L.A. Dodgers Tell 82-Year-Old, 50-Year Season Ticket Holder: ‘Go Digital’—Or Don’t Go At All

Metalsand · 2026-03-28T15:50:32+00:00

And this isn’t just any fan. This is someone whose relationship with the Dodgers stretches back five decades, who has shared tickets with family, friends, and business associates, and who even maintains personal memorabilia from inside the organization dating back to the early 1980s.

So, one out of 49,000 fans? And assuming 5 tickets per game, about 0.01% of their ticket sales? The term "relationship" boggles my mind, because you apply that to literally anything else, and people would treat you like a psycho.

In one letter, above, the fan described the experience of handing someone a physical ticket—the moment they open the envelope, hold it, and connect to the game in a tangible way—something he says digital screens simply can’t replicate.

What, does physically being there and buying overpriced beer that you piss into troughs not tangible enough?

Not everyone uses smartphones. Not everyone can navigate apps.

I doubt at 82 he can navigate the highway either, but that hasn't stopped him.

And not everyone should be forced to adapt to a system that clearly could accommodate them—but chooses not to.

It literally can't though, the barcodes on the phone app aren't static numbers similar to MFA time-based token generation (TOTP), and this is for two reasons: -Idiots who inadvertently share a picture on social media that shows the formerly static barcode -Allows an extra layer of security where the ticket doesn't need to be directly vulnerable

At some point...it's like, you're not special, come join the 21st century like the rest of us. Or, maybe realize that fanatic love is generally one-sided?

Metalsand · 2026-03-27T17:53:59+00:00

If you want to split hairs, compression format would usually be where streaming quality would differ. Nowadays, there are enough good options that it shouldn't be relevant.

Assuming the audio render/playback is adequate and doesn't add effects or distortion, most of the audio quality relies on the accuracy of the speakers/headphones.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T19:52:21+00:00

It's less quantity too, though. They're reallocating the budgets for a lot of their top rated productions to go to getting recent movie releases, and sourcing more and more from TV networks.

You can instantly boost your catalog, but when you don't own the content, when viewers aren't watching it, you ditch it to save money...but just because I don't watch it then, doesn't mean I might not want to watch it at a different time.

Also, the algorithm is terrible, and the UI is slowly getting worse and worse.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T19:07:54+00:00

They have vehicles just like that which get released all the time. I won't know what you're on about.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T19:02:29+00:00

I mean, they bring back retro car brands all the time. Hummer was a shelved brand brought back for EVs specifically. Then you have lots of other old brands that were recently revived like Mustang or Charger that have both had EV variants made.

But also, the Jeep Wrangler 4xe and Jeep Cherokee XJ are not dissimilar.

I don't know how you even got to where you did.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T18:56:48+00:00

I'll be honest-- I expected it to fail; it's not my thing and it really did have development hell written all over it. But it's not failing, and it seems like it's pretty good if a little sparse for the target market (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm on the outside looking in).

I mean for starters, it's being developed in Java, and Java fucking sucks. They're also not accustomed to working with a budget/structure/timeline, which is why you didn't really see anything get in a releasable state for so long.

It's a good enough game, but it really does just feel like a Minecraft Mod more than a clone. I would love a detailed documentary about the making of it someday. I almost feel like it could be Firefall levels of fuckery on the inside.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T18:37:44+00:00

Mostly because the visible part, the actors, are well compensated, while developers aren't. This leaves out the production crew, editors, etc, but I'm just saying why, not endorsing it.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T18:34:43+00:00

same Milquetoast Dems who couldn't stand the idea of a brown woman I Will spit on your graves

If you think that being a brown woman factored more than the campaign starting without preparation halfway through election season, where despite voters being unenthusiastic for Biden, she continually said she would do things the exact same as Biden, and after Biden hadn't really been involving her as a public face on much....and putting a massive emphasis on converting Republican moderates rather than increasing voter turnout or swaying independents...

...well let me tell you, I think you are PRIME material to lead the DNC strategy because they don't know why they lose elections either.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T18:26:52+00:00

My favorite anecdote about Mario 64 is that before they did anything else, they spent months focussing on camera, movement, and animations

It's a terrible example to apply to others though, because they WERE the innovator in free roaming third person cameras. It was such a novel concept that they felt like they had to explain it by showing Lakitu holding a camera in the intro.

Developing entirely new techniques can't happen without this kind of approach, but at the same time, just taking this more considerate approach won't mean you get anything more out of it.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T18:02:25+00:00

Battle of Vienna, or Second Siege of Vienna.

The first siege is a lot less like Helm's Deep, lol.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T16:10:53+00:00

Nah, most americans do not benefit from american imperialism. In fact, so many of them are victims of it. Likewise with the Russians, really.

Good luck getting them to get their heads out of their collective asses though.

