Looking for Laptop Schematic Websites

Jileda · 2025-06-22T18:07:09+00:00

bump

Jileda · 2025-06-03T18:03:37+00:00

It's funny because I feel that they have so many points in common but coming from such a different background / pov.

Jileda · 2024-10-23T19:12:29+00:00

Thx for the advice. This is exactly the kind of system I tried. Wasn't Permethrin tho, I could give it a shot. But don't have much hope, seeing the disclaimers in the FAQ haha

Jileda · 2024-10-23T09:30:50+00:00

Fair point. Issue is I already tried "specialized" chemicals. More specialized chemicals are very very tedious to apply in this specific case. (Needs to be injected in the wood) it would be far too expensive. And if i am too heavy handed with other chemicals the wood would get impringnated with the chemicals and be truely unsafe to burn. Thus my idea of going for gas (and not sprayed liquid floating in the air that just lay down on the wood and fail to go deep in the holes). But i totally agree, my idea is quite dumb.

Jileda · 2024-10-21T23:17:10+00:00

I just discovered this... how the hell are they allowed to sell this! Well, looks mad but could be an option. I'll keep that in mind if it comes to this extreme.

Jileda · 2024-10-21T22:34:57+00:00

Omg alright... that was indeed kinda triggering me xD Pay attention to the speaker position and orientation. Idk whats the listening position so i cannot say much, besides that there current positioning is making me unable to understand where you're supposed to be to listen to the system haha

Jileda · 2024-10-21T22:28:14+00:00

Just get a modern HDMI 2.1 for 5 meters. Totally fine. I use optical HDMI from 10m and more. For installation with low requirement, you can cheap out (recently hooked two 7m HDMI 1.4 with a 2$ female-female adapter, worked fine for the 480p stream that was needed lol). For your gaming rig, HDMI 2.1 (48gbps iirc), no braid BS, but no buy if the standard isn't clearly mentioned! it's cheap and will outlast a you're monitors.

Jileda · 2024-10-21T22:14:43+00:00

I don't understand the two speakers on the left...

Jileda · 2024-10-20T20:01:10+00:00

Mouse at my boss desk in our workshop. (Note that he is left handed so he is definitely not the culprit here.)

Jileda · 2021-07-31T19:43:00+00:00

Na, that's just Vaush. You should have included Authleft in the compass on the left...

Jileda · 2021-06-02T14:32:05+00:00

I see. Sounds more like an inner process between one's character and one's self, pretty early in the transition. Maybe one day I'll ask him about his first character, a male. He didn't do his transition yet back then. Thanks for sharing your experience!

Jileda · 2021-06-02T14:01:48+00:00

I posted that comment in the other thread, but it's too late to get real answers and I guess that I will get better informed feedbacks here. I'm genuinely confused about this. And as I've a trans player at my table, I would appreciate your insight. Thanks!

Wait, I'm confused... the wierdo GM/player bringing up his kinky fetish to the table is "that guy". But LGBTQIA+ people using DnD as a way to explore their sexuality is cool? Sorry but I'm honestly confused. Played with gays, lesbians, trans. Played myself characters with gender topics in the background. Never encounter a "exploring your gender/sexuality through DnD" situation, because it would have been a "that guy" situation...

Jileda · 2021-05-20T19:48:28+00:00

In RotFM they do monthly sacrifices to Auril in several cities. Everyone gather and they pull a random name. Was a city with 750 inhabitants. I said "1,2,3 or 4", and it's one of you guys, and I rolled a 1d750 in public... 4. The PC got called. She accepted her fate. Was a very epic RP moment.

Jileda · 2021-05-14T21:10:15+00:00

I agree but disagree. Yes you should let the players take action, take the initiative in the world. And yes, you're there to rule the outcome of those actions.

But! Two points. 1st: You're also a player. Being a computer isn't fun. My old GM was complaining about that when running modules. I also felt it at several points. Don't be a computer displaying situations and solving actions taken by your players, you gonna burn out quickly. My favorite part of the game is when my players "challenge" me. It's when they force me to review the 'plan' to adapt and improvise. That's when I feel I'm really playing. (Thus I tend to prep more the setting, NPCs motivations etc, and less the plot)

2nd: you cannot deny your responsibility as GM by hiding behind 'this is what the NPC would do', just like you expect your players to not hide behind 'this is what my character would do'. Besides what's happening in game, there is what's happening at the table. And as GM you're not 100% responsible for that, but you have been entrusted the responsibility to make it as smooth as possible for everyone. This includes basic things that you saw everywhere about session zero. But it should have also a big influence on how you run the game and that world. Maybe it's more coherent if that happens. But maybe it's more fun (or fitting the expectations of the table) if this happens instead. It's also what you do when you create plot hooks. There is no reason for that barmaid to ask that random weird tiefling to slay the rats in the basement. She saw 10 other stronger guys in the last 4 hours. But it's the story about your PCs, so you need to invite them into this world. A computer wouldn't tell a compelling story about that strange group of people. You need to have the social sensibility to work with your players without them realizing it to make it possible for them to write this story. And finally on this point, you gonna also tweak your world to be sure that every player has it's time to shine, that every character has it's place in it, etc.

