Government agencies around the world continue to run a dragnet on a large amount of communications, most of which is sent under the expectation of having a private conversation and yet the vast majority of the public seems apathetic to the issue. Why is this? Is it because of an underlying cynicism and belief that you can’t do anything to stop them? Is it because you don’t care and are using the “I have nothing to hide” argument? Do you think that it is too much work to protect yourself? I don’t know the answers to these questions, but I hope that we can at least talk about it and maybe I can even convince you to care if you’re willing to hear me out.

First, lets take a look at what these agencies actually do. There are many to pick from such as the CIA, FBI, MI6, MI5, the NSA, GCHQ, and FSB just to name a few. Their goals are pretty much the same as far as intrusive espionage goes. They all want to gather as much data as possible in hopes of finding political dissenters and protest groups, information on powerful leaders from other governments (usually with a strong potential for blackmail) and terrorists (although they rarely ever find them). Like many tyrannical practices before them, it is done under the guise of national security. This is because people are usually willing to sacrifice their freedoms for more (perceived) security. It is important to note that these agencies do not solely operate domestically. They are global threats and their reach extends far further than you may think. Just because you live in the EU does not mean you are safe from their reach.

Does it sound like I’m exaggerating here? It can’t be that bad can it?

Well, lets look at the facts. We don’t know that much about these agencies but what we do know is absolutely terrifying. Whistleblowers like Edward Snowden have shown us that their technology is being used for far more than just hunting terrorists. In fact, the NSA and GCHQ have essentially been running a dragnet on the entire world. Here is an article on the GCHQ showing how they hacked the cell phones of foreign politicians attending the G20 summit in 2009. They did not discriminate, they simply tapped everybody so they could read their texts and listen in on their calls to see whats going on. Here is a similar story where the NSA collected phone calls of Verizon subscribers, only this time they weren’t looking at politicans and suspects, they were either spying on you or people like you. The more recent Vault 7 and 8 leaks showed that the CIA was engaging in similar practices such as developing tools to send information from Smart TVs. Using a code that was written and gifted to the CIA by the UK’s MI5. Even the FBI, a domestic federal police agency has been given the go ahead to hack any computer in the world. Here is some evidence of when they hacked over 8,000 computers in 120 countries using only one warrant (given by a US judge which is NOT valid in any other part of the world) during a child pornography investigation.

But they’re targeting criminals right? I have nothing to be worried about.

First of all, that is the same rhetoric being used by the Chinese Government as they continue to develop facial recognition technology (currently being used to take pictures of jaywalkers and post them on billboards), their social credit system and mandatory surveillance apps on the phones of their citizens. All in effort of building a surveillance state.

This has also not been the case historically. The two biggest enemies of the FBI in the 1960s was the Civil Rights movement and the Anti-War movement. The former article touches on the wiretaps placed on Martin Luther King Jr by the FBI, but its also important to note that they also sent him a death threat as well. The latter link is about the program that targeted both groups. Some modern day examples include the FBI’s survellance of PETA and Greenpeace as well as the NSA and GCHQ’s probe into humanitarian groups such as UNICEF. I also encourage you to read this post written by a redditor about what it is like to live in a surveillance state.

Ever since 9/11, the motto of US intelligence agencies and many others around the world who feared the same threats was “never again”. Never again would they let an atrocity like 9/11 take place. They would do whatever it took to prevent another disaster from happening and so they introduced the PATRIOT act in congress. This 2,000 page act appeared less than a month after the attacks, and was passed with an overwhelming amount of support. As Michael Moore showed in his mockumentary film Fahrenheit 9/11, a member of congress has openly admitted to not having read the bill as well as many of his colleagues. Concerning parts of this act can be found in here.

Now lets take a quick look at what happened in 2002. DARPA created a division of US government called the Information Awareness Office, now if that sounds Orwellian than just take one look at their logo. One year later in 2003 this organization started the Total Information Awareness Program which was described as a "Manhattan Project for Counter-Terrorism". The scope of this program was massive for the time and Senator Ron Wyden called it "biggest surveillance program in the history of the United States”. Sounds pretty creepy right? Yea, the American public thought so too, so DARPA responded in a brilliant stroke of genius to rename the program to Terrorism Information Awareness and suddenly nobody cared about being watched.

Okay, but I’m fine with them spying on me as long it helps them to thwart terror attacks.

Have you seen the news lately? The terror attacks that these practices are supposed to prevent still occur. There has yet to be one documented attack that has been prevented by any of these programs and I will prove to you why. During Edward Snowden’s tenure at the NSA, the Boston Marathon bombings happened.

Here we are in 2013 and the second biggest terror attack since 9/11 has occurred. Snowden watched the events unfold on the news while sitting in the NSA’s break room. He made a remark to his colleagues saying that he would bet anything that we already knew about the bombers, and that they had slipped through the cracks with nothing that could be done to stop them. Turns out he was right Russia had warned both the FBI and the CIA about the older brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev but when the FBI investigated they found nothing. As Snowden so eloquently put it, “when you collect everything, you understand nothing”. Not only are these practices morally wrong, they are also ineffective.

One year later in 2014, Snowden decided to leak everything. He objected to the American and British government’s warrantless surveillance and decided that the public had a right to know what was happening. Among the numerous startling documents, he revealed a program called XKEYSCORE. This program works as a sort of search engine for intelligence agencies. Analysts with access to the system will search for keywords like BOMB and PRESIDENT or DONALD TRUMP. It will then give them a list of unsecured text messages, emails, social media posts and so on. In fact just by writing this, I will likely show up among one of these searches.

Okay, so if they are targeting everybody in the name of safety and they aren’t effective at keeping everybody safe, then why the hell are they still doing it?!

One word: power. Just imagine the things you could do if you had access to everyone’s texts, emails, Facebook posts, bank records, as well as the legal and technical means to gain root access to any of the billions of devices in the world. Sounds pretty impressive right? Unfortunately for us, it all comes at our expense and without taking the proper steps, our lives are not private in the eyes of the government. After all, you wouldn't let a stranger go through your phone, so why would you let a government?

I hope this information has been helpful to those of you who are either learning about this for the first time or getting a reminder on the extent of these invasive practices. I hope that you will reconsider the repercussions of these practices and maybe take steps to protect yourself. If there is any interest then I will post a part 2 later with things you can do to minimize this data collection. Its not as hard as you might think!

For those of you who are still not convinced that governments are a threat to your personal privacy, please drop a comment below so we can get a discussion going.

By the way, anyone who is interested in their privacy is likely under heightened surveillance due to interests in anonymity and security software.

I'm probably about to be guilty of causing the problem I'd like to solve, namely the endless iterations of questions asked and previously answered, or seemingly innocent questions that are tantamount to trolling.

I'm sure there have been prior discussions about pinning items, and I've seen prior commentary about further refining the ground rules for some sub-group areas.

For the sake of efficiency and comity, there are communities where it would be helpful to create a common body of rules, reference material or other semi-permanent posts which should be regarded as the minimum governance/factual/technical basis for having a productive discussion.

From a UI design perspective, Reddit, xda-developers, and some other forums have created visually confusing, dis-unified means of handling this - there are multipage FAQ/Wiki top links plus sidebars plus top pins. There's considerable independence among Reddit forums as to which model is chosen, furthering the confusion. I'd like to see Tildes "keep it simple", so pinned topics may be the way to maintain consistency and uniformity.

Seeking thoughts and discussion about whether this is needed, feasible, desirable, etc.

[What prompted this query was a a random response on this topic which posited a strawman argument so disingenuous that I wanted to run off and pull a Wiki together just so I could say, "do this minimal amount of homework and come back later, or get reported for being an obvious troll".]

Note: edited to remove confusion of groups, sub-groups and topics, since I hadn't had enough coffee yet. Sadly I can't do this for the topic title...

Thought I would share this simple recipe for protein bars I've been making for the last year or so. I used to spend something like $50-$60 per/mo. on the store-bought kind so these have saved me a good bit of $. Bonus points for taking, at most, 10 minutes to put together.

• 1 1/2 cups old fashioned oats
• 1 scoop vanilla whey protein powder (chocolate also tastes good)
• 3/4 cup natural peanut butter
• 1/4 cup mini chocolate chips
• 2 tbs. almond milk

Mix together and mold into bars or roll into balls, and refrigerate for 30-40 mins before eating. Each batch makes about 6 bars or 12 balls.

They don't look like much, but they taste great!

If you haven't watched Firefly, this should still be safe to read. No spoilers.

Let me start by saying I'm a huge fan of Firefly. If someone could somehow combined the core cast, the favour of the universe, the ship, the adventures and everything into one awesome person, that person would be my BFF. However, as an Asian, I probably would not be theirs.

Background

The series is a space cowboy western drama. It takes place in the year 2517 in assumed to be distant solar system from our Earth (Earth-that-was). From the comics, there's a brief comment that mentions Earth-that-was sent generation ships to colonize this new solar system. The ships were sent by the two main superpowers at the time - USA and China. This explains the general western feel mixed with, I'm going to call it - generic Asia.

Core characters

• Malcolm "Mal" Reynolds
• Zoe Alleyne Washburne
• Hoban "Wash" Washburne
• Inara Serra
• Jayne Cobb
• Kaywinnet Lee "Kaylee" Frye
• Dr. Simon Tam
• River Tam
• Derrial Book
• (The ship, Serenity)

And yes, though Kaylee, and the Tam's stand out as Asian-ish names, they are not Asian. In fact no one in the core cast is. There was mention that Kaylee was suppose to be, but they just fell in love with Jewel Staite. I honestly can't imagine another Kaylee, but still can't help but wonder. And to be honest, I'm not sure how I feel with the idea of the only Asian walking around as the only person wearing Chinese clothes.

Non-core characters

Too many to list, but feel free to scroll down the list on IMDb.

You'll find "Jim Lau" - Narrator. I also believe I saw an Asian woman in "Heart of Gold" but can't find her name, so I'm guessing it's an uncredited part.

That's right, in a universe settled by the Americans and Chinese, you'll see maybe one unnamed Asian.

Asia without Asians

But not seeing Asian people doesn't mean there's no Asian influence.

• Kaylee wears "Chinese" clothes a fair bit and even has a paper umbrella. Of course, if any of you have recently visited pretty much anywhere in China, you'll notice no Chinese people wear clothing like that walking their dog.
• Chinese food, like "bao" is also mentioned.
• Quirky Chinese things like "washing feet" and "hundreds of fat children" are woven in.
• The Chinese language in both written and spoken form are littered through-out. The ship, Serenity is named in Chinese (painted on her), but no one actually refers to her by it. Bits of Chinese are tossed around everywhere and obviously every person in this universe is expected to be fluent. There was Asian consultation on this part, so a lot of the language is "correct". They went out of their way to string together crazy sentences, so it's not anything most people would say, but honestly adds to the show. And for their part, you can tell the actors do put an effort in speaking it right, with varying levels of success.

Final thoughts

I still love the show, but do feel disappointed that someone can obviously love my culture so much to see its influence everywhere in this series, but not enough to actually include us.

