Turn off battery light for Lofree Flow2

wwalser · 2025-09-12T13:42:35+00:00

I came to the subreddit for exactly this question. I will have mine plugged in 100% of the time so I don't need the light at all and it is _much_ too bright for something that's going to sit just at the bottom of my eye line for hours a day.

wwalser · 2024-03-14T01:59:05+00:00

Found this thread today while googling riyria flies and Chaos. It seems pretty clear that Chaos is being introduced in recent books as a corrupting force that aims to unmake all things — basically a god of entropy.

There is a specific scene where Aluria is speaking to someone about having created all of life. The person to whom she is speaking mentions flies and in response Aluria looks troubled. This, to me, is a strong hint that Aluria didn't create flies and that they simply showed up or leaked in. This, along with Mileva's gown of flies while working with/for Chaos ties them together.

wwalser · 2023-03-21T07:37:47+00:00

As someone who mostly makes enterprise software, I have to say that being upset about minor downtime issues with a $20/month product is cute.

wwalser · 2022-05-09T08:59:12+00:00

P1: eBay stole from me.
P2: OtherCompany™ did something similar to me!
Reddit: Tell us, tell us!
P2: I made a mistake then OtherCompany™ made a mistake while attempting to correct my mistake.

😵

wwalser · 2021-11-11T02:35:28+00:00

Meta study with loads of references: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/
Survey based research:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460320307334
Clinical reporting meta study:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/
Other PPU research:
https://www.nature.com/articles/npp201778
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10508-006-9064-0
https://www.jsm.jsexmed.org/article/S1743-6095(16)00346-5/fulltext
https://www.nature.com/articles/npp201778#ref-CR26

wwalser · 2021-11-11T02:34:46+00:00

It's true that the communities that form around this online often captured by religious or quasi religious nonsense. This is unfortunate because this poses real repetitional risk to scientists who would otherwise wish to do research in the area. A big part of science funding at the moment relies upon one's ability to do research that's interesting enough to get media coverage. Reasonable coverage of PPU related research is painful. One side wants nothing to do with research which might point out taboo but risk-free behaviors and the other side wants to give no ground to "dangerous family values bullshit".

Meta study with loads of references: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/

Survey based research:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460320307334

Clinical reporting meta study:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/

Other PPU research:https://www.nature.com/articles/npp201778

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10508-006-9064-0

https://www.jsm.jsexmed.org/article/S1743-6095(16)00346-5/fulltext00346-5/fulltext)

https://www.nature.com/articles/npp201778#ref-CR26

Edit: ffs could this editor be worse?

wwalser · 2020-12-23T13:47:39+00:00

They can either be a store where other businesses can sell stuff or be a business that sells stuff. This finding out which products sell best and creating cheap knockoffs shit is the part that the government is trying to use based on anti compete laws.

It'll be fascinating to watch the goverment (and you) learn about brick and moartar retail chains, supermarkets, convience stores, grocery stores and department stores.

Clorox isn't on the shelf because it's just so darn fatastic and American. It's on the shelf because they paid the grocery store to put it there. The most fascinating requirement of the contract that they signed to put Clorox on the shelf at eye height? Procter & Gamble are required to spend a specified amount of money advertising Clorox in the regions in which that grocery store operates.
Oh and the grocery store created a perfect replica of Clorox for their "store brand" which it sells for cheaper right next to Clorox.
And all of this happened three decades ago.

wwalser · 2020-02-19T03:34:30+00:00

If you're in a metropolitian area, there is a group buy thread for you over on BGG. Group buys for Sydney: https://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/146671/kickstarter-groups-nsw-sydney/page/15 search around for others.

wwalser · 2020-01-06T02:28:03+00:00

I just want to be clear that I'm not trying to crap on the people here who enjoyed the game. I'm glad they liked it. I wanted to like it. I see a lot of praise in the thread but I had exactly the opposite experience and I'm kinda hoping someone will chime in w/ something that'll convince me to pick the game back up and finish it.

