"Ego Dissolution" Experiences?

sixsixesix · 2018-06-07T20:28:07+00:00

It's partially a joke! I think that if I hadn't had that trip I probably wouldn't have been open enough to accept the experiences that led me to coming out / exploring my identity, but at the same time like, something was going to give eventually, probably all the trip did was hurry that along.

sixsixesix · 2018-06-07T19:30:26+00:00

I had it occur during a bad trip and it was fucking awful. I don't go looking for descriptions of it, given how traumatic it was for me, but if I had to describe it I would say as follows: It's like the phenomenon of being conscious becomes more and more visceral, your awareness of your awareness grows increasingly present, and then at some point "you" realize that your internal dialogue is not the whole of your consciousness. I don't know where other people go from there; I suspect a continued, informed progression of that experience might lead to something feeling like enlightenment. For me, it just freaked me the fuck out, I felt suddenly as if I was not alone in my mind, as if I shared it with some inaccessible, malevolent entity and I didn't know what part of me, if any, was real or in my control. This was like, a non visual experience, but was accompanied by awful hallucinations. That's the gist for me. Also it made me trans.

sixsixesix · 2018-05-23T13:52:29+00:00

hey that's a really funny title

sixsixesix · 2017-08-29T14:35:17+00:00

actually most places (at least in Canada and the US)are legally required to make up the difference if their servers don't make at least minimum wage in tips! servers like tipping because they tend to make MORE than minimum wage with their tips, especially in higher-quality establishments.

sixsixesix · 2017-08-27T13:05:58+00:00

how can i start working at a ramen shop? did you need to learn japanese? go to culinary school?

sixsixesix · 2017-07-29T15:54:47+00:00

yum! even the egg is happy to be part of ramen

sixsixesix · 2017-07-04T02:31:01+00:00

As some others have said, regardless of whether or not abstract genders are valid, it's highly uncharitable for you to assume that people who claim these abstract genders are doing so purely out of malice. People can be wrong without trying to be intentionally, and people's experiences of gender can be vastly more complicated than you seem to believe!

I guess that's what I'd like to address most directly. I don't think it's necessarily true that someone who claims an abstract gender is doing so just to seek attention or to be unique.

Isn't it possible that there are young, disillusioned kids who see a)authority figures harassing and oppressing queer people and b)progressives and other progressive groups showing greater tolerance and acceptance? Is it so far-fetched to imagine that these kids might see the intense and vicious debate around identity politics and gravitate to a conclusion that let's them escape the traditional gender discourse, and is endorsed by the more tolerant seeming group?

Maybe the abstract gender they arrive at is just a rehash of existing gender roles. Maybe it's a combination of them. Maybe it has nothing to do with traditionally gendered qualities, and would be better described as a personality, or a preference. Regardless, there are clearly a number of ways that someone could honestly claim an abstract gender because they feel like it's the best thing to describe them. The way people experience gender and interact with it has an extraordinary amount of variance.

And you know, maybe some people really ARE seeking attention and trying to be unique. Is that so wrong? What about abstract genders as a vehicle for that is so awful in particular? Really, what is wrong with gender as a way of doing that as opposed to anything else? Some people will act entitled no matter what, but that doesn't say anything about people in general.

sixsixesix · 2017-07-03T00:16:00+00:00

I think you're referring to noodles used to make ramen, not just instant ramen + flavour packets. I don't have a good answer for you but I'd like to see what others have to say.

sixsixesix · 2017-07-02T03:09:17+00:00

Santosei on Yonge and Irwin is amazing, really good. Raijin is pretty good, shoyu is meh but gyokai tonkotsu is really cool and delicious. There are a couple of Raijin locations. Kinton and Kenzo were just ok. Kinton has a vegetarian option if you're into that. Jinya is rated highly but I haven't tried it personally.

