Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Duuvian

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 195
301
General Discussion / Re: Maybe the WWIII thread (soon) (Ukraine)
« on: March 01, 2022, 10:13:04 am »
I apologize about the angry tone of my diatribe above and especially for the profane namecalling, which was unneccessary and I regret. However I am very tired of this being the result so often, no matter where it occurs.

Ctuhlu, I don't think Putin would use nuclear weapons unless Russia itself is threatened with invasion. He has a long life ahead of him that a nuclear exchange / railguns from space would hinder, even in an elaborate bunker. There may even be the possiibility he does care for his people despite the results of his actions. An exception maybe tactical nukes, but if I were playing in a Paradox game as Putin doing this crazy gambit I wouldn't use them except in the case of breaking an encirclement that captures a large portion of my army otherwise because I would reasonably fear the consequences of such a terrible action even if it resulted in short term victory, since the other side has them too but doctrine does not include first use of tactical nukes (if I understand it correctly, I may be wrong not an expert).

JoshuaFH, that is funny. I don't think it is true but I could see why by events it seems credible.

302
General Discussion / Re: Maybe the WWIII thread (soon) (Ukraine)
« on: March 01, 2022, 05:38:07 am »
To be fair, I was appalled that Putin had succeeded in a long term and multinational trick on Xi into supporting his ambitions (directly counter to China's stances on intervention btw) by running a massively successful 5th column in the West driving anti-China sentiment in peoples skeptical of China or ideologically opposed to communism, often while supporting their own nation's similar behaviors to show hypocrsy to the audience of Xi. This doesn't make the bad things China sometimes does with it's national policies acceptable to me, but the current situation of antagonism being pushed as deisrable makes it far, far less likely for the West to be able to influence China's troubling policies morally and moreover distracts from problems within our own nations.

It happens everywhere. I don't think there has been a person anywhere in the world not impacted by Putin's machinations. I would not be surprised if in Antarctica there is a person shedding a snowflake to drift melancholy to the ice when they read this.

https://www.theafricareport.com/150126/russia-mali-who-is-spreading-moscows-soft-power-in-bamako/

That said, is there any recent evidence that China is supporting Putin in this? As far as I've read, they backed away immedietely into neutrality and Chinese banks are divesting from Russia to avoid sanctions from a much larger share of their trading partners.

303
General Discussion / Re: Maybe the WWIII thread (soon) (Ukraine)
« on: March 01, 2022, 04:54:56 am »
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1/us-rules-out-ukraine-no-fly-zone-after-zelenskyy-appeal

Biden, put together a fucking army on the Western border of Ukraine and start working towards a no fly zone, stop with this pussy shit. Even if your primary concern is re-election like it always is with the polishits in your crew, how you think you do with Putin in Kiev in November? Stop looking for the easy way out, you have Putin right where you want him except that he sees you doing not enough to counter the invasion and backing away. Whatever happened to "all options on the table"? Is that limited to opponents who don't have nukes? No wonder they are so popular in "rogue" states!

You have a very short window it appears until it is likely that you will lose control in the Congress and the party that has influential if not dominating Putin sympathizers in it are able to torpedo WhAtEvEr you do on their principle of obstruction. Right now there are people in their party telling the Putin sympathetic Republicans to STFU and sit down, which will not keep working if you ignore them by allowing Ukraine to fall. There's how it's in your political interest, while the public broadly agrees despite the efforrts of Tucker.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_column

This whole time of the buildup I didn't call for you to be ready because you got out ahead and said these things are off the table. I would have had to contradict you and been jumped on by both sides to the detriment of my position, since the righty base may have been convinced to take the opposite position by default and punish the no to Putin Republicans by affiliation with "liberal" ideas once the 5th Column had a moment to realize they had such an opportunity. Now that you. Biden, have found yoiur way here, you still do these things and I can't in good conscience not say anything about the lack of strategic flexibility regarding preparedness that seems to be a running theme in foreign policy.

I was going to post an old quote by myself from 2014, the previous time I posted about a no fly zone in Ukraine. I found it the first day I heard Kinzinger propose a no fly zone, finding it with the search function, but it is not finding it today. Is the search function messed up due to the forum errors? Also is quoting from an ancient thread from 2014 a good idea, or does it misquote or shiver the gears of the forums so to speak? I posted a lot on Ukraine over the years at times like today, and while I found results prior to today I can't find them on today's search.

