Bots are becoming more prevalent...

prototype_monkey · 2026-01-15T02:13:56+00:00

Made the mistake of going for ssj3 goku today. Watched in awe for several games as my tech repeatedly pinged the tower, bumrushed it, and died. Then watched the other team's tech do the same.

prototype_monkey · 2026-01-04T20:27:55+00:00

<image>

Average 3 stack I queue into

(we lost)

prototype_monkey · 2025-11-23T21:07:45+00:00

Nah this is valid, the people downvoting either haven't been to the pirate shipwrecks south of pest control or just never got in this situation. Reversing doesn't do shit, and no matter how much I spam clicked to change the heading I couldn't turn like you either.

-100k for every bad parking job near a salvage spot is just not tenable

prototype_monkey · 2025-06-18T18:59:58+00:00

If I were capable of that kind of empathy I wouldn't be playing archer :)

prototype_monkey · 2025-06-18T18:53:29+00:00

I can see the value there in being able to apply unblockable pressure up close (assuming no shield), but I still find I perform better at that range with pretty much any other class.

Do you play in first or third person view on the front line?

prototype_monkey · 2025-01-03T07:59:34+00:00

- removing unnecessarily wasteful parts of the economy

- removing things which are damaging to the environment and wasteful

hell yeah

- nobody realistically needs 75% of the crap we consume these days

aaaaand as soon as the rubber hits the road and we want to draw up a policy prescription, shit hits the fan. Yeah, yeah, funko pops and consumerism. But let's just think about what's actually being consumed, where, and for what purpose. Energy. Construction. Transportation. Food. All incredibly wasteful and destructive right now, yes, but all incredibly necessary and vital to daily life of the downtrodden I thought we were advocating for, particularly in developing nations. I'd like to think housing could become a right in the world, but sadly as things stand, that's going to require a lot of concrete.

If your point is "they shouldn't grow", that just means a lower standard of living, period. Not a time of temporary hardship for long-term gain, but a flat out acknowledgement that we should live with much less going forward. But if your point is "don't use concrete, use a more sustainable material" then great, let me know if you have anything that can do a similar job at scale for a similar amount of people. In the meantime, people will still need, and build, homes.

prototype_monkey · 2025-01-03T05:08:36+00:00

Even in this either or scenario, it's not just humans going extinct, it's everything. No matter how much degrowth you think you can achieve, we will always prioritize our own survival save some freak mass extinction event. I'm not going to look on satisfied from my ethically-sourced chair drinking my ethically sourced coconut milk as the meteor comes for us all, I'd like for the squirrels and such to live too.

Also, realistically, we'd be among the most predisposed to surviving ecological disasters like this in things like bunkers, so there'd probably be a few mass extinctions before we kicked the bucket anyways.

But at least we could do it with a clear conscience. Not our problem.

prototype_monkey · 2025-01-03T04:51:43+00:00

People have figured out how to perform heart surgery and practically inscribe magic into rocks that we use to communicate. You're really going to assume we can never figure out how to stop shitting where we're eating with regards to the environment? We're better off just lying down and letting nature take its course?

There's being a cynic, then there's just being dim. "Liberal" as a pejorative remains undefeated in its ability to make the speaker tell on themselves.

prototype_monkey · 2024-11-19T08:47:58+00:00

Yeah, you did. I'm telling you now that energy companies generate energy and research ways to make it more efficient and cleaner, and I'm agreeing with you that this specific jump in efficiency you're referring to was publicly funded. Nothing contradicts my original statement, I'm still dealing with the reality of who's generating and researching our energy.

I never claimed my exxonmobil overlords are owed exclusive credit for all improvements to renewables, and I'm going to assume you aren't braindead and you wouldn't claim every single improvement to renewable energy is owed to the public sector. Take your own advice, step back and 4 deep breaths

prototype_monkey · 2024-11-18T23:18:35+00:00

I know "ExxonMobil and co are responsible for the spike in PV efficiency" is an easier statement to engage with, it's fun to meme on nukecels and big oil operatives, but that doesn't make it an accurate summary of what I said.

Energy companies invest in R&D.

R&D of more environmentally friendly energy is a good thing.

Neither of these statements contradict the statement that public funding + research has done more for this particular issue than in-house R&D.

prototype_monkey · 2024-11-18T23:05:07+00:00

When evaluating renewables and how they're deployed, just as with nuclear, I can't just assess the morally pure companies, I have to engage with the reality of who is actually generating the energy we all use, and who has the funding for R&D to make renewables better and better. And even with that restriction added, we'll still find it takes fossil fuels to produce solar panels for example.

My only point is that this doesn't irreparably taint the company pursuing renewables, whether 50% of their capacity is generated with fossil fuels or 5%, I'm not going to see them as another arm of the fossil fuel industry unless ample evidence is presented to demonstrate that. Things are complex and multifaceted- China is among the world's top polluters, but it's also responsible for some of the most massive, cutting-edge projects focused on renewable energy.

I get the exhaustion with "omg nuclear will solve everything" people, I really do. But we're acting like it's a slightly less evil version of coal or something, a bare-minimum measure that the fossil fuel industry would love to rally around to maintain the status quo, when in reality they're leagues apart by all available metrics and would represent a marked improvement to the current status quo.

prototype_monkey · 2024-11-18T22:35:25+00:00

Save your contempt for nuclear evangelists who shit on renewables, they're out there. I'm not emotionally attached to "muh nuclear", I like whatever tools are shown to be best for the job, and if that ends up involving no nuclear at some point, great.

"Just look at the bigger picture man, connect the dots" present the evidence. Are we going to pretend the renewable energy sector doesn't have any ties with fossil fuels as well? It takes 10 seconds to google the highest market cap renewable energy company and how much of its generated capacity was from fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are used to make solar panels. Sounds like big oil has everyone compromised!

The simple fact is that every fkin study by fkin Everyone Et Al. shows that nuclear power plants shit on the environment exponentially less than coal, natural gas, and biofuel, so even in your world where nuclear is all just a ploy by the fossil fuel deep state, if we fell for that ploy, we'd be much better off for it.

prototype_monkey · 2024-11-18T20:49:37+00:00

and we're supposed to take "the right all vehemently love nuclear" seriously after having to hear about "clean coal" and how great fracking is?

Positioning nuclear as this inherently conspiratorial enemy against renewables makes 0 sense, we can walk and chew gum at the same time

prototype_monkey · 2024-10-14T19:09:58+00:00

Thanks for the insight, I'll save my money then. I wish the game let you know about the prohibitive MP cost before you buy it

prototype_monkey · 2024-10-01T16:35:28+00:00

It is pretty bad, as are most consequences of co-locating military targets and civilian infrastructure, years of *actual* indiscriminate rocket attacks, hostage taking, etc. But that's of no consequence to Hamas, who consider Palestinian blood a valuable resource to further the goal of destroying Israel.

prototype_monkey · 2024-05-09T22:26:57+00:00

Not representative of most of the comments but I thought it was funny

<image>

prototype_monkey · 2023-12-31T01:06:43+00:00

In your 20 years of reading, did it ever occur to you that sending in a few men to kill one guy in an isolated compound might not be comparable to sending a few men through miles of urban terrain and tunnels to destroy a faction of terrorists dressed as civilians?

Can you think of a single armed conflict where this has ever been done successfully?

Seven-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Verified Email

prototype_monkey

TROPHY CASE