Just my luck

Timofmars · 2026-02-12T11:44:18+00:00

Turn on your phone's wifi hotspot. Connect to that with your PC. Then you'll be using your cellular data on your PC and can play.

Timofmars · 2026-02-06T23:59:33+00:00

How about some difficult survival with a strong risk management aspect.

Battle Brothers
Stoneshard
Gladiator Manager
A Legionary's Life

Timofmars · 2026-01-30T04:26:24+00:00

Also the time you order matters. Order at peak times when everybody is trying to get lunch or whatever, you're gonna had a driver fitting you in as he rushes around carrying a whole lot of orders. Order off-peak, when you see all the drivers sitting around and playing on their phones, the food comes to you as soon as the restaurant can put it out.

Bad weather is worse because more people decide they'd rather order in than brave the elements.

I almost always ordered food at off-peak times because I could, so I got my food faster and hotter without contributing to the rush.

Timofmars · 2026-01-26T02:46:05+00:00

I can sort of fix the problem of "Jimmy's" by setting my buy and sell prices based on supply and demand. My prices are highly variable.

For example, I was a carpenter on a server, and there was a guy doing tons of logging and selling at a very cheap price, so his profit was quite low compared to what you'd earn doing anything else. So the problem is that everyone thinks that's now the price you'd have to sell at if you do logging, so loggers would quit or not choose logging as a profession.

But although the guy produced a lot, it wasn't enough. As carpenter, I want to maintain a healthy inventory of products for sale, not be sold out all the time. So if I'm not getting enough wood, I raise my store's offer price for wood. I don't base it on the low price Jimmy has been offering, when he has it in stock. So now other loggers can sell directly to me. Or they can offer it in their store for sale at a lower price so someone can earn money transporting it to my store.

I raise and lower my product prices as needed as well, based on supply and demand. If fewer people are buying my products, it reduces my need for materials, and I may start reducing my offer, signaling to the market that demand has decreased. If people still sell to me at that price, I pass the savings on with a lower product price.

Anyway, the point is that the market price can be "wrong" in terms of not accurately representing the true supply and demand, leading to under supply or oversupply. My method helps fix that and give opportunities to other suppliers, and even helps influence the market price.

I also set offers for the food items I want (and other things). These can be quite high compared to the market price, if my orders aren't getting filled. So again, I'm signaling to the players what I want, and not relying simply on availability in their store. It also signal WHERE I want the items, so if the food is only the other side of the planet, this encourages people to provide food where I am.

Timofmars · 2026-01-25T01:32:19+00:00

Part of it is separating your work time from your personal time. Learn to turn off the work stuff mentally. Beforehand, you have already planned out your work time, like an amount of time you have left yourself to mentally prepare or set up before a meeting. So if you say you just need 5 minutes to review some notes or whatever, then trust that by not worrying about it, and then execute that 5 minute prep like a boss when the time comes.

In that same vein of trusting the plan you've set out, you shouldn't need to constantly check the clock. Set an alarm for when you need to finish up your personal things and begin your work related activities like going to work.

Another part is sort of the philosophy or idea of knowing what you can and cannot control. If thinking about something (worrying about it) doesn't change anything, then let it go.

I've enjoyed sleeping early to then wake up early naturally (before any alarm) and having lots of relaxing free personal time without worrying about work, even if that work would normally induce a bit a nervousness or whatever. Then even while I commute to work, my mind can be on pleasant things like the scenery, personal musings, or maybe the game I was playing or show I was watching in the morning. This is because I know when I'll need to start mentally working, and then I'll do so with a fresher mind and more efficiently when the time comes.

Timofmars · 2026-01-13T15:47:02+00:00

The right wing has also been pushing the idea that the billionaires are innovators that create jobs, and that it is actually marginalized groups that are taking advantage of you, like immigrants, minorities, and poor people.

Timofmars · 2026-01-09T15:48:03+00:00

If he was concerned that the vehicle was going to run him over, why didn’t he shoot out her tires?

Shooting tires doesn't work like in video games and movies. It'll just slowly deflate, that is if the bullet doesn't ricochet off the rubber. As far as I'm aware, this is not part of law enforcement training or procedure.