While I cannot find the quote, it was in response to a reply that stated invading Russia would start WW3. In my response and what I sought to quote was a statement that the idea of crossing the Russian border was not needed, as the forces involved would have no need to push past the Ukrainian borders.

I think at the very least if you sit and watch the absolute calumnity that is about to unfold, you will soon want to make an exclusion zone/ humanitarian corridor etc at some point such as the Turks have done in Syria. You will need forces there beforehand for that, even if you cannot place a counter invasion army there like your Eastern European NATO friends would prefer you will need a substantial force that will not be cowed by Putin's threats.

304
General Discussion / Re: Not the WWIII thread (yet) (Ukraine)
« on: February 24, 2022, 05:40:18 am »
I'm not well read on this subject, but I thought it was interesting. It isn't binding, being a recommendation, but it is an alternative to disbanding the UN perhaps. I haven't tried to gauge support for such a thing at the General Assembly either.

United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution 377 A,[1] the "Uniting for Peace" resolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_377

From the article:
United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution 377 A,[1] the "Uniting for Peace" resolution, states that in any cases where the Security Council, because of a lack of unanimity among its five permanent members (P5), fails to act as required to maintain international peace and security, the General Assembly shall consider the matter immediately and may issue appropriate recommendations to UN members for collective measures, including the use of armed force when necessary, in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. It was adopted 3 November 1950, after fourteen days of Assembly discussions, by a vote of 52 to 5, with 2 abstentions.[2] The resolution was designed to provide the UN with an alternative avenue for action when at least one P5 member is using its veto to obstruct the Security Council from carrying out its functions mandated by the UN Charter.

EDIT:
Uniting for Peace
General Assembly resolution 377 (V)
New York, 3 November 1950

By Christian Tomuschat
Professor emeritus at Humboldt University, Berlin
https://legal.un.org/avl///ha/ufp/ufp.html

305
General Discussion / Re: AmeriPol thread
« on: February 24, 2022, 05:37:14 am »
There's more than enough production in the US and other countries to take up the slack at need. Biggest problem would be controlling the price rise.

Fertilizer commodity prices are very high right now, and that is a large input cost for grain commodity prices. Here is a very technical pdf that explains it. I am no expert but in my inexperience it seems like it could be something to work on to lower food prices. The TLDR charts are on pages 5 and 6 of 10.

https://agmanager.info/sites/default/files/pdf/Ibendahl_Fertilizer_02-09-22.pdf

EDIT:
Here is how it is applied by farmers who use it:
https://www.agriculture.com/crops/corn/2022-could-be-profitable-despite-skyrocketing-input-costs

306
General Discussion / Re: AmeriPol thread
« on: February 22, 2022, 01:30:51 am »
I do think that was a bad thing to say, but I also think that the poster is solid enough to regret having said such a thing when their anger has cooled.

Here is a link to what happened at the UN Security Council and some other live updates.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/22/un-meets-after-russia-sends-troops-to-eastern-ukraine-liveblog
Spoiler: Kenya (click to show/hide)

307
General Discussion / Re: AmeriPol thread
« on: February 02, 2022, 02:36:09 pm »
The article is from 2016 but I reckon if I could find newer statistics it would paint a similar picture of public opinion today. I did cherrypick this graph; the one showing campaign finance as Most Important Issue or similar sounding header does show that different issues garner more importance rating in comparison to campaign finance.
https://mountsaintvincent.edu/money-politics-americans-views-campaign-finance-reform/


Problem is, in order to change the rules of the game, you must be able to win the game under the current rules.

If you can win the game under the current rules, why change the rules of the game?  Especially when you're encouraged to keep winning the game in the future.
EDIT: took out short emotive grandstanding sentences

