Lurker > berlyman101

they're getting ready to take over once the coasts flood

it's so gross to watch these brilliant people people still suck his dick.

There will be some protests when it warms, sure. But it feels like this next generation has been getting hollowed out. They're less educated and socialized than ever. Expect more floating question marks over heads from young people in person. The most sensitive to the events are probably online too much.

DoesntMatter posted...

in California? holy shit.

this is alarming.

lotta MAGA country out that way.

I foresee a long Russian occupation in the eastern part. The major individuals will probably by out of power by the next true progress for Ukraine, if ever. It could all come apart in a much quicker way, of course.

Jeffries was a bad pick for leader since the moment it came off someone's breath. this is gonna be a rough few decades.

well yeah our country is headed to the shitter. sorry that accurate reporting of this burns you out

resigning is a reasonable thing to do when put in an impossible position.

one thing that irks me about The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel is using obviously not Jewish actors for very Jewish roles. including this dope

I think of the Falcons failing stay in field goal range before Matt Ryan got sacked in the Super Bowl between the Falcons and Patriots. That and the Patriots winning that fifth ring seems like it had a wild spinout effect. So I guess the decision was not playing conservatively enough with the lead.

And the decision to go pass and the clock mismanagement by the Seahawks two years before that.

But for personnel decisions... the Ricky Williams trade was wild.

For the Bears, taking Trubisky instead of, say, Mahomes. That draft changed a lot of things for better and worse for different franchises.

Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers slipping to the Packers.

The Deshaun Watson trade and contract was unbelievably bad at the time and even worse now. The Browns, perpetually beleaguered, are set back over another half decade.

it's a complex thing. I think the only correct answer is "we don't know." he would take it very seriously and I imagine he would be deeply conflicted and subject to change his mind, based on his character.

I think that lost in all this talk about whether it's thematic or whether it works in the analogy part of the game is that if a game ends in a stalemate, one player decidedly did not beat the other. It's not even a punishment for bungling the play. It's just that those cases are the examples people are most familiar with. The rules itself don't care which side is "winning" because neither side has won or lost until the game is over. There are many examples where one player has more, even much more material than the other but simply cannot checkmate the opponent. If there were no stalemate, the game would continue in perpetuity. Even if there are more familiar examples where one player could have checkmated the other, it is irrelevant to the rules which must be applied equally. This is the best practical approach.

Thighs are easier to make good.

Doe posted...

It is interesting that most of the arguing is more philosophical than what is best for the "health of the game".

Such discussion always involves some sort of philosophical element.

There is a discussion to ban the "tush push" in the NFL now. On one hand, only one team consistently uses it in such a dominant fashion. But it's "basically unstoppable" so the rest of the league wants to ban it. If it's so unstoppable, then you do it, is my stance. For those who don't know it's basically just a play where the linemen push the quarterback (Jalen Hurts on the Eagles) for a yard at the goal line or on a close fourth down. In the playoffs the Commanders kept trying to jump the play and ended up with consecutive penalties and the refs threatened to award the Eagles a touchdown for abusing penalties. Some in the league worried that this is a mockery so they have to ban it. That's just punishing the Eagles for being good at something simple, though, that no one else is better at doing.

I do think, however, the defense should be allowed to push their own players into the other team, which is perplexingly illegal. I think it's to prevent high impact collisions, but it's still fundamentally unfair for the offense. I guess that would be the "philosophical" argument that also prioritizes "the health of the game."

I see the stalemate in much the same way. Magnus Carlsen, the best chess player in the world, stopped competing for the FIDE world championship in part because he was tired of classical chess in a match format with long, tiring games that rewards safe play that often ends in a draw. But such matches are inherently grueling. More "exciting" blitz or rapid tournaments exist but they do not currently carry the same prestige. A move toward the faster formats might make it more watchable for casuals but it would fundamentally be different and reward players for different skills and talent than the ones that got them there. A change to the stalemate rule would fundamentally change what we know as chess.

How would it even work? In tournament level play, would an arbiter decide when and where the different move should have happened? In casual play, would it just end with the program awarding the player with more material? That's fundamentally not chess and material alone does determine the outcome of games, the position does. Since most mistake stalemates happen in time scrambles, play in a format that has a different clock if it's that bothersome. Whenever I end up in a frustrating stalemate from either side I just remind myself that I'm not playing real chess anyway.

kirbymuncher posted...

There's a lot of people in here talking about how it makes sense with the rules, which it does, but I think that's sort of a tautology. Of course it makes sense when you consider the rules, it is one of the rules.

I agree that it is thematically weird, and if chess was invented nowadays it probably wouldn't exist

I don't think it's a tautology. The rule is that a player can make no illegal moves. But, there are plenty who agree and it has been debated for centuries and there have been plenty of times where it results in something other than an equal outcome (it is not technically considered a draw, but each player receives a half point in a match, so effectively, it is).

The Wiki article has historical viewpoints on it as well as detailed explanations.

