Cordeos

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1563

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Cordeos

  1. Posted

    8 hours ago, itsamoose said:

    I've spent the last few weeks reading into the democratic socialist viewpoint (for lack of a better word) and to be honest, almost none of what they advocate is really socialism.  Most of their advocacy and ideas come in the form of social programs, safety nets public works and the like, and in many ways I see the same sorts of personalities advocating for democratic socialism as I do for libertarian ideology.  Mostly I see these movements as a response to crony capitalism, lobbying, private prisons, military contractors, and other things of this nature where nepotism and culturally adverse economic incentives exist.  The two main points of socialism, to take a pragmatic view, is to criminalize profit and outlaw private property, neither of which seem to be objectives of the democratic socialists.  There seems to be some general sense that a socialist system will take over gradually, but so far I can't find any proposals of how they intend to achieve this, or how they intend to defend against having the sort of outcomes that, to be perfectly frank, every single socialist government in the world has had.  I suppose the one distinction I've noticed is the idea that economic and governmental systems should be decentralized, but I've yet to encounter any compelling arguments as to why this would create better outcomes.  The argument tends to go that dictatorial power drives society in a negative way, but this seems to me just a possible for a bunch of people acting selfishly in the way democratic socialists content wouldn't create different but equally negative results.  I suppose I'll keep an open mind, but so far I'm not finding much of the argumentation or pragmatic concerns of the philosophy all that satisfying.

    Democratic socialism as represented by Sanders or most of the center left European parties is more of a band aid to try and fix the problems created by capitalism than a fix for many of deeper problems. Part of the concept of permanent revolution as I understand it is that you always need to be pushing for more reform, for tweaks for new programs for granting of more rights and protections. The ACA was a mediocre first step towards fixing our healthcare system but failed to solve the deep issues with our healthcare system. Even a universal healthcare system in the US wouldn't solve the problem caused by rampant profit seeking by pharmaceutical and medical device companies. In the same way that stronger unions, bigger unions and even union representation on corporate boards will not solve all issues with wages and worker protections.

    The party I am a member of, Socialist Alternative, has worked in multiple cities on issues like the minimum wage, housing protection, unionization of workers and getting party members elected to local positions. We see none of this as an end in its self but a means to chip away at corporate power, expose the center leftism of many democrats and a way to empower the working class. We also see none of these fights as ever truly won. A $15 minimum wage has been passed in several cities and states but its not really enough for many larger cities and without tying it to inflation it will soon enough not be enough anywhere, so we must be ready to fight for higher wages again. Our goals are revolutionary, but you cannot just sit around and wait for the revolutionary situation to happen and then swoop in to lead it. We must destroy the destructive and exploitative systems that run our country and our world, but the more we are able to show the possible better way the easier that is going to be. The more you expose how capitalism doesn't care about those at the bottom the more willing people will be to fight it.

  5. Posted

    I beat the game last night after discovering I had purchased it despite not remembering doing that.

     



    The game is unarguably well produced, the station was very pretty and the voice acting was great. I was pretty disappointing by how short the game was and how straightforward the mystery was, I kept expecting a hidden message on one of those window panes, or for more hidden information elsewhere, something to reward more investigating of the physical environment. There only being 6 major conversation nexuses feels like the skeleton of what could have been a much more engaging story. I liked the game overall, but wish it was more Firewatch length, with more interesting twists and turns rather than the straightforward 1.5 hours it took, I kept expecting something else but it never showed.

  7. Posted

    5 hours ago, Roderick said:

    The final episode was 1 hour and 20 minutes and filled with drawn-out scenes that edged on being boring.

     

      Hide contents

    I couldn't believe how stupidly everything is working out. The Sansa-condemns-Littlefinger reveal was cathartic for viewers, but made so little sense for the characters. They could've done away with Littlefinger at any earlier point without the chicanery, and Littlefinger spent the entire season moping around Winterfell doing his thing for no apparent other reason than that he seemed to distrust Arya? The logical thing for him to think was: 'Hey, one of the Starks is now a magical seer who can see everything I've ever said. TIME TO SKEDADDLE, BACK TO THE VALE BOYS.'


    Two people went to talk to Cersei and taunted her to kill them. Both walked away. Nothing much was accomplished. I honestly can't remember what else happened in the episode.

    Oh yeah, the Night King stiffly and non-emotively riding a dragon. It looked really silly.

     

    At least Jon Snow's butt looked nice, I guess!

     

    I have heard that that Littlefinger scene was written first and then they wrote backwards from there, it seems likely this is the method for the show. Write an epic scene and then figure out how to justify it

  8. Posted

    1 hour ago, eot said:

    Definitely the best HL2 content. I think I'd rank all of them:

     

    1. Half-Life

    2. Half-Life 2: Episode 2

    3. Half-Life: Opposing Force

    4. Half-Life 2

    5. Half-Life: Uplink

    6. Half-Life 2: Episode 1

    7. Half-Life: Blue Shift

    8. Half-Life 2: Lost Coast

     

    I haven't played Half-Life: Decay!

    What about Codename: Gordon?

  10. Posted

    I finished Defenders I thought it was ok

     



    , not as good as Luke Cage or Jessica Jones but not as bad as Iron Fist. I appreciated that it was a bit shorter than the other Marvel shows, which often felt like they had too many episodes. Sigourney Weaver was great IMO. The Hand mythos felt less hammy than it did in Daredevil, but i think fleshing them out more in Iron Fist helped some with that.  My main gripes were the overly choppy cut scenes, weirdly overdone scenes like the argument over the using the bomb just felt too long and kind of a stupid debate. Also a little confused because they teased Punisher in one of the trailers and he never showed aside from the post credits trailer.

