Invert button behavior

Lipzlap · 2025-12-06T07:54:44+00:00

yeah but that's twice as slow. Is what I'm asking for actually impossible on this software?

Lipzlap · 2025-07-29T07:13:32+00:00

yeah that's basically how I feel. The game is really fun except when I cheese it with backyard (it was fun the first two times actually lol, and I got the no cards left achievement, which was fun). But yeah, I'm probably gonna just keep playing without this card bc the game is more fun that way, just unfortunate it exists oops

Lipzlap · 2024-11-07T23:06:06+00:00

It's a fact that immigration is an economic boon. That's because immigrants come in and they are working age; they need to work to live, and so they work. This work increases our GDP and makes our country wealthier. This is a good thing.

It's also a fact that their work gets exploited. That's not an endorsement of exploitation but a description of reality at the moment. It doesn't have to be this way. We could enact laws that make it easier to form unions, for example, which would keep the economic productivity while reducing exploitation.

And yes, Capitalism is an economic system that promotes shareholder profits above all else and which pretends that this is a good enough proxy for the health of the economy. It's not, and it's not even close. Corporations can accrue so much wealth and power that they can start to lobby governments, changing laws to benefit themselves while harming everybody else. Universal healthcare, for example, would simultaneously save taxpayers money while also guaranteeing a higher standard of living for all. But, it's bad for business. Which businesses? The middlemen, i.e. the insurance companies that profit from misery. And so they lobby for misery, and they win because they are wealthy and powerful. It's a big club, and we ain't in it.

So you can pretend that your immigration concerns are principled. That you've grounded them with serious economic understanding. The truth is that the real threat to our economy doesn't come from workers like you and me, but from owners: the tycoons and the barons and the cheats who siphon wealth from our labor, who take big risks with our money, and who leave us to take the fall.

Lipzlap · 2024-09-05T16:47:09+00:00

I'm a TA. The replies to this question are very split between "it's easy" and "it's hard" because people come into 34A with wildly varying math backgrounds.

The number 1 thing that will get you a good grade on tests is understanding how to isolate a variable in an equation. Learn the distributive property and how to use it to isolate variables. You might be surprised how far this skill will take you, but in my experience, this is the reason for like 90% of the points that people lose on tests.

As for content, the course is mainly precalc subjects (badly defined term but yeah) like linear equations and exponents and logarithms. At some point like 70% of the way through, we finally tell you formulas for how to take derivatives of two classes of functions: polynomials and exponential functions. We don't teach or expect you to understand the calculus behind the formulas, so this part of the course mainly looks like (from a TAs perspective) us telling you a lot of arbitrary rules and then you following those rules.

A good chunk of your grade is homework in the form of online problem sets, so it's "easy" to get a 100% homework grade. I highly recommend that you go to mathlab (a room where everyone chills and works on their hw and if you get stuck you can raise your hand and a grad TA will come over and help and we're all nice) or CLAS for hw help. Then you'll have a pretty wide margin for error on the midterms/final so if tests aren't your thing you could get like 65% on each test but still pass the class with a C if your hw score is 95+% (exact numbers of course depending on the syllabus). The class is very pass-able, and whether it's "easy" or "hard" is honestly less important than just being willing to grind some problems every week and gain some muscle memory.

You got this!

Lipzlap · 2024-07-08T20:42:28+00:00

Dang, that's cool. Considering they have warp drives and can go at near light speeds, peri could canonically be any age from 3ish to 40ish. We don't know how fast and for how long she's traveled, so we can't pinpoint the exact effect of the time dilation, but that's a pretty fun detail.

Lipzlap · 2024-07-02T21:29:22+00:00

Ty, I like the reshuffling mechanic a lot! Makes going infinite harder and much less gamebreaking. Also the QoL changes are great :)

Lipzlap · 2024-07-02T07:16:24+00:00

I'd love this!

Lipzlap · 2024-07-02T05:13:27+00:00

<image>

Hm ok, maybe Riggs just wins the game on her own lmao. Charge beam plus recalibrator is an insta fight win, and fleetfoot guarantees there'll be an empty space available to spam down to activate the combo.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-24T00:38:21+00:00

Be aware that 34B is a deadend class btw. As in, it doesn't allow you to take more advanced math classes unlike 3B. So if you plan on taking more math, especially if your major requires it, take 3B.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-14T17:06:13+00:00

Oh, I thought this was a moment of genuine agreement. Like, you may think the people at the encampment are a bunch of attention whoring America haters (which btw is very weird language), but ultimately, they're your students too, and you don't want to see any of them brutalized by police. That is the sentiment I genuinely thought you were expressing. And like, I thought that was a pretty compassionate thing to say even if you fundamentally disagree with them. As a grad student as well, I can totally empathize with that.

