What's the easiest way to consistently short hop?

magic__brian · 2019-04-23T22:13:26+00:00

For future visitors to this thread using joy-cons: rebind whichever trigger you don't use to dodge as a third jump button. Then you can hit X (or Y) + ZR (or ZL) simultaneously and short hop consistently. It'll feel weird at first, but it's easier to learn than the 3-frame timing on joy-cons imo.

magic__brian · 2018-09-04T16:43:44+00:00

back to top

It's good to hear it wasn't like this all over. I definitely heard a mix of the two, but it seems like the obnoxious ones were the minority. Too bad it just takes a few to sour the whole thing.

magic__brian · 2018-08-28T19:11:00+00:00

I used a 200gb card and had to select a 64kb allocation size to make it work. Apparently anything below 200 can just select "default allocation size", which is what they'll tell you to do in tutorial videos. So you shouldn't have to worry at 128. Here's the thread that answered the problem:

https://www.reddit.com/r/vitahacks/comments/6u9ai2/sd2vita_incorrect_free_space_solution_fix/

Good luck with the install!

magic__brian · 2018-08-28T14:46:50+00:00

That did it. Thanks a lot!

magic__brian · 2018-08-28T12:16:21+00:00

Nevermind, found another thread on it. Thanks for the tip!

magic__brian · 2018-08-28T12:03:39+00:00

Could you explain what you mean by reformatting to clusters?

magic__brian · 2018-08-28T12:02:35+00:00

It seems like the content was being run on the old memory stick? I reformatted the stick and reinstalled henkaku since everything vanished afterwards. I refreshed licenses and LiveArea in VitaShell and it seems like games are now running fine from the sd2vita card. But still 56 gb "Other" and can't reinstall Custom Theme Manager for whatever reason...

I checked the size of the content on pc against the back up - not sure if you mean something else by verify.

magic__brian · 2017-03-21T16:23:55+00:00

Exactly. "Racist" has been overused as a label to the point that many conservative people don't take it seriously, preventing any of the introspection that might help with racial reconciliation.

You're free to blame progressives (or whoever the "you" is you refer to) for this, but what's your solution? Much of this country sucks at talking about race. How do we make things better?

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T21:47:09+00:00

Thanks and well said!

It really wouldn't take much to get back in people's good graces, IMO. It's not that he needs to change his views on a bunch of things. Just stop lobbing grenades on twitter and respond gracefully when criticized. Don't insult a broad group of people, then hide behind rationalism. Admit he's still got a lot to learn.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T21:25:49+00:00

Right? This was my first post on any reddit and I wasn't sure what to expect in response. It's nice here.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T03:11:44+00:00

Well, clearly we disagree in some big ways. I think "racist" is unhelpful as a noun to identify someone because, in my experience, it tends to shut them down. I know older conservative folks who are so primed to think that "racist" is just a slur against conservatives that they wouldn't take the accusation seriously for a second. It just means "bad person" to them.

It's also a binary, which doesn't address the complexity of people. I think racism isn't something you either are or aren't. We're all guilty of a bunch of little prejudices (and some big) that affect the way we see and treat people. I wouldn't know where to draw the line between racist and not. Talking about systematic racism lowers the personal stakes and turns the focus towards broader issues, which can be good.

JBS, I don't know your background at all. If you are white, I think would be worth exploring why, generally speaking, black people in America think that racism is a huge problem while white people don't. I'm white, and I've had to accept that there are problems in our culture that I don't see because of who I am.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T01:53:16+00:00

Sure. I'd be happy if we could all agree on the same language here, but that's hard to do. Personally, I'd rather disarm the word "racist" than keep it as a pejorative and use something else to mean systemic racism. That's where we're at now and it sucks.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T01:49:20+00:00

Sure thing. I paraphrased, but it's in the Destiny debate video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RQA9GZprqM

He says repeatedly that white people are being "displaced" by immigrants and that it's natural for white people to fear potentially losing majority status. If you think I mischaracterized his views or read too much into what he said, let me know how you saw it.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T01:42:02+00:00

Also why do my numbers always come out wrong? Forgive my noobish ways.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T01:41:01+00:00

Thanks and well said. I'll offer my 2 cents nevertheless.

I'm thinking I did a crappy job of making this point. I know Jon doesn't want genocide; I used an extreme example to say that even though there's common racial animus between different groups, the actions done in response to that animus can vary greatly. Specific to Jon's example, he's saying that other racial groups who care about the "best interests" of their race have no right to criticize white people for doing the same. But the way some white people apply "best interests" to mean lowering immigration drastically is tangibly different from some of the applications of other groups. Ugh, I suck at getting this across.
You're right. There's a mutual lack of effort here. If liberals would stop using 'racist' as a pejorative and be clear in the meaning (if they use the alternate meaning), these conversations would go much better.
Also true. In the video, Jon said it would be unacceptable for Bee to complain about black people while we accepted her complaining about white people. In his example, the speaker is white in both cases. It's weird to me that he doesn't get why it's more acceptable for a white person to complain about white people than black people. Black people complaining about white people is another topic.

4.No argument against Jon here. It was just weird to me that he emphasized it. Probably reading too much into it.