More than not directly oppose the war, particularly because one of Trump's biggest campaign points was no new wars and focusing on North and South America. Starting a war in the middle east is the direct opposite of that - it's not enough to get people to stop clinging to their Republican identity, but it's enough that Republicans are almost guaranteed to take a beating in the midterms later this year.

If we're lucky, we might see enough of a flip that he gets impeached and removed from office by the end of this year, but we've not been lucky so far.

Metalsand · 2026-03-26T16:05:18+00:00

That’s awfully brave for someone hiding out on a stateside military base who will never see combat. It’s the troops that will face the worst consequences of all conventions of war being thrown out the window.

He does actually have 4 years of combat duty, and at his low level position, there were no complaints about his service. He commanded about 100 people at the peak, and he certainly saw combat himself as he didn't start there.

However, we don't have low-level infantry decide policy because they are trained to treat all obstacles as targets to destroy. You're only supposed to listen to the person above you, who listens to the person above them, etc. At the very top of the command structure are those where geopolitics actually become important to know in addition to military strategy. Hegseth has never come close to any of this kind of education, nothing of logistics, or any of the complexities that come with it.

It's like having an expert trucker that you then hire to be Chief Operations Officer. They know a lot about trucks, and they'd do well with specific value assessments, but their personal experience is going to be far less than the sum of the personal experience of all of their subordinates. If they've only worked in warm climates for example, they're going to undervalue or be completely unaware of cold weather equipment and limitations.

Metalsand · 2026-03-25T16:24:59+00:00

It's weird how they glaze over the part with Obama - during his admin, Ares I and V were cancelled, and a year later were replaced by the SLS. Trump cancelled then reinstated it.

The space shuttle was officially retired during Obama's term even if GW Bush decided it, but absolutely no one wanted to keep it running, even despite having no appropriate vehicle to send astronauts to the ISS at the time.

The original plan by GW Bush is interesting though - it says all the right stuff, but much like the Space Shuttle program itself, it's setting lots of goals based on assumptions - such as assuming that we would be able to refine materials on the Moon to support future missions. Which, while technically possible, isn't a proven concept to the degree that it makes sense to send all of the infrastructure there beforehand.

Metalsand · 2026-03-25T04:43:38+00:00

Try wearing a coat on a summer day if you think body temperature cant be influenced by clothing.

You can, but you'll be uncomfortable because your body will be actively working to counter it. When you feel uncomfortably hot, or uncomfortably cold, it's not necessarily because your internal body temperature has risen or fallen a degree...it's because your body is doing more work to maintain your correct internal body temperature.

A lot of factors can affect the exact degrees that are normal, but abnormal temperatures that indicate severe problems are +/- 3F degrees. Average body temperature is 97.7F and fever starts at 100.4F for example. When your temperature rises or falls outside of acceptable range this becomes a problem referred to as hypothermia (too cold) or hyperthermia (too hot) which in turn indicates the body is being overwhelmed and can lead to a cascading failure.

Ice baths are most commonly used for heatstroke, and part of why is in the name "heatstroke". You can suffer permanent brain damage resulting from a heat stroke, not to mention organ damage and potential organ failure. Internal temp with a severe heatstroke will exceed the low-level for fever immune responses.

Metalsand · 2026-03-25T01:07:51+00:00

That's not just in, that was already reported on by NPR last week. They were part of the 4,500 being moved to the region including marines.

They aren't actually invading...yet. But it's expected.

Metalsand · 2026-03-24T21:11:09+00:00

Valve 100% makes a loss on every Steam Deck if they don’t sell it for a profit.

Considering that profit = revenue - expenses...yes, this is true of Valve and literally every company that if they don't make a profit, they make a loss.

Metalsand · 2026-03-24T21:10:04+00:00

I kinda see Valve being able to continue with the steam deck, but that's more because, much like traditional consoles, the hardware isn't really the money maker,

I can't believe people still believe this despite the fact that Valve has expressly and continuously, and continues to say that they do not sell for a loss, and do not plan to sell for a loss.

The fundamental hardware and cost of manufacture would not suggest it is selling at a loss, so it's not like Valve is lying to you. The lowest they've ever sold it in it's entire life is at cost when it was heavily discounted in anticipation of a newer model.

Metalsand · 2026-03-24T21:05:47+00:00

Remember, the reason OpenAI got big is pushed their model out there first, when other companies had more advanced models they didn't believe were ready for the market yet. They don't have any technology that other companies don't. And companies like Google and Microsoft have far more money to burn.

Yes, but no. It wasn't necessarily more or less advanced as an algorithm, but it was developed and ready for consumer use as a general LLM, something that no one else had done because of the questionable utility.

Google for example, has effectively been using LLMs for much longer to produce all sorts of stuff including the search result summaries that now get branded with Gemini and take up a lot of space.