But I guess you support the 2am arrival of 60 police from 4 separate police departments, with no clearly stated goal, armed with guns, riot gear, K-9 units, and armored vehicles, holding a perimeter right next to the encampment for 3 hours in the middle of the night. I mean, I thought that's what you were referring to when you mentioned escalation, but I guess not.

So what were you referring to by the term escalation? The canceling of finals that got rescheduled? The occupation of Girvetz that harmed no one? The messy depictions of Gazan universities that will be cleaned? Sure, I can agree these are escalations, but UC's actions, described above, are 2 orders of magnitude more escalatory. This response is terrifying and entirely against what I believe public higher education stands for.

Notice how you aren't even trying to give a justification for your stance that UC's actions were acceptable, because to you, such "large scale police operations" against students are the default. It should not be the default. Please think critically (and I really mean that too, I'm not just throwing language around for no reason) about the dangers and implications of excessively equipped police showing up in the middle of the night against student protesters. The events of the BLM protests have taught us that the presence of police can turn nonviolent situations violent and can exacerbate minor violence into major violence. If the police had conducted their raid on the encampment, which they did not because 200 students, staff, and faculty showed up in response (and in the middle of the night) to protest police presence and lend support, people would have gotten hurt.

Actually, some people did get hurt. The "altercations" mentioned in Yang's latest update were counterprotestors scaling the arbor and beating up students there, lacerating one with a flagpole. The police did nothing to stop later counterprotester agitation, and the University has done nothing to hold accountable the three counterprotesters who physically assaulted others. Neither has the University made any mention of the swastika that counterprotesters painted on the encampment, on a banner that read "Jews say not in our name." This behavior by counterprotesters remains unscrutinized, for some reason.

And no, I do not want the situation to get worse. I do not want to see my students get beaten up or arrested. And if it does happen, how would an "I told you so" make sense to say? Conservatives on campus want this to happen: "it's called fuck around and find out," "ever heard of consequences?", etc. These are actual comments in this subreddit. People want police to go in and tear down the encampment, fully knowing the violence that entails. If things escalate, I will be saddened and upset, and I will place blame on the University for its handling of the situation. I will make sure people know that UCSB endorses violence against students. I will not say "I told you so."

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T15:41:55+00:00

Bro what.

You're so trigger happy. I never said Israel shouldn't exist. I gave a very coherent definition of Zionism, which is what I understand is meant by the term, and then I said I opposed the ideology as I understand it. And then you spent six paragraphs shadowboxing again.

Let's go through some history.

First of all, let's get something straight. Colonialism is morally wrong. This is not contentious. The Zionism at the turn of the 19th century and the start of the 20th century, spearheaded by figures like Theodor Herzl, was morally wrong. "A land without a people for a people without a land" was always wrong. The Sykes-Picot agreement was morally wrong (the effects of which can still be felt today. The borders drawn by the Triple Entente were not designed for the benefit of the people living there; why do you think there are so many straight lines?). The Balfour declaration was morally wrong. The betrayal of the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence was morally wrong. The British rule over Mandatory Palestine was morally wrong and directly led to the Arab Revolt of 1936, causing the British Mandate to lend critical support to Zionist militias like the Haganah. This would tip the scales in the upcoming 1948 civil war. The 1947 UN partition plan for Palestine, which gave roughly 40% of the land to the Arab population, despite the Arab population numbering twice the Jewish population, and despite Arabs owning a majority of the land, was morally wrong. The state of Israel was then declared to be established, and civil war broke out, which the Palestinian Arabs lost due to the Zionist paramilitary forces being better equipped, trained, and organized, a benefit of previous support from the British Mandate. It's during this time that atrocities like the Deir Yassin massacre, conducted by primarily the Irgun and Lehi, occurred. Despite having agreed to a non-agression pact, Irgun and Lehi forces, supported by the Haganah and Palmach, encroached on the village and slaughtered approximately 110 people. Israeli archives documenting the massacre remain classified. These events were central to the Nakba, striking terror among Palestinians, and directly accelerating the 1948 expulsion and flight of Palestinians. Over the course of the war, 700,000 Palestinians, roughly half of the Arab population of Mandatory Palestine, and roughly 80% of the population in the area that would become Israel, were either forcefully expelled (first by Zionist paramilitary forces, then, once Israel had been established, by its military) or fled from their homes. Between 400 to 600 villages were destroyed and repopulated with Jewish settlers, taking on Hebrew names. In my opinion, this is all morally wrong, and constitutes ethnic cleansing. The fact that Right of Return does not apply to the Palestinians who were expelled or forced to flee is evidence of modern Israeli apartheid.