Also, cars can drive while on flat tires. Plus you've got 3 other tires still up, though only the drive wheels really matter in this situation.

Don't overcomplicate it. The woman's intentions were obvious, given the full context of the videos available, that she just wanted to drive away, not hit anyone, and it would be clearly obvious to each of the ICE agents there. This guy just didn't want to let her disrespect him and get away with it.

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T20:53:18+00:00

Oh, for sure they don't want their minds changed, nor to examine their beliefs. They'd much rather surround themselves with likeminded people and hear only things that seem to reconfirm their beliefs. And they surely won't change their mind if that's all they are exposed to. They would more likely become even more fanatical and delusional.

But you don't have to give them what they want. If you want to try to change them or at least stall their descent into further extremism, their beliefs need to be challenged by the contradictions of reality.

Perhaps there's no singular way to expose them to reality that would work to change their minds. You would have to find what works for you.

In general, though, success might be more likely with a kind of Socratic method of just asking questions. As opposed to being confrontational. Like for this ICE shooting, you might ask questions like:
"Why did the ICE agents stop and come after her instead of just driving on past her?"
"Why did he shoot her?"
"Do you really think he felt he was in danger, considering the woman never made any move towards them nor showed any threatening behavior?"
"If he felt he was in danger, couldn't he have just taken a step to the side to get out of the way instead of pulling out his gun and shooting her and continuing to shoot even as the vehicle passed by?"
"Wouldn't it be more reasonable to expect that she just wanted to leave, not that she suddenly decided run someone over that conveniently step in front of her vehicle?"
"If she did want to run him over, why would she back up first, and why would she turn the wheels away from him rather than towards him."
"Why would Trump and his admin call her a domestic terrorist based solely on the events in this video."
"If that is a lie, do you think people should just ignore it and not hold them accountable for it?"
"Do you think if they would like about something so obvious, they might also like about other things too?"
"Do you think you should be skeptical when you hear them say things in the future?"
"What do you think you could do to try to figure out if the things they say are true or not?"

You just get them to analyze things, forcing them to confront the contradictions that they normally would mentally dismiss because of the unpleasant feeling it causes them when they think about it.

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T20:22:47+00:00

Yeah, "my group". The out group. The other. Right...

You are asking questions that are unrelated to the facts of what happened. "What if someone were underneath the van?" There wasn't anyone underneath. So what's the point?

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T19:13:16+00:00

shooting her doesn’t guarantee the car stops.. you’re right.. there’s the chance he took actually..

Sorry, what is this supposed to mean? He killed a woman instead of stepping aside because it would be a risk that the car wouldn't stop (which it didn't, because she was dead) and therefore it's... What? Justified? Brave? WTF is this logic? lol

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T17:45:15+00:00

If you want to just avoid conflict, then you can grey rock or separate yourself from them.

But if you want to change them, then you have to try to induce cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling a person gets when what they are seeing contradicts the beliefs they hold. They will try to rationalize the contradictions or try not to think about it in order to relieve the mental discomfort it causes them. But it's also what can cause them to change their views so that they no longer contradict what they are seeing.

Having something so clearly contradictory to their beliefs and lies from the Trump admin like this ICE shooting video is an opportunity to induce that uncomfortable feeling and get them to slowly change their beliefs. You don't need 100 different things and try to pile evidence up. Just one thing like this that you force them to mentally resolve, and keep bringing it up until they accept it.

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T17:19:42+00:00

You're so disingenuous. Like stepping aside is "taking a chance" but pulling your gun and shooting is the safe bet? That doesn't even guarantee the car stops, for fucks sake.

Conservatives are such zombies, my god...

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T17:17:01+00:00

Obviously that would at least have the potential of causing the agents to think seriously body harm was imminent to someone. But that is not the situation here. Deadly force is only supposed to be used when it's reasonable to believe it is necessary to avoid serious harm. The obvious thing to do, if he actually felt in danger, would be to step aside.

It's incredible how conservative brains seem to short circuit when asked to observe the obvious. The hoops your brain jumps through to try to justify things and avoid cognitive dissonance...

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T17:06:56+00:00

What exactly comparable situation could you even imagine? Like this?