Edit: formatting

This comes from an article in Current Affairs, which to be upfront is an openly leftist publication. I thought it was an interesting anecdote, especially with the news from a few weeks ago about the woman in Boston begging for people not to call an ambulance for her because she wouldn't be able to afford it (which is also mentioned in the article).

I was in a New York City diner two nights ago and something disturbing happened. It was about 2am, and a woman was sitting alone in the next booth. She was disheveled and possibly homeless, and looked unwell. She had been eating a plate of food, but then sprawled herself along the seat and fell asleep. Someone in the restaurant must have called 911, because an ambulance showed up. They parked directly in front of the entrance and left the flashing lights on, and through the large windows the lights filled the restaurant and were overwhelmingly dazzling. The two paramedics approached the woman and told her to sit up. She mumbled a refusal. They insisted. As she finally sat up, bleary, they told her she would need to leave with them and that she should pay her bill. She replied that she had no money. The paramedics became upset, one of them asking her why she would order food if she couldn’t pay for it, and telling her she’d need to pay before they left. While the paramedics stood issuing her instructions as she muttered and fumbled, a young man at the front of the restaurant quietly approached a server and paid her bill. He then told the paramedics he had paid for her. They looked vaguely annoyed, and told her she should be grateful that a stranger just paid for her. The woman did not seem to comprehend, and just made a noise. Then the paramedics took her out to the ambulance. In the hour or so I stayed in the restaurant, the ambulance didn’t leave, and kept its lights on.

Here’s why I was disturbed: the paramedics did not act like health professionals. They acted like cops. At first, I thought they were cops. Their uniform was similar, and the dazzling flashing lights were like police lights, and had the same bewildering effect. They were more concerned with whether the woman had paid her debts than whether she was okay. They had very clear contempt for her, treating her as a nuisance who was bothering restaurant patrons and needed to be removed. She wasn’t actually bothering anyone, of course; I was sitting in the next booth and had barely noticed her, and there were plenty of spare booths in the diner. But the paramedics were aggressive and unsympathetic in the way that many cops are. Incidents like the one I saw must happen constantly all across the country: homeless people and drug addicts (I don’t know whether the woman was intoxicated or on drugs, though it seemed somewhat likely) not being cared for with compassion, but being “policed” even by those who are supposed to be selflessly devoted to the improvement of health. The flashing lights were totally unnecessary, and made the whole diner feel like a police raid. And, of course, how typical of America that the issue of whether you can pay the bill is more important than whether you will live or die.

What do you think of this? If you've had an experience with emergency medical services, how did it compare?

This is a complex issue and one that's hard to address succinctly. It gets into the larger matter of media and its role and interaction with society, which is profound. This includes political and social elements going far beyond consumerism and consumption, though those are part of the dynamic.

For a short answer: advertising is not the only problem, but is a large component of a set of conflicts concerning information and media. It both directly and indirectly promotes disinformation and misinformation, opens avenues to propaganda and manipulation, and fails to promote and support high-quality content. It also has very real costs: globally advertising is a $600 billion/year industry, largely paid out of consumer spending among the world's 1 billion or so wealthy inhabitants of Europe, North America, and Japan. This works out to about $600/year per person in direct expense. On top of the indirect and negative-externality factors. Internet advertising is roughly $100 billion, or $100/yr. per person if you live in the US, Canada, EU, UK, Japan, Australia, or New Zealand. The "free" Internet is not free.

And the system itself is directly implicated in a tremendous amount of the breakdown of media, politics, and society over the past several years. Jonathan Albright, ex-Googler, now a scholar of media at the Tow Center (and its research director), Columbia University in New York, "Who Hacked the Election? Ad Tech did. Through “Fake News,” Identity Resolution and Hyper-Personalization", and editor of d1g (estT) (on Medium).

[S]cores of highly sophisticated technology providers — mostly US-based companies that specialize in building advanced solutions for audience “identity resolution,” content tailoring and personalization, cross-platform targeting, and A/B message testing and optimization — are running the data show behind the worst of these “fake news” sites.

(Emphasis in original.)

A Media Reader

By way of a longer response, I'd suggest some reading, of which I've been doing a great deal. Among the starting points I'd suggest the following, in rough order. Further recommendations are very much welcomed.

Tim Wu

The Attention Merchants is a contemporary version of the media, attention, distraction, disinformation, manipulation, and power game that's discussed further in the following references. If you're looking for current state-of-the-art, start here. Ryan Holiday and Trust Me, I'm Lying is a 2012 expose of the online media system. For an older view, Vance Packard's 1950s classic (updated), The Hidden Persuaders gives perspective both on what methods are timeless, and what's changed. A 2007 New York Times essay on the book gives a good overview.

Hamilton Holt

Commercialism and Journalism (1909) is a brief, easy, and fact-filled account of the American publishing industry, especially of newspapers and magazines, at the dawn of the 20th century. Holt was himself a publisher, of The Independent, and delivered this book as a lecture at the University of California. It gives an account of the previous 50 years or so of development in publishing, including various technologies, but putting the greatest impact on advertising. I'm not aware that this is particularly well-noted, but I find it a wonderfully concise summary of many of the issues, and a view from near the start of the current system. Holt includes this quote from an unnamed New York journalist:

There is no such thing in America as an independent press. I am paid for keeping honest opinions out of the paper I am connected with. If I should allow honest opinions to be printed in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation, like Othello's, would be gone. The business of a New Yourk journalist is to distort the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the foot of Mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. We are the tools or vassals of the rich men behind the scenes. Our time, our talents, our lives, our possibilities, are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.

(An HN commenter reveals that this was John Swinton.)

Jerry Mander

Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television. This is a 1970s classic that's held its value. Mander is an ad executive himself, though he took his talents to the Environmental movement, working closely with David Brower of the Sierra Club.

Adam Curtis

BBC documentarian, most especially The Century of the Self (part 1, part 2, part 3, and part 4), and Hypernormalisation. These documentaries, the first a four-part series, the second a self-contained 2h40m single session, focus on media and propaganda. The first especially on Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud (Bernays' uncle), advertising, and propaganda. The second on Vladimir Putin.

Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. The title itself comes from Walter Lippmann and his earlier work, Public Opinion, which is something of a guide to its manufacture, and the genesis of "modern" 20th century media. The notion of mass media as having a political economy is a critical element in answering your question. That is: media is inherently political and economic, and advertising and propaganda (or as it was rebranded, "public relations"), all the more so.

Robert W. McChesney

McChesney has been continuing the exploration of media from a political-economic perspective and has an extensive bibliography. His Communication Revolution in particular discusses his own path through the field, including extensive references.

Marshall McLuhan

Particularly The Gutenberg Galaxy and The Medium is the Message.

Elisabeth Eisenstein

Either her book The Printing Press as an Agent of Change or the earlier (and much shorter) article that pressaged it, "Some Conjectures about the Impact of Printing on Western Society and Thought: A Preliminary Report" (more interesting than its title, I promise). Eisenstein draws heavily on, and improves greatly on the rigour of, McLuhan.

Generally: Other 19th and 20th century media scholars and writers

H.L. Mencken, I.F. Stone, and perhaps Walter Lippmann and John Dewey. Mencken and Stone are particularly given to shorter essays (see especially The I.F. Stone Weekly Reader, The Best of I.F. Stone and his New York Review of Books articles) which can be readily digested. Mencken's "Bayard vs. Lionheart" whilst not specifically concerning advertising largely describes the crowd-psychology inherent in mediocre or pathological social-political outcomes, and is a short and brilliant read. Mencken has a long list of further writings.

Edward Bernays

Especially Propaganda and Public Relations. Bernays created the field of public relations, and largely drove the popular support of "democracy" (a WWI war bonds advertising slogan) in favour of the earlier "liberty". For Stone, I cannot recommend his Day at Night interview (~1974) highly enough. 30 minutes. Bernays' New York Times obituary makes interesting reading.

Charles-Marie Gustave Le Bon

The Crowd: A study of the popular mind. "[C]onsidered one of the seminal works of crowd psychology." Wikipedia article.

Charles Mackay

Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (1841). "[O]ften cited as the best book ever written about market psychology." Wikipedia article.

I have yet to read all of these works, though they're on my list, and I've at least reviewed most of the works and authors and am familiar with major themes. Virtually all of these will lead to other sources -- books, articles, authors, fields of study -- by way of bibliographies (looking backward) and citations (looking forward). Among my favourite and most fruitful research techniques.

This is also really just a starting point, though I hope it's a good one. Media isn't my field, or rather, I'd thought that, working in technology, it wasn't, but I've come to realise that (1) "information technology" is in very large part "media technology", and (2) the interactions of media systems and society, politics, economics, even culture as a whole, are beyond deep, and highly underappreciated.

The role of mass media in the spread of early-20th century Fascism is a particularly sobering story. See "Radio and the Rise of The Nazis in Prewar Germany", and recognise that you could include cinema, magnetic audio tape recording, public address systems (it's hard to address three quarters of a million people without amplification). More recently, radio has been studied in conjunction with the 1994 Rwandan genocide. These remain extant issues.

Bootnote

Adapted from a StackExchange contribution.

Expertise researcher Anders Ericsson on why the popular "ten thousand hours of practice to become an expert" rule mischaracterizes his research:

No, the ten-thousand-hour rule isn't really a rule

Ralf Krampe, Clemens Tesch-Römer, and I published the results from our study of the Berlin violin students in 1993. These findings would go on to become a major part of the scientific literature on expert performers, and over the years a great many other researchers have referred to them. But it was actually not until 2008, with the publication of Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers, that our results attracted much attention from outside the scientific community. In his discussion of what it takes to become a top performer in a given field, Gladwell offered a catchy phrase: “the ten-thousand-hour rule.” According to this rule, it takes ten thousand hours of practice to become a master in most fields. We had indeed mentioned this figure in our report as the average number of hours that the best violinists had spent on solitary practice by the time they were twenty. Gladwell himself estimated that the Beatles had put in about ten thousand hours of practice while playing in Hamburg in the early 1960s and that Bill Gates put in roughly ten thousand hours of programming to develop his skills to a degree that allowed him to found and develop Microsoft. In general, Gladwell suggested, the same thing is true in essentially every field of human endeavor— people don’t become expert at something until they’ve put in about ten thousand hours of practice.

The rule is irresistibly appealing. It’s easy to remember, for one thing. It would’ve been far less effective if those violinists had put in, say, eleven thousand hours of practice by the time they were twenty. And it satisfies the human desire to discover a simple cause-and-effect relationship: just put in ten thousand hours of practice at anything, and you will become a master.

Unfortunately, this rule— which is the only thing that many people today know about the effects of practice— is wrong in several ways. (It is also correct in one important way, which I will get to shortly.) First, there is nothing special or magical about ten thousand hours. Gladwell could just as easily have mentioned the average amount of time the best violin students had practiced by the time they were eighteen— approximately seventy-four hundred hours— but he chose to refer to the total practice time they had accumulated by the time they were twenty, because it was a nice round number. And, either way, at eighteen or twenty, these students were nowhere near masters of the violin. They were very good, promising students who were likely headed to the top of their field, but they still had a long way to go when I studied them. Pianists who win international piano competitions tend to do so when they’re around thirty years old, and thus they’ve probably put in about twenty thousand to twenty-five thousand hours of practice by then; ten thousand hours is only halfway down that path.

