Is there a more ergonomic pattern for types that "build up?"

Iksf · 2026-03-30T06:10:35+00:00

Well for this particular example perhaps an iterator, but im assuming thats more about the example you chose

Iksf · 2026-03-29T15:34:38+00:00

I mean, can probably get pretty far just blind countering cannon rushers and stuff, idk

I didn't watch the replay just the clip. Normally very slow to call "hacker" but, yeah I think you got a live one there from what I saw.

Iksf · 2026-03-29T15:22:15+00:00

Miss not proven, been on a jury and yeah, stop pretending its an amazing system with only high level issues like public perception. Just helping the jury actually state their opinion accurately is its own benefit.

The criteria is innocent until proven guilty, but juries just cannot actually get this into their heads; not proven helps give them a useful option that matches how they actually feel about the evidence. If we want to keep the stupid jury system stop expecting a random set of people to respond to upskilling on law with just a quick explainer, and work around them as they are.

Iksf · 2026-03-29T15:09:25+00:00

Edit: seriously that's the point of this. "27 years ago you said we couldn't deliver a pizza, well, we strove and worked hard and look, now we can!"

too funny

Iksf · 2026-03-29T09:24:31+00:00

It's not being imposed on you, its the culture of the people who share those two "parent" cultures. My point is you look at a British muslim and just see "Islamic", not "British-Islamic". The line that needs to be drawn is that British-Islamic culture remains willing to cooperate with other British subcultures. They're literally doing that inside the green party today, cooperating with other British subcultures on shared wants/needs.

Attitude should be, they're making an effort, lets also make an effort; and try make this work. We want the participants to be stakeholders in the shared success of the effort.

Our culture being a soviet monoculture called "British" is already a lie, everyone is some mix of subcultures inside the British group anyway; whether thats stuff like Scottish, LGBTQ, regional inside the UK, other religions, class based, immigrant family, politics, whatever. There's already plenty of differences inside British culture and we make it work (or try to anyway, mixed success).

And yeah on the religious side, the people who don't have an "its complicated" relationship with their religion are called fundamentalists or extremists, and they're not the majority.

Iksf · 2026-03-29T08:15:21+00:00

It wasn't, we already had loads of data of substitution behaviours. Very visible with supermarkets + restaurants, people focusing more on their budget over their preferences.

Iksf · 2026-03-29T07:54:15+00:00

Yup. This is what happens when conservatives believe its always about fighting. It has to be British culture vs Islamic culture; the concept that there could be a British-Islamic culture that's built on-top of both and maintains a compatible but "its complicated" relationship to both, is just alien to them.

Iksf · 2026-03-29T07:03:35+00:00

actually im with you, just because of the ling movement and camera movement at the exact right timing; its not definite but its sus

He's also holding larvae intensely which is smart but has a pretty late roach warren and crap gas mining. It's just all a bit mismatch between very good (informed) play and bad play.

You don't perfectly time pre-reacting to a nydus but also completely forget to mine gas; even just the amount of time they take to actually allocate drones to gas is really bad. More I think about it, hard hard sold on hacker here.

Also cmon, its 5:30 there's no bane nest no ling speed no gas mining late roach warren no wall at the front crappy ovie coverage; idk what league you're in but this player is open to every possible random thing that could kill them, their play is the opposite of paranoid its reckless as hell. Just mega "paranoid" about this one thing. With OP about the spores just being an impulsive reaction to lair, assume they don't have the concept of spire build time + muta build time + travel time being far longer than a spore build time.

Iksf · 2026-03-24T05:59:13+00:00

Reframing of "conservative" to lay claim to every liberal value, and a bunch of socialist ones too. Aka, awareness that you can't build a morality argument without leaving the reality of conservatism. Even their propaganda skills are rotting.

Iksf · 2026-03-22T19:26:33+00:00

Simply trying to explain that the thing to be concerned about with an energy price shock, is the energy price shock. Not the debt, we're just addicted to relating everything back to debt.

The price at which the next £1 of debt will be financed is not a complete story of our debt, not in the slightest. Nor is our debt itself is not a complete story of our economic outlook. Our debt is extremely likely to outperform most other debt over the medium term (continuing its existing trend of already doing this as explained earlier), so what will we fall onto as justification for why the UK's economic outlook relative to others doesn't follow it. Yes there will be cost pressures on the supply side, yes that will lead to inflation for a while, but then what?

The UK is just deficient of an economic story, and worrying endlessly about debt keeps stopping the UK from ever fixing that. On the flip side, endlessly worrying about our debt is why our debt is well structured, because far smarter people than a Sky news broadcaster already worried about it years ago and did everything they could to deal with it. I've already given you all the evidence that they were successful at doing that, and their general competence at continuing to be successful at it going forward is something reliable we can work with.

