#and still as non-viable as it has been for decades it is SO not viable anymore

[jyndor]

who the fuck seriously believes a two state solution is viable in the year of our whatever 2024

keep deluding yourselves it's not going to happen

[akallabeth-joie]

The Blue Castle, chapter 11

The dinner party continues, and it's anyone's game!

To be honest, we start off with a lot of boorish but (finally!) non-abusive behavior. Until Aunt Wellington brings up her stupid teapoon. [-1] Obviously, she needs to take better care of her possessions if they mean so much to her.

And then Cousin Gladys tries to shame Valancy for... not smiling at a her failed attempt at wit? [-1]

Aunt Mildred, please expand your horizons.

Then some blatant hypocrisy from Mrs. Frederick Stirling, who as far as I can tell, never performs "loving service" for anyone. Perfect timing on Valancy's part, following that with "to be free sneeze when you want".

More bad conundrums from Uncle James (-1), making the second time in as many pages that someone at this dinner party tried to cow Valancy by referencing her estate of single blessedness. F that.

"It is such a fatal mistake to try to be funny if you don't succeed" applies to all Stirling humor, except the unintentional bit with the dog and the Catholic church.

Not here for body-shaming anyone, but Aunt Mildred absolutely started it. [-1]

Mrs. Stirling finally called Valancy by her name! Probably just because the syllables can be drawn out better with "Valancy" than "Doss," but it's a start.

Benjamin Stirling, what on earth has Valancy done to warrant a spanking that every person here hasn't done first and worse to her? Also, she hasn't disrespected you. Yet. [-2 for this and the raspberry jam. Seriously. It's been decades. Cope.]

And thus we learn that "Old Dear" is kryptonite to Stirlings.

Ah, Barney Snaith. Weird how they're all obsessed with him. While Valancy is completely right, and right to be upset at their unfair nonsense, I'm not taking points for people attacking him, since the scoreboard's for how they hurt Valancy.

Still this gives us a nice encapsulation of how the Stirling's critical thinking (doesn't) work: judging guilt based on his name, physical appearance, and a lot of more-or-less mutually exclusive rumors.

Olive gets another -1 for trying to trip Valancy up (and using the wrong name).

Maybe Second Cousin Sarah Taylor is just an idiot, but I am absolutely judging Isabel for hating Barney over rumored cat ownership.

Aunt Wellington gets the -1 for trying to shame Valancy for saying the quiet part out loud, but I do want to point out the hypocrisy of everyone present, particularly Uncle Wellington, who brought up Barney and alluding to the salacious rumors first, and then blamed Valancy for contradicting them in plain language.

It seems unsporting when Valancy so neatly returns their volleys, but a final -1 each to Mrs. Stirling and Uncle James for attacking Valancy. Also, is this the first time Mrs. Stirling has actually mentioned her late husband on page?

Exit Valancy stage left like the legend she is.

I seriously enjoy everyone's consternation once Valancy leaves. She doesn't hear it, so I don't think it can really count one way or another, though I sort of want to give Uncle Herbert a point for making tentative defenses of her (calling her sensible and trying to suggest a medical explanation rather than blaming her). I think I will: after all, Valancy likes him, probably from doing stuff like this in the past, and his efforts here may well help her with the fallout from this episode. In that vein, Georgiana also gets a point for defending Valancy (or at least attempting to calm Benjamin's anger towards her).

Please welcome Aunt Alberta and Second Cousin Jane to the scoreboard. Many small changes to the order, as the pack spreads out. Our four-way tie in second place (both second cousins, Aunt Alberta and Uncle Herbert) just goes to show that not talking to Valancy much on page constitutes a viable strategy. Cousin Georgiana remains in first place, with a new high score of 2!

Mrs. Stirling: -37

Cousin Stickles: -11

Uncle Benjamin: -8

Aunt Wellington: -8

Uncle Wellington: -4

Olive: -4

Uncle James: -4

Byron Stirling: -2

Aunt Isabel: -2

Cousin Gladys: -2

Cousin Betty: -1

Aunt Mildred: -1

Aunt Alberta: 0

Uncle Herbert: 0

Second Cousin Sarah Taylor: 0

Second Cousin Jane: 0

Cousin Georgiana: 2

[jcmarchi]

Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble Preview - Bringing Monkey Ball Back In 2024 - Game Informer

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/super-monkey-ball-banana-rumble-preview-bringing-monkey-ball-back-in-2024-game-informer/

Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble Preview - Bringing Monkey Ball Back In 2024 - Game Informer

Last month, I had a chance to play Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble, the first all-new entry in the Super Monkey Ball (SMB) franchise in more than a decade. While I went into the demo skeptical that the series, which experienced its best years in the early-to-mid 2000s, could feel like a modern experience in 2024, I emerged from the demo impressed by the gameplay improvements, single-player level design, and the game’s approach to multiplayer (you can read my full preview here). 

Shortly after the preview, I had a chance to dig deeper into Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble with several of the developers behind Ryu Ga Gotoku’s franchise that isn’t about the seedy underbelly of the Japanese organized crime to learn how the team worked to modernize the franchise while still remaining true to its roots.

Back to Top

[embedded content]

Recently, we’ve received some remakes and remasters, but no new entry for many years. Why did the franchise take such a long break?

Nobuhiro Suzuki, Producer: We believe this is the result of a combination of factors. Whether it was due to development resources being refocused towards other large titles, the creators leaving the company, sales numbers, and more, the SMB development line disappeared and there was a period of time when production came to a halt. However, after releasing two remakes, Super Monkey Ball Banana Blitz HD in 2019 and Super Monkey Ball Banana Mania in 2021, and after receiving positive feedback from our fans, we decided to release a completely new title, Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble. We hope fans are excited to play this first brand new entry in over a decade!

With that unique position in mind, what were the primary goals of Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble?

NS: Following the release of those two remakes, Banana Blitz HD and Banana Mania, our goal is to firmly establish the revival of the SMB franchise with this completely new title. To that end, we set out to make a new entry that firmly inherits or captures the best qualities of past SMB titles while also feeling like an all-new game with 16-player online battles, refined game and character designs, and the addition of new characters and storylines. 

With such a big gap between the last all-new, non-remake/remaster release, were there any updates to the design and gameplay best practices that needed to be applied to this latest entry to ensure it feels modern in 2024?

Daisuke Takahata, Director: Based on the data we pulled, such as the number of people who cleared each world of Banana Mania and comments from various playtests, we updated the game with a level of challenge that new players (as well as longtime fans) will enjoy. Compared to the past titles, the difficulty level of the early worlds is now milder (in previous games, things were too difficult right from the beginning). We also made it so that the first time you boot the game, you will be taken to a tutorial that will help you learn how to play the game and use the controls. The same goes for the camera, where we made some small adjustments to the default settings to help make things feel smoother. Players will also be able to fine-tune these settings in the Options menu, which we think longtime fans will appreciate.

The physics in Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble feel good. How did the team go about overhauling the physics, and how did you know you got them just right?

Jack Ko, Programmer: Banana Rumble’s physics actually builds upon those in Banana Mania, which in turn was based heavily on the original GameCube version’s physics. We made special adjustments to the movement in the previous game to make it viable as a remake, but thanks in part to comments from fans, we were made aware of a few elements that might contribute to some of that unintuitive behavior caused by the physics in Banana Mania. With Banana Rumble being a new entry to the series and having its own new stages, it means that this time around, we were able to focus on making the movement feel simpler and more intuitive.

Additionally, the physics system is extensively parameterized, meaning that designers can make adjustments to different parts of it on the fly. With internal testing happening at least once a week during development, tweaks were made incrementally and whenever needed. We knew we had it right when anyone could just pick it up and be able to immediately roll out like a pro.

Why was the Spin Dash such an important inclusion in this entry? What do you think it most adds to the experience?

NS: In creating this all-new game, we wanted to add the right technique that would give users a wider range of play and challenge. Also, in order to implement the 16-player battles, we needed something that would really emphasize the user’s technique so they can overcome the competition. As a result, the Spin Dash was implemented. While the Spin Dash is simple to perform, we believe it adds a lot to the game; for beginners, it’s an exhilarating element that allows them to sprint and bounce off obstacles, and for advanced players, it can serve as a way to find shortcuts and quickly reach the goal. We are very pleased how players have been responding to it.

This question may be better asked to the localization team, but with the Super Monkey Ball franchise so reliant on puns and wordplay related to bananas, did the team ever consider calling it “Peel Out” instead of “Spin Dash?”

NS: To be honest, we didn’t think about it at all. [Laughs] We wanted to make it easier for users to understand just by looking at the name, so we made it straight out “Spin Dash.”

When creating a level in Adventure mode, what factors must be considered to create an effective stage?

Yukio Oda, Designer: As for “what elements,” our basic idea is to combine “various elements” in a complex and effective manner. For example, if we break down a stage into smaller pieces, you can see that the “path” includes various elements such as “thickness,” “curve,” “slope,” “moving path,” and so on. Depending on how these parts are combined, the stage can be easy or difficult, interesting or boring. The Monkey Ball team has a lot of expertise in these combinations, all accumulated over many years with the series, and we always aim to create an interesting stage based on that know-how. But the first step in creating a single stage starts with the inspiration of the stage designer.

How does the team balance fun with challenge when designing stages?

YO: The stages created by our stage designers are regularly playtested by dozens of people inside and outside the team. Not only do we pick up a variety of opinions, but we also analyze data such as the percentage of clear rates and times, and we are constantly making adjustments to make the stages even better. We are also strongly aware that the Monkey Ball series has been characterized by its contrast between having very easy stages and very challenging stages. Sometimes, even if a playtester finds that a stage is deemed “too difficult,” there are cases where we end up leaving it the way it is. However, we are always pleasantly surprised when, after launch, we see users uploading videos showing how they were able to complete extremely difficult stages with ease. 

The stages I played were very enjoyable and sometimes over-the-top, but they were just in the first two worlds. How wild should players expect the challenges in Adventure mode to become?

DT: We are glad you enjoyed the early stages of the game! As we announced, there are 200 all-new stages to be found in Banana Rumble’s Adventure Mode, all spread across different worlds. The final world, in particular, has a variety of exciting gimmicks waiting for players, which will prove challenging even for fans who started with the previous titles. Stay tuned for a “very wild” challenge!

Can you talk to me about the process of designing the Battle modes? They bring such enjoyable twists on the Super Monkey Ball formula, and I’ve always found the minigames/side modes to be as enjoyable as the main Adventure mode.