And the number varies from field to field. Steve Faloon became the very best person in the world at memorizing strings of digits after only about two hundred hours of practice. I don’t know exactly how many hours of practice the best digit memorizers put in today before they get to the top, but it is likely well under ten thousand.

Second, the number of ten thousand hours at age twenty for the best violinists was only an average. Half of the ten violinists in that group hadn’t actually accumulated ten thousand hours at that age. Gladwell misunderstood this fact and incorrectly claimed that all the violinists in that group had accumulated over ten thousand hours.

Third, Gladwell didn’t distinguish between the deliberate practice that the musicians in our study did and any sort of activity that might be labeled “practice.” For example, one of his key examples of the ten-thousand-hour rule was the Beatles’ exhausting schedule of performances in Hamburg between 1960 and 1964. According to Gladwell, they played some twelve hundred times, each performance lasting as much as eight hours, which would have summed up to nearly ten thousand hours. Tune In, an exhaustive 2013 biography of the Beatles by Mark Lewisohn, calls this estimate into question and, after an extensive analysis, suggests that a more accurate total number is about eleven hundred hours of playing. So the Beatles became worldwide successes with far less than ten thousand hours of practice. More importantly, however, performing isn’t the same thing as practice. Yes, the Beatles almost certainly improved as a band after their many hours of playing in Hamburg, particularly because they tended to play the same songs night after night, which gave them the opportunity to get feedback— both from the crowd and themselves— on their performance and find ways to improve it. But an hour of playing in front of a crowd, where the focus is on delivering the best possible performance at the time, is not the same as an hour of focused, goal-driven practice that is designed to address certain weaknesses and make certain improvements— the sort of practice that was the key factor in explaining the abilities of the Berlin student violinists.

A closely related issue is that, as Lewisohn argues, the success of the Beatles was not due to how well they performed other people’s music but rather to their songwriting and creation of their own new music. Thus, if we are to explain the Beatles’ success in terms of practice, we need to identify the activities that allowed John Lennon and Paul McCartney— the group’s two primary songwriters— to develop and improve their skill at writing songs. All of the hours that the Beatles spent playing concerts in Hamburg would have done little, if anything, to help Lennon and McCartney become better songwriters, so we need to look elsewhere to explain the Beatles’ success.

This distinction between deliberate practice aimed at a particular goal and generic practice is crucial because not every type of practice leads to the improved ability that we saw in the music students or the ballet dancers. Generally speaking, deliberate practice and related types of practice that are designed to achieve a certain goal consist of individualized training activities— usually done alone— that are devised specifically to improve particular aspects of performance.

The final problem with the ten-thousand-hour rule is that, although Gladwell himself didn’t say this, many people have interpreted it as a promise that almost anyone can become an expert in a given field by putting in ten thousand hours of practice. But nothing in my study implied this. To show a result like this, I would have needed to put a collection of randomly chosen people through ten thousand hours of deliberate practice on the violin and then see how they turned out. All that our study had shown was that among the students who had become good enough to be admitted to the Berlin music academy, the best students had put in, on average, significantly more hours of solitary practice than the better students, and the better and best students had put in more solitary practice than the music-education students.

The question of whether anyone can become an expert performer in a given field by taking part in enough designed practice is still open, and I will offer some thoughts on this issue in the next chapter. But there was nothing in the original study to suggest that it was so.

Gladwell did get one thing right, and it is worth repeating because it’s crucial: becoming accomplished in any field in which there is a well-established history of people working to become experts requires a tremendous amount of effort exerted over many years. It may not require exactly ten thousand hours, but it will take a lot.

We have seen this in chess and the violin, but research has shown something similar in field after field. Authors and poets have usually been writing for more than a decade before they produce their best work, and it is generally a decade or more between a scientist’s first publication and his or her most important publication— and this is in addition to the years of study before that first published research. A study of musical composers by the psychologist John R. Hayes found that it takes an average of twenty years from the time a person starts studying music until he or she composes a truly excellent piece of music, and it is generally never less than ten years. Gladwell’s ten-thousand-hour rule captures this fundamental truth— that in many areas of human endeavor it takes many, many years of practice to become one of the best in the world— in a forceful, memorable way, and that’s a good thing.

On the other hand, emphasizing what it takes to become one of the best in the world in such competitive fields as music, chess, or academic research leads us to overlook what I believe to be the more important lesson from our study of the violin students. When we say that it takes ten thousand— or however many— hours to become really good at something, we put the focus on the daunting nature of the task. While some may take this as a challenge— as if to say, “All I have to do is spend ten thousand hours working on this, and I’ll be one of the best in the world!”— many will see it as a stop sign: “Why should I even try if it’s going to take me ten thousand hours to get really good?” As Dogbert observed in one Dilbert comic strip, “I would think a willingness to practice the same thing for ten thousand hours is a mental disorder.”

But I see the core message as something else altogether: In pretty much any area of human endeavor, people have a tremendous capacity to improve their performance, as long as they train in the right way. If you practice something for a few hundred hours, you will almost certainly see great improvement— think of what two hundred hours of practice brought Steve Faloon— but you have only scratched the surface. You can keep going and going and going, getting better and better and better. How much you improve is up to you.

This puts the ten-thousand-hour rule in a completely different light: The reason that you must put in ten thousand or more hours of practice to become one of the world’s best violinists or chess players or golfers is that the people you are being compared to or competing with have themselves put in ten thousand or more hours of practice. There is no point at which performance maxes out and additional practice does not lead to further improvement. So, yes, if you wish to become one of the best in the world in one of these highly competitive fields, you will need to put in thousands and thousands of hours of hard, focused work just to have a chance of equaling all of those others who have chosen to put in the same sort of work.

One way to think about this is simply as a reflection of the fact that, to date, we have found no limitations to the improvements that can be made with particular types of practice. As training techniques are improved and new heights of achievement are discovered, people in every area of human endeavor are constantly finding ways to get better, to raise the bar on what was thought to be possible, and there is no sign that this will stop. The horizons of human potential are expanding with each new generation.

-- Ericsson, Anders; Pool, Robert. Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise (p. 109-114). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Kindle Edition.

Hi everyone, glad to see you here in week number 5! It's time for another classic record discussion: John Coltrane's A Love Supreme!

Here's the place to discuss your thoughts on the record, your history with it or the artist, and basically talk about whatever you want to that goes along with A Love Supreme. Remember that this is intended to be a slow moving thing, feel free to take your time and comment at any point in the week!

If you'd like to stream or buy the album, it can be found on most platforms here.

Don't forget to nominate and vote for next week's obscure record in response to this comment!

EDIT: Since a few people now have not realized how old this topic is before making a comment, see above date ↑. :)

My old PC's CPU (i7 930) started to critically fail after 8+ years of being overclocked from 2.8 to 4.0 GHz, so I decided to build a new one based on the Ultra-Compact Mini-ITX Gaming PC Build from TechBuyersGuru.

I went with Mini-ITX this time since my old PC was in a huge Antec P193 tower which weighs 16.4kg (36.2lbs) before components and so was a giant PITA to move around. The new Sugo SG13 case is roughly 1/7th the volume and initial weight so is much more convenient to move (but not build!).

p.s. I was unsure whether to post this 'buildapc' style content in ~tech or ~comp.... thoughts?

PCPartPicker Part List
^{Parts labeled incompatible are not... see "Notes" below in Build Process section.}
Salvaged from old PC:
GPU   -     $0 - EVGA - GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB Superclocked ACX 2.0+ Video Card
SSD   -     $0 - Samsung - 850 Pro Series 1TB 2.5" Solid State Drive
SSD   -     $0 - Samsung - 840 Pro Series 256GB 2.5" Solid State Drive
HDD   -     $0 - Hitachi - Deskstar NAS 4TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive

New Components:
Case -   $72 - Silverstone - Sugo SG13B-Q Mini ITX Tower Case
Mobo - $190 - Gigabyte - Z370N WIFI Mini ITX LGA1151 Motherboard
CPU   - $325 - Intel - Core i5-8600K 3.6GHz 6-Core Processor
Cool - $114 - Silverstone - NT06-PRO 74.0 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler
RAM   - $220 - Corsair - Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-3000 Memory
PSU   - $175 - Silverstone - 600W 80+ Gold Certified Fully-Modular SFX Power Supply
M.2   - $143 - Crucial - MX500 500GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive
M.2   - $143 - Crucial - MX500 500GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive

Total:  $1382 (CAD)

Build Process w/ Pictures:

TL;DR - Behold my new Battlestation, IN ALL HER GLORY!!!

After saying goodbye to my old, heavy, oversized, Antec P193 case...
Unboxing the new one, which is almost the same volume as my UPS!...
And prepping all the new PC components for a photo op...
I began the arduous process assembling my new computer.

Everything went fairly smoothly to start. I installed the RAM, M.2 Drives, CPU and CPU Cooler before mounting the motherboard to the case, as instructed in the build guide. The CPU Cooler was a PITA to attach but that's no surprise as they always are.

Note: These "incompatible" parts listed on PCPartsPicker actually do fit together as the build guide said they would. However the RAM and CPU cooler fan are actually touching and I barely managed to squeeze them in together, so the build guide probably isn't lying when it said that particular low-profile RAM might be the only one that actually works with the cooler.

I then mounted the motherboard to the case and began slowly plugging everything else in. This was a particularly slow and frustrating process as I have pretty large hands and everything was incredibly tiny, in incredibly cramped positions, and required more finesse to get in place than I could muster with my fingers alone. As a result I wound up using long needle-nose pliers, including some bent-angle ones, to get most everything plugged in.

This is when I ran into my first major problem though... and one that was not mentioned in the build guide at all. The Case's front panel USB cable wouldn't fit in the motherboard with the CPU cooler fan in place. After trying fruitlessly to get the cable plugged in for 30min I finally gave up and decided to solve the issue the old fashioned way and it plugged in just fine afterwards. (Thanks for saving my ass yet again, Mr. Dremel!)

The other potential issue was due to the CPU cooler and case mounted PSU, which aren't supposed to work together, but once again as the build guide suggested they actually do... with a whopping 3mm clearance between them! At this point I also decided to swap out some of the ribbon power cables that came with the new PSU for some spare braided ones I had from another build since they are much nicer looking and allow for better airflow.

Note: The other supposed incompatibility listed on PCPartPicker is due to the fact that the case only officially supports 3x 2.5" drives or 1x 3.5" with 1x 2.5" but that's easy enough to get around, as explained below.

I also decided to cram an extra SSD under the front case fan, secured with double sided tape to the properly mounted SSD on the case floor panel. It worked just fine and allowed me to get my 3.5" 4TB HDD properly mounted on the underside of the top plate. Linus Tech Tips, in his similar Sugo SG13 build, even managed to squeeze 2 more SSDs above the PSU using double sided tape as well, so I guess that even leaves me with some room to expand my storage later. ;)

The rest of the build assembly process went relatively smoothly and once everything was hooked up, in position and plugged in, it booted straight into windows 10 (which was still on my old 1TB SSD). The moment when a new PC build gets past the POST is always a huge relief, however that momentary relief soon turned to dread as I quickly noticed a pretty big problem; The machine couldn't detect one of my new M.2 SATA drives.

