3 Day old (new) machine.
Using the keyboard, I find that unless the keyboard is in continued use, the first keystroke, be it any key, usually goes unregistered. This is all whilst the laptop is in active use, the screen is not dim, the laptop is not going into sleep etc. For instance, I could be browsing the web with the mouse and may not have used the keyboard for lets say, 2 minutes, as soon as I press the first letter on the keyboard, be it any letter, it will not register unless I press it twice and it always starts working after the second keystroke. Why though? What have I configured incorrectly? I looked at the USB Selective Disable posts on Reddit but afraid, I just dont have that option in the Control Panel Power settings (Advanced) menu. Running Win 11 Home and it came installed from the factory. Gutted as it is otherwise an amazing laptop.

Hi Reddit! I'm traveling with my wife to Munich for a week (going to see both Metallica shows on my b-day!) and we'd like to get some insider tips on stuff to do and see in the city.
I browsed the sub, I saw the most common and easy ones, but we like to do alternative stuff. Weird museums? Quirky walking tours? Fun pop-ups? Generally off-the-beaten-track/"off Broadway" things. Thanks!
(Also - we don't drink beer (shame!!) but we looooove us good cocktails.)
​
​

Long story short : My master’s degree thesis writing is driving me mad. Sitting down to write it is physically painful and every comment my tutor made about it makes me want to crawl out of my skin. I know I wrote something mediocre and I just want to get it done and never talk about my subject anymore, I’m completely done with my field of study. I feel useless and stupid.
The only thing preventing me from falling into depression is that I have a study reorientation personal project upcoming, but I’m scared my anxiety will come back again and again.
I have struggled with generalised anxiety for pretty much my whole life. It was getting better tho, before this whole masters situation kicked in. Is it only reactive to my shit life situation? Do I just need to get out of the shitty situation? I’m worried my anxiety will keep fucking me up, and fuck up the reorientation I want to do and leave me with nothing to hope for, nothing to wake up for.
I worked up the courage to ask for medication to a GP (due to personal family history I am scared of medication for mental health), but was put on two antihistamines that do barely nothing (latest is atarax). (I’m still scared about benzos due to familial genetic concerns and the side effects). I still can’t get up in the morning because of my debilitating anxiety, I still procrastinate sleep at night, I still procrastinate writing the damn thesis all day thinking "i need to do it" in a loop…
I just want to drop out, it’s that bad. Even tho it’s due this month and I’ll be over it after. My tutor keeps asking for more and more correction. It’s like she’s moving the goal post all the time while I’m on my knees begging it to stop. I told her I was having mental health issues, and she seems rather comprehensive but she can’t just hand me my diploma because I’m anxious. So I get her. But why is life so so hard for us. Why do I have to suffer so much. I also wonder if I don’t have an other type of diagnosis like ADHD and Autism, frankly I just want to know what is wrong with me. I want to be better. I want to wake up in the morning and feel like a normal person, capable of organising themself and do stuff and not be a slog the entire day panicking about nothing.
It’s so hard. I’m so done. I can’t even find a psychologist because browsing the list of healthcare providers is too much of an effort…

WARNING: VERY HEAVILY DELTARUNE INFLUENCED. If you have no idea what Deltarune is, you should probably know that first before reading about this OC... I have a whole-ahh google doc on them and I am also currently writing a story for them hsgdkslsbdhdk yes they are a Deltarune OC, yes they look like Winter King but I assure you, I made them in 2022 which predates him, and yes, they look like a combination of Spamton and Rouxls. I'll just copy-paste their description from the Google doc-
Age: 20 Gender: transmasc nonbinary Sex: female Sexuality: bi demisexual Pronouns: they/them (preferred), he/him Height: 5’6” Date of Birth: August 11, 2003 ~ Notes ~ Lovesan is a virus(worm is a subcategory). A Creator reprogrammed Lovesan to be docile, but did not remove any code, putting up a firewall against the malevolent code instead. - can summon things via code tethers as well as change the properties of things via code - has a hologram computer with various ports as well as a universal (seriously universal) USB hub - is vulnerable to glitchy/corrupted code (might do something unpleasant to them...)
Extended notes: In Safe Mode: - Can summon energy shields. They make a habit of sticking with defense rather than offense. These energy shields are able to bear weight, block attacks, and can be used as a blunt weapon if necessary; however, if they are low on energy, these shields will be weaker and more fragile. They are bright blue and hexagonal. - Can manipulate the source code of an object. They can change the properties of an object and can make it do things it isn't normally able to do. - They have a gentle and calm demeanor, and they choose to be someone who blends into the background. They dislike showing their teeth, as their visibly sharp canines are a potential giveaway that they were, at some point, a malevolent program. Since they have the ability to hop universes (a minor ability granted by the Creator), they tend to look for people to keep in contact with so they are able to revisit a universe, if desired. - Their appearance is somewhat unusual for an Addison, as they are not naturally a uniform color. Their hair and eyes are white, and their skin is dark blue. The color scheme is rather reminiscent of an old bluescreen. Their hair and eyes also have a faint glow to them, in addition to thin white bands that are around their wrists and ankles. (The bands often get mistaken for jewelry.) Their eyes appear to have no pupil or iris, and they have poor eyesight; they wear glasses to see. - They typically wear a dark grey shirt with ivory-colored buttons, beige pants, and dark ankle socks with loafers. (The ankle socks are to cover up the bands.) In Virus Mode: - Can use their Safe Mode abilities offensively. - Can summon energy weapons. The weapon can be any type. Their signature weapon is a broadsword. Weapons have the same properties as their shields. In addition, their speed is faster. - Cannot die. Upon entering Virus Mode, they will trick their opponent into thinking that they are still mortal. Upon the first death of their body, they may reform somewhere else and perform a sneak attack. (They can continue doing this until their opponent realizes that they cannot be killed.) - They become much more violent and destructive. They will toy with their opponent, and will either become bored and kill their opponent, or take a liking to them and allow them to walk away from the battle. (The opponent will be killed upon refusing the option of mercy.) They care less about hiding their abilities, and are therefore more ruthless. - Their appearance changes slightly. Their eyes are no longer pure white; they instead are black with white pupils. Their teeth become sharp, and their fingers become slightly clawed, much like a cat's paw. (a proper visual would be looking at Spiderman 2099's hands.)They frequently smile at their opponent, which can unnerve said opponent. Their glasses are cracked, but they no longer need them to see. - Their original virus form does have all of these features, but in addition, their hair was blue and black instead of white, and they wore more formal clothing, consisting of a white dress shirt, black pants and shoes, and a dark cloak with a fastener made of their energy. - A last resort move, they only enter Virus Mode if they are about to die in Safe Mode. This also helps with giving them time to break down the firewall to their malevolent code, as their opponent thinks that they have nothing left. Since it is an internal process, they are able to hide their advantage.
They are the main character of my story, Second Life. (I feel like I need to change the title bc it feels uncreative but idk)
also, image descriptions!! 1. the doodle sheet of them I made when I suddenly had an urge to draw. I hadn't drawn for a few months, and it turned out I had a massive change in style, with much better anatomy and posing. 2. The second version of the poster I made for my story. The first version looks horrendous, trust me 3. Their virus form! 4. Their virus form, pre-plot! 5. plot happening to them, starting their story! 6. The most recent non-meme piece of them, showing their abilities in Safe Mode!

Sorry guys, this is going to be a long one. I've been considering homeschooling my children for quite a while. I have a few reasons why the thought continually crosses my mind.
The first is the education aspect. From Kindergarten to now, my oldest seems to struggle in class. More socialization and less concentration. I will say that did tone down quite a bit during this past school year. But beyond that, each progress report sent home says that she is behind in this area or that. They don't assign homework, so I rarely know there is an issue until the reports come home. Despite my asking several times, I never receive anything that shows what they are working on, so I use the report to see the struggle areas and sit one on one with her, and she does wonderful! I know all parents feel that way about their children and boast, but she really seems to do well. I have no problem getting her to focus and learn. I've also noticed that some of the areas they claim she's struggling in, she's not as behind as the reports say. There's been several times where I've found she knows the material quite well and when I bring it up with the teacher, I'm brushed off and told that the testing system they use is never wrong. Even when I've showed the extra work she has done at home that shows she knows the material, I get "well you probably gave away the answers without realizing it".
The second is the bullying. She was bullied half the year this year by a kid in her class twice her size. Nothing was ever done about it until the day he went too far and she stomped him. Not figuratively either. Principal said after he kicked her, she literally only used her feet to get this boy to the ground and proceeded to kick him until the teacher pulled her away. Until that incident, she would come home in tears saying she was told she was ugly and stupid. She would beg me not to make her go to school. She used to be so self-confident and now it's gone. He stopped bothering her after that incident, but she still says that she feels that she's ugly and stupid despite us telling her that is not true.
The third reason is an incident that took place near Christmas time. We are not a Christian household. We follow a different faith. But one day both children came home and started saying we were celebrating winter holidays wrong. I asked my oldest what she meant, and she told me that they had watched a video in class and learned that we are supposed to only celebrate the birth of Jesus. She said it was in music class and that they were also learning songs for the winter concert and when I asked what songs, they both started to sing church hymns. That night my husband and I explained that there are different religions in the world and that Christianity is only one of them. The next day I brought my concerns up with this particular teacher and I didn't like that her response was "Oh we learned a Jewish song too so it's not all Christian based." I have no problem with my kids learning about other religions. The way I see it, the more they learn about other religions and cultures, the more understanding they'll be as adults and not judgmental just because it's not theirs. But this is a public school. Unless they're learning about all other religions and cultures, I don't see the need for anything religious based to be brought up at all.
With all this I thought I might give homeschool a sort of trial run over summer break. I figured that if it went well, I would homeschool starting next year. My husband is on the same page as me, but when I've mentioned this to other people/family though, they all tell me I'm making a mistake and I'm being selfish/overreacting. I've been told that I would be robbing my kids of special moments/memories like school dances, picture days, end of the year award ceremonies, and graduation. I've also been told that I'm setting them up failure because homeschooled kids don't get real diplomas and I'm ruining any chances they have of getting into a good college or a good career later in life. I've been told that their after-school activities won't be enough socialization and they'll be socially stunted as adults. So many people have said these things to me that it makes me question if I'm doing the right thing. So, I came here for advice. Do I follow my instincts, and continue on with my plan or am I really overreacting as everyone says?