YO: Thank you very much! When it comes to the game design of Battle Mode, we paid close attention to how “control” and “sense of speed” were expressed during gameplay, as they are key characteristics of this series. We also took care to ensure that the skills players learned and improved upon by playing through Adventure Mode can be utilized in Battle Mode as well. One of the main features of this game is its emphasis on “ease of understanding” – basically, we made sure not to make the rules overly complicated when adding any twists and turns, so players are able to enjoy themselves.

Where would you like to see the Super Monkey Ball franchise evolve from here? Do you think there is a place for multiple releases in a shorter time window than we’ve seen in recent eras?

NS: First of all, as a basic premise, we will continue to carry on the fun and originality the SMB series is known for, and make sure SMB fans can fully enjoy their time with it. On top of that, we would like to evolve the series to a level that offers something that incorporates a variety of exciting new ways to play that is altogether unique to Sega. With the support of our players, we believe we will be able to continue to release new games on a regular basis. We would really appreciate everyone’s support for Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble and the Super Monkey Ball series!

Super Monkey Ball Banana Rumble arrives on Switch on June 25. For more on the upcoming series revival, head here to read our full, hands-on impressions.

[militantinremission]

Ok, Donald Trump's Indicted... Now What?

So Mainstream Media & their Democratic Shills R celebrating the 37 Count Indictment against Donald Trump- R they being premature? What exactly R the odds of Donald Trump getting convicted of a Felony Act, let alone dozens? Government & Mainstream Media have been busy keeping The Masses 'Emotional' over the last 20Yrs; all the while, giving up Our Freedom as Citizens for empty promises of Security. This fearfulness has led to an American Society where there are more incidents of Mass Shootings & Mass Killings, than Days of The Year.

This fearfulness has also been weaponized to cause the equivalent of Human Stampedes over Non- Issues, like The Debt Ceiling & Donald Trump. America was NEVER going to default on Its debts; the unnecessary game of Chicken was a waste of Time. The Issue of Donald Trump is an ongoing Saga. Democrats have used Trump to scare their voters to The Polls, but Dems haven't offered a viable alternative. Joe Biden has created hundreds of thousands of (Part Time) Jobs that still don't pay The Bills. His Administration has fostered a steady rise in The Cost Of Living, but Mainstream Media's attention is focused on Donald Trump.

For The Record, I don't see Donald Trump getting convicted. He may finagle a continuance that allows him to campaign throughout the 2024 Election Cycle, but I don't know if he will need to go that far. People are so quick to put Trump in Leg Irons, that they forget the precedent ANY CONVICTION of Donald Trump will set. If American Courts see fit to convict a former President, what will stop The World Court from going after American Politicians, Diplomats, & their Aides for an assortment of War Crimes? Afrikan Governments are expressing frustration over watching their Leaders Tried, Convicted, & Imprisoned, while European & American Leaders commit atrocities, yet remain free.

Lindsey Graham's tone towards George Stephanopoulos on 'This Week' may have been a Tell of sorts. Despite obvious bad behavior by Donald Trump, Republicans appear to be Circling The Wagons around him. Chris Christie, John Bolton, & Bill Bar are getting their 'shots' in, but they also sound like they're hedging their Bet. Does anyone believe that Trump could serve Decades in Prison? In a Case tried by a Judge that he appointed? I feel like saying 'The Fix is In', is an overstatement... I have more concern for his former White House Valet & current Personal Assistant, Walt Nauta.

Mr. Nauta is reportedly seen On Camera moving boxes to Donald Trump's Residence from a storage room, during the same period that The National Archives requested the Presidential material. When asked, Mr Nauta denied moving the boxes. His Indictment may be more worrisome. Donald Trump is keeping Walt Nauta close for now, but Michael Cohen can attest to the length of Donald Trump's Loyalty... Walt would be wise to keep a couple dollars stashed for his own Attorney.

-Just Saying

[mariacallous]

Last year, climate action was all about declaring dates for achieving net-zero carbon emissions. At the 2021 UN’s climate change conference in Glasgow, COP26, India pledged that it would reach net-zero by 2070, a date just 10 years behind China, despite its per capita emissions being some 30 years behind China’s and only half the present world average. COP27 is just days away, but this year many countries are distracted with energy security issues, instead of upping their game for more aggressive emissions cuts.

This COP, we must shift the conversation from futuristic net-zero ambitions toward practical and equitable emissions trajectories. The rich and overall high emitters have to reduce emissions aggressively, while the low-emissions poor must lower their growth rate of emissions on a credible path toward zero.

Development from a very low base inevitably means the poor must increase their emissions in the short term. The good news is this should still fit within global emissions targets if high emitters reduce emissions quickly up front. Unfortunately, the push toward zero has been interpreted as a prohibition on public support for new unabated fossil fuel energy. This is both unfair and unviable.

Developing nations need energy, which may require a little fossil fuel

Developing countries are being asked to “leapfrog” to renewable energy (RE). However, if we don’t allow any new fossil fuel investments, then RE is difficult to scale because it’s intermittent. How do you meet the evening peak electricity demand with solar power? Batteries are still very expensive. Today’s optimal electricity grid design may maximize RE by relying on minimal fossil fuels for occasional peak needs. Batteries should soon be able to meet much or even most of the peaks cost-effectively, but if one designs for zero fossil fuel, then it’s very expensive.

The good news is that simply having some fossil fuel capacity doesn’t mean it will get used much – the marginal cost of RE (and a battery) is virtually zero, once built. As my research group modeled for India in detail, an optimal design focuses on high RE first, without worrying about storage just yet. The cost savings from not over-ambitiously getting down to zero carbon can be spent on accelerating up-front decarbonization, which lowers cumulative emissions.

For the poorest of the poor, the real need is electricity access, regardless of fuel. Sub-Saharan Africa is where most people lacking modern energy services live. Giving 250 million homes electricity connectivity, with 35 kWh/month usage (enough for a TV, refrigerator, and fan), even entirely from coal, would only be 0.25% of global emissions. And most new builds don’t rely on coal – solar is already far cheaper, at least for the daytime.

A push towards RE-only has created pressure to not finance natural gas in poorer countries, despite them being told for decades that natural gas was a bridge fuel to a cleaner future, and one that would avoid the use of coal. This pressure hurts not just energy security but also food security. Recently, there was global pushback against a natural gas fertilizer plant planned in Bangladesh that would be three times more efficient than older designs. This isn’t climate justice.

Developing regions want to minimize their use of fossil fuels, such as India’s ambition to achieve 500 GW of non-fossil electricity capacity by 2030. This would quadruple India’s current RE capacity (excluding hydropower), and more than double its current total installed capacity. But rising RE doesn’t mean switching off coal prematurely before viable alternatives emerge, more so because India’s cumulative emissions from all sources would still be modest. In reality, India’s 2019 per capita coal consumption was only half the world average when we adjust India’s tons consumed. This is because of its lower energy content per ton, which means lower emissions.  In contrast, India used only about 22% of the world average of oil and gas per capita.

Globally, total oil and gas emissions were 25% more than from coal, even after factoring in coal-based emissions from cement. Thus, it is inconsistent to focus disproportionally on lower coal use instead of lower total emissions. It is also inconsistent to focus on emissions created by new builds in developing regions, instead of emissions from already built infrastructure that is overwhelmingly in high-emissions regions.

The poor need more energy, and much of it will be clean energy which is already viable. It’s the last fraction of energy that is hard to keep fossil-free. It can be done – at a cost. That cost should disproportionally be borne by the rich, first as they go full zero and pay the early adopter premium, and second, through financial support for developing nations. The premium is important, not just to cover the cost of developing batteries, but also for green hydrogen to avoid industrial emissions.

Such support should be part of promised aid or concessional finance and certainly not more traditional debt. At COP15 in 2009, there was a pledge to provide $100 billion of annual climate support for the poor by 2020, but the form such support would take was never specified. Sadly, the pledged funds haven’t yet fully materialized, and the date has since been pushed back to 2023.

Many developing countries are asking for funds due to climate-related “loss and damage.” How much materializes remains to be seen. Regardless of what form it takes, all climate finance support should be flexible, allowing recipients to not just mitigate their emissions, but also pay towards adaptation and resilience.

Present net-zero plans are not just unfair – they are insufficient

The focus on “net-zero” also brings with it many other problems, including of accounting and fairness. Today’s offsets are often accounting tricks, whereby an entity helps avoid emissions elsewhere, often in a developing country, and claims that as negative for them. Financiers discussing offsets have repeatedly told me “All carbon is equal.”  John Kerry recently told African leaders “Mother nature does not care where those emissions come from”.

These physical realities miss several issues. First, if all carbon is equal, then we cannot ignore historically accumulated carbon. Second, when considering offsets, paying to avoid future emissions elsewhere doesn’t negate emissions – it simply avoids growth. Not to mention a lot of “carbon finance” is just a label. It’s often not additional money and, even worse, is routinely debt funding for things like solar projects which would find funding anyways. Third, avoiding all carbon isn’t equal. Cheaper low-hanging fruit like offsets in poorer countries must not absolve the rich from aggressively ending their emissions from hard-to-abate sectors like home heating, industry, and transportation. The recent U.S. Inflation Reduction Act was a step in this direction by focusing on increasing the supply and use of clean energy.

Keeping the world within 1.5°C maximum average temperature rise needs aggressive steps and while most countries are doing more than in the past, their targets don’t add up to staying within 1.5°C. Even worse, their policies and actions don’t match the targets. Countries like the UK and the United States tout lowered emissions, but that’s from a very high base, and they also benefited from a one-time shift from coal to cheap gas, which isn’t available to many poorer countries. Another issue is many developed nations import a large fraction of their emissions as embedded carbon, which doesn’t show up in national emissions accounting. The UK imported 41% of domestic emissions as embedded carbon in 2019, growing from 11% in 1990.

The rich already have saturated development: the cars, refrigerators, roads, and homes they need to build are mostly replacement stock, although they will also need infrastructure to support the clean energy transition. However, poorer countries’ growth needs are far more than just replacement of fossil fuels with zero-carbon infrastructure. Given such high growth can’t be met easily by zero-carbon solutions, their emissions will need to rise in the short run. But the poor’s rise in emissions will be less than the likely failure in reduction by high emitters in the coming decade.

Rich countries must reduce their emissions faster

Achieving net zero emissions by 2050 requires a 3.3% reduction each year from 2020, assuming a constant annual decline. However, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s special report on staying within 1.5°C maximum average temperature rise stated we need a faster reduction up front: a 45% decline by 2030 from 2010 levels. Unfortunately, global fossil CO2 emissions grew by 10% from 2010 to 2019. Thus, in this decade, we need to accelerate the decline and also get to zero sooner to make up for the extra emissions in the previous decade. This means that to achieve the 1.5°C goal, the annual decline must be more than twice as fast as the IPCC report suggests. And the decline must be even greater from richer high-emitting countries.

