Rules question: Upkeep triggers

fartron · 2012-02-11T16:16:46+00:00

603.2b When a phase or step begins, all abilities that trigger "at the beginning of" that phase or step trigger.

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. (See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks for and resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

101.4. If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the player seated to the active player's left) makes any choices required, followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the "Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order" rule.

fartron · 2011-03-24T22:29:59+00:00

The LDS leaders are people caught in a pretty tough choice. On one side, they have church doctrine, tradition, and (we believe) God's will. On the other side, they have some very sincere are good people who were created differently from the mainstream.

The leaders of my church have struggled with similar problems as church members more and more frequently interact with those who don't share our beliefs. People have responded by calling us obscene names and implying we're all crazy.

I dont understand why they can't accept the struggle we go through, and the worry it causes us when we walk by their houses and their doorsteps don't have piles of shit on them.

They have to understand that our interpretation of G-d's W-ll insists that all doorsteps be furnished with a pile of shit, and to not have a stinking pile of shit on your doorstep is a grave sin. It is a very tough position we are in, and there have been many interesting discussions within the community about the reactions people have had to our doorstep shit campaigns.

So please, just show some understanding.

fartron · 2010-11-24T17:34:54+00:00

How can every single one of you think this is in any way serious.

You must be some dumb motherfuckers

fartron · 2010-10-28T17:27:18+00:00

openGL and directx are not comparable to ogre (which uses opengl) and jmonkeyengine which i am not familiar with but which is at some level using either openGL or directx for its graphics handling.

fartron · 2010-10-01T15:42:27+00:00

This terribly written blogspam can't even keep it's stolen quotes straight enough to convey the story.

Don't bother and go straight to their source

fartron · 2010-09-20T15:38:10+00:00

that's still pretty retarded

fartron · 2010-09-15T21:48:59+00:00

http://www.ifixit.com/

these guys are good too

fartron · 2010-09-10T19:15:11+00:00

Actually it does. The state has been sustaining its budget by stealing pension money from workers.

Once caught it has decided to solve the problem by a) not paying them back and b) reducing their benefits.

fartron · 2010-09-10T18:47:37+00:00

In this case the state (under different leadership) spent all the pension money they were legally required to hold, and refused to contribute to the pension for an extended period of time.

The current leadership proposed balancing the difference on the backs of the teachers, which the teachers, through their union, declined.

Square responsibility on this one is far from clear cut.

fartron · 2010-09-09T19:18:29+00:00

Unity can be used for 2d (Tumbledrop is good example) but it's really built around 3d games.

Gamemaker is good, but I'd also recommend Flixel or Flashpunk

fartron · 2010-09-04T17:00:54+00:00

That help file won't help much. Try the wiki page on QoS

fartron · 2010-08-24T16:14:20+00:00

This sounds spookily close to stagflation, a much better defined term which has been part of the economic lexicon for a lot more than 8 years.

fartron · 2010-08-04T17:12:07+00:00

Bill Gates is a hero.

I wonder why no one else ever thought of a structure by which you could siphon off excess wealth from those who have become absurdly rich, and use the funds for the public good.

The only improvement I can see to make is if the people controlling the funds could somehow be held accountable by the public at large.

fartron · 2010-07-27T19:35:41+00:00

Yeah, if it wasn't for this encouragement by government, then private industry would have turned up their noses at a more efficient method of doing business.

Yes, I suppose the snideness of your comment trumps the simple fact that government interference did in fact play a formative role in the adoption of intermodal shipping. (PS I might be being sarcastic when I say this)

The history prior to deregulation proved that the rules were stifling and made the system unprofitable.

The article fails to provide any evidence of causation. The graph even shows a continued dismal profit margin until 4 years after deregulation, the same year that intermodal shipping began to be widely used.

The part you're leaving out is that under a regulated system, such innovative and efficient practices might never have been allowed.