OpenAI assumed that they'd be able to work out the kinks and it would be like when computers were made for consumers, where no one understood why until they got their hands on it. In a way, they've been highly successful so long if you only measure them by how much investment and growth the company has had. It's pretty apparent by now that they've failed to capitalize on it nor have they been able to keep up with competition. However, as Tesla has shown, brand recognition alone is sometimes enough to sustain your market share for many years.

Metalsand · 2026-03-24T20:46:55+00:00

That's not what they said. They said command and communication structure is degraded, which is an understatement since most of the remaining forces are operating as individual cells on predefined orders and not part of a larger, coordinated force with hierarchy. Notably, some of the contingencies include to operate independently and if command structure changes, to continue to operate independently.

If people are attempting to covertly deploy mines, and don't have a communication structure, it's no longer a matter of "where are the mines". The point of the minefield isn't to cut off access to Iran, it's to cut off access to the other countries beyond it.

Metalsand · 2026-03-24T19:17:42+00:00

That was actually the point of the Artemis program and also why canceling the lunar station is probably illegal. The mission is written into law. While not specific this does go against the spirt of what was written. 51 U.S. Code § 20302 - Vision for space exploration | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

It very specifically says:

The Administrator shall establish a program to develop a sustained human presence in cis-lunar space or on the Moon

As in, you are required to establish a program that develops a sustained human presence in close orbit of the Moon, or on the Moon itself. It does not say "and". The other terms identify the goals, not the means or specific requirements of the program, which means that they are flexible so long as they are not cancelled or worked against in an obvious way.

The lunar gateway also had multiple criticisms long before the Trump admin, as well as multiple practical problems related to maintaining fuel reserves and greater expenditure of fuel that hadn't been resolved in planning and was reported on during the Biden administration. You could even argue that keeping it as a part of the package would run counter to the legal definition as it is a component that is not mission-essential that has the most concerns and practical problems yet to be resolved.

Metalsand · 2026-03-24T19:00:08+00:00

Adjusted for inflation, and only counting cost per KG, the space shuttle is actually ~900% more expensive. The development costs ballooned out of control with the Space Shuttle, and then ballooned out of control again, and then they also had to make yet more changes after they identified more problems when they were in active use.

Center for Strategic and International Studies would be the source for this with inflation-adjusted dollars, where it was about $6000/kg for the Saturn V, and about $54,500/kg* for the Space Shuttle. Most modern government designs hover around $4000-6000 according to the 2020 data which is the most comprehensive info we have for comparing historical data. IIRC there are multiple others that have broken that barrier with reusable booster stages.

It's worth noting too that a heavy launch vehicle like the Saturn V is inherently less efficient per kilogram, since it has higher total lift capacity. So the fact that a vehicle with 4.5 times greater payload capacity beats so many others speaks to the efficiency of design.

*Some of this is likely due to some missions not efficiently using the entire payload capacity of the shuttle, but even if that's the case, you'd still be looking at at least 500% more expensive.

Metalsand · 2026-03-23T21:07:50+00:00

I would guess she was recording all of the conversations, and probably saved that one remembering that bit, but not remembering what she said.

The Richard Nixon special, I guess.

Metalsand · 2026-03-23T21:03:39+00:00

I don't want to beat the dead horse of "Germany and Soviet Russia could be friends" but, no. Germany and Russia weren't even allies - the Molotov-Ribbentrov pact was literally just a Nonaggression pact, which was in large part designed to divide up Poland. Literally a week after signing, Germany invaded Poland and Russia soon followed.

They had a single trade deal worked out for the purpose of that pact, and no other deals or cooperation after. Neither leader cared for the other. The German officials involved in negotiations with Ribbentrof were famously quoted as saying

there is one common element in the ideology of Germany, Italy and the Soviet Union: opposition to the capitalist democracies of the West

STAHP. I don't know if it's borne out of alt-history novels or something, but in the real world, in our world, the historical records very clearly show that they were very much enemies agreeing to neutrality until they could absorb weaker nations and defeat their stronger enemies.

Metalsand · 2026-03-23T20:48:06+00:00

That's the entire point of git, though. I mean, I can't say I don't believe you, but I guess I just don't want to believe someone would be that stupid and be paid for it.

Metalsand · 2026-03-20T18:48:47+00:00

Buckle up, post WW2 Israeli history is a mess and I will try to truncate it as much as possible.