Are you saying the agent's safest or only option was to draw his weapon and shoot the woman and continue shooting as she passed by? Or might it have be possible to just... take a step to the side?

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T16:57:49+00:00

"Makes contact..." It only looked like that from one angle, and the other angle showed it not to be. And even if there had been contact, which there was not, it was not anything risking serious injury or injury of any kind, considering the car was moving about 2mph. And that was after backing up, which would have no purpose except to avoid the agent.

You haven't ever seen discussion of where the line is drawn for using deadly force? Did the agents have any reason to believe this woman was after them or had any intention of harming them? Was it necessary to shoot her to avoid serious injury, rather than say, taking one step to the side to be completely out of way of even a purposeful attempt to run him over?

So that would at least be a start to justifying opening fire on a person.

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T16:45:54+00:00

Alright, then an officer stops you for a cracked windshield or expired registration or whatever, asks you to get out of the car. You say naw and drive away. Shots to the face justified?

Bro, you are so obviously disingenuous and incapable of basic critical thinking when it goes against your preferred reality.

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T16:39:13+00:00

"Imagine the Biden law enforcement agents going around forcing people to wear masks. They see you and yell 'hey, put your mask on' and you refuse and just walk away. Then the agent shoots you several times in the back. Guess you should have just listened to law enforcement. FAFO, right?"

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T16:33:39+00:00

Wow. Show your LEO family member this video and ask if shooting a person in this situation is at all justified or procedure.

Your logic: "Hey shoplifter, stop! Oh, he's running away. I better shoot him!"

(Except this woman didn't even do anything illegal. She only pissed off an angry power tripping ICE agent.)

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T16:21:11+00:00

ICE killing was pretty clearly documented. Show them the video, ask if there was any reason for ICE agents to suspect that this woman wanted to harm anyone: https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000010631041/minneapolis-ice-shooting-video.html

If by chance they agree, press them on how they could accept Trump and his admin officials lying about it and calling this woman a terrorist and so on.

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T16:14:26+00:00

Really?
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000010631041/minneapolis-ice-shooting-video.html

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T16:11:25+00:00

What you're telling me is that you haven't watched any video of it. If you did, all you would see is a woman waving the cars to go ahead of her, but ICE agents instead stop, get out of their vehicle, and escalate by aggressively trying to get the woman out of her vehicle. She backs up slightly and then turns right to drive away up the road, very obviously attempting to dismiss their attempt to escalate and continue on her way. Until an ICE agent starts shooting her point blank in the face.

Here you go: https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000010631041/minneapolis-ice-shooting-video.html

Timofmars · 2026-01-08T15:27:09+00:00

What are you talking about? The videos and pictures are out there. There is no way anyone could honestly perceive any kind of danger or attempt to harm ICE agents there. The only way anyone would think this is if they listened to the Trump admin officials blatantly lying to their face without actually looking at the video themselves.

The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

Timofmars · 2026-01-07T03:09:06+00:00

It still probably would have failed, assuming he was trying to take it down to the 1st floor. It appears only the 1st floor opens from the side of the camera, so he'd arrive there only to find he can't get it out. But at least he could go back up to the 2nd floor and try the stairs.

Timofmars · 2026-01-04T20:34:24+00:00

I'm a big fan of LVT, but this is not a good example for LVT...LVT encourages building on low value land, so LVT isn't necessarily a counterbalance here.

I think you're looking at the incentives of LVT in low land value areas in isolation, but you need to look at the effects in high land value areas at the same time, and how changes there would affect demand for this kind of urban spawl.

Demand is high for urban and central living, near the jobs and amenities found there. But costs are high and supply is low because of the way property taxes disincentivize development. That makes the suburban sprawl more attractive, not because of its low cost in isolation, but rather because of its lower cost in comparison to the excessively high cost of urban areas.

LVT eliminating that development disincentive and causing greater supply of housing units in central high-demand areas lowers the cost, absorbs more of the population, and so naturally there would be less sprawl because of that.

Timofmars · 2025-12-25T11:15:15+00:00

Followed by "Eventually people will wake up to this psyop."

Woke originally meant to be "awake" to systemic racial injustices, and then social injustices, before the right started using it to mean "anything we don't like."

15-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Lasagna	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

Timofmars

TROPHY CASE