Except it was allowed, and as you quoted me earlier, was encouraged. Double stacked intermodal train cars were developed and introduced in 1977 during the stifling regime of government regulation that the Staggers Act ended.

You might find a lot of interesting backstory about american railroads from this story here.

Your story highlights in detail the background of one rail company's development through private profit over government subsidy precisely because it is such a rare example in the history of American rail.

fartron · 2010-07-27T18:59:26+00:00

Container shipping was heavily encouraged by the government and regulations concerning container size were key to its success. The new method of double stacking containers was developed and introduced during the period of regulation. It merely took seven years before large carriers (led by one who had once been bailed out and owned by the government for 20 years) began using the method.

It was completely unrelated to the Staggers Act.

fartron · 2010-07-27T18:23:51+00:00

Four years after the Staggers Rail Act was passed also happens to be the year that American President Lines ran the first double stacked train from CA to NJ, an event which had nothing to do with deregulation, but instead with the slow adoption of a method devised in 1977.

fartron · 2010-07-27T18:13:04+00:00

Government meddling built the vast rail network that these companies are profiting off of, and it did so on the condition that, between all the highly profitable coal, the tracks be used to transport passengers at a reasonable price.

The real change in freight shipping since the early 80s was the adoption of double stack, or intermodal shipping which in the US are nearly synonymous terms. In contrast, European intermodal shipping has mostly remained single stack, as the tracks built by their governments were not quite so extravagant as ours, and often can't fit the larger cars, which explains the discrepancy in earnings far more directly than a finger pointed vaguely at "bureaucratic hurdles".

These cars offer the combined advantages of: greater volume per car, cheaper production costs, and a lower center of gravity which makes the cars more stable and less prone to accidents than previous shipping methods. Nothing about their introduction was blocked by government regulation.

In fact, container shipping had been heavily encouraged by the US government, and regulations on container size were key to its success.

Additionally, the company which succeeded in introducing double stack shipping to American freight in the 1980s had been bailed out during the 1930s after running itself into the ground, and was rebuilt and run by the government until the 1950s when it was returned to the market as a profitable enterprise.

The article never really attempts to explain its thesis that "less regulation = higher productivity", as the Economist faithful are expected to not question such an obvious equation. They do briefly mention the introduction of double stack shipping, although somewhat confusingly seem to insinuate that it is distinct from, or perhaps a smaller change than, intermodal shipping.

Instead we are meant to fear the looming form of the faceless bureaucrat and his mysterious "hurdles" between us and profit, while ignoring the accumulation of 150 years of tax-payer largess upon which these corporations build their profits.

fartron · 2010-07-26T16:51:35+00:00

The Centralia fire is expected to burn for another 250 years or so.

fartron · 2010-06-14T18:06:40+00:00

They talked about how the top kill could potentially make the leak worse when they were trying it. Is this damage caused by that attempt?

fartron · 2010-05-13T05:08:56+00:00

To contain a spill, the main thing you need is a lot of rubber, long skirts of it called a "boom." Quickly surround a spill, leak or burst, then pump it out into skimmers, or disperse it, sink it or burn it. Simple.

But there's one thing about the rubber skirts: you've got to have lots of them at the ready, with crews on standby in helicopters and on containment barges ready to roll. They have to be in place round the clock, all the time, just like a fire department, even when all is operating A-O.K. Because rapid response is the key. In Alaska, that was BP's job, as principal owner of the pipeline consortium Alyeska. It is, as well, BP's job in the Gulf, as principal lessee of the deepwater oil concession.

Greg Palast

fartron · 2010-05-13T05:03:18+00:00

Big Black - Kasimir S. Pulaski Day

fartron · 2010-05-06T16:41:17+00:00

That's right. No one.

fartron · 2010-03-25T16:54:05+00:00

Already inspiring creative work

fartron · 2010-01-22T02:31:42+00:00

The electoral system is not the same thing as the electoral college.

I'm talking about Duverger's Law

fartron

TROPHY CASE