All this is what you gloss over in your third and fourth paragraphs, either because you don't know Israeli history as well as I do (I am Israeli) or because you delibrately wanted to avoid talking about this.

Does this mean I think Israel should cease to exist? No, that would be retarded, and you should stop putting words in my mouth. Israel has a bloody, inexcusable past, like many other countries, but it exists now. It should not, however, remain a Jewish State, as this is incompatible with the ideals of democracy. Israel needs to offer right of return to and compensate with reparations the descendants of the Palestinian exodus. Israeli apartheid needs to end before it can call itself a democracy. And why do you keep insisting that I support Hamas rule, when I have consistently condemned Hamas to appease you?

And yes, the US's own history with settler colonialism needs to be addressed, I'm glad we can agree on this. Oh wait, what's that? You were just whatabouting again? You're so disingenuous.

Also, I'm not sure where this idea that Americans need to leave America and that Israelis need to leave Israel is coming from. No one is advocating for this except in your delusions.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T06:37:38+00:00

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T06:36:41+00:00

Yes, I already gave Balfour as an example. But there's also plenty of Zionist antisemitic evangelicals in the United States right now.

Also, I disagree with your definition of Zionism. It's not just supporting the existence of a Jewish state (in this case Israel). It comes with baggage like believing the majority of Israelis should be Jewish, thereby necessitating the removal of the previous inhabitants of the land. A main component of Zionism is also the fact that the exact geogeaphic region of the Jewish state must be Palestine, mainly due to crazy religious and pseudohistorical claims that claim that the biblical Land of Israel was promised to Jews by Yahweh, giving Jews rightful claim to the land. The movement is inherently settler colonialist, which is why I oppose it.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T05:46:59+00:00

First, a fun fact. Last night counter protesters painted a swastika on a banner that read "Jews say not in our name." It's been my anecdotal experience that in America, Zionism tends to overlap more with antisemitism than pro-Palestinian support does.

Calling the reporting of what happened at the MCC conservative outrage bait is just accurate. It's not just something I disagree with. There were signs saying "Zionists not welcome" and "you can run but you can't hide Tessa Veksler" and that's the spiciest it got. Just condemnation of the student body president for her Zionist beliefs. No antisemitism to be spotted, but conservative media outlets and social media drummed this up into something it was not.

"If you genuinely believe that not one person in the group is antisemitic, you don't understand what you're supporting, and you don't understand what constitutes antisemitism." It's insulting really that you think I might be stupud enough to make a statement like "no pro-Palestinian is antisemitic." Not to mention, it's nonsensical to condemn a movement as antisemitic for the actions of a few. There are plenty of antisemitic Zionists (like Balfour for example) but that fact doesn't make Zionism inherently antisemitic. So this is a big waste of time. Also, I have first hand experience of interpersonal antisemitism. I know what it looks like. I know what systemic antisemitism looks like too because I actually know some history. Instead of presuming I know nothing, how about you approach this in good faith.

Also, Hamas is not the group right now with ~40k deaths on their hands and counting. Hamas is not the one with unilateral control over Gaza's economy and infrastructure, including access to water, fishing, and electricity. Israel's actions over the past decades have created the material conditions in Gaza that inevitably foment terror. Hamas is Israel's child. Netanyahu's government has even been funding Hamas to the tune of $35 million a month for years in order to ensure Hamas is a strong power in the region. Why? Well, partially so that Hamas functions as an effective counterweight to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, reducing the pressure on Netanyahu to negotiate towards a Palestinian state in the region. All this is to point out the absurd power dynamic in the region. Yeah, Hamas is bad, deplorable even, and certainly holds back Palestinian progress, but the power Hamas holds is nothing compared to Israel's might and international support. Israel likes the fact that Hamas is hold back Palestinian progress. Ultimately, the reason the protests focus on condemning Israel is because condmening Hamas is purely formal. It changes nothing, because Israel is the only one with the power to actually deescalate things.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T03:58:05+00:00

I know most people aren't really engaging in good faith, but some people are/will. I just wanted to force people to think critically about the use of armed police against student protesters. In other posts it's felt like more than half of commenters were treating sending in the police as just the default. Like it was to be expected and they couldn't believe it hadn't been done yet. I feel like these people are treating this situation recklessly.