Hi, I am a Japanese bilingual and I'm casually browsing job openings and found out that Eclaro, SupportNinja, CAI, Genpact and others have openings.
I want to ask mga magkano range ng pasahod ng mga companies above, and how is it working there, pros/cons, benefits? anything you can share regarding companies above? kahir non-bilingual pero kung may kakilala kayo dun, can you share?
P.S. no need to mention Accenture and Fujitsu as they are out on my list 😂.
I believe this will also be helpful for those bilinguals who are looking for job right now.

Hey new to the page and hope to get some help where i can.
I have a 95' 80 series with both petrol and gas, automatic fzj engine. I have had a mate do a keybanger in my cruiser and he's since been banned from driving it but the car is now having some issues.
Issue: Cold start is fine doesn't skip a beat working on both petrol and gas, the higher the temp the rougher the idle.
Once at operating temp it gets pretty bad and stutters/revs drop and jump back up constantly to the point it goes down too 100rpm and unless you accelerate it drops to zero and stalls but accelerate for too long and it stalls anyway.
Point 1: cold start idles 1000rpm till warms then goes to 800rpm.
Point 2: happens both petrol and gas
Point 3: since keybang (backfire) the fuel gauge doesnt drop when car is turned off
Point 4: close to everything is original however motor was fully refurbished 130k ago
Point 5: diagnostic shows nothing except a previous rear knock sensor issue

Hi there,
I'm a nube looking forward to get a page count along my word count in vim. I've implemented the following method in order to get a live wordcount:
" This is the cordcount
let g:word_count=wordcount().words function WordCount() if has_key(wordcount(),'visual_words') let g:word_count=wordcount().visual_words."/".wordcount().words " count selected word else
let g:word_count=wordcount().cursor_words."/".wordcount().words " or shows words 'so far' endif return g:word_count endfunction
set statusline+=\ w:%{WordCount()} set laststatus=2 " show the statusline
Since I managed to get this working, I'm wondering if there would be a way to get a page count by implementing a similar method. The criteria would be the following:

1. A page is defined as a set of words (e.g each set of 350 words = 1 page)
   
2. The current position is defined as the current set of X number of words that the cursor is positioned in
   

If the position feature is not feasible, then a simple page count for the file would be good enough.
Would anyone have an idea on how to implement this?
Regards,

Charlie was sitting in her room, gazing out the window at the darkening sky. The beautiful colours of twilight had become a dull grey like how she felt within. She hadn’t seen her parents in what seemed days, although the clock on the wall seems to indicate only a few hours ago. They appeared to be forgetting that Charlie was alive and it hurt more than anything else.
As she descended into the kitchen, her steps were marked by creaking wood, which gave way under her feet that were bare. Emma, her mother, stood with her back towards the entrance cooking supper. Charlie paused outside the door hoping for acknowledgement from her mother but received none. In the lounge Mark sat engrossed in his book, unaware of Charlie’s presence.
“Mom? Dad?” called out Charlie with a tremor in her voice.
No answer came forth. Inside anger boiled and frustration welled up inside her as she marched to the dining table and knocked over a glass sending it crashing onto the floor without even getting attention from them.
“What is wrong with you? Why don’t you see me?” She screamed through house walls.
Yet there was no response at all. She was boiling with anger and frustration. She went to the dining table and hit it up against a glass that fell on the ground, breaking into pieces.
Her mother jumped, turning quickly. “Mark, did you hear that?” she called out, concern in her voice. “What was it?” Mark asked, looking up from his book. “I think the glass fell over on its own,” Emma replied, hurrying to the table. She knelt down, carefully picking up the shards. “Strange, there’s no breeze in here.” Charlie stood frozen, watching her mother clean up the mess she had made. Emma’s face was a mix of confusion and sadness, as if she was struggling with something deeper than a broken glass. As her mother swept up the last of the shards, Charlie felt a chill run down her spine. Something was terribly wrong. “What’s your problem? Don’t you see me?” She shouted loudly and her voice reverberated all over the house. However, there was no response from them. Her mother hummed a sad melody as her father proceeded to turn a page in his book without interruption. Charlie felt coldness run down her spine; something was terribly amiss.
On that night she hurried back into her room seeking answers. In desperation, she got out one of her old photograph albums intending to find some solace in happier times. While flipping through pages, she came across an image which made her heart skip beats. It had been a photo of both of them standing by a grave their faces full of grief deepness etched on their faces . Her name was engraved on the tombstone: Charlotte "Charlie" Evans
The truth hit her like a sledgehammer and she felt the rush of cold air. She had died months ago. The accident—it was all coming back to her now. The car crash on that rainy night, the blinding headlights, the screeching tires. She had been so sure she would make it home safely, but she never did.
Her parents weren’t neglecting her; they simply couldn’t see her. She was a ghost, trapped in a world where she no longer belonged. It was frightening and at the same time liberating when she realized what this meant for her life. Her face was soaked with tears as the depth of grief in her parents’ heart and own tragic end unfolded to her.
Charlie, determined to seek reconciliation, decided to pay her respects at the grave. A silence fell over the night as she trod through dark streets into the cemetery. The mists were dense; and there was a gentle wind in the trees. The parents’ flowers were already withered on her headstone that stood under an old oak tree.
Next to the grave, she kneeled down and put a hand on the cold rock. “I am sorry Mommy, Daddy.” She apologized silently. “Now I know better than I did before. I love you so much.”
The first rays of sunrise brought mild heat around Charlie’s body. At that moment, she looked up and saw them standing by cemetery entrance holding hands with their faces white but unyielding. They were here for her, they came back to cry again.
Emma wiped away tears from her eyes as she placed some new flowers on the grave which sparkled in the morning sunshine.“We miss you darling,”she murmured.“Every single day we miss you.”
Charlie felt comforted – he felt at ease with the world. They stared at each other as she backed away from the TV and watched them silently celebrate their memory. She knew that their love for her and conscience would continue to be as strong as the heart’s beating.
‘This is the finest way to end it’ thought Charlie as she gazed at her parents one final time before drifting away for good. She learned that she was never there alone – she wasn’t. And as she closed her journey towards the light, she again said ‘goodbye’, because she knew that she was a part of all of them, and that all of them are a part of her.

