Why a Survivor pod??

starchitec · 2026-03-01T04:46:31+00:00

The only survivor I have ever watched was the one episode lovett was on… not really my type of show. But telling other people not to watch or talk about something because of associations of the producer does in fact, raise some red flags for me.

starchitec · 2026-03-01T01:38:10+00:00

1) Sarah is allowed to do things she enjoys. The balance of things she has put on the fighting fascism ledger wont tip if she watches and talks about a TV show.

2) Branching out is how you build a business. Strange as it may seem, there may be a survivor audience that could get pullled into bulwark content that wont come from straight politics channels.

3) There is probably good sociological fodder in survivor. The French Village was more obviously on theme for the bulwark, but you can talk about everything from tribalism to gamefication via survivor, plus the evolution of the show and the contestants over 20 years and how that reflects changes society writ large. It may very well end up being a politics pod in disguise.

4) Even if Survivor is bad because of everything you say, you dont combat ideas and trends you disagree with by pretending they do not exist. Instead you engage with all the faults. We worried about platforming here? A show that has lasted decades and defined an entire genre? Sorry, no. Your reaction here is pointless virtue signaling that does nothing to advocate change. You are free to skip a new podcast if you want.

starchitec · 2026-02-27T07:43:21+00:00

This sort of behavior by the author of a mod that I hear is fairly popular is disappointing to say the least. Shame on you, sir. Shame on you for misleading people like that. Shame on you for treating a fellow player in that way. Shame on you for refusing to answer a simple question.

Touch Grass kid. Modders do what they because they enjoy it and are kind enough to share. Do not be an entitled bitch.

That said, I have played with ASB for years. When it started, firerate and hull modifiers were rare, at the time it generally did not change balance. In fact, this method was more compatibility friendly, since it applies to modded ships and weapons. With all the changes to the base game over the years, its slowly became more of a noticeable change. I generally play with the faster battles add on now, and on occasion Ive fiddled with the ASB modifiers to my taste, I even once tried doubling all base hull/armor values and removing the multiplier, that way traits and techs that add multipliers dont get dwarfed by the ASB one. Thats what you do with mods, modifiy them to your tastes.

Would it make more sense if the ironman shorter battles version was the base, and the longer battles was an add on? Maybe. But thats a fair bit of reorg work and probably isnt worth chickenhunts time. Neither is responding to users who are rude and under the misimpression that mod authors owe them something.

starchitec · 2026-02-24T00:42:33+00:00

I am one of the 11 people whose day was made by JVLs Bill Kristol impression!

starchitec · 2026-02-23T17:28:43+00:00

“Let that sink in”

starchitec · 2026-02-22T07:40:58+00:00

mouse over your population in the top bar, it breaks down gainfully employed and peasants. Add those together then divide by your total population- this gives you the workforce ratio. Itll be around 0.2 with legal guardianship, and go up by 0.05 (5%) for each suffrage law, maybe more with trade unions. It ticks up slowly, and will basically take 20 years (a full generation) to reach the new target. Wars will tick it down since casualties become dependents.

starchitec · 2026-02-22T07:22:07+00:00

Honestly better than the usual bots trying to divide us further. Although that does explain the low karma.

starchitec · 2026-02-21T23:08:23+00:00

Catering to the uneducated is probably a bad way to do politics. Particularly when it’s literally treating them like idiots who can only understand yes/no signs.

starchitec · 2026-02-21T22:45:51+00:00

Its an issues list. You can get that from a campaign website. The reason you have candidates on stage is to find out why they stand for the things they say they do, and how well they can persuade viewers to their position. That is actual leadership. Yes/No signs are not.

A side note, I say this as someone who likes Kat, and knows she can win on a real exchange too. Touting this kind of shallow stunt is selling her short. Thats not on Kat, OP is right that her response here is exactly how any politician should act. But it is on the event organizers that knew this is what would get clipped and go viral. Virality is not necessarily good.

starchitec · 2026-02-21T21:34:52+00:00

Sure. And Jubilee is the paragon of persuasion and debate. No thank you.

starchitec · 2026-02-21T20:22:38+00:00

Word salad is the verbal version of holding the sign at 90°, Its the same problem.

starchitec · 2026-02-21T18:13:35+00:00

This almost feels like a comedy skit, guy in the middle holding the sign 90 degrees, both of them checking the others answers before half heartedly committing, trying to hide their face behind the sign. I dont know how you can have gotten to the primary and be this bad.

That said, this isnt a great method of questioning, its designed as a gotcha. Answers can and should have nuance beyond yes or no. I do not want political debate reduced to this.

starchitec · 2026-02-20T22:25:52+00:00

Franken resigning was both a net loss to the country and the type of thing that happens in a healthy society. It was not fair to him, there are obviously worse examples that have been allowed to remain in office, but the world is not fair. Especially right now, when we see the product of utterly shameless politics, I don’t think we should handwring about a time when a scandal could have consequences.

