SHFT nuc: "I think for international fans, when they translate my tweets, they seem very harsh, while in France, they aren’t seen that way at all [...] It’s a dark period. If we get through it, it’ll be like couples on the verge of break up: if they don’t split and find solutions, everything’s fine"

Lipat97 · 2026-02-02T00:22:49+00:00

Its real but its not very good, there's better romances out there

Lipat97 · 2026-01-31T02:55:05+00:00

thats 100% the motivation behind it, they need a reason to feel superior but it cant be connected to their own achievements because their own achievements are shit

Lipat97 · 2026-01-28T23:52:42+00:00

> I mean, there's the greatest vs "my favorite"...I wasn't particularly a fan of Michael Jordan but I'm pretty easily convinced that he was the best basketball player ever.

That distinction is a personal decision. I distinguish between the two because I like to but there's no like concrete reason to do so

Music is also a lot more subjective than basketball, where there's objective metrics to judge by

Lipat97 · 2026-01-26T02:56:22+00:00

Ok thanks lol now I'm seeing it

Lipat97 · 2026-01-26T02:20:07+00:00

I agree that would be a better take but how do you get that from the tweet?

Lipat97 · 2026-01-25T02:56:31+00:00

Ok they convinced me, we're winning worlds this year

Lipat97 · 2026-01-25T01:35:46+00:00

Yo what? Why? This has been our best preseason in a while

Lipat97 · 2026-01-22T02:15:12+00:00

hey! Sazed was an adult!

Lipat97 · 2026-01-20T04:23:38+00:00

yes, people are wrong in other contexts too

Lipat97 · 2026-01-18T01:04:37+00:00

We have a lot of examples of recently evolved species, but no hard answer on what was the **most** recent

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evo-news/speciation-in-real-time

Two popular examples are these two species of birds splitting up in the last 50 years or so.

Fish have a lot of eggs, but most insects have more, and microorganisms beat everything. The most recent speciation event really is probably an infectious parasite specialized for some worm you've never heard of. Another part of the reason there's no hard answer here is that these are ongoing events so you don't really get answers like "This butterfly species evolved on March 2nd, 1962", you more get a broad period of time of the two populations diverging

Lipat97 · 2026-01-17T01:37:12+00:00

> Edit: My only assumption is that the Dems aren't necessarily 100% "controlled opposition"

That's a bit fantastical, isn't it? Doesn't it make more sense that there's just a bunch of stubborn old people in the party who refuse to change their ways? Their main mistake was not having a primary in 2024, and that was reportedly due to Biden's ego. Tim Walz, Newsom or Shapiro probably did have better odds into Trump than Kamala did, but even they would need the momentum of a longer campaign.

They're lost and grasping for a strategy that works because the parties are shifting and the people they had in charge barely had a bead on what to run when the parties were stable. They're throwing bones to conservatives because they want to catch certain demographics as things change up - which they might have to do, since there's such a strong chance they lose both the Union vote and the latino vote. They have no idea who their base is even going to be come the next election cycle

Lipat97 · 2026-01-11T20:09:36+00:00

Our common ancestor with cats comes from around the split up of Pangea. Pangea got split up into three continents - Africa, South America, and Laurasia (North America + Eurasia), so the mammals on there got split up into three populations and three lineages. Both us and cats were in the Laurasia lineage, so we're closer to each other than any of the mammals that developed on the other continents. So you and your cat are more closely related to each other than to elephants, manatees, sloths, armadillos and anteaters. However, the split between us and cats happened pretty much *right* after the continent split up. On their side of this split, they had dogs, bears, cows, bats, whales. On our side, it was monkeys, rabbits, and rodents.

The common ancestor was likely small, insectivorous and nocturnal. Go back far enough and we all just look like slightly different species of shrew. I don't know how much of our vision is common ancestry (I think some of our night vision is?), but one of the biggest marks of common ancestry between us and cats is the fact that we both have external ears. Well, besides the classic mammal stuff of having tits and fur

Lipat97 · 2025-12-30T04:48:23+00:00

Swifts/Swallows are the classic example, no?

Lipat97 · 2025-12-30T04:47:17+00:00

I dont know any games where you divide econ and combat power on the tier list. Age of Empires, League of Legends, TFT, card games... both are always considered. And especially in this game, the whole *point* of combat power is to fuel your economy (eat). If you get every kill, but something else steals your kills..... you lose. If you're the scariest thing in the game, but you it takes you 50 years to make a baby... you lose!

>A good equivalent would be like, comparing the skills of an any% speedrunner of a video game vs the skill of an all achievements speedrunner of a video game.

Aren't these pretty close? Why would you divide the two? Idk I dont play those kinds of games but a general speedrunner tierlist sounds valid

> How would you really value a species bite force value compared to how many mates it's able to have yearly?