After several hours of frustrated tinkering and much googling I finally found out the reason why, cursing PCPartPicker for not warning me and face-palming pretty hard for not having read the motherboard specs more carefully. It turns out that the Z370N motherboard actually only supports 1x M.2 SATA drive and the second M.2 slot is NVMe only. I had apparently just wasted $140+ on an M.2 SATA drive I couldn't use and my plans to configure them both in RAID 0 was shattered. But that's honestly not the worst part... in order to get the useless M.2 drive back out I had to basically FULLY DISASSEMBLE my entire build again since the NVMe M.2 slot is located on the bottom of the motherboard!

Despite the serious temptation to just leave it in there even though I couldn't use it, I wound up going through with the disassembly purely because I had a pretty good idea for how to actually make use of that second M.2 SATA drive based on something I saw on Linus Tech Tips a few months ago. So rather than leaving it in there or even returning it, after ordering myself the necessary enclosure I now have myself a pretty nice DIY 500GB Thumb drive. ;)

So several hours later after completely taking apart my new build, removing the bottom mounted M.2 SATA drive, and fully reassembling my build once again, I booted it up, it got past the POST and into Windows 10 again. I then reactivated Win 10 on the new hardware configuration (which was surprisingly painless compared to how it used to be where you needed to actually phone Microsoft) and then began the process of installing Linux Mint on the M.2 SATA drive I still had remaining.

Conclusion:
After several days of going at it now, I am finally done and my new computer is fully assembled, functional and ready to use. As always with building computers it was a bit scary, a bit painful, and more than a bit frustrating but ultimately well worth it. I couldn't be happier with the results and can't wait to overclock this bad boy when I get the chance!

I would have to say Pink Floyd's Shine On You Crazy Diamond. It's got a spacey presence in the beginning and the solos hit, which are so wonderfully crafted. The vocals come in and the chorus sounds magnificent and epic in nature. What are your thoughts?

Every now and then we get a change in a traditional medium that has the potential to completely change the medium itself. In TV, we went from black and white to colour to 3D, and now to VR. In theatre, we've been seeing more use of screens, and other technologies.

In the last few years, Broadway saw two amazing game-changers - Hamilton, and Deaf West's revival of Spring Awakening. Hamilton, honestly needs its own post.

Deaf West, as their name suggests, casts deaf actors with other actors supplying their voices. American Sign Language is incorporated into the dialogue, songs and choreography. It adds a whole new dimension to existing works and allows the theatre medium to be enjoyed by a more inclusive audience.

I really hope to see productions like this more.

Thoughts? Anything new or old brought to theatre that you love? Any changes you'll like to see?

Introduction and motivation

In an effort to get more content on Tildes, I want to try and give an introduction on several 'hot topics' in semiconductor physics at a level understandable to laypeople (high school level physics background). Making physics accessible to laypeople is a much discussed topic at universities. It can be very hard to translate the professional terms into a language understandable by people outside the field. So I will take this opportunity to challenge myself to (hopefully) create an understandable introduction to interesting topics in modern physics. To this end, I will take liberties in explaining things, and not always go for full scientific accuracy, while hopefully still getting the core concepts across. If a more in-depth explanation is wanted, please ask in the comments and I will do my best to answer.

Today's topic

I will start this series with an introduction to spintronics and spin transistors.

What is spintronics?

Spintronics is named in analogy to electronics. In electronics, the flow of current (consisting of electrons) is studied. Each electron has an electric charge, and by pulling at this charge we can move electrons through wires, transistors, creating modern electronics. Spintronics also studies the flow of electrons, but it uses another property of the electrons, spin, to create new kinds of transistors.

What are transistors?

Transistors are small electronic devices that act as an on-off switch for current. We can flip this on-off switch by sending a signal to the transistor, so that the current will flow. Transistors are the basis for all computers and as such are used very widely in modern life.

What is spin?

Spin arises from quantum mechanics. However, for the purpose of explaining spin transistors we can think of an electron's spin as a bar magnet. Each electron can be thought of as a bar magnet that will align itself to a nearby magnetic field. Think of it as a compass (the electron) aligning itself to a fridge magnet when it's held near the compass.

What are spin transistors and how do they work?

Spin transistors are a type of transistor whose on-off switch is created by magnets. We take two bar magnets, whose north poles are pointed in the same way, and put them next to each other, leaving a small gap between them. This gap is filled with a material through which the electrons can move. Now we connect wires to the big bar magnets and let current (electrons!) flow through both magnets, via the gap. When the electrons go through the first magnet, their internal magnets will align themselves to the big bar magnet. However, once they are in the gap the electrons' internal magnets will start rotating and no longer point in the same direction as the big bar magnets. So that when the electrons arrive at the second magnet, they will be repelled just like when you try to push the north poles of two magnets together. This means the current will not flow, and the device is off! So, how do we get it to turn on?

By exposing the gap to an electric field, we can control the amount of rotation the electrons experience (this is called the Rashba effect). If we change the strength of this electric field so that the electrons will make exactly one full rotation while crossing the gap, then by the time they reach the second big bar magnet they will once again be pointing in the right direction. Now the electrons are able to move through the second big bar magnet, and out its other end. So by turning this electric field on, the spin transistor will let current flow, and if we turn the electric field off, no current will flow. We have created an on-off switch using magnets and spin!

That's cool, but why go through the effort of doing this when we have perfectly fine electronics already?

The process of switching between the on and off states of these spin transistors is a lot more energy efficient than with regular transistors. These types of transistors leak a lot less too. Normal transistors will leak, meaning that a small amount of current will go through even when the transistor is off. With spin transistors, this leak is a lot smaller. This once again improves the energy efficiency of these devices. So in short, spin transistors will make your computer more energy efficient. This type of transistor can also be made smaller than normal transistors, which leads to more powerful computers.

Feedback and interest

As I mentioned, I wrote this post as a challenge to myself to explain modern physics to laypeople. Please let me know where I succeeded and where I failed. Also let me know if you like this type of content and if I should continue posting other similar topics in the same format.

There's lot of academia out there that suggests that everyone has blindspots, topics and issues that we take with so much certainty that we would not even think to question them, people who so rarely enter into our concerns that we do not think to consider their needs or concerns, etc.

It's hard to know exactly what our own blindspots are because by their very nature as soon as they are identified they lose some of their power. This sort of self-awareness is difficult even on the best day, but it allows us to more reasonably address people who don't hold our views, so I think the exercise is justified.

This topic is intended to be introspective. Wherever you identify politically (left, right, moderate, anarchist, libertarian, the works), what are some topics and groups that your political people tend to struggle to focus on?

Batgirl background:

• A lot of Batman fans maybe be familiar with Barbara (Babs) Gordon's Batgirl. She was the first Batgirl (not to be confused with Betty Kane's Bat-girl), and is often the on-screen Batgirl of choice.
• Barbara was paralyzed from the waist down in the infamous The Killing Joke. Her forced retirement from the Batgirl mantle has always triggered mixed feelings, and she's often the top three Women-in-Refrigerators.

Oracle background:

• Barbara returns to DC comics after the events of The Killing Joke as Oracle, where she continues to fight crime in a less overt manner. She often provides much needed expertise and assistance to other vigilantes, including Batman.
• As Oracle, she is also one of the first major depictions of disability in DC comics.

Barbara's return to Batgirl:

• The New 52 Batgirl series is the first Batgirl title with Barbara as Batgirl. After a glossed over miracle cure, she can now walk and picks up her cowl again.

The lost of Oracle:

• Though it's great to finally see Barbara with her own Batgirl title comic, and her struggles to be Batgirl again. And it definitely doesn't hurt that she was written by Gail Simone. It seems the lost of Oracle was greater than the return of Batgirl.
• The Batgirl mantle has been carried by a few people at this point, specifically Cassandra Cain and Stephanie Brown, both of which are in the New 52 and Rebirth continuity. To put it pointly, Batgirl is replaceable.
• Oracle is not, and has not been replaced. In a world where information is the best tool and weapon in fighting crime, Oracle's role is more important than Batgirl's, which is basically one of might.
• Oracle was a show of determination and will. Barbara may have been forced to retire as Batgirl, but she chose to continue fighting against crime. Loosing the use of her legs didn't affect the use of her mind.

Any other fans of Batgirl/Oracle have thoughts on this? Is re-empowering Barbara as Batgirl, minimizing her contributions as Oracle? How do you feel about the representation of disabilities and/or women in comics in general?

Months ago I decided I was going to build my own underwater remotely-operated vehicle. I got sidetracked by a kitchen remodel, but since it is now complete I will have some free time to start working on my vehicle. There are some decent videos out there where others have done the same thing, some are wildly complicated and others are basically built from items out of a scrap bin. I am hoping to land somewhere in the middle.

During the bit of research I have performed, I discovered companies selling very high-end parts, the likes of which you would find on a highly funded/sponsored deep sea expedition or a government project. I didn't find a whole lot of middle ground really, either you DIY or you dump a ton of money into it.

My plan is to use PVC for my hull. I had thought about constructing it similar to the Russian Typhoon-class submarine, with two pressure hulls within an outer hull. That would allow the electrics to reside in dry compartments while I use the void space for ballast. I even found RC submarine ballast systems on eBay which would allow me to take on water and dump it remotely so I could trim it out on the fly.

The general opinion, I have discovered so far, is to make it neutrally buoyant. As much as I would like to add that ballast tank system I may need to just keep it simple for my first attempt. Tethers also seem to be an issue, adding too much weight when they get to a certain length and if you do not take steps to make them buoyant. I thought pool noodles, but learned from someone else that they become water logged and are a bad choice. Then there is power, the trend I noticed is keeping it onboard in the form of a battery pack, but I would like to keep it ashore and just add a wire to the tether so I can not have power to worry about.

So far I have an Arduino board, some old laptops, and some rivers to explore. If we had a makerspace or hackerspace nearby I would be all set. I did search, and the closest is an hour away, which is disappointing since I know I am not the only person into ridiculous projects/hobbies around here! Anyone on here into things like this?

As a lurker on the somethingawful forums one of my favorite features is a button which will show all the posts a single person has made in a thread. It'd be really handy if someone (like the OP) is answering questions about a topic. It's really nice to have on a more traditional forum website, but I'm not sure how useful it'd be here. Regardless, I thought I would suggest it.

Here is an example: Before and After

I've been consuming the darkness that is wartime histories from the past three or four centuries and I feel like I've encountered a lot of people who had what they believed to be justifiable reasons to launch wars against other powers. There are people who thought they had divine right to a particular position of power and so would launch a war to assert that god-given right. There are people who believed in a citizen's right to have some (any) say in how their tax money gets used in government and so would fight wars over that. People would fight wars to, as John Cleese once said, "Keep China British." Many wars are started to save the honor of a country/nation. Some are started in what is claimed to be self-defense and later turns out to have been a political play instigated to end what has been a political thorn in their sides.