https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/bernie-sanders/summary?cid=N00000528&cycle=2022
If you combine that graph with a small donation driven political campaign, it's still playing within the rules afaik. To be honest you make a fine point due to the difficulties of such a self imposed limitation. I don't know what would occur when the donation model campaign is tried on a larger scale. I assume most campaigns are not so costly to run as the presidential, but I don't know how far the donations would have to spread over x number of candidates. I'm not married to the idea of the theoretical single issue party for election finance reforms only taking small donations, but I think if it is capable of function it would be more powerful of a message.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-issue_politics
The viability of such a party in today's US is one of the questions I have. This wiki article says it's difficult in systems such as the US with first past the pole and two party dominance, but a bit more effective in parliamentary systems and local issue elections. It may be that the circumstances are better for such a party in the US today than at previous attempts at it if it has broad public support on the issue and factions in both parties, however I have no links to provide which support that. It's probably too specific to search for someone having done the work for me and would require cobbling together a lot of articles and books to try to reach a conclusion; and single issue parties in the US too rare to find good search results. My source for learning that single issue parties had been done in the US before the civil war was a pdf scan of an old middle school textbook someone put on the internet and I found with a search a few minutes ago. I was going to read that chapter, but the pdf links were broken and so I only know offhand there were anti-slavery single issue parties before the civil war from the only paragraph visible in the search result. I assume those may not have succeeded.

EDIT: I was wrong in my previous post, there was an effort for campaign finance reform law in 2002 by John Mccain and a democrat I can't recall offhand. This is the law that Citizen's United struck down. I read this in an article that otherwise isn't a useful link.

308
General Discussion / Re: AmeriPol thread
« on: February 02, 2022, 11:56:30 am »
Over here you don't. Political parties are all funded equally by the treasury for their activities, some get some extra money from party membership fees, but you do not need money perse to get into parliament or government. Ofcourse, the economical right wing parties mostly have rich fucks as their politicians, but that is because they are the rich fuck parties that try to push rich fuck rights.

Note that we do not have silly things like rallies, or personal voting campaigns that costs millions. That's illegal over here. It is illegal also to spend personal money on political campaigning, and illegal to recieve large donations, either private or from business.

Recently, a new law was passed that enforces a 2 year cooldown period for ex-ministers. They are not allowed to take any job in a field that touches even in the slightest with the field of governance they had as a minister.
Huh. That's interesting. I knew America was more oligarchic than most of the rest of the First World but not to that extent. TIL.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

I think democracy heavily flavored with that would be a closer fit than classical oligarchy, but that link also describes civil oligarchy which is a new idea to me
(summary)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/oligarchy/civil-oligarchies/86DDCA90915EAF82AB028F8FAA0949E6
It does seem to be reflective as well in many ways, though I haven't read more than the summary from the link of that book's chapter on civil oligarchy.
Spoiler: Summary (click to show/hide)
Party Political Broadcasts are by a fixed allocation of free slots on the various national broadcasters' channels, so minor-but-significant parties neither get priced out of the market nor so easily wipe the floor with everyone else by having a Sugar Daddy funder dominate the field.

Yeah, same here. Starting two or three months before election day, every political party that reached the treshold to be on the voting lists (you need 30000 signatures in support to start a political party here) will all get their 5 minutes 'broadcasting time for political parties' on our public television network a few times a week, regardless of how big or how wealthy the party is. And within equal-for-all predefined budgetary limits, paid for by the treasury.

I've thought that a similar system would be of great benefit to the US political system after learning about it here a long time ago. I do think that current Supreme Court precedent would not allow that to stand as of now, but I also have done 0 research past assuming the court's Citizen's United decision or related precedent would prohibit as limiting the "free speech" which wealth enables with that ruling. I'm not sure if the public funding ad slots would run afoul (probably somewhere somehow) but within the past 10 years I recall several arguments to remove pay from politicians by conservative movements on the logic that most are stereotypically wealthy and the taxpayer shouldn't pay their salary. This is an easy narrative to push, when the counterpoint is to say it's so that poorer individuals may hold high elected office, because that is uncommon. The same argument could be used against public funding of campaigns, especially if financial donations to campaigns remain poorly regulated ("they don't need it")

Another wrench in the gears is that many influential and important institutions profit a great deal from the status quo. Facebook too.
https://www.emarketer.com/content/facebook-dominates-2019-2020-political-ad-spending
(following link has a wall popup of the type that became common after the eurocookie law was passed, apologies, also ads aplenty)
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/election-boom-heres-how-much-ad-money-cnn-fox-news-and-msnbc-are-expected-to-make-in-2020/

Moreover I've only spotted a nondominant part of one of the parties ever seem particularly active in espousing significant campaign finance reform. I think in order for the idea to even have a chance politically in the public, reforms for publically funded elections would have to be a partywide plank at a time when the opposing party is something like a threat to democratic norms or something. Moreover it would take far more research than the 0 I've done to determine how to frame such reforms in a manner held constitutional by the highest court for it to go beyond a political plank to a legal chance of becoming and remaining law. I would also suggest as a specific example that the current makeup of the Democratic senate could not pass Build Back Better after a great deal of cajoling and broken promises to the liberal wing to pass the Infrastructure Bill alone. Due to the very narrow margins in combination with the above contributing factors, as much as I would very much like to see such a party plank, it is completely unrealistic at this time.