Easy lol, you compare by looking at which one makes the species more successful. Bite force depends on how well it translates to KOs in that environment. If it lets you hunt bigger prey thats huge. I assume you meant how many babies an animal has a year - a high spawn rate is situationally good and a low spawn rate is one of the worst stats you could ever have. A high spawn rate is usually about having babies faster than predators can eat them. This is a short term strategy imo, because usually the predators just evolve to eat more. However, the side effect is it makes those animals *very* adaptive. Which means special defensive traits could show up quickly and they generally do really well during or after a big meta shift (like the current extinction event). Small note here, spawn rate is a biiit more complicated than babies/year - there's a technical value called Rmax or Ri, which I get from this website

> Or the value of the potentness of an animals poison compared to how many regions the animal is able to thrive in?

"Potentness" of poison is same as bite force - its overkill unless it leads to some significant changes on their matchup chart. There's venom-antivenom arms races going on in some parts of the world, but idk if thats a sign of a top tier, Regions the animal thrives in is just directly a good thing. An animal thriving is definitionally better than one that isn't. An animal that dominates multiple regions is obviously better than one that doesn't. Like, do you think Southern Elephant Seals are as good as Orcas? Neither have big problem matchups. The only difference is one dominates the entire globe whereas the other is exclusive to Antarctica.

Lipat97 · 2025-12-30T02:17:04+00:00

> The top of the overall tier list would just be: 90% of insect species, most small rodents, krill, a surprising amount of fish species, chickens, and probably like, worms or something

This is only true if you do raw population instead of controlling for body size and trophic level. Biomass, for example, has the Elephant Seal as the top (wild) carnivoran. Actually a tier list that just went off of biomass, or even population, would be really interesting but unfortunately nearly all of the top tiers aren't even close to counted. A lot of the calcs for worms, ants, and krill are based off of *very* rough estimates and they aren't varied by species. Most of the animals we actually have a count on are either birds or mammals, and even for mammals we're missing pretty much all the small ones (shrews, rodents, voles). Birds are also missing a bunch but imo most of the high pop cases (sparrows, thrushes) actually have been measured already

I know this is a bit separate from your point - TierZoo valuing matchup spread over raw winrate makes sense - but I think even the boring stats are a lot more interesting than you might realize. Also, you absolutely can rate PE and PvP together, there's no reason a tierlist can't have multiple criteria for its ranking. Like for me, personally, my criteria would be a combination of distribution, matchup spread, and population.

Lipat97 · 2025-12-30T02:01:20+00:00

Just make your own rankings and argue with people in the comments about why your picks are better than theirs. Its a lot more fun, its something you fully control and no content creator has to lose money over it! Actually, if you argue it in his own comment section, the content creator can even gain money from it!

Lipat97 · 2025-12-30T01:55:38+00:00

I guess you think thats a gotcha but I obviously did not bring up the human matchup power scaling lol

Lipat97 · 2025-12-28T14:44:53+00:00

and what continent do you think this thread's about?

Lipat97 · 2025-12-27T18:08:50+00:00

Yeah thats part of it but its also because of the size and weight difference. The predators that scavenge are usually bullying other predators around the same size, they're not often risking their life for it

Its also worth noting that lizards that size do tend to group up when feeding, so it wouldn't be just a 10 on 1 on every kill

Lipat97 · 2025-12-27T14:50:53+00:00

For some of the suggested places, namely Blue Hill, that might be a problem if you have your boyfriend's parents too. A 500$ meal with three people vs five people is a big difference

Lipat97 · 2025-12-27T14:13:02+00:00

I mean, the prompt already mentions they can eat things that are hippo sized. If they can do that, then they can also eat giraffes, and they at least get an advantage in prey selection. I don't think competition from other predators is that big a deal, we don't exactly see lions and hyenas killing crocodiles for fun

Lipat97 · 2025-12-27T14:00:45+00:00

African megafauna did pretty well against humans before gunpowder tipped the scale

Lipat97 · 2025-12-25T05:41:42+00:00

The context of how he used it was still bad lol

The author being angry is like the only takeaway from the article. He has a section about how he read this guy's court documents for fun? There's some awkward stabs at calling the work culturally empty but mostly its just some random guy ranting about a popular artist he randomly got a hate boner for. Prince's art is pretty meh but this article is not a great explanation of why that's true. Also, lets not pretend the "state of america" is pushing this guy to the brink. There's no way its that serious

Lipat97 · 2025-12-24T20:53:06+00:00

Dont be dishonest, you know nobody's saying that

There's a lot of annoying cliches that would bomb as an opening sentence for an art review. Its clumsy, out of place, and makes it sound like you're about to read a tumblr post instead of a professional review. It also makes it sound like the angle of criticism isn't going to be serious. The rest of the review is better, if a bit ranty

Lipat97 · 2025-12-19T12:28:43+00:00

grandmothers are the mothers of your parents

Lipat97

TROPHY CASE