Unfortunately, high emitters have collectively never reduced their emissions over a decadal timespan. The UK, the top performer out of the G7 countries, reduced its domestic CO2 emissions by 35% from 1990 to 2019. But this is only an 1.2% annual reduction, falling short by more than 2% annually compared to the 3.3% target. And this is ignoring imports of embedded carbon.

Not only do we need high emitters to aggressively reduce emissions, but buried in the details of the IPCC report and far less publicized is IPCC’s finding that virtually all pathways within a 1.5°C temperature rise or with limited overshoot also require significant Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR). While planting trees is one technique, it doesn’t scale well, more so for developing regions where land pressures are higher. Plus, we have the risk of trees and their stored carbon going up in smoke with forest fires.

Many CDR plans involve literally sucking carbon dioxide out of the air for long-term storage, an expensive prospect through direct air capture. The volumes that must be removed are enormous. Taking a mid-range IPCC estimate, 500 Gt of CO2 removal means 10 Gt/year for the second half the century, or about a quarter of present annual emissions every year. This burden must also not fall on the low emitters of today, the poor, even if they represent a high­­­­­ share of global emissions post-2050. This is because the need for CDR is overwhelmingly due to over-emissions by today’s high emitters. Also, expectations of future CDR should not become a rationalization for not mitigating today.

What do developing regions need?

RE is already viable at large scale, but its deployment in many developing regions lags its potential. This is where developed countries can help through improved finance (especially cheaper capital). While many cross-border projects carry risks, some of the risks could either be shared by developed countries or mitigated by multilateral agencies who can provide counter-guarantees or other risk-reduction mechanisms.

At COP26, a coalition of financiers announced $130 trillion was available for the transition, but this money is the gross total funding pool, and not necessarily incremental money available to pay a premium for becoming carbon-free. The good news is that financial help as climate support is only required for the incremental cost of going green, akin to viability gap funding, and not all the costs.

In addition to finance, access to state-of-the-art technology is also important. While much of this may be owned by the private sector, government nudges and incentives can help.  As well as technology, countries need secure supply chains. Given many of the global minerals for clean energy are concentrated or controlled by a handful of countries, developing countries need help to ensure they aren’t last in line or forced to pay a premium. COVID-19 and Russia’s war in Ukraine showed how the poor became the last to get access to vaccines or global supply chains.

Growing RE is one part of the solution. But given existing fossil fuel plants in developing regions (especially new ones) aren’t going away any time soon, we need to make them cleaner, more efficient, and flexible. Unfortunately, a global finance model of “don’t touch any fossil fuel project” means a missed opportunity to reduce local air pollution and make the transition less expensive.

COP27 is an opportunity for countries to not just ratchet up their ambitions, but also give credence to their ambitions. We need aggressive targets for all countries – but the targets won’t be the same everywhere. Poorer countries already face the brunt of climate change, but they want to do their fair share of mitigation. They may even do some amount of unfair share. But this cannot mean climate absolutism.

[hedoughnism]

Something I’ve complained about awhile back, and will complain about again, Is what I called the Nerd Solution,

There is a sort of person who doesn’t like doing advocacy, they think activists and protesters are cringy, they consider Politics a muddy mess that they are above, and they are convinced we can solve all our important problems through inventing our way out of them, without ever addressing policy or changes in consumer behavior

To be clear, If something already exists at non-experimental commercial scale, It isn’t a Nerd Solution, solar panels and wind turbines were once nerd solutions, we already have Solar Panels and Wind turbines, and they haven’t been a panacea despite being cheaper than fossil fuels. There is progress to be made in new technologies in the space sure ( and maybe some specific new designs someones rallying around qualify as Nerd-Solutions themselves) , but simply inventing solar panels and wind turbines wasn’t a complete solution, and we still have to play politics to shrink and hopefully one day eliminate the fossil fuel industry

The appeal of Nerd-Solutions is based on this Idea of Progress As some fundamental force of society, that since the dawn of Homo Sapiens, There has been some sort of steady all-encompassing progress in which the median person got materially better off, was less diseased, the world got more peaceful, and society got more egalitarian and less bigoted ( across all forms of bigotry) , all in unison and as facets of some vague core idea of progress, down stream of technological innovation, and that if we just keep inventing things we’ll get steadily closer to utopia , ( I could speed forever deconstructing this idea, but this gay vegan thinks it self evidently falls flat on its face, and the Steel Man that There was a fundamental positive change in average Human quality of life after the industrial revolution goes without saying and has no modern political implications )

Liberals like this story because they get to gloat about being on the side of history future people will praise, conservatives like this story because it allows them to exaggerate their cultural power in the Good Old Days and use patriotic nostalgia as a rallying cry for societal change, and also to pretend they are doing a chesterson’s fence.

The Nerd-Solution I think about the most are Clean-Meat and new Nuclear Reactor designs ( fusion but also novel kinds of fission reactors) , but Mostly Clean-Meat

I’m skeptical of Clean-Meat, for a-lot of reasons ( we’ll get to them in a second), but part of it is that it is a Nerd-Solution, the people who are loudest in favor of It Hate Vegans, Especially Activists, they consider us cringey and overly emotional for having committed principles , they shit on our lame bland food to promote their alternative, and though they can rationally understand that killing animals for meat is morally wrong, they can’t internalize that animals meaningfully morally matter, and so see Clean-Meat not as an alternative to killing animals for food, but to vegan activism and the Animal Rights movement , As a way to get us to shut up

The thing is There is no reason to believe Clean-Meat is a solution

- The closest equivalent we have, of a identical replacement for a status-symbol consumer commodity, is lab-grown Diamonds, the industry though commercially viable, failed to take any meaningful bite out of the industry for decades ( before weirdly making very rapid progress in the 2010’s? I really wish I could find good sources explaining the why of this change)

- Research from the UK has found no correlation between a rise in plant-based-meat sales and I remember similar pre-covid( shutdown altered things cause people eat more meat at restaurants) data from the US showing plant-based meat and animal meat both rising in consumption, Plant based meat isn’t the same of course, but people who are big proponents of Clean-Meat tend to be also for “ plant meat innovation” ( Even if it means killing hundreds of rats) and do some garbage reasoning that one plant burger sold equals one fewer meat burger sold to justify it.

- People Mostly Eat Meat because it is a status Symbol, Rice and beans and bread and cabbage soup is for poor people, Meat is for Rich People. Men also eat meat as a larger share of their diet then women also for cultural Masculinity, Man The Sadist Hunter reasons, Cultured Meat advocates refuse to Engage with this, They stubbornly insist that if they managed to get Clean-Meat as cheap or cheaper, Indistinguishable from Animal-Meat, and just as convenient to access Everyone will switch, because they take consumers at face value and don’t interrogate societies relationship with meat, because that would be politics, and require advocating to people to change their values, Clean-Meat can’t substitute Animal-Meat because it can’t give people what they value.

- Most Rhino Horn today on the market is fakes made of Wood or Buffalo Horn, There were projects to make “ lab grown” rhino horn, pitched as an environmentalist thing, but they were shot down by actual Rhino Conservationists because it would make it impossible to tell real from fake and to enforce bans on Rhino Horn, we have this problem currently with Ivory, where fresh Ivory is often sold illegally as “ Antique” , If we are optimistic a far future society is Vegan at all, We Do Not want this society to have cultured-meat, as it would make enforcement against fishing hunting and animal farming impossible

- Commercial Animal Agriculture is heavily subsidized, Cattle Ranching and the Dairy industry especially, There is a reason the US has a national Cheese reserve and a Got Milk Campaign, 90% of the money from grazing livestock in the UK is from subsidies It also acts as a subsidy itself on the corn and other crop industries because of its inefficiency, Even if Clean-Meat completely took over commercially politics would still be necessary to stop paying farmers to torture and kill animals

- the commercial market will never be able to produce substitutes for all the species people eat, Animal Right Advocates already are tarred and feathered as racists for advocating against Non White cultural practices , Imagine how much worse “stronger” this accusation would be if they could be munching on lab grown chicken fingers and thanksgiving turkey roasts, while advocating against eating dog/cat/monkey/seal/whale/ etc

Any way, what I was getting at is I can’t be arsed to complain about Rond De Santis’s Clean-Meat ban, Clean-Meat isn’t a panacea and so it getting shot down isn’t a big deal, also If Clean-Meat is ever commercially successful enough to he an existential threat to the Animal-Meat industry the ban will be overturned, it won’t last forever, advocacy will still he needed, we will keep having to play politics, even if it switches to advocating for lab-grown-meat one day instead of veganism, it’s not a substantial difference

@random-thought-depository ( just cause I talked about this before and I know you don’t follow me)

[sizablelad]

i used to be dogmatically opposed to a two-state solution primarily because i perceived it through a (probably north american liberal democracy) inspired fear of nationalism=bad, therefore a two-state solution, which inherently endorses BOTH israeli and palestinian nationalism means more nationalism in the world, so according to a utilitarian framework, two-state=bad.

but something i've learned a lot during this era of the conflict by listening to a lot of grassroots peace activists/movements is to kind of abandon that framework because it's simply not that simple. i feel like the root of a lot of the political disagreements (actual political disagreements, not "hummus is israeli, no hummus is arab" dumbass discourse) i have at this point is with people who view political polities, whether it be people or governments themselves, as immutable, as fixed. a two-state solution doesn't need to be a final goal (though maybe it is, i'm not a policy expert and this post is more about recognizing a flaw in my own political worldview), but it is a viable solution (like a GODDAMN CEASEFIRE) that could potentially address security concerns and extreme national sentiments that exist and just can't be ignored. like. they are there. there's no point in pretending that they don't, that far-right israeli nationalists aren't going to say BUT HAMAS every time you critique the israeli government response, that hamas isn't powerful because of decades of subjugation and trauma. solutions that have been discredited as non-viable in some hypothetical future because they aren't "the perfect solution" or whatever can and SHOULD be a method of triage in the current absolutely devastating human rights abuses that are occurring.

the issue though, once the triage has been completed and there's room for more nuanced political discussion, is when we as a people decide our work is done, look away, and allow propaganda from ruling powers to convince us that "actually...... no more change is necessary, the system is okay as it is" and allow what is supposed to be a temporary framework for peace and the alleviation of human suffering become the norm instead of constantly working to better the system. the people that allow this are those that benefit from the current system, and then as the distance widens between those that benefit and those that don't it allows for extremists to take advantage of polarization, sticking their feet in the door and stoking extremist sentiments. i don't know the history as well as many and i'm not a political commentator so take this with a grain of salt, but this appears to be what happened with the oslo accords. they have their flaws (BOY do they have their flaws), but it was a start at triaging the conflict in a less extreme time. but the negotiations were allowed to stagnate with no followup to address the structural and nationalist concerns that were still VERY REAL. and look how that worked out.

so on another note, THIS is what activists from that region mean when they say you're exporting politics from another region that is just different than yours, THIS is what they mean when people say the conflict is complicated. layering USAmerican racial tensions over a region that literally isn't the US, doesn't have US socio-political history, is just inaccurate and is gonna lead to misinformation when you try to force a conflict that is fundamentally not North American into a North American narrative. it's honestly kind of imperialist in it of itself. you're just being naive at that point and it's going to lead to dangerous conclusions.

this epiphany was inspired by palestinian activist Khalil Sayegh's episode on Babel: Translating the Middle East. his interview is really insightful and important, so go listen to it (it's very accessible). and, as always, extremism=/=radicalism, there are always 50 caveats that i'm not mentioning so don't think you Know Me based on this one random essay, peace and coexistence should be our ultimate goal, and secondary to everything is prioritizing the sanctity of human life. none of us are free until all of us are free.