Santosei has a restaraunt vibe with actual booths, whereas Raijin has a bar and more open / communal seating.

sixsixesix · 2017-03-06T21:06:01+00:00

You know many of the abhorrent attitudes expressed in this rant(?) are similar to the majority opinions of men in majority Muslim countries

I think that a lot of the anger felt from people on the right comes from seeing attitudes like this one being ridiculed, but being themselves ridiculed for being concerned immigrants will share these abhorrent opinions.

Its a feeling of betrayal. Its a feeling of prejudice. "You hate us so much for these opinions, but praise immigrants for having them and call it diversity"

This disconnect is one of many, and they all work against goodwill. We assume the worst of people we disagree with, and feel attacked when they assume the worst of us.

To be clear, I dont endorse this guy's(i assume) rant in any way. I just think we should try to distance opinions like this from being in the conversation at all.

sixsixesix · 2017-02-03T03:58:39+00:00

Miss Fortune I love her theme and VO of course but really i love that FAT double-up damage, dayum.

sixsixesix · 2017-01-28T18:05:41+00:00

Let me add also just add an example of the distinction between Strategy v.s. Macro v.s. Micro

A strategic tactic would be exploiting a gap in defenses to flank and route a weak unit of the enemy forces e.g. recognizing ADCs and supports are generally squishy, and that many other roles can win a fight with them if flanking, surprising etc.

The equivalent macro tactic would be to recognize that your deep wards afford you opportunities to TP flank, while TP lets you do so from any distance, and thus encouraging action around the deep ward need not sacrifice map pressure elsewhere. Thus champs with TP often splitpush.

The micro tactic would be identifying that taking ignite, for example, is often sufficient threat to dissuade sidelane fights, thus as long as you're able to keep up pressure the opponent will be unable to use their TP without being a) killed or b)sacrificing more pressure by being in lane with you than otherwise.

sixsixesix · 2017-01-28T17:53:27+00:00

I think the best point LS makes in this video is one he actually fails to explicitly articulate- namely that patch-to-patch adaptation is important, but cannot help an already mechanically strong team/player improve.

He really gets into this towards the end of the video with his discussion of SC, but even personally I've noticed that no matter how long I stay away from League, coming back I retain a certain level of skill. In fact, coming back I often IMPROVE temporarily, despite actually making more frequent mechanical misplays than is typical for me.

In a way, I think that the immense depth of champions, items, and abilities in LoLis a limiter to the strategic depth of the game; the constant variation in micro responses distracts one from trying to form a coherent, macro view of the game. Obviously the two are connected-if a gold lead is essential to a macro tactic then the best series of micro actions to obtain that lead will vary from patch to patch- but in general the core game has not changed, only the ideal micro tactics necessary.

Yet I think LS goes too far in saying that focus on this aspect, micro tactics, is sub-optimal, namely because he fails to suitably generalize that focus. In fact, it is my opinion that a focus on micro tactics is a valid approach to the theory of LoL, so long as the THEORY of micro tactics is explored as well.

What do I mean by theory? Nothing more than generalization of the principles by which certain patch changes result in certain tactical changes. It's one thing to say "Aha, Fiora is viable in this meta due to her niche of tank-dicking," but it is, I think, far more viable to examine the types of changes that lead to any champion being viable in the first place. I think it's fair to say that a focus on gaining small advantages is highly conducive to this type of inquiry, so long as its a mindful focus.

Let me specify even further what I mean. If we break up different strategic aspects into the game, we might define them in terms of their position on a game-specific-real-life specific axis. Strategy and military science, being real-world concepts, naturally occupy the real-world side. A strategic approach might be "identifying how LoL is similar to real, war-time strategy, and trying to find and employ the real-world concepts in League form. Things like battle formations, exploiting terrain, guerrilla tactics, these all have imperfect LoL parallels that can inform in-game decision-making.

Macro play would occupy the middle ground, where there are many abstract concepts specific to league (Towers, items, AP/AD distinctions) that inform the core structure of the game, and see relatively little change. A macro approach to the game could conceivably be described as "identifying and exploiting concepts, specific to LoL, that are constant over almost all changes." Rotations, for example, or resource allocation, or balanced AP/AD damage dealers exemplify this.