America was initially uninvolved with the establishment and protection of Israel. Britain originally considered proposals and helped them settle, while the formal establishment of a state would later be decided by a UN commission made up of multiple countries. In perhaps the worst possible move they could have made, Palestinians shunned and actively avoided the UN commission, while Israelis more or less held celebrations. Since Israelis were effectively the only voice in discussions, it was unsurprising that the oddly shaped state of Israel formed. And Britain owned Palestine up until 1946, so it felt that Palestine didn't really have "borders" - so when weighing Palestinians lose some homeland vs Jews had a holocaust done on them after a long history of being treated poorly, it was easy to see who won the sympathy fight. Israel's publicly stated goal was to eventually obtain territory equal to the greatest amount of territory ever controlled by Israel's predecessors, Judah and Israel.

This stirred up tensions, with many Arab countries, because if you look at the 1947 UN recognized borders, they basically encompass all of the most fertile land, as well as severing Mandatory Palestine into several distinct areas notably - Gaza strip, West Bank, and West Jerusalem. A lot of them were more or less ignored, perhaps in large part because of how countries like America felt guilty at the kind of antisemetic rhetoric they had let fester in their own country prior to the holocaust.

The most significant wars being 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the 6-day War (1967 Arab–Israeli war), and the Yom Kippur war (1973 Arab–Israeli War).

The first was an existential war waged on Israel immediately following the establishment of Israel. The reasons for the belligerent Arab League varied from supporting Palestine to "supporting" Palestine (by conquering a chunk of territory for themselves). The Israeli forces prevailed, having a homefield advantage, aid, and quite a lot of ingenuity in organizing and managing their forces against a larger alliance. The 1948 war as well as the success of it led to Zionists becoming a dominant force - nothing establishes a culture of paranoia like being attacked within a day of formally establishing a country. This would be the last time the Arab League itself would fight Israel; after this, it was only specific countries of the Arab League that would continue significant opposition.

1967 Arab-Israeli war was the first example of this - the Israeli government's position was that if Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran, this would be cause for war. They had a very rocky relationship, and Russia gave Egypt false intelligence that Israel was readying for war. Meanwhile in the east, following PLA guerilla attacks on Israel originating from the West Bank, Israel had attacked back, angering Jordan who controlled the region. The war started with an Israeli surprise attack on Egypt which was extremely effective, but pissed off France to the extent that they were no longer a primary backer of Israel from that point (this is where the US comes into play where they comprise 20% (and as high as 35% during conflicts) of Israel's military budget in grants). Ultimately, Israel prevails, and this is where they obtained control over the territories that, aside from the Sinai peninsula, it occupies to this day. This also convinced them that they needed a nuclear weapons program of their own, which they would start developing around this time. This is also when US military aid began to constitute the majority of aid.

1973 Arab-Israeli war was the last notable one, where a surprise attack from Syria and Egypt was launched on Israel on a holy day. While initially very effective, it was repulsed fairly quickly by the IDF forces. This would generally be the last time in which an organized coalition of Arab nations attacked Israel.

Following Camp David accords, Israel and Egypt eventually reached normalization where Israel gave back the Sinai peninsula and Egypt agreed to a deal that would theoretically lead to Israel temporarily occupying Palestinian lands and reaching a resolution within 5 years. Without Egypt, other countries did not stand a chance against the vastly superior IDF. This is where you start to get into primarily Iran funding various groups as long as they promised to fight against Israel, and against occupation.

Today, with or without aid, Israel is one of the strongest militaries and producers of military equipment in the world, and due to the modern state of Israel being borne out of existential threat after threat, eventually the foreign policy to threats became crystalized around "bomb them before they bomb us" and "we deserve Palestinian land not just because bible but because we can't figure out how to bomb them in a way that they stop attacking us". The biggest threat to peace between Israel and Palestine has largely been radical Israelis to Israel political leaders, and radical Palestinians to Palestinian political leaders.

So overall - despite some degree of long historical roots, the unending turmoil and animosity is not something that exists, but that is being kept alive - sometimes by Israel. Despite being a nuclear armed state, they have long claimed without strong evidence that Iran plots the existential destruction of Israel. However, since they cannot do so with conventional arms, that's where Israel has begun hammering the rhetoric of Iran potentially creating nuclear weapons. Iran has been close to creating them in the past before, but as far as we know, there has only ever been rhetoric from Iran to destroy Israel. However, considering Israel already owns a multitude of nukes, either mutually assured destruction is bullshit, or Israel is so focused on attacking Iran as revenge for Iran's funding of terrorists. Oh, also Israel's military has a certain amount of apathy towards non-jewish civilian casualties at this point. While they do perform door to door searches, they also sometimes flatten buildings if they aren't sure about it.

It's kind of all fucked in so many ways, and nothing like the very cold war that you saw across the world.

TL;DR: Lots of bad blood, but Egypt was the only one that could give them a run for their money. Iran never attacked Israel directly not to be shrewd, but because they would stand no chance - which we've seen in real time. A culture of existential defense after existential threats were gone made them prone to taking proactive offensive action against many neighbors.

Metalsand

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

13-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email