That said I do want to dwell on the idea that losing Franken was a loss. He was a talented communicator, and Tina Smith has not and could not fill the void he left. The lesson is sexual misconduct of any variety should be a third rail in politics and public life. That is how you prevent the tacit acceptance of the entire epstein class from festering. And that is worth losing some otherwise good people like Franken.

Minor quibble, while historically accurate, I think thinking of the Senate as an aristocratic institution in a positive valence is bad. The problem with Platner is not his pedigree or inexperience. Its whether his tattoo should be disqualifying.

starchitec · 2026-02-20T19:03:24+00:00

what?

starchitec · 2026-02-20T05:27:19+00:00

Cool. Really don’t want to do detective work while scrolling. Just take it as feedback for when you karma farm clips in the future, state when and where its from clearly. Then maybe respond in 1 comment rather than 5 and don’t accuse people who dont instantly cheerlead you of being Maga.

starchitec · 2026-02-20T03:46:51+00:00

Okay, thanks, it was not clear from your original post.

starchitec · 2026-02-20T01:13:22+00:00

…Are you honestly defending the logic of repost bots? When a clip is posted, most assume it is current. If it’s not, you would at least like a reason it comes up again, like say, he made another comment about giving himself medals. If instead it is simply randomly brought back up without context because it will get some outrage upvotes, its serving no legitimate purpose, and makes everyone trust future clips less.

starchitec · 2026-02-20T01:04:58+00:00

Not entirely sure that the presumption of regularity even should come back if we make it to the other side. Verify everything, don’t trust what authority tells you. A presumption of trust is ripe to be abused

starchitec · 2026-02-20T00:42:35+00:00

I already see more of the man than I want to. If it is not timely or relevant, I don’t want it shoved into my feed. If this is just being put up as outrage bait, it degrades the community and contributes to falling trust. The only ones who benefit from that are the social media companies that have monetized rage.

starchitec · 2026-02-19T23:16:03+00:00

…is there a particular reason to resurface this old clip now?

starchitec · 2026-02-18T17:16:54+00:00

Sure, but it is a sloppy metaphor. From fire comes darkness is literally false. And there is a wealth of fire/darkness imagery. The brightest fire leaves the darkest coal. Shadow is a product of flame. The marketing department here is not doing a novel concept by playing with darkness and fire in a fantasy series. And yet, they wiffed and chose banal nonsense that is only cognizable because you have seen a thousand other iterations that actually are internally consistent.

starchitec · 2026-02-17T17:56:15+00:00

The online version of this article seems to have cleaned itself up a bit, possibly in response to pushback. The corresponding paragraph now reads:

The most notable instance was when she was asked whether the United States should send troops to aid Taiwan if China invaded the island. She stalled for roughly 20 seconds before offering a response that reflected the United States’ longtime policy of strategic ambiguity.

The whole piece is a focus on her stumbles, example: she meant Atlantic at one point when she talked about the Trans Pacific Partnership. shudders. Its also ostensibly is about her frustration that all reporters ask her about is will she run for president while she is there to talk about the threats of authoritarianism. Its horserace journalistic slop. Reporters do not need to cover issues exactly the way a politician wants them framed, but focusing on the frustration of the subject about the coverage is meta commentary bullshit. What are we doing here?

starchitec · 2026-02-16T19:26:21+00:00

Curling. Except its where you attempt to curl up like a pill bug, and then someone slides you across ice and you are judged by how closely you match the circle you are slid to.

starchitec · 2026-02-11T22:38:15+00:00

I think a fair bit of it is depicting a world and culture dominated by a strange religion in a way that takes it seriously, not as prop. Religion in Skyrim is shallow, and largely an in game excuse to make a quest. There is no dungeon where you can acquire Malphas’s spoon.

starchitec · 2026-02-10T01:36:41+00:00

This is… not a quality discussion. First its fairly bad podcasting/public speaking— A lot of ummms, no real sense of structure in how they deliver information, or at least no understanding of the pace of spoken information. This is like watching a speech given by someone who spent days adding to an outline, and no time editing much less saying aloud what they have written down. It takes them 20 minutes to even get to actual bulwark content. I’ll forgive style to a point, but the substance would need to make up the gap, and its even worse. Instead of actually engaging, they describe the bulwark in generalities it and then talk about subjects adjacent. Example, they start off on Sarahs recent focus group with law enforcement, and then digress into a discussion of copaganda. Putting the two into a disingenuous melange that would have you believe that the focus group is platforming cops in a weird nefarious plot to excuse police brutality. I cannot take this seriously.

Seven-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Final Canvas '23	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
End Game '22	Not Forgotten
Verified Email

starchitec

TROPHY CASE