“We’re a meat family,” my dad would proudly tell strangers. He’d wait for the quizzical look, then launch into detail, starting with how many freezers we had, how long we could sustain ourselves on the contents. It was just his way of starting a conversation, which made sense when you considered that raising and home-killing animals for food was, for want of a better term, his life-long hobby. His prize possession was one of those industrial-sized vacuum sealers: you could put half a pig inside and wrap it in plastic so tightly that every wrinkle and skin fold waxed unreal with shiny detail.
If we hadn’t lived in a rural area, albeit semi-urbanised, I guess it would have been pretty weird. But the mostly farming-stock locals only found his extra enthusiasm a little bit odd.
When he wasn’t being a bit embarrassing talking about it, I never really paid much heed to his hobby. I had a child’s vaguely grateful awareness that though our family went through some lean financial times, our stomachs never suffered like some of the families around us. All the beef, pork, ham and bacon in those big old chest freezers passed down from his dad really could have fed us for years.
I should preface all this by saying that I wasn’t a particularly bright kid, though neither was I dumb. I didn’t fail badly at anything in school, I just never achieved beyond a pass. I didn’t know it yet back then, still quietly dreaming about being a ballet star or a dressage champion, but mediocrity was my destiny. And I think that’s why I got on so well with my Aunt Liz.
Liz was my dad’s live-in youngest sister. She was one of those women who get described as ‘bubbly’ — not really pretty, not really smart, not a lot going on besides just being… well, all Liz. But she was salt of the earth; kind, caring, and great with kids. She was the only person who would willingly mind my two older brothers, who fought like hellcats and caused more trouble than the whole last generation of my family combined. People would privately lament to my parents that it was a shame Liz didn’t have kids of her own, but dad would just shake his head and say Liz liked it that way – that all the fun of looking after kids is being able to give them back to their parents.
I guess she was like me; nice, but mediocre. Lovely, but somehow forgettable when she wasn’t doing something for you.
But when Liz left us, I couldn’t forget her.
In hindsight, it was pretty weird timing that we had a big fortieth birthday party for Liz right before she disappeared. She was radiant that night; she’d hired a local girl to do her hair and makeup, and it was honestly the first time I’d ever seen her look pretty. She’d even worn a push-up bra under a tight red dress, which flattered her very plump curves well enough that the neighbour’s farmhand was spotted disappearing into the woolshed with her for a snog. In my dawning awareness, that gave a plain girl hope: if Aunty Liz could get a guy at forty, maybe things would turn out okay for me.
Anyway, I couldn’t forget how her pink cheeks, her eyes, her whole self, glowed that night before Liz went to bed. She said it was the best birthday ever, and that she was very much looking forward to the next stage of her life.
Would I have done anything different, if I had known? If I had realised what, exactly, that next stage was?
The week after the party, Aunt Liz said she was going on a little holiday up north, to visit some old school friends. She packed her things – she didn’t honestly have that many – and drove her little orange mini out onto the main road. And with a wave of one fleshy hand, she was gone. Nobody really thought much of it when she didn’t call, because nobody rural had cellphones back then. And Liz was, as I said, somehow kinda forgettable when she wasn’t right in front of you.
When we hadn’t had contact for six weeks, Dad tracked down the land line numbers for their old school buddies. They were surprised to hear from him — Liz had never arrived, so they had just assumed she’d cancelled her visit. No-one had thought to check. I eavesdropped on the conversation, and it sounded for all the world like *they* had forgotten about Aunt Liz, too.
From there it became a missing person case. The local cops came and talked to all of us; the farmhand who’d been seen snogging her was briefly detained, then let go, dad got grilled at length, even my hellion brothers were questioned thoroughly to see if this was one of their wild and dangerous pranks gone wrong.
But everything was a dead end. Nobody knew where Liz was, or what had happened to her.
The remains of her old mini were found halfway across the country, burned out on a beach, on a derelict stretch of ragged, rocky coastline. The police assumed murder and combed the area for remains. But even the most expert divers couldn’t conquer the incredible undertow and fast-shifting seabed of that coastline to look for evidence, so none was forthcoming.
Eventually the cops collectively shrugged and said that there was really nothing more they could do unless more information suddenly came to light. The locals knew nothing, no witnesses had come forward, and the trail was cold. As far as anyone knew, poor aunt Liz had been murdered on some desolate beach, far away from her home.
It didn’t feel fair to me. She’d once mentioned wanting her remains buried on our farm, in the graveyard plot beside grandma and grandad.
So, in my grief, I went into her room to look for something of hers to bury beside them.
Like I said, Liz didn’t have many things. Her room was pretty spartan, and her wardrobe was mostly sensible farm stuff. There was one exception: she, like me, did like to read, and she had a pretty good collection of well-thumbed books. I think it’s the escapism – even the most mediocre girl can lose herself in the plot of some trashy romance novel, imagine there’s still hope of being swept off her feet by that handsome stableboy, his inexplicable yearning for chubby plain girls.
So I set myself the task of going through the books, to find the right one to bury in the graveyard plot.
Most of them were exactly what you’d expect, but some of them were racier than I was used to. I felt various parts of my body flushing and tingling, as I read breathless prose about calloused hands touching the softest flesh of the protagonist. Okay, if I’m honest with myself, I might have got a little *too* invested in my project at that point. But that was also why I persisted going through her entire collection, until I found the ragged paperback from 1970, entitled Tawny Sands. And inside that trashy cardboard romance cover, I discovered not the tale of Tawny Sands, but some carefully hand-cut, stitched-in pages. A handwritten story in my Aunt’s rounded penmanship: Memoirs of a Long Pig.
I read her story twice in a row, utterly gripped.
Aunt Liz was no Stephen King – heck, she wasn’t even the Goosebumps guy – but her story was gripping and compelling, and I couldn’t put it down. Even if I hadn’t known her, I think that would have been true.
The gist of it was that Liz, when she was sixteen, had discovered that our family had a very long history of eating what she described as ‘Long Pork’. It’s an antipodean term, anglicised from the Pacific Islands: human meat.
Like me, young Liz still had some hopes and dreams. In one of her many failed attempts to find a special talent, she’d taken up cooking as a hobby. Naturally, with our family’s overabundance of meat, she’d scoured the freezers in the shed for ingredients: the racks of ribs and stacks of pork chops, butcher-paper wrappings all neatly labelled with the first letter of the name of the animal they came from.
She found familiar meat from Rodney, one of the pigs that had been recently slaughtered, emblazoned with an ‘R’ in her father’s strong, blocky lettering. There were cutlets labelled ‘M’ for Mary, from one of the lambs she’d hand-reared, and ‘F’ for Ferdinand, the steer they’d killed the month before. But she couldn’t explain the many, many curious parcels of meat on one side of the huge freezer, all labelled ‘J’ – at least, not until she took it all out and assembled it as well as she could on the scoured concrete floor of the killing shed. A big, frozen jigsaw puzzle without the box, her best attempt to discover what kind of beast the pieces had come from.
The animal, she quickly realised, was a Long Pig. Her own Aunt Jenny, who had died the month before – just after her fortieth birthday.
Fortunately, or perhaps not, for Liz, her father entered the shed right at that moment and realised his daughter had discovered the family secret. He sat down calmly on the lid of the freezer, and explained to her that this was a long-running family tradition, dating back to at least before his grandfather had been born.
“There are always people in life, Liz,” he’d said, “who won’t really amount to much. They want to be useful, want to be more. They strive and they strive, trying job after job, hobby after hobby, trying to hit on something they’re really good at. Something that makes them special. Those people can waste their whole lives, chasing dreams that never come true. Eventually they die unfulfilled, knowing that all their time has been wasted. That what they leave behind will fade quickly.”
His voice was oddly gentle as he leaned down and patted one of the neatly wrapped cuts of Aunt Jenny, still sitting frozen on the shed floor.
“Your Aunt Jenny was one of those people. So was my Aunt Irene.” He paused to gaze at his daughter, his next words peppered with emphasis. “But you see, my sweet Liz, they did find a purpose in life. They did find a way to be special, and they left this world utterly certain of their gift.” He stood up, stretched his back. “Let me show you.”
Liz waited while my grandad meticulously stacked the meat back into the freezer, all but one J-marked parcel that looked for all the world like a thick venison steak. He took her back to the farmhouse, and reverently unwrapped the deep red, heavily marbled meat to let it thaw. Then he laid it in the family’s ancient, cast-iron pan, basting it with butter and rosemary until a heavenly scent filled the kitchen, and Aunt Liz couldn’t stop her mouth from watering.
“Just try it. Let her show you. You’ll see exactly what I’m talking about.”
Even though she knew it was her aunt, Liz couldn’t stop herself from taking that first bite. There was something transcendent about the smell, overriding her natural revulsion that this was human meat, not one of their farm animals. For the first time, she truly realised it: we’re just another kind of animal. And weren’t her memories of Mary the lamb almost as fond as her memories of Aunt Jenny?
Liz explained then, in her curly handwriting, the explosion of taste that had assaulted her when she tried the steak. It was tender, it was succulent, it was rich beyond imagining. The fats melted on her tongue, lingering somewhere between pork and beef, but oddly neither. The flavour of the meat defied identification; something familiar, yet not.
But one thing she couldn’t deny; it was the most delicious thing she had ever eaten. Tears dripped onto her plate, mingled with the juice, the grease — not grief, but a pure, real, giddy delight.
“You’re tasting your aunt’s love for this family,” my grandad explained. “Her entire life was carefully curated, to eventually make unforgettable moments for us, just like this. This was her way of being special. This was the greatest gift she could possibly bring to our world – and because she realised that, she died with not a single regret. She knew her life had purpose. She was perfectly, completely fulfilled.”
I felt those words. I felt them lodge in my own belly, settling uncomfortably deep. I knew Aunt Liz, probably better than anyone else in the family. I’d seen how fucking happy she’d been on her fortieth, how goddamn fulfilled she was, despite apparently being a *nobody* and achieving *nothing*. Somehow, in the space of a single day, she had gone from being a forgettable background character to becoming the *main character*, immortalising herself in our family’s history with her sacrifice. Quite literally becoming part of all of us, forever.
I went to the killing shed after I finished with the book. I looked inside the freezers.
But there were no vacuum-sealed packages labelled ‘L’, no matter how deep I dug into the frozen stacks of plastic-wrapped flesh. Panicked now, not sure if I wanted to connect all the dots or unconnect them, I tried to think back over the last few months, recall any meals that had been unusually good. A few Sundays ago, we’d had a stew that really hit the spot and left me craving more. And I realised that the family had a really good night that night; my brothers behaved themselves, my parents didn’t fight, and grandma and grandad had been there. Hadn’t they looked far more… expectant than they should have?
I strained my brain, trying to recall if I’d seen the homekill bag on the kitchen bench – if I’d registered what letter it was. I knew it wasn’t an L. I would have remembered if it was an L.
And then it hit me, the memory, the connection, sizzling as if branded with a hot iron.
It had been an ‘E’.
E for Elizabeth. Not for Edward the pig.
I snorted at my own stupidity – of *course* Liz was short for Elizabeth – and as I comprehended my lack of smarts, I felt something give inside me.
I wasn’t clever, and nothing, nothing would ever make me smart. I had no big talents. I wasn’t beautiful, or even cute – and even if I had a million plastic surgeries, it still wouldn’t fulfill me. It wouldn’t be real.
I was a Liz.
I was a Jenny.
I was whoever the first aunt had been, the aunt who had dedicated her life to making her flesh as delicious as possible, who had worked every damn minute to be the best Long Pig she could ever be.
I wondered how many magical family evenings had been spent eating Aunt Jenny. How many glorious, satisfying, memorable dishes had been made out of her.
And… I wanted that. I wanted to finally know I had a *purpose* in life. One so simple, and so easy to achieve.
I wanted what Aunt Liz had.
***
It's my fortieth birthday today and I’m so fucking excited. For the last twenty-four years, I’ve dedicated myself to this moment; I’ve eaten exactly what I needed to, I’ve exercised just enough, but not too much, to maintain that perfect balance of marbling vs tenderness. I’ve relaxed and meditated to keep all those amazing flavours inside of me. I’ve researched all the greatest meats in the world, from prime Angus beef to A5 Wagyu. I really think I may have outdone myself.
I’m having my hair and makeup done at the local salon this afternoon, and I’m going to look so pretty; all prize piggy on show at the fair. I’m even going to have a big red ribbon in my hair, in memory of Aunt Liz.
Maybe there’ll be a cute boy I can snog in the wool shed, maybe there won’t – I don’t really care; because the most important, most certain thing is that I’m going to be the most delicious Long Pig in the history of our entire family.
I’m going to make everyone so damn happy, and I’m just so glad I can share my story with you all, instead of hiding it in a grubby book like poor Aunt Liz.
My only real disappointment? That you won’t get to taste me.
Reader, I have loved, loved my life. My Long Pork will be out of this world: once tasted, never, ever forgotten.

