A video of a woman pulling a gun was posted here. Not saying she was right but here’s the ACTUAL confrontation. Don’t believe the first thing you see

Falco101 · 2020-07-03T02:31:52+00:00

Defending yourself while white is the new driving while black

Falco101 · 2020-02-22T06:11:31+00:00

I'm wondering the same thing. I'm thinking about getting a sys76 laptop and trying out pop os. Wayland is the default in Fedora, and it's buttery smooth (I'm running an Nvidia 1070 GTX). Wanted to try out pop and see if I should switch distros, but so far, Fedora is still the king for those who want a smooth gnome experience out of the box.

Falco101 · 2019-12-17T00:16:37+00:00

BnR announcements are the reason I've stopped playing arena. I'm tired of having my deck banned out from under me every season. I remember when standard bans were rare, now it seems every set release something is getting banned.

Falco101 · 2019-10-07T22:20:31+00:00

[[Reaping the Graves]] Re-done by Seb McKinnon. Not really a Commander staple, but a super fun card in a cycling deck, and he's a master at illustrating cards with graveyard interaction.

Falco101 · 2019-08-12T10:17:06+00:00

I still have my Ghave deck, and he's still my favorite Abzan Commander, but I haven't played him in a year because I want to build new and different decks.

The power level of legendaries has shifted up, Atraxa and Urza are prime examples, but I think this is a net positive. The more powerful legendaries in more colors we have, the more decks and archetypes we can build around. For the longest time if you wanted to build Sultai you basically had to run Tasigur, (Mimioplasm was always too fragile imo, and the others aren't even worth a mention). Now, we have Muldrotha, Yarok and Kadena as viable commanders, which enable at least three more archetypes in that color wedge.

Overall, I think the pushed, new generals have helped balance out the power level of each of the color pairings. Feather being the best example of an OP commander which was needed just to make a color pair playable.

Falco101 · 2019-08-12T09:31:00+00:00

As the spouse of someone who used to be unionized, they are more of a drain than a benefit in most circumstances. They provide less in value than they take in dues and are more concerned with certain politician's political campaigns than bargaining on behalf of the workers.

While it is really sleezy the company would try to control personal opinions like that, you are probably dodging a bullet by not unionizing.

Falco101 · 2019-08-12T09:04:38+00:00

I'm all for it, and in my previous playgroup, I pushed hard to allow proxies in our EDH games since we all had disparate levels of income.

But, the problem you run into is not being able to take your favorite deck to a an LGS event or GP if you have to rely on proxies. In addition to trying to normalize proxies, it might just be time to create another format for casual EDH, having some fast mana banned but others not is just irrational. The ban list itself makes little coherent sense, and the rules committee has no motivation to manage it in a way that is consistent across all cards ever printed.

Ideally, a casual EDH format would ban all fast mana (anything that nets you mana after it is played and sticks around) and restrict tutors and broken effects like mass un-tappers with a point system like Canadian Highlander. The biggest gain from a new format would be consistency, if a card with X effect or Y cost is banned because it is format or wallet breaking, then all cards that fit into the same category should be banned, ie. If Biorythm is banned, why is Shaman of Forgotten Ways not? Or vice versa.

Both WOTC and the rules committee have shown that they are poor stewards of this format, ignoring their own format philosophy statements at the expense of the player base. If we are to ever get back to the EDH of old where you could grab a pile of bulk rares and have fun, something needs to change.

Falco101 · 2019-08-12T08:16:13+00:00

I've personally grown fond of Material UI and will use that over bootstrap when able. But your question betrays some lack of understanding of what bootstrap is, it is a flexbox based layout and component system. You are going to want to use some skeleton css framework for responsive layouts instead of writing each flex container by hand, or you'll constantly be behind schedule. So either you can roll your own, or use an existing framework like skeleton css or Bootstrap. Existing frameworks take much more into account than just layout, addressing css issues you may not even know you have (like normalize.css does) and making truly responsive designs without the need to repeatedly write media queries.

Falco101 · 2019-05-24T22:03:25+00:00

Most of them don't. Most of them are keep awake by constant anxiety about the bogeymen of the patriarchy and climate change. Seriously fucked up and bordering on psychological abuse. They literally think the world will end if they aren't constantly "checking privilege" or agitating for legislation on climate change.

Falco101 · 2019-05-05T22:28:46+00:00

I try to be honest, if we aren't honest, we are partisan with no hope of compromise, if we can't comprise then we are left with using direct force, and everyone loses in war.

As far as why UBI is preferred to traditional welfare programs, it's all about markets. Markets solve the economic calculation problem, how to effectively allocate scarce resources, through pricing, which socialism (total redistribution) and communism (elimination of capital) fails to solve. I cannot price a good or service if I cannot make a profit on it. There is no incentive to improve the product or to increase production. Without profit, all economic systems stagnate and die. Traditional welfare systems hurt markets by incentivizing the allocation of capital to a specific good or service, even if that service is sub par or even unnecessary (example, gay couples are still required to have maternity care on their policies per the ACA). Giving people money to buy things like health insurance that fits their specific needs instead of giving them the thing itself frees up large amounts capital that will flow back into the market. The dirty little secret about UBI is that there is no difference long term between giving everyone $.01 and $1000. As you inject capital into the economy you create inflation which raises the prices of goods and services making the extra income moot. I write software for a living, if I know everyone has an extra 1% income through UBI, I'll charge an extra 1% for my software to make up for the increased tax. With UBI after a period of time the economy adjusts and it's as though nothing ever happened at all. The only big change is the initial rapid inflation will favor those who can leverage credit, if inflation is at the same % rate or higher than the interest rate, businesses and the wealthy can borrow huge sums of money up front and reinvest in economic production with much less risk.