In all this time, I've struggled to really justify many of these wars, but some of that comes with the knowledge of what other wars have cost in terms of human carnage and suffering. For some societies in some periods, the military is one of the few vehicles to social mobility (and I think tend to think social mobility is grease that keeps a society functioning). Often these conflicts come down to one man's penis and the inability to swallow their pride to find a workable solution unless at the end of a bayonet. These conflicts also come with the winning powers taking the opportunity to rid themselves of political threats and exacting new harms on the defeated powers (which comes back around again the next time people see each other in a conflict).

So help keep me from embracing a totally pacifistic approach to war. When is a war justifiable? When it is not only morally acceptable but a moral imperative to go to war? Please point to examples throughout history where these situations have happened, if you can (though if you're prepared to admit that there has been no justifiable war that you're aware of, I suppose that's fine if bitter).

I played the older 2017 demo with 2 characters and really liked the gameplay and visuals. Great old-school feel, yet very polished to feel somehow modern and unique, with novel mechanics like the character-specific skills or "paths" when interacting with NPCs.

I also tried the new June 2018 demo for a few minutes as Tressa. It was fun but jarring with few interactable NPCs and very little in the way of introductory story or cutscenes, fewer than I remembered from the old demo. I wasn't sure if this was because it was still just another demo, so I've decided to hold off and start from scratch in the full game. (The save file carries over from the June demo to the full game.)

I would normally have preordered, except for my extended backlog from the Steam summer sale.

There's a review roundup on Reddit in /r/JRPG: https://old.reddit.com/r/JRPG/comments/8ybg3i/octopath_traveller_review_megathread/ -- looks like a lot of 8's and 9's with a meta score around 84/100.

So since we no doubt have many rpg gamers amongst us, I thought I'd start a weekly or bi monthly thread to post about looking for groups, looking for members and the like. So if you want to, why not come and make a post.

I myself happen to be looking for people who'd be up to play a spot of Shadowrun or preferably Cryptomancer.

Welcome to week four! This week we focus on another user-voted record: Weather Systems by Anathema.

Puling @deciduous' original pitch :

Weather Systems is an interesting album to me because it is both immediately catchy, but also very dense. It was specifically created to be an emotional experience that required engagement by the listener and bot does it deliver on that front. Each song flows well into the next and has a different a unique emotional resonance. "Lightning Song" is intense in a way few other songs are and "The Beginning and the End" is one of my favorite tracks ever for its fantastic piano riff that carries throughout the song. If you're at all into post or prog rock, this album is perfect for you.

Here's the place to discuss your thoughts on the record, your history with it or the band, and basically talk about whatever you want to that goes along with Weather Systems. Remember that this is intended to be a slow moving thing, feel free to take your time and listen / comment at any point in the week!

If you'd like to stream or buy the album, it can be found on most platforms here.

This question stemmed from a friendly argument my S.O. and I had involving The Sims. She thought it was the weirdest thing ever to try and create myself within the game. I understand the idea of truly creating a new character, but my first impulse is always to create myself and then behave how I normally would in whatever game I'm playing. I don't know if this is laziness on my part, or some sort of subconscious effort to maximize immersion.

Disclaimer: I do often create characters that don't just emulate myself, but it's almost always after I've finished my first play-through. I'm not averse to role-play AT ALL.

I noticed it spans further than character creation too. Like, if there's a pool of characters to pick from, I almost always pick one that looks the most like me, or one that I relate the most with. My S.O. will pick whichever one she's feeling at that time (usually the cutest). I've also noticed that I'm more apt to consistently pick that same character, while she is more likely to switch it up every so often.

One last observation I made that I think ties closely to this topic: When I'm playing a game, my mentality is always "I'm going to do this, then I'm going to do this. Did you see what I just did?!" etc. I see it from a first-person perspective, even if I happened to create a character that does not emulate myself. When she plays, it's always "Look what he's doing, oh man my guy did this" and verbalizes the game from a third-person perspective.

What's your take on this? What's your mentality when you game? Do you think there is a fundamental mental split among players? Is it because I game drastically more than her or started gaming sooner in my life? I'd love to hear some other perspectives on this.

Good morning!

I was listening to the CBC radio on my way to work and there was a very interesting discussion about how people choose to interpret the results of DNA tests. I did a quick search and unfortunately couldn't find the radio broadcast on CBCs site.

Points mentioned (from my memory):

• People don't look at the results of a DNA test and go "this is who I am", instead they use it to cherry-pick who they want to be
• Statically, "white" people tend to identify with a more "exotic" finding in their test
• Example used included a person that chose to identify with who they thought they would pass as; results showed Native and Celtic blood, and person went with Native because he didn't believe they physically passed for Celtic

The cultural appropriation part:

• When non-minorities, who have generally not been raised or have much interaction with the minority they are now choosing to identify with, they can skew, more specifically flatten stats. For example, for a person who's always identified as caucasian to start checking off boxes for a minority, they are potentially 1) disregarding the consequences there are to race (discrimination), and 2) pumping up the stats for minority representation.

As a visible minority myself, I just find it in poor taste. I would love to think people who find a little bit of Asian blood will go and try to discovery more of what it is to be Asian, but I would definitely roll my eyes, if you just come up to me and say "I'm 1/64th like you".

So thoughts? Has anyone done a DNA test and how did it go?

(Obligatory disclaimer: Yes, I know the difference between a "theory" and a "hypothesis". I'm using the colloquial usage of the term. I'm not submitting a formal paper here.)

I figured a post like this now and then might be a little fun. I wanted to discuss a little theory of mine about the Mario universe. As the title suggests, the short version is that Mario is a dictator.

This theory hinges on one important point: There are inconsistencies within the stories that are told about Mario's adventures that suggest that his exploits are fabricated.

Let's begin with the most central theme in Mario's adventures: The repeated kidnappings of Peach. Consider for a moment that in every kidnapping event, Peach has had less-than-stellar security detail--typically none at all--despite the number of kidnapping events that have occurred over the years. If arguably the most high-profile member of a kingdom is being kidnapped on a regular basis, you would expect their security detail to be significantly greater than it's consistently shown to be, so why is it always so lax? The three most logical explanations are either a) the security detail is actually much tighter than is shown and Bowser is just that much stronger, b) the security detail is thinned out before every kidnapping event due to a coordination between Bowser and an insider in the mushroom kingdom, or c) there are no kidnappings at all and they're merely being portrayed as such.

We can eliminate option (a) fairly easily: Are we really expected to believe that an ordinary plumber can single-handedly take out an entire kingdom that an entire other kingdom was unable to stand against while their princess was captured? This plumber has no military training whatsoever, and we're expected to believe that he can stand against an entire army by himself? Unlikely.

That leaves us with two logical explanations: Either the kidnappings are coordinated on the inside, or the kidnappings are completely fabricated. Deciding which of the two is the most likely requires further considerations.

With that in mind, you may be wondering if there's any support for either of those accusations, so let's first discuss Bowser himself. Specifically, let's discuss his physical traits. He's a scary-looking dude, no doubt. But Bowser is clearly not a creature that evolved for aggressive behavior. If we examine his build from an evolutionary perspective, we can see that he has a large and bulky shell; his claw strikes are powerful, but slow; his fire generally lacks range or (in the case of earlier Mario games where range was better) sustained use, and its speed is generally terrible; and he can't move quickly at all, except in short bursts. All of these traits suggest a creature that isn't built for aggressive, offensive action, but for self-defense. A creature like Bowser is unlikely to attack another kingdom at all, unless he's acting in self-defense or given some other form of incentive.

Now, between the remaining two options, we again have either an inside job or a fabrication. Without deciding yet which it is, let's at least consider this: If it really is an inside job, there are only two ways in which someone could stand to benefit:

1. Mario would stand to benefit due to receiving and perpetuating his status as a hero, so he would have to have some kind of way to incentivize Bowser to coordinate with him, otherwise Bowser wouldn't have any need to work with him. If Mario really is a plumber, however, then there is absolutely no way he would have the wealth or political leverage for Bowser to benefit in that relationship. It's possible that he was a plumber at first, but ended up becoming a puppet to Bowser, but in no situation does Mario remain a plumber if we're to assume that he's continually coordinating with Bowser, otherwise he would have no way to deal with the increased security detail.
2. Peach isn't actually being kidnapped, but is attempting to escape the kingdom with Bowser's help. If Mario is actually an independent dictator rather than a puppet, then it would stand to reason that prior royalty would want to escape in order to avoid harm. In this case, it's easy for a coordinated escape with another kingdom to be portrayed as a kidnapping.

So, to quickly recap, we have inconsistencies in the security detail, in the antagonist, and in the protagonist. These already suggest that the stories of Mario's exploits may not be at all what they're portrayed as.

With the above in mind, let's take a look at one more damning detail about Mario himself: The mushroom peoples are said to have transformed into bricks, yet Mario has no qualms with destroying them throughout his adventures.

With everything above in mind, we can see the following narrative fall into place:

1. The mushroom people were never turned into bricks. It's a false story used as a dehumanization tactic in order to justify Mario's murder of innocent people. It's pretty easy to justify killing your own people, after all, if you convince people that a brick wall was erected and had to be destroyed so you could save the princess, so the loss of those transformed people was necessary.
2. Mario isn't really a plumber. It's possible that he was at one point, but he definitely can't be anymore.
3. Mario's exploits are either staged, or he's continually re-kidnapping a fleeing princess seeking refuge in another kingdom and the kidnapping is being portrayed as a rescue.

Now, a final important point: Over time, we've seen the narrative shift in Bowser's reasons for kidnapping Peach. The most recent case was an attempted marriage in Odyssey. It stands to reason that, as a dictator, Mario has to continue controlling the narrative as news leaks out regarding foreign events, e.g. a marriage between a "kidnapped" princess and a foreign ruler. The continuous stream of foreign news and gossip could install doubt about your prior narratives--"Why is our princess marrying someone from another kingdom? Was she even really kidnapped or did she run away?"--and force you to adopt a new one--"The princess is being forced into an unwanted marriage by her kidnapper!". This is a far different narrative than those cases where Bowser was said to want to destroy the mushroom kingdom.

We can therefore establish that Mario's image is absolutely essential. Any crack in his portrayal as a hero could cause the mushroom people to revolt, so he needs to assert control in any way possible. Thus, he will create any narrative necessary to paint himself as a hero and to make himself more relatable, and to make his adversaries as monstrous as possible. It's also particularly unlikely that he's Bowser's puppet, otherwise we wouldn't expect Bowser to allow himself to be thwarted so frequently, something that would make him appear weak to his own people and threaten his place. It's far more likely that Mario is acting independently and losing his grip on his narrative.