[marlasomething]

(my) Mag a Week: Natural Destruction

Before anything: next week there won’t me another “chapter” of these, I am going on holiday.

Hello there!

I am participating in the "a mag a day" idea which is BRILLIANT and I decided to do "statement a week", rolling dice with the characters and fears that were ftw that week in the episodes I have listened.

This week I am a bit late, sorry, life. For today I rolled Archivist!Martin Blackwood and The Extinction (Eps. 147-155).

As usual, please do forgive my quick tipper and non-native speaker mistakes, Marla

Allons-y!

CW: mentions of murder, self-harm, swearing, toxic family  dynamics

Also on AO3!

 Statement of Mary Cage, regarding the re-appearance of her twin children, almost a decade after they disappeared in the first place.

 Audio recording by Basira Hussain; The Archivist.

 Statement begins.

  I never wanted children; all I ever wanted was a legacy and children were the easiest way of getting one. If you ask me, the best option is to have three kids, so at least one will be worth saving , even if it just because he or she wants to prove to be less of a disappointment than the other siblings.

I know it sounds harsh, but it is what it is. One of my children needed to outlive me in a manner in which I would never be completely forgotten; it is not an affair to let completely to luck and randomness.

Therefore, that is exactly what I did: I had three children, my beautiful precious Rosalind and her older brothers, Charles and Jack. I recall thinking for a very long time I got lucky, since I had two thirds of the work done at once…now, I am not so sure, perhaps I will still have one viable child if they hadn’t been that close…Maybe they wouldn’t have disappeared at all.

  It wasn’t long before I knew Charles and Jack wouldn’t make it in this world in any significate way. It wasn’t that they were bad, or stupid, or especially clumsy; they just weren’t enough of anything. It was so, that I started to feel laziness towards them, as if they weren’t worth my time. And, then, Rosalind was born and, even though she was the blandest baby I have ever seen, she brightened up my life. After all, her emptiness meant that she had all the potential to be moulded into anything. Not only that but, as she grew older, she proved to have absolutely no mind of her own, yet a brain so powerful she was quickly to understand everything, memorise almost all data and even be sensitive with people in a manner not even mental health professionals can be.

In other words: I have my child and, also, two other kids who also happened to share my blood.

Since the only complain I used to have about Rosalind was how fragile her health was in summer (and only summer, we still don’t know the reason behind this), this was the part of the year where most annoying I found those other two needed mouths.

I wanted them so badly not to be there, to not keep occupying space and oxygen and even part of my capacity of loving …but I couldn’t, at least, not directly.

Perhaps leaving the door open before taking Rosalind to the hospital wasn’t that incidental, maybe, only contacting the authorities, no PI mixed on trying to get them back…maybe I was glad they were gone.

Maybe, now, like this, I could work more and better in the perfect offspring I had always deserved.

  The next nine to ten years were uneventful. Rosalind was growing into the very exact person I wanted her to be, my husband was just a presence that did his part (and I make no illusions he thought any other way about me) and things were…as they were supposed to. I made a world for myself and, yes, that can become rather tedious from time to time, but the overall is safe, nice. A perfect design in which the faults of our reality mattered no more.

With, of course, the extra-safety of knowing that, no matter what, everything I was would be carry on thanks to my wonderful only daughter.

Then, her siblings re-appeared.

  If there was any doubt it was the teenage version of the boys that had gone missing almost a decade ago, it was corroborated by the DNA test my husband and I almost violently insisted to be done to them the moment it was legally allowed to do so.

At first, they were silent, and we were afraid they had become some simpletons with more animal than human instincts, but we were wrong: they were just shy, scared of being pushed into the streets…just as I should have done.

Their story was quite simple, actually: the twins had gone lost in the woods, where they had found a couple determined to live without the poison that is Western Civilization (their words, not mine), the pair had adopted them, turned out to be far more literate than most teachers we could have found for the pair and eventually died. So they had chosen to come out, arguing that “even we like what we were taught, we want to believe there can still be hope for our species”. We couldn’t do nothing and, after all, all they did was to eat more expensive (and healthier, according to them) than before and speak certain nonsense to whomever was there to listen.

However, one day, their audience was different than the usual.

One day, the audience was Rosalind.

I just wished she had cut her ears off beforehand.

  I know that, deep down, the twins meant nothing with what they said. They did believe their charged rhetoric, but that was it: there were no brainwashing shady second intentions to their speech.

Still, they should have realised that Rosalind wasn’t the ideal person to listen to a fiery discourse without taking out the most dramatic conclusions and how to act upon them.

The entire concept of the human species destroying a place that is not own by us more than a flower or the oceans infuriated her up to the point that she actively refused to take any means of transportation other than one of her three bikes or her very own feet.

This only affected her, but then she started to interfere with her father and I, trying to throw away or donate those clothes that we had tailor-made for one concrete event, changing our daily menus and even meal times, calling to cancel all our television subscriptions…I don’t know how she did it so efficiently in so little time, but before we could even began to react, we were in the most Spartan house I could even begin to conceive in the twenty-first century.

Meanwhile, the monster of teenagers my oldest children had become just kept a perpetual smug face, as if they were proud of their influence in their baby sister. They weren’t so high and mighty when Rosalind decided ( found out , according to her) that she wasn’t doing enough.

And so she went to her next phase.

  I recalled the disgust I felt when I saw my beautiful perfect Rosalind staring at a mirror, at her beauty untarnished and simply started to scratch her face. First almost gently, then with such fervour pieces of skin were falling to the floor, right next to a mirror.

I gasped and tried to stop her without being harmed in the way (she was much stronger than she looked and my bones are fragile), to what she only reacted by lowering her arms and calming me, saying that she had had enough, that it was just “not fair” that someone like her got so much when other people were being condemned just for the factions they got at birth.

I immediately sent her to her room and called her father and siblings to the living room. It would be shameful, but I was completely willing to put her in an asylum if that could help. Yes, sorry, that word is not politically correct but, if you see your life project mutilating herself out of some nonsense her estranged brothers muttered without even being firm believers (they are already back to the sports team and playing X-Box every other day, for fuck’s shake!)….you wouldn’t care either about what should be said.

However, what was so clear to me wasn’t to my useless husband and even more dead loss children. They began to say I was being “too much myself” (whatever that meant) and we spent hours arguing. By the time I had managed to convince them, we went upstairs…

…to find the lifeless body of Rosalind, who had been mutilating herself until she had died. Apparently, of blood loss.

With some…I hope it was just blood, she had written in the floor “that is what Humanity deserves”.

  At first, I thought it was bit too extreme. I could understand the pressure getting to her, her weak mind falling for certain moralities and even the self-harm. After all, it isn’t as if I hadn’t been her age…the message, though? That was beyond worrying, my child hadn’t been that crazy, been that wrongly made. She was a vision, not a nightmare; she shouldn’t have believed that.

So, as I mourned the empty casket we buried (there was a break in the funerary the night before and the bastards that did it took a few corpses apart from every single item of value), I started to wonder how she could have come to that conclusion, to the almost stated fact that Humanity deserved ugliness and annihilation…then, I understood it.

It wasn’t my daughter who had been at fault, not even my now also deceased stupidly insidious twins; it had been this rotten planet of ours. This place is ungrateful to us, the species who managed to turn it from a jungle filled with irrational parasites to the garden of refinement and progress it is today.

I will avenge my daughter and, with her, also myself. I am making my personal mission to scorch this world to the ground; I am even making sure no remains of those I might end in my path can be used by the Earth as its personal fertiliser.

Please, if I am writing to you it is because you are people of thought and intellect and I wish nothing but to spread my word to those who could understand it.

Help me consume this planet.

   Statement ends.

   The more time I spend as The Archivist, the most certain I am this whole classification of fears is pure bullshit that we had turned real after inventing it. Yes, I know that our new director that doesn’t have at all Elias’ eyes and speaks just like the bastard Jon went to jail for rightfully murdering him is giving me this statements about The Extinction as this new threat that is rising from the shadows but, in all honesty? If it is real, it is just re-contextualizing other elements that people following these alleged Fears.

 About the statement itself, I could look into it, even look into it properly; but I would rather go have a drink with my equally doomed mates, taking advantage of our new director curiously connecting so quickly with Lukas…

 End recording.

[sportsminorityreport]

The torturous expansion history of the PAC-10

A brief History of PAC expansion

Today I am going to try to put down what I recall from years of covering realignment and cover the history of PAC failed expansion efforts to explain why even though the PAC appears poised to survive this year, I am still worried about their long term prospects.

To my way of thinking, the last truly successful execution of expansion in the history of the PAC was the addition of Western Athletic Conference powers Arizona and Arizona State to create the PAC 10.

I contend that the PAC’s policy of unanimous votes on expansion has hamstrung the conference in every opportunity since then.

The PAC’s first shot at UT

When conferences were allowed to start negotiating their own deals at the end of the 1980′s, the Southwest Conference, the Big Eight, and the Southeastern Conference were all concerned about their lack of markets.  All three conferences had about 8% of the US viewership and all were concerned about their futures.

The Southwest Conference was at the time the weakest of the three.  Their pairs of schools in their dominant media markets (TCU and SMU in Dallas/Fort Worth) and (The University of Houston and Rice University in the Houston DMA) had seen their game day attendances collapse in the 1960 through the late 80′s as NFL teams crushed their collegiate football competition for public ticket sales.

With half of the University of Texas’s conference schedule in front of empty stadiums in the 1970′s --- an era when ticket sales financed most of college athletics --- UT was making noise about their dissatisfaction with the Southwest conference.

The Metro private schools needed some way to make their programs seem more valuable to the conference so they began aggressively paying their players under the table.  The most successful program at that was SMU which became a top 5 program nationally due to their pay for pay system that was literally decades ahead of their competitors.