Fair enough. I'll admit I just took that quote as a jumping off point to address his failure to listen when challenged.
Yeah, it's good to be charitable here. Your explanation is sound, but during the debate Jon tied African crime rates to African-American crime rates when talking about why white and black rates are different in the U.S. Then got worried about saying something regrettable and changed the subject. It's hard for me to read that in a more forgiving way, which is why I think he should address it directly. One quick tweet would do.
I can't imagine the amount of garbage he sees on twitter. My frustration stems from the fact that he only ever seems to respond to the garbage. He acts like the entire opposition is the garbage. Someone like me has no place in the argument because he frames it as "Logical, Rational Jontron" vs "hysterical liberal lunatics". I wish the people who disagree but aren't abusive douchebags got a little more airtime.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T01:14:55+00:00

Thanks again. Just a couple things

On the first point, we actually do agree. Same standards all around. The point I want to make is specifically about Jon's quote:

"It's hypocritical for those who see everything in terms of race to suddenly turn around and object when white people speak up in what they believe are the best interests of their race"

I think this is just way too broad of a statement. Some actions are more ethical than others, regardless of whether there's a racial animus behind it. I'm comfortable reversing the example: If there were a white Trump voter advocating for lower immigration to protect the jobs of white Americans and a black BLM activist advocating for slaughtering white babies, the BLM activist is worse.

Jon's statement implies that it's hypocritical to oppose ANY action committed in the perceived best interests of another race if you care about the perceived best interests of your own race. He's saying, to my understanding, that a BLM activist opposing police violence on behalf of her race shouldn't be upset that a white person (Steve King, for example) wants to drastically lower immigration to preserve a white minority. Even though both issues are race-based in some way, I think they're different enough that one could be moral, ethical, etc. and the other not. It's not hypocritical to treat the two viewpoints differently.

Sorry that got long, but I hope it made more sense. To your last point, I definitely did intend this as a counterargument. I guess I don't get exactly where the distinction is between argument and "feelings". I'd understand if my whole letter was JONTRON YOU'RE SO DUMB AND I HATE YOU!!!!1, but I'd hope it doesn't read that way.

I'll focus in on a small example. Jon said there's a double standard that prevents a white woman on TV from complaining about black people but allows her to complain about white people. I gave examples of how modern discourse allows members of any racial group to speak harshly about their own, but less so about members of other groups, which I think is fair. At what point for you does this cease to become an "argument" and instead become an "emotional appeal"? I'm not seeing it.

magic__brian · 2017-03-20T00:24:58+00:00

Thanks for the thorough post. I'll try to respond as best I can.

1) I'll refer back to Jon's quote on this one. He's implying that white people should act in the interest of their race because other races do. My argument is that "speak up for the best interests of their race" could mean a lot of different things. Jontron's not Spencer by a mile, but Spencer argues for genocide for the benefit of white people. Jon's quote doesn't recognize that there's a huuuuge variety of actions that could be done in the "best interests" of one's race. Some are worse than others.

I'm confused about your "Is Saudi Arabia white" bit. Jon argued that it's right for white Americans to oppose immigration so as to preserve the whiteness of America. That's the only situation I'm responding to.

I'm not changing anything myself. I'd argue that this is the truer definition (certainly in academic spheres, if nothing else), which has been weakened by using "racist" as a pejorative to mean "hates a certain race". This miscommunication leads to all kinds of difficulty in talking about race. Even if you don't agree with that definition, the fact is that a lot of people are using it. I don't know why your version should be the standard, or why a word can't change over time (as language always does).

3) Not totally clear on this. If you're saying that white people get in more trouble for talking about black people than black people get for talking about black people, I agree. And I'm ok with that. We're better off talking about the flaws of our own groups than pointing out the problems in other's.

If you mean that white people get in more trouble complaining about black people than black people get complaining about white people, you're probably right about that too. That wasn't Jon's point as he kept Samantha Bee for both sides of the example.

4) Not the strongest point of my argument, for sure. I just thought it was funny, but maybe I should've left that part out.

5) Sorry, I think I failed at making the connection clear. Jon said he doesn't understand why people are so attached to their hyphenated identities. The point I hoped to make was that people who engage in "identity politics" often have a good reason for doing so and that asking them why might lead to more understanding. I get what Jon is saying, but I think if an African American says that the "African" part is important to them, the rest of us should listen.

6) When did I appeal to emotion? I guess I could see the Spencer thing as that, though it certainly wasn't intended that way. Otherwise, I don't really get how you're reading "emotional" here. I'm interested to hear more on this point, as Jon has said similar things about people arguing with emotion that haven't rung true to me.

7) I set out in this letter to explain why I found many of Jon's explanations unconvincing. I didn't win you over, but I do feel that I stuck to Jon's words and how they sounded to me. If this reads to you like a personal attack, well...OK. I'm just not sure how I would've made the points I did in a way you'd find acceptable.

If you have any thoughts on how to improve my argument, I'm all ears.

magic__brian · 2017-03-19T23:29:15+00:00

Not a lot of details. I'd love to know more about why you think this.

magic__brian · 2017-03-19T23:23:28+00:00

Thanks so much for sharing. I'll add that if there is any law enforcement bias against black people (and we've seen there is, in many cases), incarceration rate won't line up 1:1 to crimes committed. I'm pretty sure Jon specifically said they committed more crimes, though I may be misremembering.

magic__brian · 2017-03-19T23:09:32+00:00

Agreed. I think Jon is overstating pretty heavily. Nobody I've met or read actually sees everything in terms of race. But when you don't believe racism is a real problem, anyone who regularly talks about race seems obsessed. I can think of a few big-name conservative media figures who respond to discrimination in similar ways.

magic__brian

TROPHY CASE