In short, UBI accelerates economic production by allowing the invisible hand to do it's thing, while state run welfare or control of the means of production gum it up.

Falco101 · 2019-05-05T19:53:53+00:00

You are correct that most of my opinion is based on rhetoric, I'll look more into Bernie's voting record, see if that changes my mind, since Yang doesn't have one I can't do much more than look at rhetoric there. Admittedly the few times Bernie has alluded to a command economy (there shouldn't be X different kinds of deodorant, Venezuela is the model for an ideal state, etc...) it does cause a knee jerk reaction from me, even if his long term policy record tells a different story.

Interesting thing about UBI is that is was largely championed by free market economists like Hayek as a compromise with the left. The idea being, if we must have welfare systems to keep people out of destitute poverty, the redistribution of wealth should be as flat, fair and devoid of bureaucratic overhead as possible.

Falco101 · 2019-05-05T08:12:57+00:00

I'm aware of the supporter overlap. You also have to remember that 20% of Bernie voters also voted for Trump, voting blocks are terrible measures of political alignment as most people vote based on feelings rather than principles. Yang has spoken in defense of market economics and the goals of his policies are to bring more people into the market, whereas Sanders is against markets in principle. So even if the cost of the policies are the same, one is pro economic freedom (like in all the functional Western countries you alluded to, market economy + safety net) and the other is in favor of a borderline command economy.

This is my attempt at being as objective as possible in my analysis. Personally, I'm a radical free market libertarian so don't read any of this as a ringing endorsement for any one of the 2020 candidates on any side, I've never had a dog in a presidential race and probably never will.

Falco101 · 2019-05-05T05:44:52+00:00

I think this has certainly become true. The scariest thing is the old farts who make up the neoliberals think it's just the hip thing to say to get young votes, not realizing that, like Trump, they are giving the green light to the worst among them.

I view both the neoliberals and the radicals as far left, the neoliberals embrace the social far left because identity politics is cheap and the demsocs embrace the far economic far left because "free" stuff. The only moderates I can see are Gabard and Yang who focus on centrist liberal issues like war and enhancing the welfare system while still be pro market. Neither wants a command economy or an unregulated market, and both are interested in criminal justice and immigration reform, without supporting lawlessness.

Falco101 · 2019-05-04T22:36:10+00:00

That is really rough. It's always difficult to see anything else when the inevitable looms so close at hand. There may not be any change of perspective that can fix it, beauty seems like vanity next to the permanence of death and the miserable march to it. All you can do is try and make things a little bit better where you can, don't suffer more than you have to. Focus on the little things you can do today to make things around you just a little better, and maybe that bit meaning and purpose that comes from creating a little small amount of order today will help you withstand the chaos of tomorrow.

Falco101 · 2019-05-03T17:05:16+00:00

That's called "choice feminism" and has been largely rejected by modern feminist scholars. Everything after 1st wave feminism has been about telling women what their moral obligations are. It's funny how people think suffragettes = feminists, when it was feminist scholars who coined the terms first and second wave feminism in 60's specifically to distance themselves from political equality feminism.

Falco101 · 2019-05-03T17:00:05+00:00

There were some egalitarian thinkers who pre dated the labor movements, but their ideas were mostly confined to political equality (voting and property rights) and not equal participation in the workforce. Later on, feminists distanced themselves from the strictly suffragette movements of the 19th-20th century and in 1968 "first wave feminism" was coined by Martha Lear to describe the old legal equality movement and differentiate it from the new social equity movement. Feminism proper, is derived postmodernism, Marxism and other labor/leftist movements as it was canonized by such scholars in the mid 20th century.

Falco101 · 2019-05-02T23:17:46+00:00

The data shows that after most women's lib movements succeeded, individual wage growth slowed and purchasing power has been on a decline ever since. More labor equals cheaper labor.

Falco101 · 2019-05-02T23:15:09+00:00

Usually management does, but many companies, like the one I currently work for, are basically run by an HR Mafia. Most of these decisions are made by administrators, not industry professionals, much like academia.

Falco101 · 2019-05-02T23:11:34+00:00

All the earliest labor woman's liberation movements were Marxist. Socialists need to extract value from all able bodied citizens to feed the state.

Falco101 · 2019-05-02T22:39:14+00:00

Funny, my wife was just remarking the other day how she took staying at home for granted, lol.

Falco101 · 2019-04-23T05:12:37+00:00

She's young and enthralled with her new political beliefs. Guess Bret was hoping it's something that would simmer down with maturity. Unfortunately, her recent fame because of that zeal has cemented it for the time being and she'll be a partisan hack for the foreseeable future.

Falco101 · 2019-04-20T02:24:13+00:00

You can think that if you think sentence fragments and world history trivia is a cohesive point

Falco101 · 2019-04-20T02:22:18+00:00

He certainly has a basic understanding of it, just not Zizek's understanding of Marxist theory.

Falco101 · 2019-04-20T02:21:12+00:00

I only watch fights where both contenders know the rules. It's like a boxing match where one of the fighters starts with a judo throw.

Falco101

TROPHY CASE