rwtwm
I’ve spent an outrageous percentage of this year playing the poker solitaire/deck builder/roguelike that is Balatro.
I didn’t like roguelikes until dicey dungeons came along, and since then my favourite games have been that, slay the spire, Hades (haven’t played 2 yet) and now this.
If you like deck builders, I highly recommend it. A very smart twist on the solitaire genre.
I have it on android! It’s been a trusty travel game for me. I do find the upgrade pathways a little narrow though. Maybe I haven’t quite got the knack for it yet, but I find that I don’t have enough agency over if a run is successful. That is to say, I lose and too often can’t point to something I could have done differently.
Does nobody else find the framing of this article a little weird? I thought the argument for boosting the economy, was because it correlated well with people’s well being. (Not that I personally but that, but I understand the line of thought). Now instead we’re suggesting that human outcomes are important because it boosts an arbitrary measure? I feel like the cart is now dragging the horse along the ground.
The sat 24 IR view doesn’t seem to match up very well with what you’ve posted, so it may just be noise, or a corrupted data load.
Using the phrase ‘valid concerns about immigration’ today is a little bit like waving a St. George’s cross in the 80’s though. I mean, it can be done with the purest of intentions, but you’re using a symbol that people (taking you at your read) you’d rather not be associated with use to identify each other.
I was certain this link would already be here! https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/2/24117976/best-printer-2024-home-use-office-use-labels-school-homework
The point seems to have gone quite a long way over your head. The person above is advocating for a system where transit/active travel is the easy option. Not one where you have to up your commute by 500% to do the right thing.
It’s not, “just use transit”, it’s “please make it easier to do so”.
My concern with this line of argument is that it bundles consequences from a system of government up with the consequences of trade embargoes and other hostile actions from capitalist economies. That doesn’t make the actions of the dictators in those countries justifiable in any way, but might have precipitated conditions that made them more likely.
How would communist nations have fared if the US had taken a ‘live and let live’ approach to them? The approach during the cold war was that they couldn’t be allowed to succeed. That led to the sort of standards of living where dictatorship tends to thrive. Note this isn’t unique to communist countries. Look at the Republican party in the US, now that Neoliberalism is failing.