At some point, he’ll piss off enough people that the world at large will just look the other way when it happens.

https://12ft.io/ works great to bypass stupid bullshit like that, as well.

So, Primer, then? Where you can’t return to a point in time before the time machine was constructed?

For example, Penny Dreadful is a fun fan-organized Magic the Gathering constructed format, played exclusively on MtG Online, wherein legality is determined by cards that were worth $0.02 or less during the previous 3-month ‘season’, making decks inherently very affordable.

It has a neat self-regulating effect since enough people play the format that if a card is particularly strong in a given season, the demand created by the format will typically drive the price up above $0.02, and cause it to be illegal in the next season.

It seems like this would create a format with only very bad cards, but card prices are a bit wild in MtGO, such that there’s actually over 14,000 legal cards currently including many rare and mythic rarity cards.

On the morality point, I’d argue that we should spend the money to rescue any person if we have the money/means, and it can feasibly happen without excessive risk to other lives, otherwise we’re assigning monetary value to human lives.

Resources are finite, though. If rescuing one person requires, say, 10 units of resources, but rescuing 10 others require only 1 unit of resources, isn’t choosing to rescue the 1 over the 10 already placing relative value on human lives, by declaring them to be 10x as valuable as the others? This is obviously operating on the assumption that we don’t have the resources to rescue everyone who needs rescuing.

This new series of Battlebots sounds pretty entertaining.

For a game built around limited formats (like drafting or sealed deck play), it makes sense / is a necessity for the format to work. It definitely sucks for constructed formats, though.

My real wonder would be if the majority of Americans would okay the amount of money it would cost to save that one man?

Depends where the money is coming from. Military budget? Absolutely. Being taken from social services and whatnot? No. The amount of money that would cost could save so many more lives if it was used for things here. Choosing to spend it on saving an astronaut rather than on, for example, feeding homeless people and distributing medication and disaster relief is like a version of the trolley problem where the trolley is already heading for the 1 person, but you have the option of switching it to the other track to kill more people if you want to. I’d have a really hard time calling that moral by any metric.

Hopefully it’ll act as a spoiler against the republican candidate, opening the door for a progressive party to also form without causing a far-right candidate to get elected.

Yeah, they’ve already placed tons of bets against themselves; own-goals are just lining their pockets.

The city should just put forth a new plan that involves taking those specific homeowners’ land via eminent domain, and using it to install new parking lots or roadways or whatever will fit to accommodate the new requirements.

“We’re going to have B-2s and F-22s and F-35s flying right over the White House,” Trump told reporters before flying to Iowa.

God. I know it’s effectively an impossibility, but if there was ever a time I’d love to see the military turn on Trump, this is it.

The definition of DEI, Wokeness, CRT, etc. according to Trump and Republicans in general is “Anything we don’t like” or “Anything we can weaponize against ‘The Left’”.

That definitely has to cause more pollution.

This is what the article is about… They’re basically saying “The fireworks are going to cause hazardous air conditions, stay inside and keep your windows and doors shut, don’t go outside to cook because you’re subjecting yourselves to dangerous levels of pollution.”

Agree with you that fireworks just seem like an unnecessary relic from the past. Plus, in addition to the pollution concerns, they scare the shit out of animals, and can cause fires, especially the ‘backyard’ variety.

It’s an interesting question, but whose responsibility are you proposing it is to find another actress? Who’s paying that actress? Is the library going to pay twice as much, or is the existing actress expected to work the same amount of time for half the money to accommodate this second actress?

This is great, thanks for this link! Didn’t know this was a thing!

At the end of the article the quote from the black actress I think eloquently summed up what feels weird about it.

It’s a weird argument to make here, though, because this isn’t a white actor vs. black actor question at all. The library isn’t choosing between one or the other. There’s only one actor, no matter what characters are being played. If they were responding by saying “Actually we want to hire a black actor to play these characters,” I’d get it, and agree with that, but they aren’t. They’re just choosing to not have black figures represented at the performance at all, which seems… worse, somehow? I don’t know.

Given the specifics, I don’t see any problem with what she’s doing. It’s not like a white woman was being cast to play a black character instead of a black woman; she put together a one-woman show that she is the sole performer in. The library even (initially) asked her to play the black characters, then changed their mind.

If someone here disagrees, I’d be interested to hear why.

but not the fatwa that prohibit nukes

My understanding was that they weren’t constructing nukes per se, just getting the capabilities to do so ready to go so that if that fatwa is lifted, they can just do the final construction and be armed, rather than starting the process from scratch at that point. Is there new evidence that this isn’t the case?

I didn’t say I was unwilling to change my mind; I said that it became clear that it wasn’t going to be changed by the people replying. If you want to debate it, my DMs are open, but leave the ad hominem attacks out of it or it’ll be a very short discussion.