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

I guess people usually get caught up in the idea that the player who played the last move before the stalemate is about to win if they play the right moves. That's overwhelmingly almost always true in the sense that the player has the pieces to deliver checkmate. But, it's also possible for that player to be down in material, just as it is for a player with fewer or less powerful pieces to win with a checkmate. A stalemate is agnostic in either case. The article also has more likely examples where there is unequal material but positionally the game is not winnable with perfect play from each side and also happens to be a stalemate.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/2d4e28e5.jpg

So compare that to these more common examples:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/767d6576.jpg

There are varying levels of material in these examples. The third has a queen, but white was still unable to end with a checkmate. In each case is possible that white could have played in such a way that they end up with a disadvantage if they did not play into the stalemate, wittingly or otherwise. We often associate it with the goofier examples where stalemates are a mistake, but again, the rule is indifferent to such things.

I also happen to think it would be pretty lame if an arbiter had to come in and say "if this person played the right move(s) they would have obviously won, so they should win" is an unsporting way to rule any game. I've delivered a fair number of frustrating stalemates in my day either because I was being lazy or I was in time trouble but I've never thought it was a bad rule.

-The diving rescue comments

-Finding reports of some whistleblowers being given the thug treatment at Tesla

-I had a co-worker who worked at Tesla who told me about his weird antics and hot temper

I think they missed the nuance on some of these but it's a fine list.

I once had a joke about this but no one ever got it. I acted out a bit where a criminal was surrounded and the police shouted at him to come out and he refused so they had to go "ah well, he won't come out. Even Stevens?"

Maybe if I added more funny voices and did it slower it would work.

Anyway, if you follow the rule that the king cannot put itself in harm's way, it logically follows that if there is no move a player can legally make, they cannot play a move. So the game cannot continue and that means it is a draw.

WingsOfGood posted...

go on

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

most people just want to live their lives. myself included. should our country fall apart and I survive it, I will tell the children of the future that I was a coward during this time.

this is a tired and stupid perspective. just looking at him I can see that he has some features that are considered attractive. he also has a lot of strong masculine secondary sexual characteristics. and on top of that he's apparently a mega-successful producer.

sfcalimari posted...

AP wanted Trump to win. Oops.

Where did you get that idea?

Give funding for trans therapy. Support abortion rights through legislation. Affirmative action. Anything that doesn't bow down to Christianity. So, nothing that's gonna happen.

fascism is not capitalism. that's far from the stupidest part of it, though.

I agree you need to cut her off on everything. Block her on everything. Delete her contacts and number.

But if you want to double down on the crazy waste of time you've given this part of your life, try to start banging another cute white girl and make sure she knows about it. You'd probably have to change several aspects of yourself and your lifestyle, and it'd be a toxic motivation, but it'd at least be more interesting than this sorry way to live.

Singapore's third? ... huh.

that seems really fake.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-cheered-booed-super-bowl/

with the way things are going, China might not need a Civil War to take Taiwan. and a whole lot of other stuff.

she's probably just the hottest woman you talk to on a regular basis.

1969 Mets

DrizztLink posted...

It's bad, yes, but I don't think you're gonna want to make that particular ruling:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_9wLAFuAi4U

ATfire567 posted...

I dont claim to be a saint, but that guy is a hypocrite of the worst kind.

the worst part is the hypocrisy.

who cares? it might even be a Russian.

both incels and fascism supporters are complex groups of people. I guess the middle of the Venn diagram would be a desire for power and status. that's not a satisfying answer to the question, but it's a vague question.

maybe the incels who supposedly push this ideology think fascism is a system that promotes rigid monogamy that will give them a better chance at securing a mate. that when women don't have as many options for freedom and safety, that's their shot.

I know it's a meme but the final calculus might include the word inflation. which isn't that much less stupid, to be fair.

I'll be generous and just assume they got tricked the same way everyone else did.

Reading between the lines, these people speaking may be conservative leaning refugees who vote in a similar way to Florida Cubans and are finding out what Trump really thinks of them. It'll be a common refrain.

The stupidity of those types of conservative voters baffles me. It's not even that they lack the most basic understanding of economics. Knowledge of cause and effect would be enough but here we are.

you can't give time back. only not waste future time.

Kalamata olives are tasty and olive oil is incredibly good and useful.

CobraGT posted...

??? I took that as making a witty remark about #47.

"trump is not a fascist because he is working within our systems of government"

I found it hilarious. Do you really believe Stewart is not clever enough to realize how outrageous this remark is?

I think he and his writers are trying to make a point which largely fell flat.

I don't know if a complete and total collapse is likely but a civil war level catastrophe is increasingly likely in the next 20 years given comparable examples in history. Things do move very fast these days, though, so that might affect the timeline.

People are saying this has to be a conspiracy but I can believe that the Mavericks' front office executives and ownership are this short-sighted and arrogant.

Joe Rogan podcast circuit and Fox News job coming in 3, 2...

ConfusedTorchic posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/6/6d3464fc.jpg

slightly related

I agree with that, though.

as I tell everyone in a Sopranos topic, look up nothing regarding the show anywhere. Spoilers abound

not with that attitude

I was curious. You post about the Michigan Arab voters a lot.

...are you Steamdude in the comments there, TC?