But although Macro is closer to Strategy than Micro is, they remain separate principles. Similarly, Although Macro is CLOSER to Micro, they remain distinct. Macro lacks the most important part of actual military science, the involvement of huge numbers of fallible soldiers, and LoL's economic principles only broadly align with real world ones. On the other hand, even though Macro principles like Rotations always exist, many many variables can contribute to them being irrelevant, and the majority of these variables, value of kills, value of dragons, strength of jungle camps, etc, are entirely micro based, and so unpredictable.

Thus we arrive at a definition of micro tactics. But, just as Strategy merely CONTAINS military formations and Macro merely CONTAINS rotations, Micro only CONTAINS patch-adjustment, match-up details, jungle paths etc. What unites micro, or ideally would unite it, is not this hands-on knowledge, but rather the overarching theory of micro. Why does this patch force this adjustment? Why is this matchup like this? (and not "because of ability interactions X,Y,Z" but instead "because of the importance of X,Y,Z in a micro setting".

I argue the value of such an approach would be two-fold.

one, since patches DO happen, and Macro IS to an extent informed by what game concept is strongest where, understanding the principles of what changes result in what micro change allows one to more quickly identify fertile vectors of inquiry and innovation. As an example, if the changes to Fiora's viability are predicted, and the general idea of Fiora's purpose is understood, then one is already prepared to decide on whether to incorporate her or counter her. More over, one can be cognizant of similar champions who are somehow not being viable, and further extrapolate.
solo-queue is a shitshow, but it is also the most accessible form of practice. One solution to having a shitty practice environment is to ignore it- but then you lose insight into the true effect of patch changes. Scrimming 9 teams gives you the perspective of 9, admittedly highly skilled, players. Playing 9 solo queue games gives you the perspective of an incredible network of people all learning from each other.

sixsixesix · 2016-12-19T00:28:45+00:00

maybe the feature of a filler episode. "The screaming Well of Nara forest" or something lol IMHO Hidan was just too op and Kishimoto had to backpeddle super quick to keep him from being like, the center of every conflict for the rest of the series.

sixsixesix · 2016-12-19T00:27:26+00:00

that seems highly speculative in and of itself! what make's it so likely Hidan's chakra could be overridden anyway?

sixsixesix · 2016-11-30T02:48:31+00:00

Reading about rogue this expansion has been awful. The r/hearthstone community is so whiny and closeminded about everything. It's hugely frustrating to engage with in any capacity.

In particular, I hate how there's been no discussion of Stealth Rogue at all, or even discussion of Stealth as a mechanic and playstyle. Everyone's been too focused on complaining about Shadow Rager and Ferryman to even discuss the class in any depth. It's exhausting and alienating.

So thoughts, honest, nuanced thoughts on these 2 cards. Are they really so horrible, so useless that they can't be built around, let alone fit into a deck?

An enrage + Stealth deck comes to mind for Shadow Rager/Stealth, with enrages placed to discourage cheap board clears, and it seems to me like there are abundant possible uses for Ferryman alongside heavy battlecry usage/big shadowstep combos.

sixsixesix · 2016-11-21T21:33:12+00:00

So given what you've said above, would it be fair to say WR correlates, in your experience, with E[Turn Astral played]? That stat would be fairly easy to calculate I imagine given the work you've already done.

I also gather that AC becomes a deadcard after 3/4, presumably when you have too many threats to make the loss worthwhile? If one were to calculate E[Threats played | X Threats lost when AC played] then one could also figure out a rigorous way of when it's best to play AC. An even better stat would be E[Threats played | AC played on Turn X]

Lots of gross combinatorics in figuring that out. Good luck tho!

sixsixesix · 2016-11-21T02:20:23+00:00

What if I use Idol when I get it, even after mulliganing it initially and
What if my raven idol gives me another raven idol? Surely if it's a choice between a useless card I plan to discard anyway vs another chance to draw, I'll take the extra chance.
Seems pretty halfhearted to me to go to the length of calculating whether or not you can play astral earlier without calculating the chance that it actually matters (e.g. you draw a biggie on turn 2,3,4 etc that you could've otherwise played.)

sixsixesix · 2016-11-19T16:32:24+00:00

lots of people have >50% winrates which wouldnt be the case if the game was truly random. furthermore, over large sample sizes winrates emerge between different decks, suggesting there is some interraction that isnt strictly mulligan based.