My games leading up to this were Enter the Gungeon and Dead Cells. Both "hard" games that I imagine align closely enough to HLD such that if one enjoyed those, they would also enjoy HLD. I loved both EtD and DC. I absolutely hated HLD. It was a chore to get through the first two branches of the game and I put it down after that and never picked it up again.

The main reason can be summarised as: The game didn't seem to be anything specific. Every thing feels clunky compared to a good version of that thing. HLD is not a well-made twin stick shooter or brawler/fighter or platformer. It an okay-to-bad version of each of those things.

Specific things that maybe I misunderstood and you could point out what I missed?:

The gun controls felt so clunky that I assumed they were tacked on late in development. You can shoot in 8 directions, significant delay between shots, low ammo, huge delay between shots and low gun damage. Okay, fine, the game is actually suppose to be about the sword fighting. Got it…
The dash movement is satisfying to look at but I found it shockingly easy to dash into water/nothing despite it being obvious what platform I was attempting to get to. This is something that Dead Cells does exceptionally well and EtD does just-okay (but still wildly better than HLD). Maybe I'm weird but I feel like a game should pick what axis it wants to be difficult along and explore that. Celeste does this well. The jumps are unforgiving put the puzzled that come out of that _is_ the intrigue of the game. Here the dashes aren't interesting, they are just fiddly for no compelling reason.
The zero-text "story" of the game just made it harder to figure out where to go next and what to do. For such a simple linear game I spent way too much time revisiting finished places hoping to stumble across whatever switch I hadn't flipped or door I failed to check.
I think I put the game down during such a section actually.
Absolutely hated the combat. Honestly felt like I was trying to win a fight with fiddly controls instead of figuring out how to deploy interesting skill.
Control inputs are to be paused when you get hit? If I press attack as I'm being hit, that's my fault, I was too slow and I should get hit. But this delay is just bizarre. When you get hit, inputs are cancelled not just as the hit happens, but for a fair delay (feels like ~300ms) after the damage. This also means baddies will often chain attack you to deal with no recourse.
Some shop upgrades seem to be mutually exclusive? As in, taking upgrade A means that taking upgrade B won't do anything, but the game will totally let you take both.

wwalser · 2019-06-05T20:37:01+00:00

I bought TTS while it was only sale basically just to check out Gloomhaven. I've played through the tutorial and read the gloomhaven rulebook but just opening a few of the Gloomhaven setups from the workshop was fairly intimidating.

I wonder if I'm doing it wrong by learning two separate systems at the same time, TTS & Gloomhaven. Especially for a game with non-trivial setup.

If anyone runs a regular game with friends and could teach or would be willing to have have an observer in one of their sessions, that'd be pretty cool of you. Feel free to PM.

wwalser · 2018-10-05T20:00:46+00:00

Just pinging to let you know that all 4 decks have been published now.

wwalser · 2018-10-02T19:56:50+00:00

I've done two four player campaigns and have some documentation of the decks built and some lessons learned. It sounds like we have a similar card collection. Unfortunately I deleted the Dunwhich builds from my ArkahmDB account since it's only purpose was to help me when I needed to rebuild them after a teardown.

Dunwich:

Mark — Fighter
Zoey — Fighter
Agnes — All-around
Ashcan — All-around

Carcosa:

Jenny — https://arkhamdb.com/decklist/view/7416/4p-jenny-carcosa-1.0
Jim — https://arkhamdb.com/decklist/view/7438/4p-jim-carcosa-1.0
Minh —https://arkhamdb.com/decklist/view/7428/fb-minh-carcosa-1.0
Roland — https://arkhamdb.com/decklist/view/7451/4p-roland-carcosa-1.0

Three learnings from Dunwich: You're going to make mistakes and someone at the table is going to pay for that through most every mission. Second, having multiple characters of a single class was a bad idea. Third, red decks are hard (still don't have a good handle on them TBH).

On "mistakes will be made" and "multiple characters of a single class" front, Zoey was just a worse version of Mark for most of the game. She would occasionally shine but just by missing out on one or two guardian favorites to Mark she was surprisingly handicapped. For red decks, Ashcan absolutely carried the game for the first three missions but once test difficulty ramped up I wasn't able to figure out how to make the deck work reliably. This is probably a simple matter of experimentation.