I play online a fair amount, and I've reached >14000VR. When I get placed in groups with players of similar point level (and especially groups that are higher...say >20000?), it frequently feels like I am struggling to stay even in the middle of the pack, and I am sure part of this is that I am driving with the steer assist and auto-accelerate turned on. I had tried turning those off once or twice long ago and found it so difficult that I immediatley turned them back on and never thought of it again. But as I increase my standing online, it feels like it's becoming more critical to focus on improving my driving skills to get to and stay near the front of the pack, and I know that to start shaving off time, the first thing I should do is turn the steeaccelerate aids off.
So I watched Shortcat's full beginner guide (in which he makes reference to an intermediate/advanced video that I cannot find?? Does it exist? Anyone have the link?) which has been helpful, and I do browse the posts here which frequently contain helpful tips, etc. But dang am I still struggling to get better. 😂 I know I'm not ready to play online like this yet so I've been focusing on the time trials, and although I've beat a handful of staff ghosts, I'm mostly struggling to get the hang of driving like this still.
I'm using (per Shortcat's instructions) a baby drvier, biddy buggy, and rollers (and cloud glider). Sometimes it feels like I misjudge where my drift will take me (probably because I'm still used to being artificially stopped from going off the track by the steer assist??) or other times it literally feels like I can't control the vehicle from drifting right off the track no matter how tight I try to take a curve. Other times when drifting too wide, there IS a wall or something so I'm drifting into the wall and then losing whatever miniturbo I had been building. I thought Shortcat said you generally don't need brakes at 150cc, but is that part of my issue? Or do I really just need to recalibrate my understanding of drifting physics. Heh. Help! Any tips or other YouTube recommendations for someone new to driving with the steeaccelerate aids turned off? Sorry for the long post, and thanks in advance!

Rant - Yes I'm fully aware that complaining about Uber Eats is a first world problem; particularly in this financial climate. But what's with all of the Uber Eats issues currently?
Over the past month alone, I've had a tonne of issues with drivers updating the deliveries to 'unable to deliver'. Surely they all can't be getting hit and not delivering.
Using tonight as an example. I live in the Inner West. After spending the day in Melbourne for work, I decided to 'treat the family' with Uber Eats. I time the delivery perfectly and it's on time to arrive at exactly the same time as I will be. The taxi pulls into my street and the Uber driver is 2 minutes away coming down an adjacent road.
By the time I get to my front door, I get an alert stating that my order 'can't be delivered'- Uber issues a refund.
Now that my wife hasn't started dinner, I quickly order from our local fish and chip shop. 20 minutes later (of the 10-20min ETD), the deliver window gets bumped another 15 mins. The driver collects the food, gets above 50 metres away from the store and he flags the delivery as 'delivered'. No image uploaded or anything.
I called the driver immediately and he states that there was another driver who collected my order and he never picked it up.
I called the store and they said the driver collected it after verifying the order and they could tell he flagged the delivery as complete.
What a shit show.
Are drivers taking the piss and having a feed on my behalf? How are these dudes delivery creating accounts?
Uber is so hard to get a hold of. But now I'm $100 in the red and Uber customer service are nowhere to be seen.
Rant over.

"Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross?"

The main reason Jesus died on the cross was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory (e.g., Recapitulation, Moral Influence, etc.).
This understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. But, what exactly was Christ victorious from, and why? To find out the answers to these questions, we have to turn to the Old Testament, as that's what the apostles would often allude to in order to properly teach their audience the message they were trying to convey (Rom. 15:4).
The OT is full of conflict between the Father (YHVH) and false gods, between YHVH and cosmic forces of chaos. The Psalms speak of this conflict between YHVH and water monsters of the deeps (an ancient image for chaos) (Psa. 29:3-4; 74:10-14; 77:16, 19; 89:9-10; 104:2-9, etc).
The liberation of Israel from Egypt wasn’t just a conflict between Pharaoh and Moses. It was really between YHVH and the false gods of Egypt.
Regardless of whether you think the aforementioned descriptions are literal or metaphorical, the reality that the Old Testament describes is that humanity lived in a “cosmic war zone.”
The Christus Victor motif is about Christ reigning victorious over wicked principalities and Satan's kingdom, and is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came to drive out "the prince of this world” (John 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8), to “destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14) and to “put all enemies under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who held the world in bondage and worked with his Church to plunder his "palace" (Luke 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal, and to kill, and to destroy” the life YHVH intended for us (John 10:10). Jesus came and died on the cross to disarm “the principalities and powers” and make a “shew of them openly [i.e., public spectacle]” by “triumphing over them in [the cross]” (Col. 2:15).
Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaimed that Jesus in principle conquered all YHVH's enemies (Acts 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all YHVH’s opponents. (Psalm 110 is quoted or alluded to in Matthew 22:41-45; 26:64, Mark 12:35-37; 14:62, Luke 20:41-44; 22:69, Acts 5:31; 7:55-56, Romans 8:34, 1st Corinthians 15:22-25, Ephesians 1:20, Hebrews 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15, 17, 21; 8:1; 10:12-13, 1st Peter 3:22, and Revelation 3:21.) According to New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.”
Because of man's rebellion, the Messiah's coming involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness.
Since YHVH is a God of love who gives genuine “say-so” to both angels and humans, YHVH rarely accomplishes His providential plans through coercion. YHVH relies on His infinite wisdom to achieve His goals. Nowhere is YHVH's wisdom put more on display than in the manner in which He outsmarted Satan and the powers of evil, using their own evil to bring about their defeat.
Most readers probably know the famous story from ancient Greece about the Trojan Horse. To recap the story, Troy and Greece had been locked in a ten-year-long vicious war when, according to Homer and Virgil, the Greeks came up with a brilliant idea. They built an enormous wooden horse, hid soldiers inside and offered it to the Trojans as a gift, claiming they were conceding defeat and going home. The delighted Trojans accepted the gift and proceeded to celebrate by drinking themselves into a drunken stupor. When night came and the Trojan warriors were too wasted to fight, the Greeks exited the horse, unlocked the city gates to quietly let all their compatriots in, and easily conquered the city, thus winning the war.
Historians debate whether any of this actually happened. But either way, as military strategies go, it’s brilliant.
Now, there are five clues in the New Testament that suggest YHVH was using something like this Trojan Horse strategy against the powers when he sent Jesus into the world:
1) The Bible tells us that YHVH's victory over the powers of darkness was achieved by the employment of YHVH’s wisdom, and was centered on that wisdom having become reality in Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25, 1 Cor. 2:7, Eph. 3:9-10, Col. 1:26). It also tells us that, for some reason, this Christ-centered wisdom was kept “secret and hidden” throughout the ages. It’s clear from this that YHVH's strategy was to outsmart and surprise the powers by sending Jesus.
2) While humans don’t generally know Jesus’ true identity during his ministry, demons do. They recognize Jesus as the Son of God, the Messiah, but, interestingly enough, they have no idea what he’s doing (Mark 1:24; 3:11; 5:7, Luke 8:21). Again, the wisdom of YHVH in sending Jesus was hidden from them.
3) We’re told that, while humans certainly share in the responsibility for the crucifixion, Satan and the powers were working behind the scenes to bring it about (John 13:27 cf. 1 Cor. 2:6-8). These forces of evil helped orchestrate the crucifixion.
4) We’re taught that if the “princes of this world [age]” had understood the secret wisdom of YHVH, “they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8 cf. vss 6-7). Apparently, Satan and the powers regretted orchestrating Christ’s crucifixion once they learned of the wisdom of YHVH that was behind it.
5) Finally, we can begin to understand why the powers came to regret crucifying “the Lord of glory” when we read that it was by means of the crucifixion that the “handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us [i.e., the charge of our legal indebtedness]” was “[taken] out of the way [i.e., canceled]” as the powers were disarmed. In this way Christ “triumph[ed] over” the powers by "his cross” and even “made a shew of them openly” (Col. 2:14-15). Through Christ’s death and resurrection YHVH's enemies were vanquished and placed under his Messiah's feet, and ultimately His own in the end (1 Cor. 15:23-28).
Putting these five clues together, we can discern YHVH's Trojan Horse strategy in sending Jesus.
The powers couldn’t discern why Jesus came because YHVH's wisdom was hidden from them. YHVH's wisdom was motivated by unfathomable love, and since Satan and the other powers were evil, they lacked the capacity to understand it. Their evil hearts prevented them from suspecting what YHVH was up to.
What the powers did understand was that Jesus was mortal. This meant he was killable. Lacking the capacity to understand that this was the means by which YHVH would ultimately bring about the defeat of death (and thus, pave the road for the resurrection itself), they never suspected that making Jesus vulnerable to their evil might actually be part of YHVH's infinitely wise plan.
And so they took the bait (or "ransom"; Matt. 20:28, Mark 10:45, 1 Tim. 2:5-6). Utilizing Judas and other willing human agents, the powers played right into YHVH’s secret plan and orchestrated the crucifixion of the Messiah (Acts 2:22-23; 4:28). YHVH thus brilliantly used the self-inflicted incapacity of evil to understand love against itself. And, like light dispelling darkness, the unfathomably beautiful act of YHVH's love in sending the willing Messiah as a "ransom" to these blood-thirsty powers defeated them. The whole creation was in principle freed and reconciled to YHVH, while everything written against us humans was nailed to the cross, thus robbing the powers of the only legal claim they had on us. They were “spoiled [i.e., disempowered]” (Col. 2:14-15).
As happened to the Trojans in accepting the gift from the Greeks, in seizing on Christ’s vulnerability and orchestrating his crucifixion, the powers unwittingly cooperated with YHVH to unleash the one power in the world that dispels all evil and sets captives free. It’s the power of self-sacrificial love.

Why Penal Substitution Is Unbiblical

For the sake of keeping this already lengthy post as short as possible I'm not going to spend too much time on why exactly PSA (Penal Substitutionary Atonement) is inconsistent with Scripture, but I'll go ahead and point out the main reasons why I believe this is so, and let the reader look further into this subject by themselves, being that there are many resources out there which have devoted much more time than I ever could here in supporting this premise.

"Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:"-1 Corinthians 5:7

The Passover is one of the two most prominent images in the New Testament given as a comparison to Christ's atonement and what it accomplished, (the other most common image being the Day of Atonement sacrifice).
In the Passover, the blood of the lamb on the door posts of the Hebrews in the book of Exodus was meant to mark out those who were YHVH's, not be a symbol of PSA, as the lamb itself was not being punished by God in place of the Hebrews, but rather the kingdom of Egypt (and thus, allegorically speaking, the kingdom of darkness which opposed YHVH) was what was being judged and punished, because those who were not "covered" by the blood of the lamb could be easily identified as not part of God's kingdom/covenant and liberated people.
Looking at the Day of Atonement sacrifice (which, again, Christ's death is repeatedly compared to throughout the New Testament), this ritual required a ram, a bull, and two goats (Lev. 16:3-5). The ram was for a burnt offering intended to please God (Lev. 16:3-4). The bull served as a sin offering for Aaron, the high priest, and his family. In this case, the sin offering restored the priest to ritual purity, allowing him to occupy sacred space and be near YHVH’s presence. Two goats taken from "the congregation” were needed for the single sin offering for the people (Lev. 16:5). So why two goats?
The high priest would cast lots over the two goats, with one chosen as a sacrifice “for the Lord” (Lev. 16:8). The blood of that goat would purify the people. The second goat was not sacrificed or designated “for the Lord.” On the contrary, this goat—the one that symbolically carried the sins away from the camp of Israel into the wilderness—was “for Azazel” (Lev. 16:8-10).
What—or who—is Azazel?
The Hebrew term azazel (עזאזל) occurs four times in Leviticus 16 but nowhere else in most people's canon of the Bible, (and I say "most people's canon," because some people do include 1 Enoch in their canon of Scripture, which of course goes into great detail about this "Azazel" figure). Many translations prefer to translate the term as a phrase, “the goat that goes away,” which is the same idea conveyed in the King James Version’s “scapegoat.” Other translations treat the word as a name: Azazel. The “scapegoat” option is possible, but since the phrase “for Azazel” parallels the phrase “for YHVH” (“for the Lord”), the wording suggests that two divine figures are being contrasted by the two goats.
A strong case can be made for translating the term as the name Azazel. Ancient Jewish texts show that Azazel was understood as a demonic figure associated with the wilderness. The Mishnah (ca. AD 200; Yoma 6:6) records that the goat for Azazel was led to a cliff and pushed over, ensuring it would not return with its death. This association of the wilderness with evil is also evident in the New Testament, as this was where Jesus met the devil (Matt. 4:1). Also, in Leviticus 17:1-7 we learn that some Israelites had been accustomed to sacrificing offerings to "devils" (alternatively translated as “goat demons”). The Day of Atonement replaced this illegitimate practice.
The second goat was not sent into the wilderness as a sacrifice to a foreign god or demon. The act of sending the live goat out into the wilderness, which was unholy ground, was to send the sins of the people where they belonged—to the demonic domain. With one goat sacrificed to bring purification and access to YHVH and one goat sent to carry the people’s sins to the demonic domain, this annual ritual reinforced the identity of the true God and His mercy and holiness.
When Jesus died on the cross for all of humanity’s sins, he was crucified outside the city, paralleling the sins of the people being cast to the wilderness via the goat to Azazel. Jesus died once for all sinners, negating the need for this ritual.
As previously stated, the goat which had all the sin put on it was sent alive off to the wilderness, while the blood of the goat which was blameless was used to purify the temple and the people. Penal substitution would necessitate the killing of the goat which had the sin put on it.
Mind you, this is the only sacrificial ritual of any kind in the Torah in which sins are placed on an animal. The only time it happens is this, and that animal is not sacrificed. Most PSA proponents unwittingly point to this ritual as evidence of their view, despite it actually serving as evidence to the contrary, because most people don't read their Old Testament and don't familiarize themselves with the "boring parts" like Leviticus (when it's actually rather important to do so, since that book explains how exactly animal offerings were to be carried out and why they were done in the first place).
In the New Testament, Christ's blood was not only meant to mark out those who were his, but also expel the presence of sin and ritual uncleanness so as to make the presence of YHVH manifest in the believer's life. Notice how God's wrath isn't poured out on Christ in our stead on this view, but rather His wrath was poured out on those who weren't covered, and the presence of sin and evil were merely removed by that which is pure and blameless (Christ's blood) for the believer.
All this is the difference between expiation and propitiation.

The Content of Paul's Gospel Message

When the New Testament writers talked about “the gospel,” they referred not to the Protestant doctrine of justification sola fide–the proposition that if we will stop trying to win God’s favor and only just believe that God has exchanged our sin for Christ’s perfect righteousness, then in God’s eyes we will have the perfect righteousness required both for salvation and for assuaging our guilty consciences–but rather they referred to the simple but explosive proposition Kyrios Christos, “Christ is Lord.” That is to say, the gospel was, properly speaking, the royal announcement that Jesus of Nazareth was the God of Israel’s promised Messiah, the King of kings and Lord of lords.
The New Testament writers were not writing in a cultural or linguistic vacuum and their language of euangelion (good news) and euangelizomai would have been understood by their audience in fairly specific ways. Namely, in the Greco-Roman world for which the New Testament authors wrote, euangelion/euangelizomai language typically had to do with either A) the announcement of the accession of a ruler, or B) the announcement of a victory in battle, and would probably have been understood along those lines.
Let’s take the announcements of a new ruler first. The classic example of such a language is the Priene Calendar Inscription, dating to circa 9 BC, which celebrates the rule (and birthday) of Caesar Augustus as follows:
"It was seeming to the Greeks in Asia, in the opinion of the high priest Apollonius of Menophilus Azanitus: Since Providence, which has ordered all things of our life and is very much interested in our life, has ordered things in sending Augustus, whom she filled with virtue for the benefit of men, sending him as a savior [soter] both for us and for those after us, him who would end war and order all things, and since Caesar by his appearance [epiphanein] surpassed the hopes of all those who received the good tidings [euangelia], not only those who were benefactors before him, but even the hope among those who will be left afterward, and the birthday of the god [he genethlios tou theou] was for the world the beginning of the good tidings [euangelion] through him; and Asia resolved it in Smyrna."
The association of the term euangelion with the announcement of Augustus’ rule is clear enough and is typical of how this language is used elsewhere. To give another example, Josephus records that at the news of the accession of the new emperor Vespasian (69 AD) “every city kept festival for the good news (euangelia) and offered sacrifices on his behalf.” (The Jewish War, IV.618). Finally, a papyrus dating to ca. 498 AD begins:
"Since I have become aware of the good news (euangeliou) about the proclamation as Caesar (of Gaius Julius Verus Maximus Augustus)…"
This usage occurs also in the Septuagint, the Greek translations of the Jewish Scriptures. For instance LXX Isaiah 52:7 reads, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news (euangelizomenou), who publishes peace, who brings good news (euangelizomenos) of salvation, who says to Zion, ‘Your God reigns.'" Similarly, LXX Isaiah 40:9-10 reads:

"…Go up on a high mountain, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos) to Sion; lift up your voice with strength, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos); lift it up, do not fear; say to the cities of Ioudas, “See your God!” Behold, the Lord comes with strength, and his arm with authority (kyrieias)…."-NETS, Esaias 40:9-10

This consistent close connection between euangelion/euangelizomai language and announcements of rule strongly suggests that many of the initial hearers/readers of the early Christians’ evangelical language would likely have understood that language as the announcement of a new ruler (see, e.g., Acts 17:7), and, unless there is strong NT evidence to the contrary, we should presume that the NT writers probably intended their language to be so understood.
However, the other main way in which euangelion/euangelizomai language was used in the Greco-Roman world was with reference to battle reports, announcements of victory in war. A classic example of this sort of usage can be found in LXX 2 Samuel 18:19ff, where David receives word that his traitorous son, Absalom, has been defeated in battle. Euangelion/euangelizomai is used throughout the passage for the communications from the front.
As already shown throughout this post, the NT speaks of Jesus’s death and resurrection as a great victory over the powers that existed at that time and, most importantly, over death itself. Jesus’ conquest of the principalities and powers was the establishment of his rule and comprehensive authority over heaven and earth, that is, of his Lordship over all things (again, at that time).
This was the content of Paul's gospel message...

Justification, and the "New" Perspective on Paul

The following quotation is from The Gospel Coalition, and I believe it to be a decently accurate summary of the NPP (New Perspective on Paul), despite it being from a source which is in opposition to it:

The New Perspective on Paul, a major scholarly shift that began in the 1980s, argues that the Jewish context of the New Testament has been wrongly understood and that this misunderstand[ing] has led to errors in the traditional-Protestant understanding of justification. According to the New Perspective, the Jewish systems of salvation were not based on works-righteousness but rather on covenantal nomism, the belief that one enters the people of God by grace and stays in through obedience to the covenant. This means that Paul could not have been referring to works-righteousness by his phrase “works of the law”; instead, he was referring to Jewish boundary markers that made clear who was or was not within the people of God. For the New Perspective, this is the issue that Paul opposes in the NT. Thus, justification takes on two aspects for the New Perspective rather than one; initial justification is by faith (grace) and recognizes covenant status (ecclesiology), while final justification is partially by works, albeit works produced by the Spirit.

