Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)RM
Posts
0
Comments
418
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran :3 A full payload of HUGS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow uwu All planes are safely on their way home with cookies! NOW IS THE TIME FOR CUDDLES! Thank you for your attention to this matter _^

  • What an absolute joke.

    I can just imagine him writing it, hunched over, peck-hunting for the keys. He starts typing bombs. No, he thinks. Slowly backspaces. Starts giggling to himself as he presses the caps lock key. "This will show them how serious I am about my bombs!"

    peck peck peck "B-O-M-B-S"

    Probably sits back in his chair admiring it for a moment. "Perfect. Very strong. Very powerful bombs."

    Then immediately starts typing about peace in the same shouty caps because why not? Everything deserves caps lock! BOMBS! PEACE! WHATEVER!

    Then ends it with "Thank you for your attention to this matter" like he just sent out a memo about updating the office dress code instead of announcing he bombed another country.

    It's such a weirdly formal, corporate sign-off after the most unhinged announcement possible. As if bombing other countries is just another agenda item he's keeping us informed about. Very considerate of him to loop us in on World War III via Twitter memo.

    Absolutely deranged.

  • Literally every big store that sells boardgames constantly have like 10+ different versions of it. I don't know who the hell all these Monopoly fans are that are apparently not just buying Monopoly, but buying enough different versions to make it viable to keep offering them, but someone is keeping them in business.

    I can only assume new parents of young kids just getting something they remember from when they were a kid. But that can only be half the story. I don't believe that these people are becoming Monopoly collectors buying up every alternate version that comes out.

  • So are you going to nerf every class similarly?

    Bard

    Vicious Mockery: avg 10 / 55 casts

    Cleric

    Word of Radiance: avg 13.5 / 41 casts
    Sacred flame: avg 18 / 31 casts

    Druid

    Produce Flame: avg 11 / 50 casts
    Poison Spray: avg 22.5 / 25 casts

    Sorcerer

    Acid Splash: avg 10.5 / 52 casts

    Warlock

    Chill Touch: avg 11 / 50 casts

    Wizard

    Ray of Frost: avg 11 / 50 casts

    Artificer

    Thunderclap: avg 13.5 / 41 casts

  • I agree and said as much when I touched on this. Again, this isn't a fundamental issue with money, it's an issue with the way it's allowed to be used, distributed and manipulated.

    Money isn't broken, our world and laws regarding it are.

  • People stopping believing in religion doesn't affect much. People stopping believing in money would collapse countries/the world. That alone will keep people believing in it. At the end of the day I can really take money and get real food with it, no matter how fake you claim it is.

    Fundamentally money is just fancy IOUs. You trade bread for eggs. One day the neighbour broke all their eggs so they give you an IOU. You don't really need more eggs at that time so you give another person the egg token for some milk. He can then go get eggs.

    That's all money is. Transferable, universal IOUs. And if you think about it, there doesn't need to be a limit to the amount of IOUs in existence. Yes, it's all built on trust and promises, that the egg farmer will honour the token and give you the eggs, but the IOU is just a concept, nothing needs to physically exist for the IOU to be valuable beyond the idea it will be followed through on.

    So to me, it doesn't matter if money is "imaginary", because that's kind of the point. The only reason we ever had something backing it was to ensure the person could actually follow through with the IOU they gave out. Because if the chicken farmer gives IOUs out en masse so that they can get a bunch of stuff from their neighbours immediately, they're gonna have a problem if everyone comes to claim them at once.

    But if you're happy to accept the idea he can eventually make good on it in some way, and the people of the village all agree to it, there's no reason he can't do this and give out the eggs over time. The fact it's built on trust doesn't automatically make it not real.

    That said, there's definitely valid concern about how speculative bubbles and extreme wealth concentration can distort the system. But that's a problem with how the IOUs are distributed and manipulated, not with the idea of money itself.

    And honestly when we look at the scale of the world today, what's the alternative? You want to go back to trading? How is that going to work for obtaining a TV, smartphone, internet? A variety of foods? Etc etc etc. I'm interested what alternatives could exist for a global or even national market.

  • Loss

    Jump
  • Yes! The tree lights up green if you're pregnant and red if you're not. It can flash between them while you're waiting, and sometimes it will randomly hold just a tiny bit longer to keep suspense high.

  • Women are human beings that should have autonomy to do as they please.

    This is 100% true, for anyone (obviously excepting it doesn't infringe on others, such as murder for example), but also its okay for people to have boundaries and for you to compromise within those boundaries, assuming you want to be with the person more than you care about the boundary they have.

    Now whether such a thing should be a boundary is another question, but if it's normal to, for example, not want your partner to cheat and have that as a boundary, we can at least agree its okay for boundaries to exist at all within a relationship, and that it isn't necessarily infringing on your autonomy as a person for your partner to have them.

    There are however definitely boundaries that should be considered a red flag, and for many people this may be one of them. That's fine, and it's fully your choice to decide whether you accept a boundary, just as some people may only want an open relationship, and so "no 'cheating' of any form" would be a boundary they wouldn't accept, despite being common.

    And they're not "yours" or anybody else's but their own selves.

    Fully agree.