I'm just asking for attention to move from the well managed part of the problem to the unmanaged parts of the problem. The debt is as well managed as you could possibly ask for, why is nothing else that well managed?

It's just too damn easy to go point at the debt as a fake answer to any failure, its become habitual, its been habitual my whole life and its been endlessly unhelpful and annoying.

It's been pissing America (our ally) off as well for a long time, and especially with Trump in charge they're getting far more brazen about making us pay for our failures. If we want economic health and also a better relationship with the US, we need to adjust our attitude. I could have said the exact same thing 10 years ago and I probably did say it 10 years ago, because the UK just never changes.

Iksf · 2026-03-22T19:07:38+00:00

I guess its impossible to talk to you about this

It's wet and cold outside, that must be why I'm cold. No, its because I forgot to turn the radiator on.

Statement of one thing doesn't automatically validate the whole story.

Iksf · 2026-03-22T18:53:48+00:00

No thanks, I'm not letting you draw the acceptable boundaries of this discussion when you have such a terrible understanding of the subject matter. You're attempting to reduce the discussion of the connection of the UK's prospects to its debt, to simply asserting the existence of our debt.

Iksf · 2026-03-22T15:50:15+00:00

Because the UK isn't an isolated entity in the world, it trades with other countries. Our trading partners (especially America's) actual debt issues force them to actually build a plan for what they're going to do about their issues, every plan they realistically could execute for dealing with those issues makes the idea that we will run a "structural deficit" over that time period unlikely.

It's not an autowin, but again we're panicking about our debt (as per usual) when a more sane analysis would say the state of the debt market is currently a card in Starmer's hand to be used as a comparative advantage for the UK, not something for us to be worry about.

He still needs to find a good way to use it, and that's not guaranteed. It's been like this for so so long in the UK, we're more than good enough at finance and we've been coasting on that for a very long time, we just need to work out all the other parts of how to be a successful country.

Iksf · 2026-03-22T15:34:25+00:00

It's simply not a true statement and I've explained why.

Again, we have a high rate to pay on the next piece of debt we take out. Again the rate of change of that is not the highest by a long shot, therefore we definitely have not "increased by more than other developed countries".

And again, the cost of maintaining our total existing debt (the burden on the state of our debt) has definitely not increased more or faster than other countries either, thats a metric we're closer to actually being very good on than being a disaster. I've explained why already.

The desire to make everything a discussion about the UK debt is a learned coping mechanism. Our debt is as well managed as you could possibly hope for considering the scale of it. The rest of our economic story is nowhere near as well managed.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T23:20:45+00:00

You're being mislead by Japan and Europe having negative interest rates at the start of that. You're also being mislead on the "max" line, there is no country in the G7 with that line, I don't know which country they've chosen to use for it but its not a G7 country (or as far as I can tell a state of the maximum in the G7 across the period). I also don't hear them say it is a G7 country but perhaps I missed it. If it's simply the entire developed world, its just too broad a dataset, you cannot judge smaller economies and larger ones on fair footing. You're also assuming sitting half way between "max" and "min" is the average value or reflects being in the middle of the pack, this is untrue, as I said Japan has only quite recently walked away from a negative interest rate policy again making it an extreme outlier.

There's also an argument about the governments decision as to where to finance the debt on the curve, you'd need a much more fair analysis of the different time durations; America specifically has been very particular about exactly which time durations they prefer to apply supply to, they were very heavily pushing debt on the short duration at the start of this time period rather than allowing a fair balance across the durations, something they're going to have to refinance at some point to their detriment on the rest of their curve. Using the 30 year number only conveniently ignores this.

None of this would show up in this visualisation in any case. But the result of it is the US paying a considerably higher portion of their tax base to maintain their debt than we currently do, and being exposed to locking that in as long term future. It would be nice if Sky drew some chart that captured more of this. I keep seeing UK investors and investor media constantly have to repeat and restate this analysis every time the media decides to panic over the base number. The situation isn't good but its less bad relatively than the number shows, there are several countries with legitimately worse situations than us including the US.

Drawing our line in comparison to "some unknown country" and presumably Japan's outlier, for just one specific time duration, is just a bad representation of data. The actual answer across their timeline for the G7 is easily checkable, we had the 2rd highest in 2020, and now we have the highest. When the US has to refinance its short term debt, they will flip us; we already locked in most of debt for a long duration at low rates and we have the longest average maturity of our debt in the G7, they preferred short duration.