Their success enraged their conference mates who ratted SMU out to the NCAA.  This started a retaliation that ended up with almost all SWC schools being on probation at one point in the late 1980s.  Competitively those penalties weakened the schools in the conference vs. other conferences.

By the middle of the 80′s, UT was done with the SWC, but realized it could not politically escape the other 7 Texas schools in the conference.  At least not as long as the conference seemed viable.  It had to appear to be faltering.

So UT AD Deloss Dodds allegedly approached Arkansas AD Frank Broyles and told him, “if you join the SEC and break the seal on the SWC, we will follow you in.”

Arkansas historically had been UT’s #2 rival behind OU. 

Broyles approached LSU leadership and LSU quickly sponsored Arkansas for membership.

The SWC, now a Texas-only conference, seemed non-viable to Texans in the new conference TV driven market.  Dodds approached his bosses about joining the SEC and they aggressively rejected the idea based on the inferior academic profiles of the SEC schools.   

The leadership at UT craved membership in the academically impressive PAC-10.

The Pac 10 also had a much better media argument with almost double the amount of people in their footprint. 

But the PAC-10 shit the bed.  The PAC liked the idea of adding Colorado and UT.  This would add about 30M people to their footprint. UT thought the Longhorns would probably at bare minimum have to take their “mini me, little brother Texas A&M to have the freedom to scrape off the other 6 Texas schools.  They suggested UT and A&M instead.

At this point all the PAC had to do was add a 4th school and they could have dominated college TV payouts for the last 30 years, but they couldn’t get their act together.

The PAC schools didn’t like Texas A&M.  (To be fair, the SEC allegedly was out on Texas A&M at first as well.  It seems laughable today, but no one properly understood how valuable an enormous fanbase with fanatical fans who will watch every second of their school’s game regardless of their record would be for TV.  Or acknowledged how fantastic their academic and research profiles were.  They were just viewed as a poor cultural fit.  And vice versa. )

It was rumored that Stanford voted against the admission of UT as they had no desire to have another very strong Olympic sports program in the conference.

With no deal in the works, Colorado leadership pushed to make a better Big 8. They pushed the Big 8 to target the remaining SWC conference schools.   The Big 8 schools wanted 2-4 of the SWC schools but a deal could not be forged because the Texas schools all felt they deserved to be there, if not for bad luck or probations.

In that haze it started to look like UT was going to be able to negotiate their way into the PAC-10.

David Sibley, a Texas politician out of Waco, had heard these ominous rumors that UT was close to getting into the PAC.  A&M was making headway to convince the SEC to let them in.

Sibley was  able to confirm the UT rumors personally with the head man at UT. Sibley recruited one of the last strongmen politicians in Texas history, Lt, Governor Bob Bullock, to help him reign in UT.

Bullock vaguely threatened UT and A&M’s sole access to the PUF fund.  His threats were not taken lightly and he quickly got UT and A&M’s leadership in his office. He told them that they needed to carry Baylor and Texas Tech into the Big 8.  A&M really didn’t want to go as their heart was set on the SEC, but Bullock promised them approval on the construction of a new basketball arena and they fell in line.

From this agreement the Big 12 was formed.  (Interesting side note... The leadership of the Big 12 also trademarked the Big 14. They had a plan that also called for the addition of BYU and New Mexico, something that might have balanced the strength of the divisions and allowed that conference to survive long term. Alas... they were not aggressive enough.)

The PAC’s second window for acquiring UT

The PAC’s second shot at acquiring UT was perhaps over before it began.

The first word anyone heard about it was that it was rumored the PAC had been in contact with UT and was prepared to add 6 schools to the conference in order to land the Longhorns.  The 6 schools... Colorado, UT, A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State.

The structure of the deal seemed apparent.  The Pac had long wanted UT and Colorado and certainly everyone can acknowledge OU was a top 15 asset.  UT and OU were a package deal.  OU wanted OSU and UT wanted A&M and Tech. 

The PAC leadership seemed very much unprepared for the leak and perhaps uncertain what to do.  Their slow response appeared telling. (Something even more odd when you hear that the PAC had prepared scenarios that were preapproved unanimously by their members.  It makes one wonder if those votes were finally taken a few weeks after the news was leaked.)

It looked a lot like this was more of a theoretical premise that was leaked by UT AD Deloss Dodd’s people to create pressure on the Big 12 schools to allow UT to keep their new Longhorn Network (something that UT had tried to form in partnership with Texas A&M but A&M had passed on it... only to become greatly annoyed when the financial numbers UT was to be paid came out.).  All of the Big 12 schools hated the idea of the Longhorn Network.

It seems very likely that Dodds initiated the negotiations with the PAC and then released the news in order to create leverage hopefully get Dodds’ beloved Longhorn network approved by the Big 12.

After getting into the Big 12 through political channels, Baylor felt they could potentially force their way in to the PAC deal.  They threw out the idea of replacing Colorado to “have all the Texas schools together”.  

The PAC made maybe their only truly smart and aggressive move in realignment and immediately offered Colorado admission regardless of the other schools. Colorado accepted immediately.

One wonders why the PAC didn’t offer the same kinds of deals to the other schools. OU, OSU, and Texas Tech would have immediately accepted.  They have long coveted the PAC academic affiliation. That likely would have been enough to make the Big 12 non-viable to UT as most of the schools that voted with UT would have been in the PAC. Deloss Dodds would have had little interest in being part of a new Big 8 where Nebraska ran the conference.  

At the time there was a perception in Texas that UT and A&M were tied at the hip and both schools probably would have left the conference together.  UT didn’t want to join the SEC back then and they sure weren’t about to let little brother A&M drive the car.  A&M has always been myopically focused on the SEC.

The PAC had gotten votes approved for certain expansion scenarios. Plan A was the PAC 16.  Plan B was to add Colorado and Utah for a PAC 12.

The PAC seemingly “let their money get mad” and moved on their Plan B, adding Utah to get to 12.  Utah looked like a solid add and frankly has dramatically outperformed for the PAC, but the Utes were not a school UT wanted in their PAC 16.  

They didn’t represent exceptional media value to the conference and UT was the financial king of college football back then.  The move sent a message to UT and really inadvertently to the fans in the state of Texas of “screw you, we don’t need you.”  

And so the Texas schools moved on.

That interval ultimately cost the Big 12 Colorado and Nebraska.

Had the PAC been slightly more aggressive and targeted Kansas and chronic unhappy member Missouri, two AAU schools, they could have forced the issue with UT.

The PAC’s third window

A couple years later UT would again piss off it’s conference mates by demanding a larger share of the conference TV revenue.

This would cost the conference Texas A&M and Missouri.

Again an offer to Texas Tech, OU, and OSU, Iowa State, and Kansas could have easily forced the issue with UT.

The PAC’s fourth window

The PAC was approached by Oklahoma which wanted to carry Oklahoma state into the PAC.  Both schools had become frustrated with the Big 12 status quo and OU did not want their program to “get into the slop” in terms of recruiting violations, which they thought was fairly likely to occur in the SEC.

It seems likely that the PAC (specifically Stanford and Cal) declined over the academic profile of Oklahoma State.   Amazingly, the PAC leadership could not make a sufficient case to it’s member schools that an OU/OSU expansion could be wildly profitable to the conference.

Given the importance of the OU/Texas game to UT’s finances, the admission of OU had the potential to drag UT by it’s toes kicking and screaming into the PAC, likely with a cost of carrying in TCU and Texas Tech to give UT a fair amount of clout.

The PAC’s fifth window

Following the departure of UT and OU for the SEC, there was an opportunity for the PAC to add literally ANY member of the Big 12 Conference.

Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech solicited the PAC as a group seeking admission, but their academic profiles would suggest they are not the kind of schools the PAC favors.

Kansas and Iowa State have the right academic profiles but may be considered too far away.

TCU may or may not be academically admired by the academically oriented spine of the PAC.

Ultimately no Big 12  schools were pulled in by the PAC.

The new Big 12 has now negotiated a new contract averaging 31M per member that will go into effect when all of the member schools sign a new Grant of Rights deal that will lock them into the Big 12 for the next few years.

Will the PAC recruit any Big 12 members before that deal is signed?

---

I think you can see why I have a lack of faith in the Pac.

They may be too arrogant. I don’t like putting it out there that way as that is so amorphous of a criticism and not something laser pointed, but yeah.

I worry about the PAC. 

I am not an industry pro.  I am an Historian who loves realignment. I am an amateur who just knows a fair bit about this stuff. 

I called the Pac after USC and UCLA’s departure and tried to talk expansion with one of their folks.  I was told that their policy is to not listen to ideas from the public on expansion matters.  That is kind of messed up just on the face value.  A good idea can come from anywhere.  I remember thinking, “Your organization has a rule where they don’t want to listen to realignment ideas from outside the PAC bunker?  You do realize that is the exact recipe for group think, right?”

They don’t treat expansion like it will make or break their programs.  And in that regard they are still living in the early 80′s. 

If not for their unanimous vote rule on expansion, the Pac probably lands UT back in the 1980′s and right now we are talking about 3 major conferences. 

That is how badly that rule FUCKED them.  And it is still on the books instead of say “80% and you are in”?  Why??? (I have not found any indication that they have changed that.  Still looking.)

They are smart folks, but historically, they are really, REALLY bad at expansion.

At some point, one has to wonder why the PAC doesn’t just go out and hire someone like former Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany to advise them on expansion matters.  He built the Big Ten financial machine through expansion.  He knows the right assets to target for media value. 

Oh yeah, because he is working for a consulting firm that has helped San Diego State convince the PAC after decades that they are the only homerun candidate for PAC expansion. 

Even though the PAC has publicly stated they are looking for AAU schools and SDSU is nowhere close to that. (More proof to my contention that it doesn’t matter what a conference says or even has been saying for years, only what they need when it is time to vote. My #1 rule in following realignment.)

If you are already bending your criteria to replace the  loss of the LA media Market (5.2M tv households) with the San Diego Media market (1.2M Tv housholds.) why would you not consider burning the 12th spot on a similar candidate like Texas Tech which would give you media coverage in all the Texas markets?  or like red hot TCU, which is NOT a fluke as Sonny Dykes has now married his air raid offense to a physical team identity.  Dykes has improved as a coach and this isn’t likely to fade.   TCU is the ONLY DFW school who legitimately gets strong local media coverage and draws a PAC level crowd.  Does it not make sense to replace the loss of LA with the addition of the San Diego AND Dallas/Fort Worth DMAs?  Or San Diego plus all of Texas?

Guys...If expansion decisions aren’t your strength, maybe it is time to listen to an amateur follower of realignment and call in the professionals.

....

Good luck, Pac fans.