So the story that seems to have the least inconsistent narrative is as follows:
Mario is a dictator who wants to appeal to the working class by being viewed as a plumber, so the citizens of the Mushroom kingdom will think "he's a true blue collar worker, he's one of us!". Peach isn't actually being kidnapped, but is attempting to flee from Mario's dictatorship and seek refuge in the Koopa Kingdom. Mario continually assaults the Koopa Kingdom in order to re-kidnap Peach. In the process, he ends up murdering countless sympathizers who try to aid in her escape, or even uses the opportunity to destroy his opposition in a way that's easy to brush off. During all of this, he continually pumps out propaganda about Peach being kidnapped when she's really seeking asylum and about his heroic rescues when he's really taking his own army with him, paints Bowser as a villain, and dehumanizes his victims and normalizes their murder. In addition, because of his clear readiness to dehumanize his own people, it's likely that Bowser and the rest of the Koopa Kingdom are also being dehumanized and portrayed as monsters in order to justify the slaughtering of countless foreign people and to help instill fear and anger among the mushroom people. Peach and Bowser have also likely fallen in love and attempted to marry, but Mario continues to lay siege on Koopa Kingdom in order to kidnap Peach, and Mario's propaganda network paints this marriage as a forced one between an unwilling Mushroom Kingdom princess and a terrifying and ruthless Bowser.

In short: Mario is dictator using a propaganda network in order to paint himself favorably while painting his adversaries as monsters or objects in order to justify mass murder and prevent a fleeing princess from seeking asylum in a foreign kingdom.

What are your thoughts? Have I made any critical errors? Is there more evidence that I missed that supports this theory? Do you have an alternative theory you'd like to share?

(If you notice any typos or repeated sections, please let me know. This took a while to write up, so it's possible that I missed something.)

Masala chai (commonly and somewhat falsley abbreviated to just “chai”) literally means “spice mix tea” – and this is what this review is about. I got myself a selection of Vahdam’s masala chais and kept notes of each one I tried. Some came in the Chai Tea Sampler and others I either already bought before or were a free sample that came with some other order.

Classical CTC BOP

CTC BOP is usually cheaper than more delicately processed whole leaves. Although the common perception is that it is of lower quality than e.g. FTGFOP or even just FOP or OP for that matter, the fact is that they simply a different method with a different outcome. You can get away with breaking cheaper leaves, though, than whole.

Also bare in mind that while BOP is the most common broken leaf grade, there are several more.

It makes for a stronger brew and a more robust flavour– ideal for breakfast teas. The down-side is that it can coat your tongue. But if you want to recycle it, the second steep will be much lighter.

Original Chai Spiced Black Tea Masala Chai

The quintessential masala chai – the strength of the CTC BOP, paired with the classic mix of spices. A great daily driver and a true classic, but for my personal taste a tiny bit too light on the spice.

Ingredients: CTC BOP black tea, cardamom, clove, cinnamon, black pepper

Double Spice Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

Same as India’s Original Masala Chai above, but with a bigger amount of spice. Of the two I definitely prefer this one.

Ingredients: CTC BOP black tea, cardamom, clove, cinnamon, black pepper

Fennel Spice Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

Due to the fennel, the overall taste reminds me a lot of Slovenian cinnamon-honey cookies[^medenjaki], which we traditionally bake for Christmas. The odd bit is the cookies do not include the fennel at all, but most of the other spices in a classic masala chai (minus pepper). I suppose the fennel sways it a bit to the sweet honey-like side.

In short, I really liked the fennel variation – could become firm winter favourite of mine.

Ingredients: CTC BOP black tea, fennel, cardamom, clove, cinnamon, black pepper

[^medenjaki]: The Slovenian name is “medenjaki” and the closest thing the English cuisine has to offer is probably gingerbread.

Saffron Premium Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

When I saw the package I thought that saffron was more of a marketing gimmick and I would only find a strand or two in the whole 10g package. But no! The saffron’s pungence punches you in the face – in a good way. It felt somewhat weird to put sugar and milk into it, so strong is the aroma.

Personally, I really like it and it does present an interesting savoury twist. It is a taste that some might love and others might hate though.

Ingredients: CTC BOP black tea, cardamom, cinnamon, clove, saffron, almonds

Earl Grey Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

I am (almost) always game for a nice spin on an Earl Grey. In this case, the standard masala complements the bergamot surprisingly well and in a way where none of the two particularly stand out too much.

The combination works so well that it would feel wrong to call it a spiced-up Earl Grey or a earl-grey’d masala chai. It is a pleasantly lightly spiced, somewhat citrusy and fresh blend that goes well with or without milk.

Ingredients: CTC BOP black tea, bergamot, cardamom, cinnamon, clove, black pepper

Cardamom Chai Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

Now, this one is interesting because it only has two ingredients – black tea and cardamom. While not as complex in aroma as most others, it is interesting how much freshness and sweetness a quality cardamom pod can carry.

I found it equally enjoyable with milk and sugar or without any of the two.

Ingredients: CTC BOP Assam black tea, cardamom

Sweet Cinnamon Massala Chai Black Tea

Similar to their Cardamom Chai, it is a masala chai with very few ingredients. The cinnamon and cardamom get allong very well and while it lacks the complexity of a full masala/spice mix, it is a very enjoyable blend.

Recommended especially if you like your masala chai not too spicy, but sweet.

Ingredients: CTC BOP Assam black tea, cardamom, cinnamon

Ortodox black

What is described with “orthodox” usually means a whole leaf grade, starting with OP. These are much weaker than CTC, but therefore bring out the more delicate flavours. It is a bigger challenge therefore to make sure spices do not push the flavour of the tea too much into the back-seat.

Because the leaves are whole, as a rule you can get more steeps out of them than of broken leaves.

Assam Spice Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

The more refined spin on the classic masala chai – with whole leaves of a quality Assam, it brings a smoothness and mellowness that the CTC cannot achieve. Because of that the spices are a bit more pronounced, which in my opinion is not bad at all. The quality of the leaf also results in a much better second steep compared to the CTC.

Most definitely a favourite for me.

Ingredients: FTGFOP1 Assam black tea, cardamom, cinnamon, clove, black pepper

Tulsi Basil Organic Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

I have not had the pleasure of trying tulsi[^basil] and regarding masala chais, this is a very peculiar blend. The taste of the Assam is quite well hidden behind the huge bunch of herbs. In fact, for some reason it reminds me more of the Slovenian Mountain Tea than of of a masala chai.

In the end, the combination is quite pleasant and uplifting.

What I found fascinating is that it tastes very similar both with milk and sugar, and without any of the two.

Ingredients: organic Assam black tea, tulsi basil, cinnamon, ginger, clove, cardamom, black pepper, long pepper, bay leaves, nutmeg

[^basil]: For more about tulsi – or holy basil, as they call it in some places – see its Wikipedia entry.

Darjeeling Spice Masala Chai Spiced Black Tea

As expected, the Darjeeling version is much lighter and works well also without milk, or even sugar. Still, a tiny cloud of milk does give it that extra smoothness and mellowness. It is not over-spiced, and the balance is quite well. The taste of cloves (and perhaps pepper) are just slightly more pronounced, but as a change that is quite fun. It goes very well with the muscatel of the Darjeeling.

Ingredients: SFTGFOP1 Darjeeling black tea, cardamom, cinnamon, clove, black pepper

Oolong

Maharani Chai Spiced Oolong Tea

Despite the fancy abbreviation, IMHO the oolong tea itself in this blend is not one you would pay high prices as a stand-alone tea. Still, I found the combination interesting. If nothing else, it is interesting to have a masala chai that can be drank just as well without milk and sugar as with them.

Personally, I found the spice a bit to strong in this blend for the subtle tea it was combined with. I actually found the second steep much more enjoyable.

Ingredients: SFTGFOP1 Oolong tea, cardamom, cinnamon, clove, black pepper

Green

Kashmiri Kahwa Masala Chai Spiced Green Tea

A very enjoyable and refreshing blend, which I enjoyed without milk or sugar. The saffron is not as heavy as in the Saffron Premium Masala Chai, but goes really well with the almonds and the rest of the spices.

When I first heard of Kashmiri Kahwa, I saw a recipe that included rose buds, so in the future I might try adding a few.

Ingredients: FTGFOP1 green tea, cardamom, cinnamon, saffron, almonds

Green Tea Chai

As is to be expected, the green variety of the Darjeeling masala chai is even lighter than its black Darjeeling counterpart. The spice is well-balanced, with cinnamon and cloves perhaps being just a bit more accentuated. This effect is increased when adding milk.

It goes pretty well without milk or sugar and can be steeped multiple times. Adding either or both works fine as well though.

Quite an enjoyable tea, but personally, in this direction, I prefer either the Kashmiri Kahwa or the “normal” Darjeeling Spice masala chais.

Ingredients: FTGFOP1 darjeeling green tea, cardamom, cinnamon, clove, black pepper

Glossary:

• BOP]: Broken Orange Pekoe
• FOP: Flowery Orange Pekoe
• OP: Orange Pekoe
• CTC: Crush, Tear, Curl
• FTGFOP: Finest Tippy Golder Flowery Orange Pekoe
• FTGFOP1: Finest Tippy Golder Flowery Orange Pekoe (1st grade)
• SFTGFOP1: Superior Finest Tippy Golder Flowery Orange Pekoe (1st grade)

A number of years ago at a family reunion, I remember a rather raucous aunt of mine who sat at the table gloating that she reads “so many books.” After she thoroughly disparaged society for its preference of films, television, and video games, etc., it was revealed that the entire corpus of what she reads is harlequin romance novels.

Being the shy and tepid fellow that I was, I didn’t call her out on her somewhat vapid achievement. But, the thought that crossed my mind was, “Two hours spent watching ‘A Clockwork Orange’ or ‘Lawrence of Arabia’ would be a much more rewarding and mentally invigorating experience than spending six hours filling my head with the risqué adventures of Fabio.”

To which, this (kind of) opens up a question about the worth of the medium that we use for storytelling. Is there intrinsic value in written stories versus audio/visual ones? Often enough, a film will be adapted from a book. The sentiment that frequently seems to follow is, “the book is better than the movie.” Is this because we value books as a format more? Is it the greater degree of detail? Perhaps our “mind’s eye” creates a more appealing interpretation than a film director ever could? Or maybe it just makes us feel good to say that we like to read.

I’m just using the books and movies dynamic as an example. The truth is that we can have this debate about all forms of artistic medium, whether it is live theater, television series, poems, music, radio plays; the list goes on. Marshall McLuhan famously coined the phrase, “The medium is the message.” How true is this, and how does it affect how we value each different kind of medium? What are your thoughts?

tor.com/2018/06/06/meat-and-salt-and-sparks-rich-larson/

A futuristic murder mystery about detective partners—a human and an enhanced chimpanzee—who are investigating why a woman murdered an apparently random stranger on the subway

Found this today and read it for my morning break. I'm worried about spoilers, but I'm curious about people's thoughts on being a non-human intelligence and the subsequent integration into human society. Did this short evoke any particular emotions in you?

It's that time of week again! For this week's programming challenge, I thought I would focus on data structures.

Goal: Construct a binary tree data structure. It may handle any data type you choose, but you must handle sorting correctly. You must also provide a print function that prints each value in the tree on a new line, and the values must be printed in strictly increasing order.

If you're unfamiliar with this data structure, it's a structure that starts with a single "root" node, and this root can have a left child, right child, both, or neither. Each of these child nodes is exactly the same as the root node, except the root has no parent. This branching structure is why it's called a tree. Furthermore, left descendants always have values smaller than the parent, and right descendants always have larger values.