I saw some lamenting on the lack of viable third parties. Here is the best I can suggest.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/02/01/power-move-for-democrats-in-2022-00004214
It's a crazy dream of mine that disaffected liberals and conservatives like these could one day run on a plank of campaign finance reform as a single issue party that intends to disband after the deed is accomplished. This would be a way for both factions to gain more influence in a publically funded campaign finance system than they currently have due to all the "free speech" arrayed against them.

Realistically it seems unlikely and with little basis in reality due to my lack of experience with such things. Unless such an event occurs, I think that if my area is still unshakably Republican for a regional candidacy I will very seriously consider supporting the anti-Trump Republicans or freshly Independent with the best shot at winning in the primary election, when party candidate for the position are voted for (assuming I am not thrown off by other issues I can't support) and if the anti-Trump candidate proceeds to the general election for local and regional positions that aren't in realistic reach for the Democrat or <other choice here> to again consider a vote further if the inevitable post-primary flip flop isn't too severe for my tastes. It would be fun to see such a candidate overperform in the general compared to Trumpist candidates, though that is getting optimistically far, far ahead of circumstances. I don't expect them to be radically different from the Republicans I had grown familiar with, but if that party is to be elected by a large margin anyways in my area I'd rather have voted for an individual that has shown the character to do the difficult thing to lose some or many of their allies and friends for their principles, and who I consider right in this important matter.

309
General Discussion / Re: AmeriPol thread
« on: January 15, 2022, 01:02:38 am »
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/13/un-chief-warns-millions-of-afghans-are-on-verge-of-death

First paragraph: "The United Nations chief has warned that millions of Afghans are on the “verge of death”, urging the international community to fund the UN’s $5bn humanitarian appeal, release Afghanistan’s frozen assets and jump-start its banking system to avert economic and social collapse."

My recommendation to leaders beyond help them immediately as ably as you may would be to help establish an agricultural tractor factory there. I once many years ago read one of my Grandpa's Old Books and in that much older version of the book it described the effects of the introduction of mechanized farming on a large scale. (the publisher's description does not reflect what I remember of it; it was largely economic statistics and explanations of processses and events and not the referenced personal historic accounts so much that I recall)

One thing I found interesting and remembered was this. Initially tractors were supplied to the highest producing and wealthiest trial villages first, in the assumption that it would increase the success already found there. However, returns were less than expected and if I remember correctly less than 10% increase in production. In a trial program, a poor and under producing village was targetted for mechanization. While I don't recall the percentage increase in yield, I believe I remember it being very much more than substantial for the poorer village. Unfortunately I can't locate my copy of the book to find that specific chapter and check the numbers, but it was a substantial enough difference to be remarkable. It's also possible that fertilizer was supplied as well as there was a substantial amount in the book about fertilizer distribution, but I can't remember if that was a factor in the example I gave.

Many manufacturers in countries surrounding Afghanistan seem to produce tractors and sell them in Afghanistan. Here is a completely random example from a quick search.
https://tafetractors.com/afghanistan/

Another quick search can't find an Afghanistan located manufacturer. Here is a sad result for example:
https://agriculturecontact.com/companies/agricultural-mechanization/tractors/in/afghanistan

It may simply mean  that I did not write the search term correctly to find the result.

Here is a related article that I found from 2018.
https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/afghanistan/publication/unlocking-potential-of-agriculture-for-afghanistan-growth

Spoiler: Portion (click to show/hide)

From the following 2010 article, it appears Afghanistan in 2010 largely had private tractor owners as contractors for farmers rather than farmers largely owning their own mechanization or having it provided through a community pool.

https://agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/assisting-smallholders-producers-an-innovative-approach/

This article supports the approach of private ownership and small contractors in less mechanized places.  It says an option for workers displaced or otherwise leaving employment in farming is private tractor ownership and working as a contractor for farmers (relates to the spoiler). However I am unsure if the number of functional tractors in Afghanistan is sufficient or if lack of mechanization is contributing to famine as I haven't found a source for that. I also don't know how much further land could be cultivated with further agricultural mechanization. Here is a document I did find, from the prior millenia oddly

The Agricultural Survey of Afghanistan (1989) by the Swedish Committee for Afghanistan
http://www.afghandata.org:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/azu/4609/azu_acku_pamphlet_s471_a3_a477_1989_w.pdf
It has some details on mechanization of farming but it is ancient. It would be a useful work to update it I think.