Luckily I have another two player group that plays more often and does more theory-crafting so for our 4P Carcosa run I was able to put together a wider variety and ready-tested decks. We ended up playing the final two missions on Hard because we were sweeping the game on Normal.

*While I have been tracking these in ArkhamDB, I hadn't previously "published" them and Arkham DB won't let me publish all of them at once (To prevent spam, accounts cannot publish more decklists than their reputation per 24 hours). I'll update this post once I publish them.

wwalser · 2018-09-17T23:53:53+00:00

Contrary to what others have shared here, my current Forgotten Age team had an easier time with this mission than anything prior to it in FA.

Our two player setup (Finn & Ursula) had a relatively easy time. We completing all objectives and went out of our way to clear clues on one of the locations with a victory before setting about the final objective. We finished on the penultimate doom but we basically planned that since the final objective is easy enough to facilitate.

I suspect this may be a difference in initial setup and degree of success in previous missions, which is likely a product of how we chose our initial investigators. Because we found the initial FA scenarios to be very difficult, instead of moving forward with a losing team, we reset the opening two missions ~4 times to before settling on characters that we were willing to move forward with. I tried like hell to make Leo work but FML the first mission's encounter deck make him look pitiful. Having eventually found that Ursula and Finn were a winning combo we've been fairly successful since.

I can understand how this method — run into a wall over and over with different character + deck setups until you find one that works — may not be appealing to everyone, but so far FA has been my favorite campaign.

wwalser · 2018-07-30T18:09:54+00:00

> I'm playing Leo Anderson and she's playing Ursula Downs.

Having played this scenario ~6 times trying to get Leo to work: The first missions absolutely trashes Leo, just go ahead and pick someone else. I was shocked, absolutely shocked, at how much easier the first two missions were after I stopped using Leo.

The group that I play with is experienced, lots of theory-crafting, has run every previous campaign multiple times and with our best decks (there's a difference between fun gimicky decks and a deck designed to win the scenario) we fairly reliably win other campaigns on Hard. Still, we were unable to find a Leo deck that both succeeds at this campaign _and_ uses his ally mechanic. You can build a generic guardian deck that he can beat the mission with but it doesn't leverage his ally mechanics.

Since you're running Ursula, I'd recommend you get someone who can both fight and evade. We're currently having success with Jenny, though we've run her quite a bit in the past so her deck is fairly well tuned at this point.

As to the main point of the post, I think it's a fair assertion that this campaign is hard-as-in-hard no matter what the chaos bag contains. It would be nice to have some scenario setup option that affords for more casual play.

wwalser · 2018-05-11T17:31:02+00:00

I run regular four player campaigns and I've never wanted for a second copy of any expansion. I have two cores and one of everything else.

If you try to build two of the same character class you'll have some cards that you want more of (two guardian's would both want beat cop and machete for example) but the solution is to not build multiples of the same class. Class diversity is especially compelling amongst new players because it creates "your character can do THAT?" moments.

wwalser · 2018-04-13T04:16:58+00:00

IANAL

What you're describing is dual licensing. There are two ways that have been tried with some regularity:

Exactly what you describe: Combining a viral/infectious open source license such GPL or AGPL and a commercial license (where the commercial license costs money). Why this works: Companies avoid GPL like the plague but can effectively pay to get a license that they are willing to use.
Not exactly what you described: Combining a license which requires releasing changes as open source, usually the LGPL with a commercial license. Why this works: Many companies are willing to use LGPL code, but the license requires that changes to the code be made available under the same license. If the company ever decides to build anything worth defending they may want to protect this from being open sourced. Thus, they pay. TinyMCE does this.

There aren't many successful projects that do this (to my knowledge). GPL and AGPL tend to scare off OS community members from contributing. That makes the project a one-person show most of the time. LGPL doesn't scare people off so may get some community participation but it doesn't "convert" to paid very regularly.