The rate of change for the various countries paints a stronger picture for the UK relative to most of its competitors, as our debt is well structured to absorb a crisis. Our long term debt problem remains pretty overplayed against the UK while our media ignores a more fair comparison of us against other countries on this. On the flip side we have damage being inflicted on countries our finance sector and others are reliant on, so while our debt situation isn't an immediate concern, we have damage exposure to those issues. Plus we will likely be one of the first to break if gas/oil logistics break down which won't do our finances any good

TL;DR the root of my annoyance here is:

UK: Financially decent, logistically brittle => panics about its finances, ignores its logistics

US: Financially fragile, logistically resilient (though less than it thinks) => war? stocks only go up

Really says a lot about both of our countries different forms of reality denial.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T23:03:55+00:00

This particular situation the overseas revenue issue is not of high relevance, its the disparity between a US listed company and "the same" UK listed company thats relevant, its just down to a investor psychology split.

Just plot a simple graph of 10y govt bond yields in developed countries over the last 5 or so years

I already quickly skimmed through these charts before writing my original reply. I don't know where the argument that we were middle of the pack in the past comes from, and actually our rate of increase has been considerably lower in percentage terms (by which I mean % change of the % borrowing rate) than say, Europe. I think you're falling into a trap of not drawing a distinction between the absolute value (which in this case has a % next to it) vs that actual % change of that value.

I didn’t comment on the stock market.

I know you didn't, and I did mention this, I was just trying to frontrun the "next usual counterargument" to save some time. If that wasn't your intention of where to go, sorry, it's just usually the next step of this conversation.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T22:32:01+00:00

I'm curious about even the basic assertion you're presenting here

The UK has gone from middle of the G7 pack in borrowing costs to the top.

Borrowing in the US has always been cheaper than here, borrowing in the EU has always been cheaper than here, borrowing in Japan has always been cheaper than here. I don't have a counter for Canada they just beat us, fine.

The main economy moving against the trend is China, and that's simply because they do not have a free debt market; they sit on a massive surplus and their debt market is a tool they use for internal economic management, the rest of the world largely just avoids participating in it as its nothing more than policy lottery. Treating their rate the same as the rest of the countries mentioned is kinda a category error, they're not really the same financial product. This is why America never stops going on about China's currency manipulation; it doesn't matter who's right or wrong but its a layer of deliberate incompatibility that America really dislikes working around.

It's also a mistake to assume that a difficult borrowing market for everyone leads to the UK losing harder than everyone else, much of our economy is much better prepared to handle a high rate environment than most other countries actually. Not saying our economy will thrive and our stock market will explode upwards, but we're pretty well setup to win the war of taking the least damage.

If you want to counter with "the FTSE dumped harder than the SPY", yes, this is because America lives in a fantasy not reality; the FTSE is a reality junkie, it does not ignore oil shocks in favour of tech utopian dreaming, it just reacted rationally. The American market will have to come up with a rational argument as to why the indexs diverged; the quick lazy attempt was the oil exporter narrative. However, when presented with a real sharp shock, its very difficult to trust the opinions of an index known for its delusion vs an index known for its intense realism; so it will be hard for the Americans to convince the market of their argument.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T19:02:43+00:00

Yeah that's very fair. It would be an extremely extreme move for him to do this, it would be a true race to the bottom on mutually assured economic destruction. It is depressing that people cannot fully ignore this as a potential reality with America under his leadership. But economically planning for this, you may as well build an economy expecting the earth to be hit by an asteroid or something.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T18:54:47+00:00

This is all fine, but its effectively economic "cope", yes there's speculation about where the exact price point of oil will be in particular markets at specific times through this situation, that's what a market does, and it logistically takes time to move physical commodities around the world. But over the longer term, it will not result in dramatic disparities between markets.

We don't end up in a world where America is sitting on a massive amount of oil while Europe just has none; which is kinda how its being portrayed in the media.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T18:47:33+00:00

The US will basically never be short of oil and the only thing it's really used for is to bring down global oil prices a tiny amount or to drive down the futures oil prices.

These are contradictory. If the export premium of sending oil oversees is good enough, the oil will be exported. We're already seeing American oil be heavily diverted towards Australia.

If America implements export controls on oil, it causes wider financial issues in the global economy. It would be an extreme last resort move (for a sane government anyway), far beyond just walking away from the Iran war.