I'm mostly very appreciative of everything @Deimos has accomplished here; so far, it's been a very smooth and interesting alpha experience. I'm seeking some clarity on how the eventual reputation and trust system he proposes might eventually materialize, and would like to start a discussion among other users as to what mechanic they're seeking. [My apologies if this has been addressed previously - search functions are also anxiously awaited.]

There are multiple social sites (Slashdot, HN, Reddit, etc.) which use new/active/upvoted categorization for ranking front-page comments. This seems to be reproduced here, and generally, I don't have a problem with it as long as the permitted posts don't become just a reproduction of inflammatory click-bait available elsewhere, dank memes, etc.

However, on a per-user-basis, the first reasonably-well composed comment on a thread collects most of the votes. My observation is that in an active post thread, the best-reasoned/researched posts may occur after dozens/hundreds of comments, as people who don't spend their entire lives camping on a social site (highly-engaged!) join, read through prior material, and comment. These users don't garner the votes and reputation points which highly-engaged users might, even though they're working harder as quality participants. Threads die, potentially prematurely, because there's no reward for late arrivals or continuing disputation.

While this phenomenon hasn't become egregiously manifest on Tildes yet, there's certainly potential for it to arise. Would it make sense to age out the votes on the "first post!" comment, so that there's some encouragement for deeper or longer posts to continue on an active thread?

Since Tildes is ostensibly built to discourage the "engagement" tactics required to optimize for maximum ad views (e.g. https://www.bitcatcha.com/blog/instagram-tools-strategies-no-ones-talking/), is there another system which might further encourage participants to engage in thoughtful discussion and high-quality posts instead?

Edit: whoopsie, already being discussed here: https://tildes.net/%7Etildes.official/2x3

This is tangential to this post here about NSFW/controversial content. Sometimes one needs to make a confidential post detached from their own identity (say for example about a psychological problem or advice on an event where the OP wants to conceal real identities), and most places one needs a throwaway account. I think it'd be nicer if we allowed people to make posts detached from their main accounts w/o having to create new throwaway accounts. It might be possible via allowing a certain number of "personas" (i.e. a couple names one can allocate and use as nicknames), or via allowing to post anonymously (i.e. hiding the poster's account name, not w/o one), or allowing personas but temporarily and randomly generated names. What's you thoughts?

Which games had really well thought out and engaging leveling system?

Skyrim was a good baseline I believe, not perfect but engaging and not too punishing. Path of Exile seems convoluted to me, to many skills the dont make any real impact. Fable was effective but very simple. Oblivion tried hard for a deep leveling system but was basically broken. Witcher 3 was pretty run of the mill (I thought, despite the praise the game gets).

I'm trying to find something where there are several viable different playstyles. And it's always good when combat isn't the only way to proceed.

Ok, so I'm relatively new here on tildes, so I'm not even sure if I'm posting this in the right place, and if I am, I apologize. One of the things that I've noticed about tildes is that it doesn't have a search bar. I've looked through some posts but can't seem to find anything about it (it was made difficult by the lack of the search bar :P), so I'm wondering is there a reason we don't have one, have we not gotten round to getting one yet or do we just not want one? What are your thoughts on a search bar?

No, not the PC classes in your game - the classes that describe the people you play the game with.

Mister Fantastic: Every single number on this player's character sheet has been optimized beyond comprehension to be at least 20% higher than you thought was possible, and it's all legal. Reading one of his sheets will teach you about traits, feats, and rules you never knew existed. Often mumbles cryptic, one-word answers while barely paying attention that end ongoing rules discussions leaving the other players with blank faces. His characters are nearly invincible except for one small key weakness (AC 26 at level 1, but with a CMD of 5). This player can typically one-shot the BBEG and reverse the party's fortunes in a single round. If he's charmed or dominated it will result in a TPK unless dealt with instantly.

The Veteran: A quiet fellow wearing a T-Shirt that says, "Don't tell me about your character: just play." He's never flashy, and seems to do very little, content to let everyone else play and have fun. Always prepared for any situation when no one else is. More likely to aid other players than act directly. He'll only involve himself when everyone else is making a mess out of things, and when he does wake up, his ability to deal with any given situation leaves Mister Fantastic green with envy. Has been known to kill BBEGs via roleplaying. Has the ability to summon natural 20s on demand but rarely uses it. The GM often consults with him on rules issues.

Negative Diplomacy: No matter the class or the character's abilities, whenever this player opens their mouth to talk to someone who isn't in the party, you know the group is going to be in combat to the death in less than three rounds. The GM is uniquely powerless to prevent this from happening. His superpower is always knowing the worst possible in-character thing to say.

Milla Vanilla: Every character this person plays is the exact same thing - even when playing different classes. For whatever reason, this player cannot mentally step into the shoes of their character, and ends up on endless repeat. Often not noticeable until one has played multiple games with this person and notices that their ninja assassin is remarkably similar in temperament to their paladin.

The Conspiracy Theorist: This player is convinced that every single thing that happens is part of some grand tapestry and he is on a mission to figure it out. Often obsesses over small details, makes bizarre (sometimes nonsensical) connections between events, places, and facts. Your worst fear is that he's giving the GM ideas. It's confirmed when some of his wilder predictions come to pass later in the game.

Aaron Justicebringer: The kind of perma-lawful good holy crusader who walks into a tavern and announces, "Greetings! I am Aaron Justicebringer. You may flee if you wish." He's on a mission to smite evil. Since he's always got detect evil running, he finds quite a lot of it and smites often, without concern for trivialities like local customs, ettiquette, roleplaying, and plot. This player always plays crusader types.

Kaboom: Kaboom likes loves lives to set things on fire. Often a wizard or sorcerer, and the kind of fellow who can reduce six enemies to ash in a single round (even if those were six fire elementals). Flaming spells, flaming daggers, flaming hair, and one can track him across Golarion just by following the smoke. Unfortunately, that's all he's good for. Kaboom is a blunt instrument, best kept wrapped in asbestos until the party finds a target he can be aimed at in a location that hasn't got too much potential for collateral damage. This player comes in non-fire flavors too.

Sleepy Pete: Sleepy Pete has a wife, six kids, and a stressful day job. By the time he makes it to the session, he's been clinically dead for two hours already. He'll be asleep within an hour of starting, even faster if food or alcohol is involved. Sleepy Pete is also prone to missing sessions with little forewarning. You're not even sure what his character or personality is because you've been given almost no opportunity to observe him in a conscious state.

Brandon The Builder: A player who in all other ways is relatively normal, Brandon must never be given downtime in any way, shape, or form. With a full set of item crafting feats and flawless mastery of the downtime rules, Brandon will not only rule the entire kingdom in less than six months, he'll find a way to provide every single party member with a Headband of Mental Superiority, Belt of Physical Perfection, two +5 Tomes or Manuals of their choice, and a well staffed keep while doing it.

Broken Billy: This player has no comprehension of the mathematical progression of the games he plays. Instead, he jumps at the first thing he finds that sounds cool. This leaves him with a hodgepodge of abilities that quickly become useless as the game progresses, leaving poor Billy more and more frustrated as the game goes on. Broken Billy steadfastly ignores all advice and all warnings given to him by the GM and more experienced players. Prone to having five first level classes on his fifth level character.

The Novice Namer: Never good at coming up with names, this player has given birth to many legendary heroes: Bob the Barbarian, Robert the Ranger, and who could forget Sheldon the Sorcerer.

The Knife Hoarder: For whatever reason, this player insists on having at least 2 knives on his belt and 4 hidden on his person. He'll never actually use these knives, but as they'd say "just in case."

The 1-Leaf-Clover: This person's dice are trying to kill him. Oh he might roll a natural 20 to get a cheap room at the inn or tell if an item is masterwork (its not), but the second he's in combat, the most you can expect is a 12 or 13.

The iGenie: Only looks away from his laptop when his name is said three times.

The Bookworm: If not taking an action, is found face first in a book looking for a rare never before seen rule that will get him out of the in-game situation. There has got to be rule specifically for negotiating with a different race to reduce the price of a toll. There just has to be!

Secretly Evil: This player almost always plays a Wizard/Sorcerer and takes a Necromantic path. They'll write a sizable and traumatic back-story. Then in game they'll never do or say anything evil in front of the group(in or out of character). In fact, they'll do very little in general. Instead they wait until everyone is gone and tell the DM what evil things they actually did while "no one was looking".

You should try FATAL: Makes all their characters and every encounter somehow revolve around sex.

Spellsaver: Spellcaster that never casts their spells because they think the next fight is going to be harder.

The Lore Keeper: This player may not be the most talkative person at the table, but that's possibly because they're too busy writing down every even happening in the game. Conversations, shared loot, timelines, and character sketches -- this player is devoted to the story, and keeps track of all of it.

What are we missing?

(Some inspiration from this old reddit thread.)

Happy Friday everyone! I thought that a solid discussion could be spawned out of us talking about weekly health goals and how we've achieved them, so I invite y'all to tell us all about them. Have you recently hit a new personal record in weight-lifting? Run your first mile in ten years? Or have you just been maintaining a good, consistent routine?

Week three, everyone! Last week's obscure record pick went well, and here we are with another classic record discussion: Wu-Tang Clan's Enter The Wu-Tang (36 Chambers)!

Here's the place to discuss your thoughts on the record, your history with it or the artist, and basically talk about whatever you want to that goes along with 36 Chambers. Remember that this is intended to be a slow moving thing, feel free to take your time and comment at any point in the week!

If you'd like to stream or buy the album, it can be found on most platforms here.

Don't forget to nominate and vote for next week's obscure record in response to this comment!

Aside from the existing conversations already going on about handling fluff and generally unwanted content, I would like to start (yes, I know, another) discussion on what we want to see on Tildes. Whenever one of these postings come up, there's generally a lot of "what we don't want to see" and not "what we want to see". So keeping that in mind, let's start...

Specifically I want to discuss Every Episode of "The Flash" Ever. The first, and currently top, comment suggests this is not content that belongs here.

I disagree. We're not anti-fun, and the comments in that thread kinda felt that way.

OP (@RamsesThePigeon) created a critic of a comic book based show in a comic book style depicting tropes and other character flaws in a easy-to-consume and humorous fashion. They correctly had it in ~tv.

This is exactly the sort of content Tildes needs.

It is not low-effort, and will still not be even if not directly created by OP (though bonus points there for sure). It had full potential to generate good discussion on the show itself, other similar shows, writing tropes and characters, and so on.

Thoughts?

A little pretext. I wrote this poem in november 2017, and I slightly improved it today. I enjoy creating stories and poems are a way that I did not try much before. I don't know much about it, except the few things I learned in school and i can't remember most of it. Also english is my second language and there might be some words that don't fit in.
The changes in lines and rythm are intended to match the story.
If this does not meet the high-quality content and discussion and therefore doesn't fit in with ~, let me know and I will remove it.

To stop my rambling: Feel free to leave criticism. I plan to make poetry my hobby so any tips, comments, feedback and thoughts are appreciated.

Somewhere,
deep in the wild
Layed there,
Cold a little child.

It wasn't very long ago,
The rotten did not show,
All consuming deafening silence,
Pierced only by crows crying violent.