[petnews2day]

Housing Prices Are Rising – Time to Invest? – Punekar News

New Post has been published on https://petnews2day.com/pet-industry-news/pet-financial-news/housing-prices-are-rising-time-to-invest-punekar-news/

Housing Prices Are Rising – Time to Invest? – Punekar News

Pune, 07 November 2022: For a long time, investors had largely steered away from residential real estate as capital appreciation was almost non-existent, and rentals were unattractive. Today, housing prices – which had remained more or less unchanged for several years before the pandemic – have increased. Rental rates are also increasing steadily.

  For many years, the capital appreciation from housing investments rarely went above 3% annually. Can real estate investors now hope for higher returns on housing? Yes, but there are provisos. Read on to understand how and when residential real estate can be a lucrative investment option.

  First of all, housing price growth will be gradual – so, as before, residential property investment remains a game of patience. It is essential to understand that real estate developers cannot indiscriminately increase prices. The market is still very cost-sensitive.

  One of the main reasons why housing prices have started increasing is because developers have no option. Builders will always seek to keep their prices competitive, and the cost of development has experienced massive inflation.

  The process of construction material inflation has been going on for over two years now, but developers initially absorbed the added costs not to disrupt the returning demand. Now, builders face a need to remain viable as businesses. Also, there is good demand for the right kinds of homes, and increasing demand is always a sure precursor for rising prices.

  Is this the right time to invest? – Despite recent marginal increases, prices and home loans are still lower than in a couple of decades. The current price and interest rate advantages will begin to decrease in the next few months, so there is no time like the present to invest and benefit from the lower acquisition cost.

  The lower prices of under-construction properties by reputed developers add another level of potential profitability. But while capital appreciation is a great investment motivator, remember that the price growth we are seeing now is not the same in all housing types. Which gives rise to the next question.

  What to invest in – affordable- mid-range, or luxury? – Not all properties will appreciate. Because of the robust demand for them, prices for mid-range and luxury homes in tier 1, tier 2, and even tier 3 cities will rise steadily. In some locations of the bigger cities, we have already seen a 3-4% price growth for such properties.

  The same cannot be said for affordable housing, which is currently in very low demand in most cities. The prices for affordable housing (generally speaking, homes costing between Rs. 25-50 lakh) will not grow as long as long demand remains low.

  Homes in integrated townships are an excellent choice because townships deliver fully on the lifestyle aspirations currently dominating the housing market. Villas are also in high demand because there is now a massive appetite for independent housing, which began during the pandemic and continues to the present.

  Even if one had not intended to invest a larger sum in housing, it makes sense to leverage the budget with a home loan and go in for a bigger property by a good builder in a good area. The more one invests in size and quality today, the higher will be the ROI. A luxury home purchased in the right location will bring great returns over the next few years.

  What are the best locations to invest in? – One maxim of real estate investment always holds – location matters. Investors should now look beyond the ‘usual suspect’ expensive central areas. Many companies, especially in the IT industry, continue to offer flexible work and even work-from-home options. This means that people can continue living in less expensive but well-connected suburbs and buy larger homes within their budgets.

  What is the most lucrative flat sizes for investment? – In apartment sizes, the best-selling configurations currently include 2, 2.5, 3 and 3.5, and 4BHK sizes, in projects with excellent lifestyle amenities that ensure a good quality lifestyle for residents.

  Ready to move or under construction? – As already mentioned, under-construction projects can be a good bet, but investors should look for at least 40-50% completion of the project and personally verify ongoing construction progress. This precaution can be relaxed to some extent if there is sufficient assurance that the builder can complete the project on time and per specifications.

  Stay away from anonymous developers’ projects, especially if they are under construction. Despite RERA, timely completion of projects remains a challenge for developers with insufficient external funding. Strong builders have enough capital and can often also raise private equity funding.

  About the Author:

Akash Pharande is Managing Director – Pharande Spaces, a leading real estate construction and development firm famous for its township projects in West Pune and beyond. Pharande Promoters & Builders, the flagship company of Pharande Spaces and an ISO 9001-2000 certified company, is a pioneer of townships in West Pune.

Continue Reading

[thefrankensteinianreview]

Do you even clone bro?

On July 5th, 1996 the first cloned animal, a sheep named Dolly (named after the actress Dolly Parton), was born. Less than a decade later, on December 27th, 2002, the first human clone was born, a girl named Eve. Cloning has always been a controversial topic, and raising the stakes from animals to humans intensified the controversy. Experts on the topic raised concerns on the safety and ethics of cloning human beings, while other more fringe scientists swore on the positive possibilities of cloning. But who is right? Should we continue pursuing this legendary technology? Or do its downsides outweigh whatever promised benefits its stark believers champion so proudly?

One of the advantages of pursuing cloning is its medical applications. It could allow for massive advances in our understanding of genetics and help heal the injured. Research in new ways to fight disease would also be greatly benefitted by the use of cloning. Another benefit of cloning would be the ability to curate and code the next generation’s genetic information. Doing this would allow us to create super geniuses and world class athletes. Any desirable trait would be within humanities’ grasp! Alas, as wonderful as these promises are, they are ultimately empty when one stops to consider the drawbacks. For one, cloning is highly risky; mutations alone would make cloning non-viable. There would be far too great a chance of creating a devastating health deficiency in the clone, causing the clone to have issues, but also possibly passing that health issue on to offspring if they ever have children. And all of that doesn’t even take into account multiple generations of clones, all operating with an increasingly shrinking gene pool. There are also societal changes that need to be kept in mind, like how people would react to there being a new generation of clones.With societies’ history of hate and discrimination against those who are different, it would be very likely that clones would become a targeted group of people. Another thing that must be considered is how the law would view and treat clones. This is especially pertinent as DNA evidence would become more unreliable, with there being the inevitability that clones will commit crimes. There are just too many variables that cannot be definitively solved, too much risk for not just the clones but for the people around them. But there is still the most important reason why cloning should not be practiced or pursued.

Eugenics is the process of improving the human race through selective gene editing. It has been used throughout history to justify the oppression of the weak and certain minority groups. Examples of this are the Nazi’s holocaust, and compulsory sterilization in the US. Eugenics is luckily now largely viewed as outdated and completely immoral. One of the reasons that led up to this was its constant abuse to further a prejudiced agenda. Groups like the aforementioned Nazis could use the pursuit of societal purity to rationalize to the world their evil acts. The traits targeted by eugenicists were also completely arbitrary, being entirely at the whims of the “scientist’s'' biases. Because of these reasons the history of eugenics has rightfully left a bad taste in the mouth of the world, and it is no wonder that cloning is so feared, as it is highly connected to modern eugenics. Allowing cloning would give eugenicists an easy blueprint to work off of, which would open the door to many dangerous and unethical possibilities.

One tool used as a cautionary tale against eugenics is Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein. Victor Frankenstein’s tragic story serves to show the dangers of tampering with the natural order of life. Many aspiring cloner’s or eugenicist’s ambitions parallel those of Victor, wanting to improve and create life— to play God—but Victor's ambition would be his downfall, like Icarus he flew too close to the sun and burned up. He was reckless, creating his monster without thought of the consequences.This too is paralleled with how people are wanting to make clones without considering the ramifications. Eventually the repercussions of Victor's actions caught up to him, leaving him and his entire family dead.The cloners will share in Victor's fate of falling victim to hubris. However, it will not be them who will suffer, it will be the innocent beings that they have so carelessly created. It will be the clones who will bear the burden of consequence, like the creature having to live their entire lives with severe, and possibly life threatening, health complications.

WC: 749

[josephwh1000]

Advantages of using Node JS in programing nowaday

Introducing Node.js

Though Node.js is not a new kid in town, however, it has been one of the most popular programming languages since its inception. The javascript runtime environment was first released in 2009 and today after almost two decades, the tech stack has been backing up some of the most prominent brands such as PayPal, Yahoo, Netflix, Uber, LinkedIn, Walmart, Twitter, eBay, Trello and the list goes on. This also means that any company, irrespective of its vertical can leverage node.js advantages and end up being popular across the globe.

As mentioned earlier, you will come across a wide range of tech stacks, so before even you begin contacting your development team, it is advisable to choose the right one prior. Your decision can have both positive and negative impacts on your existing system. Now you must be wondering how? Well, you can prioritize these technologies on the basis of their scalability, learning curve, speed, performance, SEO-friendliness, how huge is their community and so forth. In today’s time technology is one such thing that cannot be avoided at any rate so in that case, you have only one option left. It has to be adopted.

To be precise, Nodejs is a cross-platform runtime environment that is considered open-source but still is known for its commendable performance. Built successfully on the V8 engine, Nodejs features low javascript code, node package manager, event loop, seamlessly handling incoming requests, non-blocking I/O paradigm, minimum viable product, active community and whatnot.

By using node.js, javascript developers can easily create fast, scalable web applications that are best in regards to everything performance, speed, etc. If you want to develop real-time applications or chat app development, message applications, social media apps, streaming websites, game app development, APIs, collaboration tools then Nodejs is the best tech to consider for server-side or backend development.

Now further I would like to mention why Node.js seems to be one of the most irresistible open-source runtime environment tech stacks? In short, time to consider Node.js advantages or why you must consider it to conduct backend development?

Node.js advantages and Why it is Favorable for Js Developers WorldWide?

1. Javascript Code is easy to learn

Having one of the most gentle learning or no steep learning curve, Node.js is very easy to learn. And maybe that’s the reason why all js developers tend to use Node for web application development. Also, the code is easy to grasp, one must know the Object-Oriented Programming basics.

In fact, lots and lots of information, tutorials and interactive courses have been shared on the Web over these years. So even if you choose an amateur or less experienced javascript developer, fret not he will be able to find some help instantly. Apart from this Node is such a tech that works both ways client-side and server-side, so it becomes extremely easy for the development team to work on web application projects. As mentioned earlier, one of the astounding Node.js advantages includes fewer lines of code. In comparison to other technologies, developers can reuse the code as many times as they want. One code works at different times.