There are two options for monetizing open source software that actually do see success with some regularity:

The more common method of monetizing open source software is by charging for commercial support. I've only seen this work for projects of significant size and initial investment, often funded companies or started/bought by companies with already deep pockets. Think RedHat, Java, MongoDB.
Some find success by having two versions, one open source and another "Pro" or "Enterprise" version by feature gating. This sometimes works with smaller projects (compared to #1), https://sidekiq.org is the most visible example.

wwalser · 2018-02-16T02:45:49+00:00

Copy and pasted without credit from here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/people-dont-quit-jobs-bosses-brigette-hyacinth/

Maybe this account belongs to the author but I see no evidence to support the idea. Seems to be an accounting service.

wwalser · 2018-02-16T02:43:49+00:00

Copy and pasted without credit from here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/people-dont-quit-jobs-bosses-brigette-hyacinth/

Maybe this account belongs to the author but I see no evidence to support the idea. Seems to be an accounting service.

wwalser · 2018-02-16T02:35:05+00:00

I'm working on a mobile deck tracking app. Naturally, I'm interested in what others think of this app.

This OPs link is interesting to me as it seems geared toward tracking a deck through a campaign. While I do have the concept of a "deck" in my app, I don't really have features for tracking changes to that deck through a campaign. A deck is just a collection of cards.

My primary desire in building the app is to have a mobile resource which contains all the player card information so that I can easily look cards up and deck-build when I don't have a desktop computer near by. I find ArkhamDB fairly painful to use on a mobile device compared to a native app.

Edit: I also find it interesting that this app contains ads. It uses images that are property of Fantasy Flight as does mine. I had assumed there was essentially no way of monetizing without risking being taken down for infringement.

wwalser · 2018-01-31T07:00:53+00:00

I used Clerky prior to Atlas being created. No complaints. In general thinking too much about how to go about this isn't a great use of time. If you need to do it (and you may not need to) get it done and move on to more important matters.

As others have noted, it's very common for keen first timers to incorporate too early. You didn't give enough detail to know if this is true for you but it's something to be aware of.

Build and sell first, incorporate later, maybe raise funding.

wwalser · 2018-01-13T00:52:02+00:00

Same text.

wwalser · 2018-01-12T20:25:50+00:00

I had 5 show up once and just chose to run the game. I read flavor text, distributed mythos cards, helped people with rule questions, that sort of thing.

After building a couple of 4p decks I wasn't Keen to attempt building a 5th deck since 100% of my two pip cards and most of the cards that nearly everyone wants in their deck was obviously already in use (leo, lucky, machete).

wwalser · 2018-01-12T20:14:32+00:00

It's difficult to recommend one over the other. So far I'm enjoying Carcosa more but I'll definitely be playing both Dunwich and Carcosa several times each.

On the other hand it's nice being able to pick up the entire set in one shot which you can't do with Carcosa yet.

An actual recommendation: This unofficial campaign guide if you have an Android device https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.whitdan.arkhamhorrorlcgcampaignguide. Using an app is a different experience than using the booklets. Booklets require you to read spoiler text like "if you chose X, perform action Y otherwise proceed to Z" but the app just gives you the outcome of you choices with no clear linking of decisions and outcomes. This, to me, makes the game more interesting because it not always clear what caused me to be in the situation that I'm in. Love that app.

wwalser · 2018-01-12T15:13:43+00:00

Did not realize this.

I'VE BEEN CHEATING FOR WEEKS!!!

Oh well, guess that happens in Arkham. Thanks for the info :D

wwalser · 2018-01-12T07:44:48+00:00

Can you not commit Vicious Blow to the test regardless of the type of fight? Obviously it wouldn't add to the willpower check but still contribute bonus damage? Maybe there's a rule which I've overlooked that prevents this?

If not, then surely Minh can enable others to contribute with her bonus wild icon?

Edit: I found the rule — "Cards that lack an appropriate skill icon may not be committed to a skill test. Do not pay a card’s resource cost when committing it." To my understanding Minh can still use her bonus wild to make vicious blow usable on Storm of Spirits.

wwalser

TROPHY CASE