What happened here?
She ran from fear.
To escape the grasp,
Of the ones she hold dear.

One soul has passed before her,
Taking with his life,
The only thing she ever strived
Her mother, father and her brother
Two of these caused the disaster.

It began with a fight,
In a cold winter night,
Snow falling lightly,
And the ice growing wildly.

Suddenly the moment
when all seemed to fly
Death was potent
Coming in the blink of an eye.

Crushed by the car's roof,
Not needing any more proof.
The little boy left,
She cried over his death

Sad things passed
and bad will follow.
To escape the sorrow
Two chose their paths

Alcohol in mornings and nights,
Followed by overbearing fights,
Inbetween this shit
Was one little kid

Treated like air,
It was just not fair
Her family's break,
Was the last thing she could take

She ran into the woods,
Only on foot.
Soon she lost her trail
And soon after she wailed.

In her last thoughts
she met her god.
Looked him deep in the eye
And pierced him with a knive

Somewhere,
deep in the wild
Layed there,
Cold a little child.

Edit: Formatting mistakes

tonight i went to a party
was never no coke and bacarti
just a bunch of people in a circle
playing uno and one dude in the corner eating smarties

his name was ignacio
(beat)
and he was hanging round
having a good night,
just bumping some music
and catching a vibe

and thats alright, and we were at your place.
(beat)
and i took a look at your face
looked like you were in a good place.

blue eyes got me feeling fine
same way they did a few years
ago - about nine, when we were
sitting in the park by the pine
and i said fine and i kissed you.

and six months passed, we been apart since then.
now im back at home
drinking corona with the lime in
twisted in the lions den
and I took you to bed.

passive thought in my head when i tucked you in
made you dirnk some water
before you woke in the morning
just so you wouldnt be moaning
and i miss you

and i think that i like you
got my heads so high in the clouds
i can see the planes
and a couple kites too
its just like you

to fade out and fade in
and leave me wondering
what would've been
but now you're flirting with me

and i like it because im hurting
and i need that attention
a little maternal care
and that desire for retention

i feel like you really want me here.

i like it

I have been using Tildes for about a week now. I have come over from Reddit where I am primarily a lurker. I lurk because I often feel my thoughts and opinions on topics and discussions have been touched on because discussions are already hundreds of comments deep by the time I arrive. The biggest positive with Tildes is the fact that the community is currently small and I read the post/sarticles that interest me instead of jumping straight into the comments to be given a synopsis. I now read more than just the headline.

I still have not found my 'voice' in regards to posting comments related to articles/stories that I have read. I think it is because I haven't found a discussion that I am really interested in. I have posted a couple of news articles that provide information about the part of the world I am in but, while they interested me, I didn't feel the need to discuss their contents further so I didn't add any comment to start a conversation to the post.

Regarding providing some more content to the site. My hobbies include, like everyone else, traveling, reading, and photography. I am no where near being an influential voice in any of these! I am not interested in having a travel blog or a website but I would like to provide information, incase someone else here is interested or has experiences too. For example, I recently took a short weekend trip from Bangkok, Thailand to Ayutthaya, Thailand. I rode the train, visited the sites, visited a bar, ate some food, and stayed the night. I want to provide a write up on my experiences and thoughts of this trip. Is a post in ~hobbies with the tags of: thailand, ayutthaya, bangkok, train the way to go?
What do y'all think?

Sharing photographs - Taking pictures is another hobby I share with everyone else. I enjoy sharing pictures I am proud of. I tend to post to r/nocontextpics, because I like their rules of no back story in the title. I also post to location specific sites. I do this to show off my pictures and to feel good from earning points. I do not post pictures to facebook very often because I like having the feel of anonymity. I don't want to be perceived as a pretentious twat. How does everyone feel about picture posts in ~hobbies with the tag(s) like: location, device used, etc..

My problem would be not 'spamming' photos. With the age of the site, and my brief interaction with it, no one wants to see 2+ picture posts from one user in the ~hobbies group.
Any thoughts on etiquette or rules for picture posts? Allow: Yes/No?

The new expansion for World of Warcraft is supposed to drop in about a month. Thought I'd see if any of you Tilderoos play WoW and what you think of it. I have been playing on and off since I was a kid and I've been having tons of fun with the introduction of the Mythic+ system in Legion. I'd love to hear about people's WoW stories and experiences with the game!

I'll level with you right now: I hate both of these terms.

"Political Correctness" is a term that gets used by a lot of people to talk about what I would consider to be basic politeness ("don't intentionally offend someone if they've made it clear they don't like a word, or would prefer to be referred in a certain way; just try"). I have suspected for a while that what these people typically really mean when they talk about political correctness is a fatigue with feeling like they're being forced to meet standards of politeness that are decided by others, and which they do not share.

"Civility" is a term that gets used just about every way you can imagine. It can mean politeness, it can mean "nonviolent protest," it can mean voting, it can mean only certain kinds of protest, and it can mean meeting decorum (which is a more formal way of saying politeness, but it has its nuanced differences, so I suppose I'll list it, goddamn, twist my arm why don't you). The range of possible meanings makes it pretty annoying, and borderline useless to talk about directly.

The title of this thread is an intentional play on one of my frustrations with a munk debate which was shared about a month ago. I believed the terms were too dependent on who "you" are in the statement. So rather than have them redo the munk debate, I thought we could have one of our own.

I definitely have my own views on this claim (that I'll be sharing below), but this has been such an awkward issue on this site that I think it's worth exploring directly. So explore with me:

1. Is there a difference between "political correctness" and "civility"?
2. Is either term valuable to society?
3. Why the hell are so many people so hot and bothered about these two terms, and also seemingly unable to interact meaningfully with anyone else?

The other day, I made a comment regarding our political climate that a number of people reacted to with anger. It is ironic because it is the very thing i was commenting on, that I wanted to avoid causing more emotional distress in that segment of the populace in my country which is right now very upset. I made my comment without taking into consideration that the very environment on tildes was no different than the environment I was commenting on.

It is something that has caught me off-guard in the past on this site as well, where I said something that I thought of as innocuous, which some people reacted to with extreme emotions. When I was told to police myself more, I felt indignant and infuriated. I thought I was already trying to walk on eggshells enough!

I don't think anything I've said or done on Tildes is objectively offensive or inappropriate - and I recognize that sometimes people see things from a completely different reality than I experience. I want to make a solid effort to get along with people here, and that appears to mean that I need to learn how to communicate in a way that doesn't provoke discord.

So how do I do it? What can I do to make sure that I'm not pissing people off here just by conversing and expressing my thoughts or feelings? What specific strategies can I employ to filter my self so that it is safe? Cfabbro and Deimos both have told me that I'm doing it wrong, but i want to know how to do it right. Please teach me.

Hey I was wondering what if Google is tracking our behaviour and using that neural (whatever the word is) to create artificial human replicating exactly to that human's behaviour..i know it's a weird thought which lead to..what are the dark side of the tech industry which is unheard of, or nobody is paying attention on it

I was looking over some of my charts of albums recently and I thought this might be a cool idea.

If you don't know what a chart is, basically you can go here and put together a chart of up to 100 of your favorite albums to show people a quick look at your taste or whatever. I've seen people use this as favorite albums, albums that mean a lot to them but aren't necessarily their favorite, people putting custom pictures and making a list of their favorite artists, people making a chart of albums with a "theme" (food on the cover, albums about break-ups, albums of certain genres, etc.), the possibility is whatever you feel like putting together a bunch of albums/artists/anything else you can think of together to show to other people interested in them. I thought it might be a cool idea to see what other ~music users enjoy listening to.

You can also use this to show your rateyourmusic account if you have one, your last.fm, your sputnikmusic, anything pertaining to music that would be cool to look at.

Before we get started, PLEASE, no political agenda harping, shit posting, trolling, etc. This is something that is on a sharp increase right now in the Bay Area and I'm genuinely wanting to hear other people's thoughts and opinions on this.

The homeless camps have officially reached an out of control level. There is no denying this. Trash and used hypodermic needles litter the streets. Drug use and sales is seen on street corners near the camps. I personally have seen residents of the camps painting graffiti in broad day light. There are unsafe cooking set ups causing explosions and fires putting residents at risk and leaving charred remains for weeks at a time. Cite: https://evilleeye.com/news-commentary/public-safety/explosion-home-depot-homeless-encampment-rattles-emeryville-west-oakland-neighbors/

What is going on here? How come cities are not cleaning this stuff up? I realize that if the city did conduct some massive eviction/clean up, the residents would just move somewhere else. But what about the trash? Can't that be cleaned up? In many places, I've seen it up to the ankles of people walking around in the camps.

I truly don't know what the non-camp residents are suppose to do? Do we just turn a blind eye and let the trash pile up? Or do we demand action to keep our streets clean and safe?

Partially inspired by the Abduction as Romance topic.

Both the Damsel in distress and Women in refrigerators tropes exists heavily in both written and screen media, especially in the comic book world, where women are reduced to easy plot devices to tell a man's story.

Women are "important" in that they matter to a man, usually the hero. They are mothers, daughters, girlfriends, but nothing more. They are defined purely by their relationships to the hero. If they are depowered, maimed or murdered, the tragedy is in the hero's loss, not hers.

People, men and women, do get hurt and die in fiction and in reality, and I'm definitely not saying this cannot be done on the page. A guy grieving his girlfriend's death doesn't automatically make her a "refrigerator girl".

For example, Gwen Stacy, who may or may not have been accidentally killed by Spiderman in his attempt to save her. Her death, and Peter's reaction afterwards has always been very organic and real to me. Her death didn't feel frivolous, and readers felt the loss as much as Peter.

As for an example of a damsel/refrigerator girl, (there are too many to choose from), let's go with Mr. Freeze's wife, Nora, who is literally in a fridge. I'm pretty sure there's no even passing Batman reader who doesn't know Nora. But do we honestly know anything about her?

Thoughts? Any common damsel/refrigerator girl that you think actually shouldn't be classified as such?

I always had a little problem with Laura Charles in this 1985 cult classic.

At the beginning of the movie, Laura's manager is begging her to play a tape. He tells her a man named Eddie Arcadian will hurt him if he doesn't get it played. He is literally terrified and begging. You can see he is terrified.

Laura actually says to him, "My life isn't filled with all that...... Drama." That's how she says it, she pauses before the word drama. Think about how dismissive that is. He is scared for his life and tells her as much, and she just says something that dismissive. Then she berates him like it is his fault he is in the situation. And the kicker is, she says her life isn't filled with all "of that drama" for two reasons. She liked the idea of it. The idea of thinking she was this person with no drama. And because she didn't care because it didn't affect her.

So the movie goes on. Now Laura is in danger of Eddie. It was all because Eddie wanted the tape played. There wasn't any "drama" in her life that caused it. But does she stop and realize that? Nope. Does she for one second think, "Gee maybe it wasn't my manager's fault he was in this situation. I wonder if he is okay?" Nope. She suddenly cares because it affects her.

And then everything in the end works out for her of course. And we never know if Eddie killed the manager or what happened to him. Laura never even looked for him to even just apologize, let alone make sure he wasn't dead.

What are your thoughts?