Original Article Link to read more

[hottestthingalive]

just want to extend my sincerest well-wishes to folks living in new england right now. if henri remains a hurricane and makes landfall in new england, it will be the first hurricane to do so in thirty years. in the past few decades, tropical storms and super storms (even the ones where new england only got bands of the storm and never entered the eye) have been enough to devastate the area. speaking from experience, a hurricane is a very different beast, especially in the path of the eye, and henri is predicted to possibly generate tornadoes as well. it’s also happening near a full moon, meaning tides are already high and flooding risks are huge. this is far more serious than many folks are taking it to be.

if you live in the predicted path of henri, please treat this seriously. a hurricane, even a category one, is enough to cause massive amounts of destruction, especially in areas unprepared for such weather conditions like new england. i’m hoping for the best, but i advise all of you to prepare for the worst. have necessary supplies like food, clean water, medication and lanterns stocked and ready, charge all electronic devices now, get gas for cars, generators, stoves, etc. beforehand, and do whatever else you can think of. there’s not much time left to prepare, so here’s a checklist for how to be as safe during the storm as possible:

-make sure you, your family, your pets, and anyone else in your household stay in one area, preferably a single room, as a sort of base. this room should have as few non-reinforced doors, windows, or walls as possible. if you are living in a house, do not go in the basement unless necessary (while the walls are likely more reinforced, it will be more easily flooded) but try to also avoid upper floors unless necessary, as branches and trees falling on or into them is a huge risk, not to mention well tornadoes. if you are living in an apartment, try to stay in a room with as few windows as possible, towards the middle of the apartment or wherever would be most stable in an emergency. in both scenarios, i’d advise bathrooms as generally good bases.

-keep the majority of your supplies in this room with you, including food, water and sleeping materials. ideally, you should be able to stay in this room without leaving it for hours at a time.

-pack go-bags, and keep your stuff organized and ready to tranport. if things get really dire, you will want everything easily moveable, even if you aren’t leaving the house: moving upstairs if your home begins to flood is far easier and safer if you can grab everything in one go instead of having to pack it all up.

-keep valuables in plastic bags. if you’re especially worried, use more than one bag and air-tight containers. make sure they’re still easily transportable, though, and have them packed up at all times. if possible, do this with electronic devices early on: you will not want your phone to die if you lose power, so you should not be using it for any reason but an emergency until you have a guaranteed way to charge it again.

-have an evacuation/escape plan. if things get bad, know where you’re going and how to get there. make sure all paths to your home’s exits are completely clear of obstacles. monitor your state’s policies on the matter of evacuation. if you’re told to evacuate, even if it is beautiful and sunny outside and seems completely fine, do so immediately. if you have to take a car and your tires are worn or not good for driving on slick surfaces, see if you can change them or get another vehicle beforehand. new yorkers and other city dwellers, do not use the subway or other below-ground transport under any circumstances until you know for certain they are completely safe or unless you have absolutely no choice in the matter. however, you should be aiming to avoid moving from your home after the storm starts until it ends: travel is extremely dangerous during hurricanes, and you want to stay in one place for as long as it is possible.

-have money withdrawn from your bank in cash, and keep it on you. make sure your important documents (passports, id, social security card, licenses) are all accessible and safe as well.

-make sure you are able to eat and drink and are doing so. if you will not have safe access to a stove during the storms, make sure you have food with you that does not require such preparation. you should also always have water, medication, and other necessary survival items with you whenever possible.

-if you have a car, make sure it’s not under any branches or structures that could fall on it during the storm. also, try and ensure it is on stable ground and is steady in place even when not braked. if you have immediate, obvious evidence to support the belief that your car could be moved or damaged during the storm, it is not in a safe space. if it is in a garage, ensure it is fully closed up and that the path to it is clear and, if you must enter the garage, try to use side doors or the like.

-do not go out in the storm, even if you think it is abating or gone, until you have full confirmation that it is. if you end up in the path of the eye, remember that the eyewall is a circle: the relative calm in the eye is a prelude to a second round of terrible winds. in your place, i would genuinely not risk going outside until at least 1-3 hours of little to no rain and wind had occurred on Monday (as many predictions expect the storm to last until Monday morning). staying inside is almost always safest.

-tornadoes in hurricanes are dangerous and unpredictable. if you suspect one to be nearby or passing overhead, stay away from all windows and outer doors and walls, and try to hunker down.

-if any property of yours is damaged outside, even if it is your car or house, do not go outside to deal with it until the storm is over unless that damage actively threatens your safety. if your chimney is blown off but no water is entering your fireplace and your roof seems intact, stay inside: however, if a tree breaks through a window, wall or roof and allows wind and rain to enter, address it immediately, although try to do so from inside when possible.

-use ‘oxygen mask on an airplane’ logic. your own safety needs to be your first priority, and then that of your housemates, and then that of anyone else. you are in pure survival mode, and odds are that playing at heroism or martyrism will not only actively endanger you but those around you as well.

-bring a book, a sketchbook, cards, or other forms of entertainment into your base: you’re gonna be waiting out this storm for a while. i’d advise not trying to sleep through the worst parts of the storm unless you have someone on watch, though: you do not want to be caught unawares by flooding or damages. i would also not advise using electronic devices that you may need in an emergency for entertainment (which includes anything that could be used to contact emergency services, even ipads or the like) although things like cd players are viable options. if you have a radio, use it to monitor alerts, and only use it for entertainment if you can be absolutely positive that you can recharge it (via batteries, for example).

if anyone has anything else, please add it. to sum this all up, though:

don’t take risks, be smart, and be safe. you can do this. i believe in you.

[filmmakerdreamst]

Why Xena: Warrior Princess Was Groundbreaking

If you remember Xena: Warrior Princess, you probably do for a few reasons. The tiny, tight-fitting costumes worn by its lead characters. That circular spinny thing Xena threw at people (it’s called a chakram). Xena’s fabulous ululating war cry. The bizarre mish-mash of history the show threw together (though the producers knew their stuff, deep down – Rob Tapert later produced the rather more accurate Spartacus for STARZ). What you might not remember, or might not know if you’re unfamiliar with the show, is just how important and ground-breaking Xena was when it first aired between 1995 and 2001.

The first and most obviously groundbreaking thing about Xena: Warrior Princess was, of course, the gender of its lead character. Xena wasn’t the first female lead of an action-adventure series – Charlie’s Angels and Lynda Carter’s Wonder Woman, for example, had enjoyed success in the 1970s, while non-action-adventure shows led by women had been common for quite some time, with 1990s examples including Ellen, Blossom, Sabrina the Teenage Witch, and Cybill.

The way Xena presented its female hero, though, was a bit different. The opening narration describes how “a land in turmoil cried out for a hero” and then presents the hero in question with an emphatic “she” as we see Xena riding into battle. Lucy Lawless, aside from being likable and charismatic, gave us a heroine who looked like she could physically handle a fight (rather than a super-powered waif-like heroine) while still being extremely attractive (as the costume department and directors were keen to emphasize!). She owed a lot to Carter and Wonder Woman, but Xena’s capability, confidence, and independence were a breath of fresh air in the 1990s SFF television landscape.

Xena’s portrayals of race, gender, and sexuality may seem fairly normal or even disappointing now but were highly progressive at the time. While the show was white-dominated, there was a clear effort made to introduce a more diverse cast. One of Xena’s early love interests was a black man, something hopefully no longer of note, but still relatively unusual at the time. The show also cast a black actress, Galyn Görg, as Helen of Troy, the most beautiful woman in the world, offering a nice change from the usual blonde, blue-eyed Helens we’ve seen on film and TV for decades. Similarly, Cleopatra was later played by Gina Torres. The series also set several episodes in Asia, featuring Asian guest characters.

The most significant relationship on Xena was, of course, that between Xena and Gabrielle. To a modern viewer, their relationship probably comes across as frustrating and disappointing, as despite many hints, frequent sub-textual references, and great chemistry between the two actresses, their relationship was never officially clearly stated to be romantic. They did, however, kiss as early as season 2.

Back in the 1990s, two characters of the same gender kissing was still a huge deal. Carol and Susan on Friends were restricted to hugging even at their wedding, while Willow and Tara’s first on-screen kiss on Buffy the Vampire Slayer was eventually worked into the deeply emotional episode “The Body,” after almost two years of subtext and more hugging.

On Xena, in the grand tradition of SFF TV (see also: Star Trek‘s “Plato’s Stepchildren”), a way was found to make the kiss more palatable to the networks. Xena was occupying the body of a man, Autolycus, at the time, so we see Xena’s spirit and Gabrielle’s come together for the kiss, played by the actresses, and then cut to Renee O’Connor’s Gabrielle kissing Bruce Campbell’s Autolycus, so the image actually broadcast is that of a man and a woman kissing. This may look like pandering and queer-baiting to modern eyes, but for the 1990s, it was a major step forward and the kiss was hugely important to LGBTQ Xena fans. Throughout the series, tricks like this were used to create a romantic story by the back door, so to speak. In another plot arc, Xena and Gabrielle’s reincarnated souls married each other.

Both characters had relationships with men throughout the series as well, but a reading of the show as led by two bisexual female characters who were in a relationship with each other was positively encouraged by numerous hints. In 1997, the same year as Xena and Gabrielle’s kiss, both Ellen DeGeneres and her namesake character on her own sitcom came out, something which sent shock waves through the entertainment industry, so this was a genuinely progressive move. And Xena told progressive stories about gender in other ways as well. Also in 1997, the episode “Here She Comes… Miss Amphipolis” featured a transvestite character winning a beauty pageant (in which Gabrielle acts as Xena’s “sponsor,” surrounded by men “sponsoring” their girlfriends).

Xena was groundbreaking in its format as well. Like contemporary show Frasier, Xena was a spin-off based on a character from another series and this produced a setup that might not have sold without its head start from Hercules: The Legendary Journeys. Our hero is not a pure and innocent champion of good, but a former villain trying to redeem herself for the bad things she’s done (this may sound familiar, but remember, the show pre-dates Angel!). This setup ensures that Xena never slips into standard Strong Female Character tropes. Strong she certainly is, but she is also fully three-dimensional, flawed (always trying to balance violent impulses and a desire for peace), looking for ways to use her violent skills for good and burdened by guilt. And then there’s her counterpart, Gabrielle – resisting physical violence for a long time, interested in art and literature but unable to tear herself away from Xena and the violence inherent in Xena’s lifestyle.

The show also popularized some of modern SFF television’s most beloved tropes. It was not the first show to break the fourth wall, or do a musical episode, or do a time loop episode, or any of the other tropes that show up. However, it did do a lot to popularize more experimental episodes like “A Day In The Life” or the famous first musical episode “The Bitter Suite” – which took the musical format completely seriously, a move unusual at the time – as the show used these in a manner and with a frequency that were unusual at the time (along with its parent show, Hercules).

The X-Files, for example, produced some great format-bending episodes, but usually only once or twice a season (with the exception of season six). Xena showed that a series format could be seriously flexible, including multiple episodes set in the twentieth century, hundreds of years away from the main setting of the show, as well as a wide range of other stories. Again, it was not the first or the only show to do so (Doctor Who is the most obvious example of a show with a seriously flexible format) but it made this type of television seem viable and popular.

Xena has had a huge influence on SFF film and television over the years. It takes only a brief look at a basic description of the show to see how much Buffy the Vampire Slayer (which debuted as a television series two years after Xena, in 1997, though the 1992 film pre-dates Xena) and Angel owe to Xena, and the debt was acknowledged in Buffy’s “Halloween” (“She couldn’t have dressed up like Xena?”).

