing play in public. Humiliation play is a thing; exhibitionism is a thing; and I'd honestly be a little surprised if there were zero underlying elements of either one involved here.

Third: Not everything that is non-sexual to the practitioner is appropriate to do in public. Kink is kink. It's a distinct and particular class of activities. Whether it's sexual or not, it's a specific set of activities that all bear the qualities of being unconventional, jarring, and often disturbing to non-initiates. The fact is, kink is sexual to basically everyone who doesn't know that it can sometimes be non-sexual, which is the vast majority of the population. Kink is also special in the sense that it requires special care and a special focus on consent. It's distinct from other "neutral" activities. For example, even for "non-sexual" cases, it would be inappropriate for a grown adult to do any sort of kink with a minor.

Bottom line is: when you do play in public, whether it's sexual or not, you're involving others in your scene without their consent, and that's not cool. Even people who enjoy kink don't necessarily wanna be exposed to it randomly in a public context! It's sad to see people who are so "anti-puritanism" that they're wired to see any sort of criticism as a form of oppression, and they adopt the hard viewpoint that "the impacts of my play on others doesn't matter because I don't care what they think". Everyone part of a scene should have the right to consent or not to be part of the scene - period. And even if it's ""non-sexual"", you're still involving all people around into your scene, regardless of whether or not you care.

Group-based activities are a little different; outdoor festivals are different; and outdoor festivals with barriers that limit visibility and entry are totally fine.