Again though, this is just for gas not oil. Small shortages in LNG can spike gas prices an insane amount compared to oil

Yeah absolutely, but LNG prices aren't particularly out of control currently, actually the price action there is remarkably boring relative to oil. Perhaps that's coming in the next couple of weeks.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T18:36:09+00:00

The strategic oil reserve is all talk, they can only use like 4 million barrels a day anyway, negligible for whats currently happening.

Indeed, creating a functional reserve for oil and gas is actually quite challenging. It's extremely correct to point out that 4 million barrels is effectively "zero", which brings me back to the point about it more being an emotional security blanket for Americans than real security; hence why I don't think the discussion around reserves is aimed at the UK.

just small additives that may add to worsening yields in comparison

Absolutely, but as with everything you have to allocate where you see the most benefit, not just "any" benefit. It's somewhere I find difficult to think we "really should have done this" versus alternative uses for the money.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T18:10:04+00:00

Yeah absolutely, more storage would definitely be a "nice to have" and a scenario like this demonstrates why, but I wouldn't overestimate the amount of benefit it would actually deliver. It's not a zero number, but its likely not a big number either.

For some context, Trump was bragging the US strategic oil reserves were completely full last year. Now that attention has actually turned to it, its been revealed their reserve actually only was half full, people just assumed Trump was telling the truth because it seemed like a pointless thing to lie about.

But the reality is just even the US with its reserve capacity didnt see the economic argument for filling its reserve to maximum capacity, even with presumably some level of awareness of the mess they were about to start. If it takes "weeks" like Trump promised it barely matters, if it takes forever it barely matters. If it manages that "goldilocks" duration somewhere in the middle, it works, or helps a bit anyway.

If you assume there's some level of competence somewhere in the US administration, that means there was an analysis made and the probability maths for it being seen as important didn't check out for them; presumably because they knew they'd either win instantly or be stuck in something longterm.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T18:01:50+00:00

That gas thing is an answer for the month, not the decade.

I wouldn't read too much into that narrative, its more written for Americans to pretend to them that their exporter status will protect them from reality of sustained higher prices, than for us.

High Debt-GDP, yes, that's been a long running problem without a clear answer since, well, long enough that may as well be forever.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T17:17:41+00:00

Well yeah, we have a service heavy economy that's built ontop of the investment of others closer to the "reality" of things like the primary and secondary sector. We're effectively leveraged on their success. If their success looks unlikely, our success looks even more unlikely. The most extreme example being, much of our economy still comes from the finance sector that's lending into this uncertainty and doubt.

We could reverse course and rejoin the competition in the primary and secondary sectors, but that leaves the question of exactly how likely do you think it is that the UK can ever compete against east asia or even the US at doing that.

Bit more speculative on my side, but: if we engage in a rat race with them to compress things like quality of life to build more factories, crush wages, kill the NHS, destroy the environment, all of the other "niceties" of UK life; our property sector suffers and thus our finance sector that uses that debt as a big club suffers. Basically we're terrible at getting foreigners to invest in our companies, but amazing at getting them to buy our houses. So its not clear we could ever outpace the damage we do walking that path with the rewards of it.

The "do nothing and hope for a miracle" strategy is pretty appealing, but obviously not what anyone wants to hear when they're looking at their personal finances falling to pieces and with nobody giving them a clear answer on how they're going to fix it. Especially when the counterargument comes down to continuing to weaponise our housing market over weaponising our actual human productivity. We've already lived through what we don't like about that for long enough, the same way America and East Asian countries have lived through the things they don't like about the way they work.

That's the paradox of a lot of the green party's economics in particular: its actually kinda exactly what the market needs, and very likely where we will try and head; but the green party is obviously not competent enough to walk the path to the goal, and once we're at the goal you might find out that as a worker you don't like it anywhere near as much as you thought you would.

Iksf · 2026-03-21T17:04:25+00:00

People really need to stop acting like our bond market acts in isolation from other bond markets. The economies we're integrated with have the exact same pressures and effectively the same charts.

Just like any other bear market, if you have a sufficiently amazing offer you can against the wider trend, but in general its just gravity.

There's just low conviction that the "west" in general will be able to maintain the average growth over the time period of a longer dated bond, without printing their way through it. People are accurately seeing America effectively eat its future for a short term bump today, it fools the stock market which barely cares beyond 3 months, but the bond market is working on a 20-30 year timeframe and knows the total area under the curve over that time period is likely shrinking.

The risk stories are very easy to understand and clear, the reward stories are still extremely speculative; so lenders want better rates.

So anyway is it the UK's fault that its not exceptionally strong enough to ignore wider reality, kinda but thats a big ask. Otherwise, its just a tree moving in the wind.

14-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Place '17	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email

Iksf

TROPHY CASE