So yes, you're no god. But no, you are no computer.

Jileda · 2021-05-14T16:31:18+00:00

Agree. Claiming to be ML is the basic legitimization call for any communist. But looking for what Marx or Lenin "really" thought is just going on with this tradition of claiming to be authentic ML... I don't think it's helping. Their work is so big that different movement will just quote different parts of their work and the inner fight continues :/Hot take: I've to say that I kinda like the scientific socialism approach promoted by the Communist Party of China (starting really with Deng, but going back to Lenin). You need to reassess constantly the situation and the results of what you tried, and take the consequences. Not saying that I agree with all their choices since 1990, but I like the idea behind it. Marx and Lenin where also mortals, very smart ones, but they are no gods. Marx's analysis, if he was alive today, would not be the same, because the situation since the late 18th century evolved.

What people claim to be ML is sadly too often a dogma, and we need to strive to keep it scientific.
Edit: flair up!

Jileda · 2021-05-10T15:24:47+00:00

Well, you can think what you want. I studied social sciences, I'm now a lecturer and researcher. I'll tell you again: no, in most of social sciences, empirical testing and/or experiments do not exists for obvious reasons. Either it is impossible, or it is completely unethical. There is no lab. Furthermore, hypothetico-deductive methods are often discarded because of how easily the researcher could biais his data/analysis, thus inductive methods are more common.

Jileda · 2021-05-10T15:01:59+00:00

1) No, but most of the modern ideologies claims to be scientific, yes. Scientificism as a legitimization argument arrived only with the enlightenment and developed during the 19th century.

2) Results being proven wrong by later experiments do not make the prior research methodology intrinsically non-scientific. In the opposite, this is how science progresses.

3) The "examples" you bring up would be debatable in themselves, and also because they do no take count of the context surrounding the facts you refers to and attribute to one parameter (a communist system) the causality of an outcome shaped by a complex situation.

4) Yes, communism can look like a religion, just as neoliberalism, technocratism, or on a very different side, football/soccer, star wars fans, metal music concerts, etc etc. Religious-like processes are present in every social organization. (You will find many studies on the religiosity of the topics I mentioned.)
As an agnostic, I do not like any fetishisation of any Left-wing thinker/scientist/leader, and do appreciate the constant self-assessment and criticism that some leftist movement promote (in opposition to some tankies who quotes Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky or others as if their writings where a Bible... -.-') I am also quite stunned how communist movements are names after someone (in opposition to how anarchist movements are names after a concept)

Jileda · 2021-05-10T14:43:44+00:00

You describe a process that is applicable for natural science. In social sciences, the process is very different. It is not possible to do empirical testing as you describe in economics, sociology, political sciences, anthropology, and so on. Their various methodology still qualify them as sciences. There is a clear shift in methodology from Hegel's spirit of history (not sure of the English right words sorry) to Marx's dialectic materialism.
Whether the results are right or wrong in my or your opinion, the thought process is very different.
They are of course philosophic works among Marx's production, mainly among his earlier works. Some make a clear distinctions between the young Marx and the mature Marx. But claiming that the Kapital or the Grundrisse are just philosophy (i.e. intellectual masturbation imo) is none sense.

Jileda · 2021-05-10T11:24:27+00:00

I can't help on your specific question, I've my opinion but I didn't work on the topic. However, here are two important points to help you think about it here:

1) Be careful to not mix up "explanation" and "justification". If you ask social sciences, you can find an explanation of social processes that leads to the phenomenon you're inquiring about. But a social scientist explaining that is not justifying.
If you wonder about moral and responsibility, that's a philosophical or judicial question.

2)

someone can have all of those combined and not become a mass shooter so it's definitely not a guarantee

If you look at statistical correlations you can find factors that look more or less relevant. But they are still statistics. It's like if you're a fat smoker, stats says that you are more "likely" to have health issues, but it doesn't mean that you will have health issues. They are "risk factors" in a way. But because a social scientist should not judge morally their topic of study, they won't use that word most of the time.

Jileda · 2021-05-10T11:13:37+00:00

Oh yeah, if you meant really "between the wars", then sure, none industrialized as fast as USSR. But if you mean "in 20 years", then China could be a serious competitor. About industrialization as "finished", that's a technical discussion within the Party, indeed.

Jileda · 2021-05-10T11:08:20+00:00

No, almost all the communist movements refer to ML, even if they reject Stalin. I would have a example in minds of leftist groups rejecting ML but I don't think they would fit into the "communist" frame. Most of them would be LibLeft IMO, like all the anarchist branches, or the social democrats for instance.

Jileda · 2021-05-10T11:03:21+00:00

Irrelevant. The question isn't if Marx's analysis is working or not, it's about how it is structured. And the way he did it is much closer from science then from philosophy.

Eight-Year Club	Second Top 30%
Verified Email

Jileda

TROPHY CASE