It’s also worth noting that, before The Lord of The Rings showed the world how beautiful the New Zealand landscape was, the cast and crew of Xena and Hercules were ignoring the distinct lack of any similarity between the geography of New Zealand and Greece and showing the scenery off as best they could on relatively low budget television. Many of the cast and crew worked on the Lord of the Rings films as well – notable examples include cast members Karl Urban and Martin Csokas, costume designer Ngila Dickson (whose departure in 1999 presumably allowed her to focus on the films), and Richard Taylor and Tania Rodger, co-founders of Weta Workshop, who worked on a handful of early episodes.

In some ways, Xena: Warrior Princess hasn’t aged too well. The special effects can look a bit ropey (not surprising considering the show’s era and budget), the stories are often cheesy, and its episodic format has gone out of fashion. But the show is well worth a watch if you haven’t yet caught an episode. It has heart and heap-loads of humor (every episode ends with a joke disclaimer about who was or was not harmed during the making of it) and managed to balance dark and light pretty well, veering between pure comedy and deeply serious material with relative ease. The current SFF TV landscape wouldn’t be what it is without Xena and her chakram.

- Why Xena: Warrior Princess Was Groundbreaking by Juliette Harrisson

[mariacallous]

In 1967, the French sociologist Henri Mendras published La Fin des paysans. Translated as The Vanishing Peasant, the book’s argument was as iconoclastic as it was irrefutable. Marshaling more than a decade of meticulous fieldwork and data collection, Mendras concluded that France’s “traditional civilization,” exemplified by the peasant, was dying out. The economic benefits of the postwar Marshall Plan and Common Market, combined with the many scientific and technological advances ranging from mechanization to fertilization, had transformed not just the nature of agriculture, but the rural civilization on which it was founded. France was witnessing, Mendras declared, the “final battle of industrial society against the last patch of traditional society.”

This winter of rural discontent in France reminds us that the final battle announced by Mendras is still being waged more than 50 years later. Last month, French farmers launched a series of protests across the country, ranging from blocking highways with their tractors to dumping rotting vegetables (or worse) in city squares or outside supermarkets. Toward the end of January, these protests threatened to climax with tractors, rolling toward Paris from several directions, threatening to form what some farmers called a “siege of Paris.”

After days of feverish speculation in the media about the coming stand-off between farming tractors and police armored cars—“Could Paris be starved?” asked more than one newspaper—the siege did not take place. President Emmanuel Macron’s recently formed government, led by the 30-something Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, accepted nearly all the principal demands of the unions leading the protests. Not only did the government, despite its previous commitment to budgetary restraint, promise an additional 400 million euros to boost the flailing income of cereal and livestock farmers, but it also shelved plans to phase out the tax break on diesel fuel, as well as its plans to ban the use of certain pesticides.

No less important, while Attal was meeting with farmers alongside their tractors, Macron took time from meeting with his peers in Brussels to vow that France would refuse to sign a free trade agreement between the EU and the South American trading bloc Mercosur, whose cheaper produce would undercut French farmers. Not surprisingly, Arnaud Rousseau, the head of the FNSEA, the largest farmers union, declared that he was satisfied by these gestures. The grievances of the members, he announced, “had been heard.”

Of course, farmers in several other European countries have also been heard by their governments on many of the same issues that spurred French farmers to threaten a siege of the nation’s capital. Whether expressed in Portuguese or Polish, Dutch or Deutsch, the reasons for this continent-wide mobilization often are the same. From the threat of cuts to agricultural subsidies from their governments to the threat of cheaper produce imported from non-EU countries like those represented by Mercosur, European farmers find that as their numbers and output dwindle so too does the prospect of a viable future.

Yet there is something exceptional to farmer protests in France—a quality that sets them apart, if only in cultural and historical terms, from the protests that have erupted elsewhere on the continent. To this point, Attal last week couched his government’s unconditional surrender in terms that were peculiar to France. Agriculture, he declared, was a fundamental element to the “French identity,” one that required a “French agricultural exception.” This new exception is “not a budgetary matter,” Attal insisted, but instead based on “pride and identity.” In fact, as the response to the protest suggests, the claim of “French exceptionalism” extends as far as the country’s extreme right and its response to the protests.

The place of la terre—the soil or earth—has long been central to the French identity. It is not an accident that the third and final volume of Pierre Nora’s landmark work of history Les Lieux de mémoire (“Sites of Memory”), which is devoted to traditions, begins with an entry on la terre. The author, geographer Armand Frémont, argues that the late arrival of industrialization in France has meant that the genealogical trees of French families “are rooted in soil of the countryside” more commonly than elsewhere in Europe.

So, too, for the very notion of “peasant.” Though Mendras concluded that the paysan had been replaced by the agriculteur and that France’s “thousand-year-old peasant civilization” was dying out, many French farmers never surrendered the word, much less the death sentence announced by Mendras. One prominent member of the (tellingly labeled) Confédération Paysanne, Christian Boisgontier, recalled that when he first read Le Fin des paysans as a young man, he gladly described himself as an agriculteur. But no longer. To identify as a peasant, he observes, is to identify with “a tradition that respects the soil, the grains, and the animals.”

However, it is also to identify with a tradition that, if not yet dead, is on life support. Agribusiness is one of France’s biggest businesses, accounting for nearly two-thirds of agricultural production. The approximately 1 million men and women indirectly or directly employed by these huge firms do not plow fields or raise cattle, nor do they identify as peasants, much less lead lives that resemble the fading images of sowers and harvesters of the 19th-century painter Jean-François Millet.

Rather, it is the 400,000 or so small farmers, representing about 1.5 percent of the nation’s workforce, who confront an existential crisis. They have been whipsawed between the compounding and, to their eyes, often punitive regulatory demands from Brussels and the government’s plans for a green transition. At the same time, they fear that the quality of their products is undermined by the intensifying land consolidations by the agribusiness sector and widening market control of large distribution chains. A recent poll reveals the French public sympathizes with the farmers on both counts, with nearly 40 percent blaming EU regulations and 32 percent the large supermarket chains like the aptly named Géant Casino and Hyper U.

Moreover, as the influential sociologist (and former student of Mendras) François Purseigle notes, the population of farmers has been shrinking at an unprecedented rate in France. From 500,000 farmers 10 years ago, there are fewer than 400,000 today. Even more worrying, Purseigle argues, is that another 200,000 farmers will have reached the age of retirement by 2030. Most of them will not be replaced. The consequences are vast: “The world of farming today has nothing at all in common with that of yesterday, and this world will be no less different come tomorrow. A revolution that defies description is unfolding.”

While the relationship between the soil and those who work it may be revolutionary, the idea of the soil has also long proved fertile ground for French reactionaries. Since the late 19th century, individuals and ideologies on France’s right and far-right have staked claims to la terre as their lieu de mémoire. This claim extends from the nationalist (and antisemitic) novelist Maurice Barrès who believed “la terre et les morts” (the soil and the dead) was the foundation of the French identity, through the fascist (and antisemitic) Henri Dogères and his interwar agrarian movement, the Green Shirts, to the authoritarian Philippe Pétain, the head of the collaborationist (and antisemitic) Vichy regime, who declared that “la terre ne ment pas,” or “the earth tells no lies.” (A line coined, ironically, by the Paris-born and Jewish writer Emmanuel Berl.)

Enter stage right, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally. As rural unrest neared critical mass last month, the party founded half a century ago by the populist (and antisemitic) Jean-Marie Le Pen pulled on its collective rubber boots and descended on farms across the country. Jordan Bardella, who will head the party’s list for the upcoming European elections, seemed drawn to the farming life—as well as the cameras recording his rural rambles. In an open letter to the farmers, Bardella praised them as the representatives of a country which “wants to live in dignity on and from its soil and proudly pass on the fruits of their labor to their children.”

For Bardella and Le Pen, the rural protests are a gift in the lead-up to the elections. Their party portrays both the bureaucrats in Brussels and the politicians in Paris as the enemy. And “enemy” is not too strong a word. On Jan. 28, as the tractors approached Paris, the vice president of the National Rally deputies in the National Assembly, Sébastien Chenu, declared that “they” sought to “efface our farmers and rurality itself because a life rooted in the soil does not correspond to their model of society.”

Less than four months remain before French choose their country’s representatives in Brussels. Given that the European elections are most often the occasion for voters to express discontent, it is time for the French left to make the case that France’s future lays in respecting not just the soil, but the men and women who work it. As Armand Frémont would remind them, “the values of the soil in France are the oldest but also the freshest as long as there are still peasants to till it.”

[jess-the-vampire]

personally, i'm on the theory that belos is phillip's descendant, not phillip himself

and that's still a very viable option, but i think when it comes to belos himself there's reasons as to why people assume he has to be phillp rather then an descendent.

For one, Belos came outta complete nowhere, there's no explanation for him and where he came from. Phillip apparently just vanished without a trace so the implication of belos begin some grandkid of his means not only did Philip have kids, but belos actually HAS an origin of some kind and there’s no reason people shouldn't know about it for any reason.

So that idea kinda ruins the whole "Belos just popped outta nowhere" thing they established because now he has a backstory and place he came from. And it’s a little harder to believe Philip had kids, and the family lived on for generations and yet somehow no one knew about this or knew belos was in said family. (Not even Gwen’s great grandma who knew him personally???)

It's much easier to accept the idea "Phillip went missing and came back with a new identity years later" since that fits better with belos's origin.

Then there's also the whole "Magic thing".

Since Phillip was the first human here, it's fair to assume anyone he had kids with was well, not human, but a witch. Therefore belos at this point should be biologically....a witch, having a magic sack and everything.

It's been enough decades, he'd be more witch then human from Phillip, he shouldn't even have an accent at this point as well for the record considering non of the other witches do.

So then...in that case....why does belos not do magic like other witches? It's well pointed out, but belos never does the whole "Circle" thing regular witches do, next to his mechanical staff he kinda just....moves around and things happen. He doesn't operate by witch rules.

If belos is not human, then like...what's the point of this? He could just do magic like a witch and they could make a  twist out of this whole decedent thing and it'd be more shocking because belos is a witch so you wouldn’t think he had relation to humans.

So this twist would make LESS sense because of what they already did with belos’s magic.

It’s again, easier to accept belos does magic this way because he’s not a witch biologically and found his own method, because the other option is that he’s just choosing not to for some reason? Which only makes him more suspicious?

The idea isn't out of the realm of plausibility, but you have to currently jump through a few hoops to explain some of these details to have it work.

Even if belos is like....100+ years old, him still being Phillip currently fits a whole lot cleaner for now.