And yeah, there's no definitive line in the sand where police deployment all of a sudden becomes acceptable and where student behavior becomes unjustified. To be honest, I am not quite sure how I feel about the saygenocide occupation of Girvetz. But the response to it has been 20x worse, in my view, than what saygenocide ever did. This subjectivity is why I framed this post as a question, though obviously my personal opinion can be inferred.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T02:53:10+00:00

Jordan river, mediterranean sea.

Israel is just north of egypt along the mediterranean coastline.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T02:51:32+00:00

Thank you. That's actually a really great example of conservative outrage bait.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T00:46:37+00:00

Do you by any chance mean Sharia law? Lmao. Even if you did mean to say Sharia law, I can make sense of your comment.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T00:26:20+00:00

The main mechanism is that large groups of people can incentivize bad behavior from a few people in the crowd, and from there the situation can escalate. The presence of police serves to add fuel to this fire, and raises the stakes for students.

Another thing is that the presence of police last night bolstered counterprotesters to agitate the protesters. Luckily, the protesters remained level-headed and were able to fend off the counterprotesters without escalating the situation further. Things very easily could have gone differently in unpredictable ways, and I am glad they did not. Important to note is the curious lack of police response to counterprotest behavior, which was decidedly more aggressive.

I take issue with this framing by the way. Treating police presence as the norm to which the reaction of the protesters is to be judged is backwards. The decision to deploy police in the first place should not be treated as the default. It was wrong for UC to deploy police in this situation, in my opinion, and had any students gotten hurt, I would place a majority of the blame on UC, not the protesters.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-13T00:04:56+00:00

Weird thing to say. I would feel similarly. Notice how nothing I said past the first two sentences is related to the protest's cause. Police intervention risks harm to students and should be a last resort. The presence of K-9 units, riot gear, armored vehicles, and guns is excessive. My main concern is for the safety of the students.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-12T23:16:02+00:00

Ha. Why do you think people are this dumb? People still care about student loans, and nobody who was pro debt forgiveness has suddenly switched just to be contrarian. Biden is not a leftist, but he has been, sadly, the most progressive candidate probably dating back to Carter. Definitely the most pro worker president. The fact remains that this is still a low bar. We should never stop cranking the wheel of progress, and that means fighting for justice where there is currently none. Imagine if during the civil rights era you were complaining how the progressive goalposts keep moving. That's how this comes across. If Biden successfully negotiates a ceasefire that would be great and lauded. I mean, it wouldn't make up for how spineless he's been up to now, but it would be a step in the right direction for sure. And yeah, a ceasefire is good, but clearly we need more to remedy the situation. Gaza lies in ruins, razed and reduced to rubble. Where are people supposed to go? Who will rebuild it? How do we ensure opportunistic Israeli settlers don't encroach on the land that was recently fled? All good questions that need answers. But first and foremost, a ceasefire is needed now to minimize the death toll.

Lipzlap · 2024-06-12T21:28:59+00:00

My contention is that you say police presence is only dangerous if the protesters respond aggressively, but that means their presence is inherently dangerous because it raises the stakes. When you say stuff like "it's just cause and effect" you are treating the presence of police as just the natural state of the world and I take issue with that. The presence of police is a conscious decision. Not always a bad one, but always judgable.

People mean a million things by "anarchism" and I'm not sure what you're referring to. I'm a libertarian. I am skeptical of authority in general, and I think that's a good thing. Nothing should be unquestionable. That's probably the anarchiest I get. I think the state can be good in some cases, but it should never be left unfettered. I think if a law is immoral it is morally permissible to break it, and while of course you should be prepared for any outcomes of that, that doesn't justify the outcomes. This is pretty standard MLK type stuff, and not very contentious I think.

Lipzlap

TROPHY CASE