Thus my small suggestion is a tractor factory for affordable but reliable agricultural tractor models, built in Afghanistan, if conditions of mechanization in Afghanistan mean that further mechanization of agriculture would be desirable. If at all possible with plans to switch the lines to electric motors if or when that is feasible in the area, as that seems to be the standard for the future at least until newer tractor engine technologies are invented and spreading. Whether nationalized or private or owned through worker's shares I have no suggestion, having not taken time to study the possibilities of types of capital ownership in Afghanistan.

Here also is an interesting idea that may be of some benefit.
https://agsci.colostate.edu/smallholderagriculture/most-effective-project-enhancing-access-to-contract-mechanization-via-reconditioned-used-tractors/
If you look at the craigslist section for tractors for sale in almost any US region you will find some.

310
Uh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police,_Crime,_Sentencing_and_Courts_Bill

Where I heard about it (opinion piece)

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/1/13/the-save-its-democracy-the-uk-should-kill-its-new-police-bill

I don't live there but many portions listed in those links sound bad to me (without having looked through bill texts). What do people who live there think?

311
Other Games / Re: SALES Thread
« on: December 26, 2021, 09:37:30 pm »
I bought a pack if the 3 Witcher games quite a while ago on a large sale like this one. I still haven't managed to complete Witcher 1 though; one of the quests was a tough choice because I either missed some relevant information or it was vague intentionally.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I eventually made a decision and finished that quest last in the act except for some fetch quests, but afterwards I didn't make it to the next act as I stalled out on the last few tasks of the list. It is a very good game for it's age in my opinion. Why is the Polish voice over recommended?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)


I saw X4: Foundations mentioned above too. I would also recommend it.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Spaceman Spiff (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Huge Minefield (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It looks like the Shadowrun Returns trilogy is on sale on Steam. The first is pretty good, the second and third (Dragonfall and Hong Kong) are both excellent. I especially like the music in the latter two. They aren't related storywise between the three except for references to events in the earlier titles and a few characters being present between the titles. They are set in fictional timeline Seattle, Anarchist Berlin, and obviously Hong Kong. The combat is turn based and sort of like the new Xcom series.

I didn't remember to screenshot the first game, Returns, but here are two from the others.
Spoiler: Dragonfall (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Hong Kong (click to show/hide)

312
In Epictetus's Discourses he says something similar somewhere, that the best defense a single individual has against a brigand society, is to behave well in accordance with what he calls right principles. However I will admit his Stoicism is TOUGH and I cannot claim to not be mildly injured at some of his crotchety criticisms of his students.

You make many fine points on unfairness however, and by doing so there is the potential for you to influence society, as humbly as that may be. In isolation there may be less hope to rectify in the long term that which would cause your retreat.

EDIT: The exception would be the pandemic, that would seem to be a good time to isolate individually during to some degree if possible.

313
What happens f they take your stuff though?

314
I think that to that conclusion Socrates disagrees in Book II of Plato's Republic, when he describes the formation of a state (or society) and the benefits it confers to the individual who must otherwise become good at everything rather than specialize and trade labors. While this later was proven to not always be the case with the rise of the polymaths much later, it does still hold water for the most part imo.

315
Other Games / Re: Automation - The Car Company Tycoon Game
« on: December 23, 2021, 02:31:48 am »
There is an alpha for v.4.2 out on Steam. It's in the betas section when you right click the game title in library and choose properties.

EDIT: The campaign is disabled for this alpha test but you can try out the new car designer stuff. There are turbochargers and also you can do aesthetic things like this now:

Spoiler: Image (click to show/hide)

If you use mousewheel to scroll on the sliders you can go push past the limits. I tried to see what happens if you keep scrolling on the elevate back and front ends in opposite directions hoping it would flip the car over for a sort of of high lifted suspension undercabin design but it can only rotate a certain amount before it hits a limit and starts rising or lowering instead. Plus the wheels seperate.

If you invert the width of the tires without any camber long enough it sort of looks like a steamroller from the front but not well enough to screenshot.

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 195