I believe what's called the "new perspective" is actually rather old, and that the Reformers' view of Paul is what is truly new, being that the Lutheran understanding of Paul is simply not Biblical.
The Reformation perspective understands Paul to be arguing against a legalistic Jewish culture that seeks to earn their salvation through works. However, supporters of the NPP argue that Paul has been misread. We contend he was actually combating Jews who were boasting because they were God's people, the "elect" or the "chosen ones." Their "works," so to speak, were done to show they were God's covenant people and not to earn their salvation.
The key questions involve Paul’s view(s) of the law and the meaning of the controversy in which Paul was engaged. Paul strongly argued that we are “justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law” (Gal. 2:16b). Since the time of Martin Luther, this has been understood as an indictment of legalistic efforts to merit favor before God. Judaism was cast in the role of the medieval "church," and so Paul’s protests became very Lutheran, with traditional-Protestant theology reinforced in all its particulars (along with its limitations) as a result. In hermeneutical terms, then, the historical context of Paul’s debate will answer the questions we have about what exactly the apostle meant by the phrase "works of the law," along with other phrases often used as support by the Reformers for their doctrine of Sola Fide (justification by faith alone), like when Paul mentions "the righteousness of God."
Obviously an in-depth analysis of the Pauline corpus and its place in the context of first-century Judaism would take us far beyond the scope of this brief post. We can, however, quickly survey the topography of Paul’s thought in context, particularly as it has emerged through the efforts of recent scholarship, and note some salient points which may be used as the basis of a refurbished soteriology.
[Note: The more popular scholars associated with the NPP are E.P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N.T. Wright. Dunn was the first to coin the term "The New Perspective" in a 1983 Manson Memorial Lecture, The New Perspective on Paul and the Law.]
Varying authors since the early 1900's have brought up the charge that Paul was misread by those in the tradition of Martin Luther and other Protestant Reformers. Yet, it wasn't until E.P. Sanders' 1977 book, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, that scholars began to pay much attention to the issue. In his book, Sanders argues that the Judaism of Paul's day has been wrongly criticized as a religion of "works-salvation" by those in the Protestant tradition.
A fundamental premise in the NPP is that Judaism was actually a religion of grace. Sander's puts it clearly:
"On the point at which many have found the decisive contrast between Paul and Judaism - grace and works - Paul is in agreement with Palestinian Judaism... Salvation is by grace but judgment is according to works'...God saves by grace, but... within the framework established by grace he rewards good deeds and punishes transgression." (Paul and Palestinian Judaism, p. 543)
N.T. Wright adds that, "we have misjudged early Judaism, especially Pharisaism, if we have thought of it as an early version of Pelagianism," (Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, p. 32).
Sanders has coined a now well-known phrase to describe the character of first-century Palestinian Judaism: “covenantal nomism.” The meaning of “covenantal nomism” is that human obedience is not construed as the means of entering into God’s covenant. That cannot be earned; inclusion within the covenant body is by the grace of God. Rather, obedience is the means of maintaining one’s status within the covenant. And with its emphasis on divine grace and forgiveness, Judaism was never a religion of legalism.
If covenantal nomism was operating as the primary category under which Jews understood the Law, then when Jews spoke of obeying commandments, or when they required strict obedience of themselves and fellow Jews, it was because they were "keeping the covenant," rather than out of legalism.
More recently, N.T. Wright has made a significant contribution in his little book, What Saint Paul Really Said. Wright’s focus is the gospel and the doctrine of justification. With incisive clarity he demonstrates that the core of Paul’s gospel was not justification by faith, but the death and resurrection of Christ and his exaltation as Lord. The proclamation of the gospel was the proclamation of Jesus as Lord, the Messiah who fulfilled Israel’s expectations. Romans 1:3-4, not 1:16-17, is the gospel, contrary to traditional thinking. Justification is not the center of Paul’s thought, but an outworking of it:
"[T]he doctrine of justification by faith is not what Paul means by ‘the gospel’. It is implied by the gospel; when the gospel is proclaimed, people come to faith and so are regarded by God as members of his people. But ‘the gospel’ is not an account of how people get saved. It is, as we saw in an earlier chapter, the proclamation of the lordship of Jesus Christ….Let us be quite clear. ‘The gospel’ is the announcement of Jesus’ lordship, which works with power to bring people into the family of Abraham, now redefined around Jesus Christ and characterized solely by faith in him. ‘Justification’ is the doctrine which insists that all those who have this faith belong as full members of this family, on this basis and no other." (pp. 132, 133)
Wright brings us to this point by showing what “justification” would have meant in Paul’s Jewish context, bound up as it was in law-court terminology, eschatology, and God’s faithfulness to God’s covenant.
Specifically, Wright explodes the myth that the pre-Christian Saul was a pious, proto-Pelagian moralist seeking to earn his individual passage into heaven. Wright capitalizes on Paul’s autobiographical confessions to paint rather a picture of a zealous Jewish nationalist whose driving concern was to cleanse Israel of Gentiles as well as Jews who had lax attitudes toward the Torah. Running the risk of anachronism, Wright points to a contemporary version of the pre-Christian Saul: Yigal Amir, the zealous Torah-loyal Jew who assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for exchanging Israel’s land for peace. Wright writes:
"Jews like Saul of Tarsus were not interested in an abstract, ahistorical system of salvation... They were interested in the salvation which, they believed, the one true God had promised to his people Israel." (pp. 32, 33)
Wright maintains that as a Christian, Paul continued to challenge paganism by taking the moral high ground of the creational monotheist. The doctrine of justification was not what Paul preached to the Gentiles as the main thrust of his gospel message; it was rather “the thing his converts most needed to know in order to be assured that they really were part of God’s people” after they had responded to the gospel message.
Even while taking the gospel to the Gentiles, however, Paul continued to criticize Judaism “from within” even as he had as a zealous Pharisee. But whereas his mission before was to root out those with lax attitudes toward the Torah, now his mission was to demonstrate that God’s covenant faithfulness (righteousness) has already been revealed in Jesus Christ.
At this point Wright carefully documents Paul’s use of the controversial phrase “God’s righteousness” and draws out the implications of his meaning against the background of a Jewish concept of justification. The righteousness of God and the righteousness of the party who is “justified” cannot be confused because the term bears different connotations for the judge than for the plaintiff or defendant. The judge is “righteous” if his or her judgment is fair and impartial; the plaintiff or defendant is “righteous” if the judge rules in his or her favor. Hence:
"If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatsoever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed across the courtroom. For the judge to be righteous does not mean that the court has found in his favor. For the plaintiff or defendant to be righteous does not mean that he or she has tried the case properly or impartially. To imagine the defendant somehow receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a category mistake. That is not how the language works." (p. 98)
However, Wright makes the important observation that even with the forensic metaphor, Paul’s theology is not so much about the courtroom as it is about God’s love.
Righteousness is not an impersonal, abstract standard, a measuring-stick or a balancing scale. That was, and still is, a Greek view. Righteousness, Biblically speaking, grows out of covenant relationship. We forgive because we have been forgiven (Matt. 18:21-35); “we love" because God “first loved us” (1 John 4:19). Love is the fulfillment of the law (Rom. 13:8, 10, Gal 5:14, Jam. 2:8). Paul even looked forward to a day when “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:10), and he acknowledged that his clear conscience did not necessarily ensure this verdict (1 Cor. 4:4), but he was confident nevertheless. Paul did in fact testify of his clear conscience: “For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation [i.e., behavior] in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward” (2 Cor. 1:12). He was aware that he had not yet “attained” (Phil. 3:12-14), that he still struggled with the flesh, yet he was confident of the value of his performance (1 Cor. 9:27). These are hardly the convictions of someone who intends to rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed to his or her account.
Wright went on to flesh out the doctrine of justification in Galatians, Philippians, and Romans. The “works of the law” are not proto-Pelagian efforts to earn salvation, but rather “sabbath [keeping], food-laws, circumcision” (p. 132). Considering the controversy in Galatia, Wright writes:
"Despite a long tradition to the contrary, the problem Paul addresses in Galatians is not the question of how precisely someone becomes a Christian, or attains to a relationship with God….The problem he addresses is: should his ex-pagan converts be circumcised or not? Now this question is by no means obviously to do with the questions faced by Augustine and Pelagius, or by Luther and Erasmus. On anyone’s reading, but especially within its first-century context, it has to do quite obviously with the question of how you define the people of God: are they to be defined by the badges of Jewish race, or in some other way? Circumcision is not a ‘moral’ issue; it does not have to do with moral effort, or earning salvation by good deeds. Nor can we simply treat it as a religious ritual, then designate all religious ritual as crypto-Pelagian good works, and so smuggle Pelagius into Galatia as the arch-opponent after all. First-century thought, both Jewish and Christian, simply doesn’t work like that…. [T]he polemic against the Torah in Galatians simply will not work if we ‘translate’ it into polemic either against straightforward self-help moralism or against the more subtle snare of ‘legalism’, as some have suggested. The passages about the law only work — and by ‘work’ I mean they will only make full sense in their contexts, which is what counts in the last analysis — when we take them as references to the Jewish law, the Torah, seen as the national charter of the Jewish race." (pp. 120-122)
The debate about justification, then, “wasn’t so much about soteriology as about ecclesiology; not so much about salvation as about the church.” (p. 119)
To summarize the theology of Paul in his epistles, the apostle mainly spent time arguing to those whom he were sending letters that salvation in Christ was available to all men without distinction. Jews and Gentiles alike may accept the free gift; it was not limited to any one group. Paul was vehement about this, especially in his letter to the Romans. As such, I will finish this post off by summarizing the letter itself, so as to provide Biblical support for the premises of the NPP and for what the scholars I referenced have thus far argued.
After his introduction in the epistle to an already believing and mostly Gentile audience (who would've already been familiar with the gospel proclaimed in verses 3-4), Paul makes a thematic statement in 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” This statement is just one of many key statements littered throughout the book of Romans that give us proper understanding of the point Paul wished to make to the interlocutors of his day, namely, salvation is available to all, whether Jew or Gentile.
In 1:16 Paul sets out a basic theme of his message in the letter to the Romans. All who believed, whether they be Jew or Gentile, were saved by the power of the gospel. The universal nature of salvation was explicitly stated. The gospel saved all without distinction, whether Jew or Greek; salvation was through the gospel of Jesus Christ. Immediately after this thematic declaration, Paul undertakes to show the universal nature of sin and guilt. In 1:18-32 Paul shows how the Gentile is guilty before God. Despite evidence of God and his attributes, which is readily available to all, they have failed to honor YHVH as God and have exchanged His glory for idolatrous worship and self-promotion. As a consequence, God handed them over in judgment (1:18-32). Paul moves to denunciation of those who would judge others while themselves being guilty of the very same offenses (2:1-5) and argues that all will be judged according to their deeds (2:6). This judgment applies to all, namely, Jew and Greek (2:9-10). This section serves as somewhat of a transition in Paul’s argument. He has highlighted the guilt of the Gentiles (1:18ff) and will shortly outline the guilt of the Jew (2:17-24). The universal statement of 2:1-11 sets the stage for Paul’s rebuke of Jewish presumption. It was not possession of the Law which delivered; it was faithful obedience. It is better to have no Law and yet to obey the essence of the Law (2:12-16) than to have the Law and not obey (2:17-3:4). Paul then defends the justice of God’s judgment (3:5-8), which leads to the conclusion that all (Jew and Gentile) are guilty before God (3:9).
Paul argues that it was a mistaken notion to think that salvation was the prerogative of the Jew only. This presumption is wrong for two reasons. First, it leads to the mistaken assumption that only Jews were eligible for this vindication (Paul deals with this misunderstanding in chapter 4 where he demonstrates that Abraham was justified by faith independently of the Law and is therefore the father of all who believe, Jew and Gentile alike). Second, it leads to the equally mistaken conclusion that all who were Jews are guaranteed of vindication. Paul demonstrates how this perspective, which would call God’s integrity into question since Paul was assuming many Jews would not experience this vindication, was misguided. He did this by demonstrating that it was never the case that all physical descendants of Israel (Jacob) were likewise recipients of the promise. In the past (9:6-33) as in the present (at that time; 11:1-10), only a remnant was preserved and only a remnant would experience vindication. Paul also argued that the unbelief of national Israel (the non-remnant) had the purpose of extending the compass of salvation. The unbelief of one group made the universal scope of the gospel possible. This universalism was itself intended to bring about the vindication of the unbelieving group (11:11-16). As a result of faith, all (Jew and Gentile) could be branches of the olive tree (11:17-24). Since faith in Christ was necessary to remain grafted into the tree, no one could boast of his position. All, Jew and Gentile alike, were dependent upon the mercy and grace of God. As a result of God’s mysterious plan, He would bring about the vindication of His people (11:25-27). [Note: It is this author's belief that this vindication occurred around 66-70 AD, with the Parousia of Christ's Church; this author is Full-Preterist in their Eschatology.]

Creating a website involves several key steps, from initial planning to the final launch and ongoing maintenance. Once launched, our underdevelopment platform, RocketPages.IO, will make it all a breeze for users. For updates on our progress and upcoming MVP launch, follow us on X (erstwhile twitter) https://x.com/RocketPagesIO/
Meanwhile, here’s a comprehensive guide for website designers to follow, whether they are building a site for themselves or a client:

1. Planning and Research

• Understand the Purpose and Goals: Identify the website's purpose (e.g., e-commerce, portfolio, blog) and the specific goals (e.g., increase sales, showcase work, provide information).
• Research the Target Audience: Understand the target audience, their needs, and how they will use the website.
• Analyze Competitors: Look at competitor websites to identify best practices and opportunities for differentiation.

2. Define Scope and Requirements

• Outline the Project Scope: Define what will be included in the project (e.g., number of pages, specific features like contact forms, e-commerce functionality).
• Create a Sitemap: Organize the content structure and hierarchy, mapping out how users will navigate the site.

3. Design

• Wireframing: Create wireframes to outline the layout and structure of each page without focusing on design details.
• Mockups: Develop high-fidelity mockups incorporating branding elements such as colors, fonts, and imagery.
• Responsive Design: Ensure the design is responsive, adapting well to various screen sizes and devices.

4. Content Creation

• Develop Content: Write or gather all necessary content, including text, images, videos, and other media.
• Optimize for SEO: Ensure the content is optimized for search engines, incorporating relevant keywords and following SEO best practices.

5. Development

• Choose a Platform: Decide on the platform (e.g., WordPress, Shopify, custom HTML/CSS) based on the project’s requirements.
• Set Up Hosting and Domain: Register a domain name and choose a reliable hosting provider.
• Build the Website: Convert the design into a functioning website using HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and other relevant technologies. Integrate any necessary back-end functionality (e.g., databases, server-side scripting).
• Implement CMS: If using a Content Management System (CMS), set it up and customize it according to the design.

6. Testing

• Cross-Browser Testing: Ensure the website works correctly across different web browsers.
• Device Testing: Test the website on various devices, including desktops, tablets, and smartphones.
• Functionality Testing: Check all forms, links, and interactive elements to ensure they work properly.
• Performance Testing: Optimize the website for speed and performance, using tools to identify and fix issues.

7. Launch

• Pre-Launch Checklist: Conduct a final review of all aspects of the site, ensuring everything is in place.
• Deploy the Website: Move the site from the development environment to the live server.
• Final Testing: Perform a final round of testing on the live site to catch any last-minute issues.

8. Maintenance and Updates

• Regular Updates: Keep the website content fresh and up-to-date. Regularly update software and plugins to maintain security.
• Monitor Performance: Use analytics tools to monitor site performance and user behavior.
• Security Maintenance: Regularly back up the website and monitor for security vulnerabilities.

Additional Considerations

• User Experience (UX) Design: Focus on creating a seamless and intuitive user experience throughout the design and development process.
• Accessibility: Ensure the website is accessible to users with disabilities by following web accessibility guidelines (e.g., WCAG).
• Legal Compliance: Make sure the website complies with relevant laws and regulations, such as GDPR for data privacy.

By following these steps, a website designer can systematically approach the creation of a website, ensuring that the final product meets the client's needs and provides a positive user experience.
https://preview.redd.it/d0wjlzqa0r1d1.png?width=1500&format=png&auto=webp&s=551c524063211e8fd6f3ffac23ee04689507baf4

I'm after experience and opinions on replacement mirrors please.
Mine developed a really annoying vibration buzz, so I want to change them and want something more to my taste.
An owners group for my bike model has several reports that the bars being pretty vibey requires bid weights to solve, so bar-end mirrors result in blurry views & numb hands - so I guess they're out!
In browsing I recognised my current ones (came on used bike) on amazon. Theyre cheapies usually saying kemimoto with a skeletonised arm.
I'd like something a bit smaller / sleeker but my budget doesn't get anywhere near rizoma stealth and he knock-offs are supposedly shite.
Any recommendations for brands to look out for or avoid? Fitting tips etc?

RAGFlow was open sourced on April 1, 2024 at https://github.com/infiniflow/ragflow and has reached 7800 stars till now, so I hope you all enjoy it.
RAGFlow is dockerized and very easy to deploy. We recommend using at least 16GB of RAM as it has some built-in models for document structure recognition and OCR to make the most of it. It can also be deployed directly from source code. RAGFlow uses Python/Elasticsearch as the backend and React as the frontend. Here is our product description:

"Quality in, quality out"

• Deep document understanding-based knowledge extraction from unstructured data with complicated formats.
• Finds "needle in a data haystack" of literally unlimited tokens.

Template-based chunking

• Intelligent and explainable.
• Plenty of template options to choose from.

Grounded citations with reduced hallucinations

• Visualization of text chunking to allow human intervention.
• Quick view of the key references and traceable citations to support grounded answers.
• Compatibility with heterogeneous data sources
• Supports Word, slides, excel, txt, images, scanned copies, structured data, web pages, and more.

Automated and effortless RAG workflow

• Streamlined RAG orchestration catered to both personal and large businesses.
• Configurable LLMs as well as embedding models.
• Multiple recall paired with fused re-ranking.
• Intuitive APIs for seamless integration with business.

RAGFlow v0.6.0 is out today, we think now it's now time to bring it up to the selfhosted community for your feedback!

"Good-bye, lover-- It's been fun... And I always did want to go in battle. You get to keep your planet, kid... Don't forget me... Don't forget me"
Bio: Val Armorr was the son of Japan's greatest crimelord, Kirau Nezumi, also known as Black Dragon, When he was born, his mother, the American secret agent Valentina Armorr, tried to hide him from his father, but she failed and was killed for her affront. Japan's biggest hero Sensei Toshiaki, the White Crane, eventually killed Black Dragon for his crimes and adopted the infant Val. He raised Val as if he were his own son, and trained him in all manner of the martial arts.
Origin in scan form ^{(Superboy vol 1 #210})
Alternate look at his origin ^{(Secrets of the Legion of Super-Heroes #2})
Databook entries

• Superboy #205
• All-New Collector's Edition #55
• Who's Who: The Definitive Directory of the DC Universe #12
• Who's Who in the Legion of Superheroes #3
• DC Comics Encyclopedia: Updated and Expanded
• All New DC Comics Encyclopedia

Original Val

Strength
Note: Karate Kid needs to concentrate and channel his chi to perform feats of strength ^{(Adventure Comics #359})

• In his origin, chops through a steel beam ^{(Adventure Comics #346})
• Chops through a spaceship hull ^{(Adventure Comics #347})
• Lightning Lad flashes back to Karate Kid stopping a car with a single chop ^{(Adventure Comics #351})
• Knocks out a Jovian Mastodon and a Tricorn Beast with a single strike each, and judo throws a Sloth Ape ^{(Adventure Comics #358})
• Chops through two trees in one swing ^{(Adventure Comics #358})
• Analyzes some thick gates, then chops through them ^{(Adventure Comics #360})
• Kicks away a hover car ^{(Adventure Comics #361})
• Chops through a tank, then starts a small earthquake with a stomp ^{(Adventure Comics #367})
• Destroys a practice bot in a rage ^{(Adventure Comics #373})
• Claims his chops could fell giant redwoods ^{(Superboy vol 1 #203})
• Creates an earthquake with a stomp that breaks apart a statue ^{(Legion of Superheroes vol 3 #31})
  • Note: This is a flashback to earlier times, so despite being in vol 3, takes place Chronologically in vol 1, as shown by him wearing the brown gi instead of his more famous white one
• Punches through a robot ^{(Superboy vol 1 #214})
• Kicks a meteor to pieces ^{(Karate Kid #2})
• Creates a counter-vibration strong enough to reverse Major Disaster's artificial earthquake. ^{(Karate Kid #2}.)
• Flexes off six cavemen ^{(Karate Kid #11})
• [MASSIVE OUTLIER] When bound with ropes made of indestructible Inertron, he somehow manages to break free. ^{(Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes #231})
  • Album of Inertron being invulnerable/unbreakable/strong enough to resist Kryptonians
• Breaks out of a machine that saps powers, minds and will (Legion of Super-Heroes vol 3 004)

Speed

• Moves "with the speed of thought" ^{(Adventure Comics #361})
• Dodges Mano and Persuader's attacks ^{(Adventure Comics #378})
• Dodges Validus' mental lightning ^{(Adventure Comics #378})
• Dodges a blast from the Emerald Eye of Ekon ^{(Superboy vol 1 #198})
• Dodges a blast from *sigh* Radiation Roy ^{(Superboy vol 1 #208})
• Rushes forward and front tuck into a Rider Kick in a fraction of a second ^{(Superboy vol 1 #214})
• Dodges a bolt from Lightning Lad ^{(Karate Kid #1})
• Dodges radiation blasts from Nemesis Kid ^{(Karate Kid #1})
• Intercepts a falling meteor ^{(Karate Kid #2})
• Backflips over a bullet ^{(Karate Kid #2})
• Dodges a laser ^{(Karate Kid #13})
• Leaps over a bullet and behind a guy in less than a fifth of a second ^{(Karate Kid #15})
• Dances around Pharoxx's strikes ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes #309})
• Redirects Pharoxx's own magic against him ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes #309})

Durability

• Survives an explosion that KO'd and nearly killed his sensei ^{(Adventure Comics #367})
• Smacked by a giant robot and recovers being back to fighting shape on the next page ^{(Adventure Comics #373})
• Endures ever-increasing pain through meditative techniques even though the pain was so bad, it made Timber Wolf go feral within a few minutes ^{(Superboy vol 1 #209})
• Clears his mind of mental influences ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #268})
• Wades though blasts from Pharoxx ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #288})
• While sick, takes a blast from Pulsar ^{(The Brave and the Bold #198})
• Pulsar explodes right next to him and he's all good. ^{(The Brave and the Bold #198})
• Gets clawed by a monster and shrugs it off ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes #309})
• Gets blasted by Pharoxx's magic and recovers, while Pharoxx getting hit with the same blast made him immediately flee ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes #309})
• [Limit] Dies after being beaten nearly to death by Nemesis Kid, then missile launches himself into a planet-draining machine. ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 3 #4})

Skill
Statements and styles

• Great Skill in all forms of martial arts, but especially Karate and Judo ^{(Adventure Comics #346})
• Master of all forms of fighting ^{(Adventure Comics #359})
• Switches from Boxing to Savate to Kendo against a robot ^{(Adventure Comics #363})
• Knocks some guys out with chops to the back of the neck ^{(Adventure Comics #360})
• Mastered every weapon form "from fencing foils to Jovian trident spears" ^{(Adventure Comics #368})
• Temporarily puts Timber Wolf in a Judo hold ^{(Superboy vol 1 #209})
• Falkone IV arm riflie technique ^{(Karate Kid #12})
• Loback III restraining hold for non-powered people to restrain super-powered people ^{(Karate Kid #12})
• Karate, Judo, "Arcturian Sli-tilla", "Venusian Txrxvrx", and boxing ("the good old one-two punch") in one page ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #268})

Against skilled opponents (Solo)

• Beats a boxing champion ^{(Adventure Comics #377})
• Beats the absolute stuffing out of Black Mace ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 3 #31})
  • Black Mace is stated to be Ganglands's answer to Karate Kid ^{(Adventure Comics #374}) and a fast, strong invincible fighter ^{(Superboy #213})
• Beats Black Mask again, with an assist from Princess Projectra ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 3 #31})
• Quickly beats a dual nunchaku wielding black belt ^{(Karate Kid #3})
• Beats the Samurai known as Master Hand ^{(Karate Kid #4})
• Had the advantage on Black Dragon II, the student of his father he previously beat in Superboy vol 1 #210 ^{(Karate Kid #10})
• Karate Kid vs Black Dragon II in a ceremonial fight. ^{(Karate Kid #10})
• Beats Dick Grayson quickly ^{(Karate Kid #14})
• Wins a tournament and the title of Samurai, going down as the youngest to gain the title ^{(Secret Origins vol 2 #47})

Against Skilled opponents (groups)

• Defeats three Black Belts he claims could waste a battalion of ordinary men ^{(Superboy vol 1 #210})
• Beats six opponents trained by his father, Black Dragon, including the future Black Dragon II ^{(Superboy vol 1 #210})
• Beats a bunch of 20th-century martial arts masters ^{(Karate Kid #1})
• Quickly beats four martial artists ^{(Karate Kid #4})

Against superpowered opponents (1v1)

• Fights Superboy and does so well, Clark says he needs to be in the Legion ^{(Adventure Comics #346})
• Training with Superboy ^{(Adventure Comics #368})
• Gets the advantage over Don Allen, descendent of Barry Allen and a speedster ^{(Adventure Comics #373})
• Defeats Ultra Boy ^{(Adventure Comics #375})
• A brainwashed Karate Kid easily beats Ultra Boy ^{(Superboy vol 1 #205})
• Survives a fight with Superboy, though he constantly mentions he's outmatched and it's taking all of his skill to just survive . ^{(Karate Kid #12})
• Temporarily holds Superboy, but admits he needs help immediately and is losing him and is saved by Mordru's magic wearing off ^{(Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes #245})

Against Superpowered opponents (groups)

• Solos the Fatal Five ^{(Adventure Comics #378})
• Manages to hold his own against Lightning Lad, Superboy, Colossal Boy, Saturn Girl, Sun Boy, and Chameleon Boy before being stopped by Cosmic Boy ^{(Karate Kid #13})

Against Skilled Superpowered opponents

• Fights four superpowered assassins and is holding his own ^{(Adventure Comics #361})
• Beats Pharoxx of Orando in a sword fight, forcing Pharoxx to resort to magic ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #286})
• Beats Timber Wolf in a spar ^{(Legion of Superheroes vol 4 #52})

Accuracy

• Splits a rock so each half flies off and KOs a foe ^{(Adventure Comics 361})
• Hits a knight with a stone and KO's him ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #288})
• Uses his sash as a lasso to disarm Pulsar of his power staff ^{(The Brave and the Bold #198})

Agility

• Rushes forward and front tuck into a Rider Kick in a fraction of a second ^{(Superboy vol 1 #214})
• Contorts himself in mid-air to stop himself from falling out of a building then Jumps back in ^{(Karate Kid #1})
• Jumps from the street to a sign to a third story roof ^{(Karate Kid #2})
• Does a series of flips to land safely after jumping out of a building while holding someone ^{(Karate Kid #2})
• Jumps out of a window, does a ton of flips, and starts running on cars ^{(Karate Kid #3})
• Flips on a pole ^{(Karate Kid #11})
• Flips over a car ^{(Karate Kid #11})
• Flips out of Batman's grasp ^{(The Brave and the Bold #198})
• Rolls back to get out of a monster's range, then launches himself into a flying kick ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #309})

Weak Point Sensing

• Finds the weak point in a diamond ^{(Adventure Comics# 365})
• Finds the weak point in a wall ^{(Superboy vol 1 #210})
• Finds Omega's weakest point, but is too weak to capitalize on it ^{(Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes #251}). This is the first time it's called an explicit "power" and not a skill.
• Finds the weak point in a hatch ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes #277})
• Originally struggled to find a weak point in massive chains encircling Earth, but after getting a hint from Princess Projectra manages to sense and destroy it ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #279})

Retroboot Val

Despite dying.....Val Armorr's back and in the past! ^{(Justice League of America vol 2 #7}) How? Never explained! ^{(Justice League of America #10}) Here's his feats. Note: All feats are done while he's dying (Countdown Weeks 14-15/ 38-37) from what's later revealed to be the Morticoccus Virus

• While disguised as a supervillain, freezes Parasite without Black Lightning realizing Parasite was the target ^{(Justice League of America vol 2 #2})
• KO's Black Lightning with a chop to the neck and stalemates (and arguably has the advantage over) Batman while sick and memoryless ^{(Justice League of America vol 2 #8})
  • Another view of the fight ^{(Countdown Week 2/#50})
  • Doctor Mid-Nite says Karate Kid very nearly took down Batman in that fight ^{(Countdown Week 7/#45})
  • Batman conceeds Val outfought him but claims he wouldn't in a rematch though he may have been being a jerk to get into Val's head ^{(Countdown Week 10/#42})
• Is still conscious and talking despite being loaded up with enough tranquilizers to give Wonder Woman trouble ^{(Justice League of America vol 2 #8})
• Somehow survives Speed Force Lightning that should have insta-killed him ^{(Justice League of America vol 2 #10})
• Finds the weak point in a vault he's sealed in ^{(Countdown Week 13/#39})
• Tears through Oracle's tendrils and punches through a wall ^{(Countdown Week 13/#39})
• Hurts Equus, an enhanced being who bragged he had fought Superman ^{(Countdown Week 16/#36})
• Kicked Equus arm clean off his body ^{(Countdown Week 17/#35})
• Breaks shotguns and kicks a police car over ^{(Supergirl vol 5 #21})
• [Limit] While he can dodge her attacks, can't move Supergirl with his strikes ^{(Supergirl vol 5 #21})
• Chops Equus arm off ^{(Supergirl vol 5 #22})
• [Limit] The closer to death he gets, the less he's able to focus and use Super-Karate feats ^{(Countdown week 32/#20})
• Takes out four Apokoliptians ^{(Countdown Week 41/#11})
• Takes a hit from an OMAC and shows some agility ^{(Countdown Week 42/#10})
• Dies of the virus ^{(Countdown Week 45/#7})
• Time Trapper puts his and Una's bodies in the mainline Earth when they had died in Earth-51 ^{(Action Comics #864})

Misc

• As a Legionnaire, he has a Legion flight ring ^{(Karate Kid #1})
• Invited his 20th-century friend to his wedding, not realizing she was in love with him ^{(The Brave and the Bold #198})
• Man married a princess. Respect. ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes Vol 2 annual 2})
• Brave enough to try to hit Darkseid with a flying kick, though all it accomplishes is knocking himself out. ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 2 #294})
• It's implied he somehow came back/will come back to life again, but this wasn't elaborated on because of the Flashpoint thanks Barry ^{(Legion of Super-Heroes vol 6 #6})
  • Time Trapper also foreshadowed this ^{(Action Comics 864})