     

    Wonder what the explanation for Matt surviving will be

  11. Posted

    3 minutes ago, SecretAsianMan said:

     

    The episode that highlights this for me is Body and Soul where the Doctor has to hide from a race that distrusts holograms inside Seven's implants, inadvertently gaining control of her body.  The majority of episode is so-so, the absolute best part is watching Jeri Ryan enact all of Robert Picardo's mannerisms.  Supposedly Picardo acted out the scenes where the Doctor possesses Seven on tape so that Ryan could better mimic him.  I would kill to see that tape.

     

    One aside from that episode is the side plot involving Tuvok going through the pon farr (the Vulcan need to mate every seven years).  I've always wished the part where Paris convinces Tuvok that mating with a hologram of his wife isn't really cheating got more discussion.  I know that marital infidelity isn't exactly a Star Trek topic but I found the concept of "not really cheating because it's still 'her'" interesting.

    UIIX6pK.gif

  12. Posted

    1 hour ago, Gormongous said:

     

    Jeri Ryan truly is a treasure, and it's interesting to watch Voyager's writing gradually go from giving her lead roles in episodes because she's the sexy eye-candy to giving her lead roles in episodes because she's got chops. I still think that Bob Picardo is the most talented actor on the show (although I wonder if that's partly an accident of the writing, since many interviews with cast members mention Tim Russ as incredibly brave and capable as an actor) but man, they bungle a fair bit of that. All the rigmarole about choosing a name for himself and then they never use it, for instance...

    He picked Joe in an alternative timeline

  14. Posted

    39 minutes ago, Salacious Snake said:

    They don't get much more developed. The general level of quality does significantly improve by, like, season 5, but they never really go anywhere with most of the characters. Chakotay and Kim are super boring forever.

     

    I'm very slowly progressing through Enterprise; I'm maybe a quarter of the way through season 3. It's a lot like Voyager in that even when it manages to be pretty OK, it still has so much obvious wasted potential.

     

    In the case of Voyager, it's ridiculous how much promise there is in certain aspects of the premise. A crew that's half unproven cadets and half insurgents who have to learn to work together? Sounds dope. And then most of that conflict is resolved immediately, only to be paid lip-service periodically thereafter. 

     

    And Enterprise throws out some interesting ideas. You've got these people flying around in this fancy ship that trivializes interstellar travel in a setting where a whole economy exists around slow ass space boats. In TOS and TNG they're always running into goofy-ass colonies; Enterprise could be digging into the idea of an expanding human frontier.

     

    If you're going to do a prequel to TOS, maybe you can explain where all those miners and space farmers came from.

    Kim never getting promoted during all 7 seasons is sad, but kind of hilarious

  19. Posted

    2 hours ago, marginalgloss said:

    I feel like I might be the last person in the world to start playing this game, but I am, after picking up the GOTY edition on disc for about £20. It is, obviously, outstanding. It's the only game since MGSV to tickle the worst of my completionist urges.

     

    I am a little disappointed to have missed all the Elusive Contracts, but there's still an unbelievable amount of content in this bundle. If anybody is holding off on it for that reason, I wouldn't worry about it. I've put at least 15 or 20 hours into the training missions and Paris alone; I've not even started on Sapienza yet, but I will soon.

     

    The only thing I'm not so happy about is the speed at which I've been able to unlock all the mastery levels for Paris -- and that's only after doing about half the challenges, all the opportunities, and finishing maybe three or four escalations. I've got all the 'cheevos for that chapter, too, so…there's nothing left to get?

     

    It would be nice if they could patch in some more rewards but equally it's fine if they don't. I mean, I can see from looking at my trophy percentages that it's only a tiny fraction of players who will ever bother to max out their mastery. I sort of hate this modern dependence on doing the thing to tick the box or to make the numbers go up -- but it does feel good to make a number go up…

    you will be happy with that speed when you try to get to mastery 20 in Marrakesh

  20. Posted

    I played some GORN yesterday. Its pretty fun, a lot harder than I expected. Had an interesting movement solution, you can either use the default which involves pushing on the touchpad and swinging your arm or just touching the touchpad and sort of gliding, far less disorienting than I expected.

  24. Posted

    I don't mind the small side stories, but episode 7 was a terrible waste of time. It spend a whole episode on a bland story that could have been told in a shorter way with the same effect. I am also finding some of the dialogue to be very pointless. If we learn nothing from an entire back and forth, why put it in?

    I like the style and the weirdness, but I don't think the show is being made well, its spending too much time spinning its wheels to be a great one.

  25. Posted

    1 hour ago, aoanla said:

    Right, so almost everyone approves of the mechanics in settings where there's some kind of opponent, playing under similar rules/context to you - strategy games, board games, and multiplayer FPSen are all cases where you're either competing against other humans, or against AIs controlling agents like you. 

     

    My initial concern was over the exporting of this into single-player asymmetric contest style games - like platformers, for example - where the "opponent" is more in the way of a constructed challenge, rather than an AI competing directly with you. 

    I didn't think about that, one of the things I dislike about platformers is that many still use lives or have annoying checkpointing. There was a puzzle late in the first Little Big Planet that I was stuck on for a long time. If I failed it 4 times I would have to replay the whole level just to get back to that spawner. I quit the game for a year after failing it repeatedly. Its the game saying, oh you're having trouble with one part? Lets make you replay the entire level just to return to the one part you are actually stuck on. (This is probably why I will never like the Souls games)