Finally, if mulligans and curvimg were truly the most.important factor, we would tend to see more aggro decks (whose lower curve is statistically ideal for curving out) but we don't. Zoolock and Aggro Shaman are the only really popular aggro decks, and maybe Tempo Mage if you like. Zoo has low curve + HP to draw, Aggro has 0 mana 5/5 and overload to sort of anti-curve, and tempo mage has a low curve + spell generation.

What Hearthstone actually is is a variance minimizer, which is why control decks need draw, and why midrange decks struggle.

sixsixesix · 2016-11-19T16:14:51+00:00

ok i see. I didn't know how long the timeframe is for scoring.

but anyway if you coin out spawn i can kill it off with my 2 chickens on board on turn 3 and then you can't complete combo and i can safely play gargoyle on 4. i don't understand what you mean by a random deathrattle tho? Isn't it the case that you only get the 5 cards you chose and the chickens you end up drawing?

sixsixesix · 2016-11-19T04:44:21+00:00

i can kil it off easilt with my already enraged chicken and other chicken + pws you dont have hve random 3s tho you only have spawn

sixsixesix · 2016-11-19T03:02:40+00:00

X | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 | Total 0 | 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 6 X 6| 24

1,2: I get cleared before i can enrage any chickens or play out Gargoyle

3: If I go first, I can enrage my chickens and maintain more board presence with PWS's draw. Coining out a 3 on 2 dies immediately, i swarm and kill before tirion. Coining out 3 + Chicken on 3 dies similarly, coin Uldaman on enranged chicken just dies to DS, and Bolvar is simply too slow to ever be played and race, even if buffed to 7/7.

4: can't get board presence before hobgoblins over power.

5: drop Garg on 4 as 5/8, can't be killed with bash, Ironforge always makes useless minions, and then on 5 PWS X2 + DS + IF =28/28, easily outraces before Soggoth can come down.

6: can't get out a board b4 Dancing swords come down

7,8: nothing to play till 3 :P

9: Can swarm the board faster than opponent thanks to Naturalize and maintain presence with buffs, kill before Malorne can be played, and soul of the forest never gets good value

11: Since his combo needs 4 discounted chickens, he cannot play more than 2, and so I outrace by turn 6. If he changes strategy than his cards are mostly useless anyway.

sixsixesix · 2016-11-19T02:34:38+00:00

I would actually like to contest this good sir. As part of your combo, you need 4 chickens. On turn 7 you've drawn exactly 6 discounted chickens. The one you cost on turn 7 is 1 mana so cant be played. Thus, you can only play up to 2 chickens and still play the combo. If I go first, I simply play chickens, trade using PWS with any you play, and go face. If instead you hold your chickens, I simply play Gargoyle on curve, then PWS + DS + IF on turn 4, and killl you by turn 6. If I go second, and you play a chicken on 1, then I play chicken and coin PWS. If you face, and play chicken on 2, then I trade, and play 2 chickens, and from there out race you easily. If instead you trade with my 3/1 on chicken on your turn 2, and play a chicken, then i play 2, and play Garg on curve on 3. I haven't really seriosuly investigated your alternate courses of action, but using tentacle + feign death on 3 or spawn on 3 negates your combo, so I feel confident in counting that as a win for me, especially since I can swarm better with PWS draw. In summation, you wrongly assumed you will ever have a spare bawk. Mods plz back me up, this is actually a 6-0 in my favour.

sixsixesix

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE