On the one hand, after the complicated mythology of Scott's Prequels as well as the extensions of the first two that are Alien 3 and Resurrection, I do want a film that's less connected and complicated and just does the survival horror angle well without being bogged down by mythology and connections. The universe of Alien is big and it can afford to tell a smaller story with new players without having to tie itself into the rest of the series excessively.
But on the other hand, there's the worry that Fede might not make his Alien movie stand out very much from the others and will just make something that's competent but boilerplate and generic. That his film won't have much to it bar "Alien invades and kills people". There's the worry that you'll make a film that causes people to retroactively like Covenant and Prometheus more by virtue of them being "About something" and "Risk taking"
I'm more optimistic about how Romulus seems but there's the total possibility that it could end up not working out. If it nails the characters and the suspense and filmmaking, that'll be everything needed, but if it doesn't then any other flaws will stick out much more.
View Poll

looking for some feedback on how to improve this [[king of the oathbreakers]] equipment deck
the idea is to equip equipment on KotO and protect him using single mana removal to make him phase out enabling him and his equipment to survive just about anything from wipes to his items getting targeted
played it a few times but noticed that while i draw a decent amount of cards i struggle to draw alot of equipment fast leading to KotO being way smaller than he should be
tried to fill it a solid mana base with some tutors to make sure i can get the right equipment
what im struggling with is that it feels like theres not much more room for removing cards without sacrificing either safety or consistency but yet i am really lacking in board wipes and sorceries
i play on cockatrice so the budget dosent matter at all
heres the decklist:
https://www.moxfield.com/decks/OlDA4aP8tkG9ZFQ56hDsWw
really hope i could get some help improving it

Edit: Don't be like pro Palestinians NPCs, voice your actual opinion, don't downv*te silently like cowards.
Please don't take it as a personal attack, but unless you have a friend of relative as an hostage in Gaza (in which case I don't blame you for protesting), I just can't put myself in your shoes, the deal is so ridiculously bad and insulting, and worse of that, the protests to accept it do nothing but kill the already small chance that a better deal would be negotiated
We often mock Pro Palestinians for being simple and emotionally driven people, but I can't help but feel like the people among us who go to the protests are just committing same sin
​
​
Details -
I can't find the exact details so I will work of memory, if someone provides the correct details of the deal I will update it
​
A few dozen of violent prisoners released per hostage - out of 30 released hostages, don't you think that on average, they will return and kill more than 1 Israeli, making the deal a net lose of life in the long one?
Retreating from massive areas of Gaza, and dismantling the "Chir Beeri" strip, forfeiting the IDF's achievements, which is a huge spit in the face of the families of the 300 fallen soldiers who died for those gains
Giving Hamas a few hours a day for a period of months where the IDF is not allowed to monitor the strip, which allows them to transfer weapons, MVPs, and rebuild tunnels
And the one condition that thankfully stopped this disaster of a government from accepting the deal - ending the war and guaranteeing Hamas' survival
​
​
I am not taking lightly of the 33 living hostages in Gaza, they are obviously going through hell and no matter how you look at it, it is absolutely terrible, but a country of 9 million people cannot give up on its security for so few, Hamas has to be finished now, even if it means that the hostages won't return

Nobody showed up to my health advisor session last week and that was kind of the last straw tbh. I've already known for a few months that I wanted to switch to The Gender Hormone Clinic for my HRT anyway, but I've actually cancelled my GGP subscription earlier than planned because I just don't see the point in paying £30 for a company that won't even send out the correct prescriptions or let their patients talk to a human being anymore.
I'll just have to survive the next few weeks without a healthcare provider. Luckily I have enough Testogel to make it through that time - I know others might not have that luxury.
My deepest condolences go out to the remaining human staff members at GGP - I used to work on a very broken system in one of my first office jobs and I know how brutal it can be, especially when customers are desperate to access something as important as healthcare.
Congrats, Helen. You've ruined what was once a perfectly good service for loads of trans people. I hope you're happy.

Hello, I am a first time keeper and plan on doing a test game with a few friends. In the meantime i have been brain storming a homebrew campaign based in WW1 on the Western inspired by Amnesia: The bunker. I have made 6 classes based on types of troops during ww1 and am unsure of how to make fair stat bonuses and negatives as i dont have much experiences with the game yet. i want the classes to fit a specific playstyle and want to make them all feel uniqe from each other, any suggestions are welcome as this is very much a work in progress project
Below i have the classes that ive made (sorry for the horrendous paragraphs ive copied this from my google doc)
Classes available for this campaign:
Raider- A lowly Trench raider they thrive in tight spaces and close encounters.
Quick on their feet, and tougher than nails their ability to think quickly through
An ever adapting battlefield is how they survive the most hopeless of battles.
Through all they have to do, seeing their comrades fall, having to dispatch the
enemy within arms reach, and the very real chance of losing their lives in a filthy
trench they fail to keep their heads on straight, they tend to be Hotheads and
very blunt with their words.

• Starts with a choice of a trench shotgun or Mp18 Smg
• Starts with a trench mace
• Starts with a metal chestplate
• Starts with 2 grenades

Infantryman- Standard soldier for the time, their time working in the trenches have
made them very efficient at planning and setting up defenses. Their ability
to stay sane whilst being bombarded by shellfire is unmatched and often
very reliable to keep morale high through cracking jokes, They take pride
in their hard work and dedication for their cause.

• Starts with a Lee enfield
• Starts with a trench periscope and folding shovel
• Starts with a 1 frag grenade and 1 gas grenade

Officer- Natural born leaders, to serve their countries they have risen to the top.
Great strategic minds and bring morale to their troops. Their ability to
think of solutions to complex solutions and pre plan is unmatched by anyone
in the foxhole.

• Starts a Pedersen device pistol caliber semi rifle
• Starts with a Webley Mk IV revolver
• Starts with Trench whistle (i want this to buff allies with drawbacks, something like buffs movement speed while lowering sanity)
• Starts with Saber
• Starts with Scr-54 portable radio

Medic- Very devoted to keeping their allies alive. The Medic is the greatest support
any soldier can wish to be on the field with them. Very caring and easy to
get along with they keep their heads on straight in the worst of conditions
Though they can keep themselves calm during troubling times they've seen
the worst of it especially whilst treating the wounded, they find it hard to sleep
at night. Even with the horrors they've witnessed they still keep a brave face.

• Starts with a standard issued medical kit
• Starts with a Colt m1911
• Starts with a multi purpose knife
• Starts with 2 smoke grenades

Marksman- The classic eagle eyed sniper. Very perceptive to their surrounding and great
at gathering information for their troops. Their ability to shoot accurately is unmatched. Marksman a great at hiding and can easily set up ambushes for the enemy but seem. struggle in close quarters making them stress any tight battles.

• Starts with SMLE Mk4 with scope
• Starts with binoculars
• Starts with 2 tripwire mines
• Starts with a Scr-54 Radio

Heavy- The standout heavy gunner. Very strong from moving their equipment and countless
rounds of ammunition. Their fortitude is unique, they are used to the sound of constant
gunfire and have come to terms with being shot at while suppressing their opposition
making them one of the bravest soldiers on the field. Though they may be strong they
still must carry some of the heaviest equipment around making them more ideal for
hunkering down and controlling an area instead of running and gunning.

• Starts with Lewis gun
• Starts with deployable crate of ammo
• Starts with a mallet
• Starts with chest plate and experimental facial armor

I really appreciate any advice you guys can give me. I really want to make this something very special for my group

“Alone in the Dark,” the recent reboot of the iconic survival horror series, has unfortunately become a prime example of how game-breaking bugs can utterly ruin an otherwise promising game. Despite its potential to revive the franchise with modern graphics and mechanics, the experience is marred by a plethora of technical issues that make it nearly unplayable.
First and foremost, the game is plagued with frequent crashes that disrupt the gameplay. Whether you’re in the middle of an intense chase sequence or solving a critical puzzle, the game’s tendency to abruptly crash can be incredibly frustrating. This isn’t an occasional hiccup; it’s a persistent problem that many players have encountered, effectively halting their progress and diminishing their enjoyment.
In addition to crashes, “Alone in the Dark” suffers from severe glitches that can trap the player in unresolvable situations. Characters may become stuck in the environment, unable to move or interact with necessary objects. At times, essential items disappear or fail to spawn, making it impossible to advance the story. These bugs force players to restart from previous save points, often losing significant progress in the process.
Performance issues further compound the game’s troubles. Frame rate drops are frequent, particularly during action-heavy scenes or in areas with complex lighting effects. These slowdowns not only break immersion but can also make combat and exploration feel sluggish and unresponsive.
Moreover, the game’s AI is notoriously unreliable. Enemies frequently exhibit erratic behavior, either becoming inexplicably passive or getting stuck in loops, making encounters feel less threatening and more laughable. This inconsistency detracts from the horror elements, as the sense of danger is undermined by the predictable and often buggy enemy patterns.
The developers have yet to release patches addressing these widespread issues, leaving many players frustrated and disappointed. The game’s narrative and atmosphere show glimpses of the eerie charm that made the original series a classic, but these moments are overshadowed by the overwhelming technical flaws.
In its current state, “Alone in the Dark” is a cautionary tale about the importance of thorough testing and post-launch support. Until the developers address these game-breaking bugs, it’s hard to recommend this title, even to the most die-hard fans of the series. What could have been a successful revival is instead a stark reminder that technical stability is crucial for any game’s success.

Ok. So in a nutshell, my ex bought my oldest (13 yo) a phone. It’s been 2 years now & it’s been a nightmare. He has told them that they don’t have to let me look at or control any aspect of the phone. (To be clear, I have no interest snooping through my kid’s phone. I just want to add screen time limits & safety restrictions.) The way it is currently set up, they can watch porn, download 17+ apps, & there are no time limits on anything.
This child is ADHD & I’m an adult with late diagnosed autism, so this element of my child’s life is one that I consider greatly. I don’t think they should be coming to my house from their dads with 13+ hours logged on chat rooms, internet, YouTube, TikTok and Roblox. I have attempted to help my oldest set healthy boundaries themself, but my ex has convinced them that I’m being paranoid, controlling & that I have no right. After two of their friends called me the other day & told me that my kid might be corresponding with a grown man, (my actual worst fear) I set a hard boundary with my ex. I said, “Every week (kid) comes to my house with a phone that I don’t have access to, I am going to confiscate it & you’ll need to collect it from me to get it back. This is not about (kid) refusing to give me access, this is about you refusing to give me access or set reasonable restrictions on the phone. Until you supply me access to the phone, (kid) will not be allowed to use it here.”
I was met with….”It’s glaringly obvious by the stories (kid) tells me that whatever info you read is lacking because as someone who has experienced an ADHD life I’m telling you my opinion is you’re off on this. (Kid) is smart. They figures out my passwords. That’s how they get around it. They sometimes falls asleep playing a game or something. My point, life happens. You can get over it in your way and also figure out your own problems. You do not need a password to regulate your home. You need to stop blaming me for your lack in relationship to (kid) and stop putting your fears rational or not, on me. (Kid) will be leaving their phone here from now on. It is no longer your concern, as my computer, and the rest of my property and how they use any of it is. Thank you so much for your understanding. I wish you the best in your parenting, but if I were (kid) you’d be a weekend parent in a heart beat. When I hear from (kid), who heard from (friend), who heard from their parents. IMO you're like the Bear Grylls of wild goose hunting—if there were a survival show for chasing wild geese, you'd be the star, navigating through the wild with nothing but sheer determination and a honking good attitude.”
That’s about how well any dialogue I try to engage in goes. I just feel so stuck & at a loss. I just don’t think an 11-13 yo should have unlimited access to a phone. I hate knowing that they are spending whole days and hours into the morning on a phone that I literally can’t do a thing about, & apparently that makes me an asshole.

Embarrassingly enough this is actually the first time in a VERY long while that I have read and finished an entire book on my own. But I can say now that reading PHM was very fun and honestly may have reignited an interest in reading for me.
That being said I finished the book about a day ago and I’m kinda bored right now so here’s my review and some thoughts.
Things I liked: - I thought it was really cool how weir structured this story with the amnesia flashbacks. It was a very clever way of explaining what was going on, the totality of the situation, and gave the story a lot more depth. - Rocky was obviously awesome. I know this was probably the main thing Weir wanted to do but it really was cool to see how different the Eridians were from humans while also being intelligent and reasonable. Really interesting how their technology developed compared to humans. Like where they exceed in material science they lack in physics and computers, and vice versa with humans. But in the end neither of them could have finished the mission without the other. - As a character Grace was pretty fun too. It was interesting to see how he solved all these complicated problems while also handling the huge stakes. - Astrophage as a concept is really cool too. It’s not an eldritch godlike space monster - it’s just like a mindless parasite that grows into an infestation.
Things I didn’t like:

• I feel like there were a lot of moments where interesting plot developments were taking place and situations were pretty tense, but then in the middle of them Weir decides to make Grace explain some scientific thing that is only sometimes helpful or interesting. It’s not a massive problem but it definitely threw me off at least a few times.
• I feel like Yao and Ilyukhina didn’t really get as much development as they should’ve. Like there’s moments where Grace talks about how devastated he is that they died, but there’s not much in the flashbacks that really suggests that they were great friends. Obviously he respected them but I don’t recall any moments that fleshed out their relationships with one another.

And another thing is the ending. - The Taumoeba problem feels like it could’ve been easily avoided if they just waited a few days before leaving to make sure there weren’t any other problems. - I think a lot of wasted potential with the ending was the fact that Ryland never sees what happens back on Earth. We never truly know what was going on, and all we do know is that they somehow fixed the astrophage issue. I truly don’t see any reason Ryland would WANT to stay on Erid for the rest of his life. Like throughout the entire book he does everything to ensure that Earth survives, and uses it as his motivation for not giving up. Obviously he thinks of Erid too, but it’s not like Erid means more to him than Earth does? Like he’s never even been there? And if he didn’t like Earth then why would he use it as his motivation? Idek. - He says “rocky is my only friend, i didn’t have a social life” when it’s pretty obvious he kind of did have a social life, like he had multiple friends and colleagues. - I felt like the flashbacks were kind of building up to this potentially very interesting moment where, against all odds, Ryland returns and surprises everyone, and we get to see where all of the characters like Stratt, Dimitri, Redell, etc are in present day. Like I’m just thinking of how cool it would’ve been if Stratt, who called Ryland a coward, found out that he was the sole survivor of the mission and managed to do the impossible and return back to Earth when it was supposed to be a suicide mission. There's just a lot of things that could've been explored with that idea, but it gets replaced with Grace living on Erid (which sounds like a genuine hellscape for humans).
I guess that could’ve been a bit cliche, but that ending just makes more sense in my opinion. It would just tie up a lot of loose ends with those characters shown in the flashbacks.
that is all, may everyone reading this have a wonderful day.

Hello,

TL;DR section with actual questions below.

I am aware of rule 7, so that there should be no duplicates. This comparison was asked few times already, but most (not all) of the questions were clueless, since they only asked who should they pull, regardless of the character skills/roles.
I have single copy (epic) of both of them and I am not totally sure about who of them should I prioritize. I am aware of some of their strengths, but I got these characters just recently and still finding proper situations to use them.
I am aware, that they have different roles (although to some extent, they are both supports - Scarlita for first 15 seconds).
I also haven't yet reached Abyss.
If I miss something in my opinion, then please correct me. I might be overlooking a critical benefit of one of the characters.
...
(you can skip my summarization, though)

My opinion on Reinier

I am aware, that investment into Reinier will significantly help me with Dream Realm and he is totally awesome for offense in PvP (using Enlightening spell - you can drag out critical enemy without swapping your character and generally fight 5v4).
But while he might help you with a difficult specific stage or enemy, he feels very cumbersome, since the lineup is not always the same and he may actually not do anything, if you go on auto-battle mode. Not sure if he is even able to give the ally Legendary+ ATK boost, when no swap is triggered.
So as far as I am concerned, he is Dream Realm king (25% damage taken to boss + extra sustain for a specific character) and exceptionally strategic character for arena offense. Not to mention, that his utimate spell makes the fight eventually 5v3, which obviously is very bad situation for enemy.

My opinion on Scarlita

While Reinier seems not to be a good fit for auto-battling, Scarlita seems like a perfect choice.. since if any of your characters die early (tank especially) you are usually dead.. Scarlita prevents this by adding a shield to the allies, which need it the most. So she allows tank to survive longer, so tank may activate some of its skills to be capable surviving on his own. At S+, she also give these allies pretty decent defense.
So when Scarlita made sure, that the early fight went well and tank's survival is established, she then comes to battlefield to finish, what is left undone. Providing heavy crowd control and dealing true damage. She also executes enemies under 20% health (but up to 25%) - somewhat similar to Odie, if I am correct.
....................................................................................

TL;DR

Questions

...while Reinier is obviously powerful for offense in Arena with Enlightening spell..
Is there some viability to use Reinier in DEFENSE arena team? (how?) I am slightlly worried about it. Worst case scenario I can come up with would be, that he will teleport enemy S+ Grannie Dahnie to me. Which would cause HUGE problems, especially if enemy has Scarlita and Hewynn too.
Also even for offense with Reinier some enemies are already aware of this possibility, so they put tanks behind their DPS characters and Arena map 5 may limit quite a lot. My core damage unit is Supreme (without +) Carolina, so she should be able to deal with tanks (except Thoran and Grannie).
Does Reinier deal some damage at higher rarity, or is his damage laughable compared to carries like Carolina, Odie, Florabelle and Cecia?
How to protect myself from Reinier attacks in my Arena defense team?
As I already said, map 5 may provide some advantage, but I haven't tested that out, but I think I will figure it out eventually, how to place units, since I can always peek into enemy configuration and check, what he is capable and what he cannot do.
What happens if I will only use two columns in my arena defense and the last in these columns will be Damian and Scarlita?
Will Reinier just pull the toy chariot or the unit before Damian?
Will Reinier just fail to do his job at all, when doing his swap against Scarlita or he swaps the targer before her?
...
Concerning Scarlita for PvP, I have very little doubts about her consistency and efficiency. She seems to be an ideal pick for arena defense especially.
At most I wonder, how she compares to Koko in overall arena performance..?
...
I do not seem to have any further questions. But I might be missing some informations, so if you fill me in, I would be really glad.
As for the Abyss, I have not many informations, so I only expect it to be a very hard strategical challenge. Scarlita seems to be ranked better than Reinier for it and I am already building Grannie Dahnie (I am somehow not a big fan of Thoran even though I have him on wishlish, because he is a must for King Croaker and he amplifies team damage - maybe because so many people claim, that he is the best tank, but then I see so many AFK challenge proxy battle and their only invested tank Thoran simply cannot hold the line, where Antandra would have no problems).
So yes, basically I have last question.
Reinier will certainly help me getting more Dream Realm currency, but if Scarlita is stronger in Abyss.. does not she actually help me get more ex-weapon currency?

Thanks for reading and possible feedback!

Above is a general idea of how the system would work (let me know if you don’t understand my handwriting). I was thinking of also possibly having things like wandering monsters if players need to make camp, who are either actively searching or passively wandering for prey, which players can try to use survival to find out whether their spot is good for a camp ground. Does this system seem like it would be interesting to play and if anyone has down something similar please let me know any insight you have.
PS: please let me know if you have any fun encounters or obstacles for a first please let me know.

I am a F, 22, I own my own business, my mom and my boyfriend work for me and we work together with my brother who also has a business in the same branch. I cannot even begin to explain the burnout that I feel. I recently had a falling out with the company that I worked with for over 2 years, and since I am currently getting a degree in this profession I kind of depend on the companies that I work for, because they have a person that lends me their license. And it has been hell since the beginning of the year. I can barely make ends meet, I work day and night and I barely eat but I cannot say no to anything my mother or my boyfriend need. I'm ready to drop thousands on things they wanna have, because if I am not mentally able to be there for them at least I can help them out financially, right? I feel like I'm digging my own grave, and I don't dare tell anyone. Everyone has looked at me as a failure my whole life, I have no boundaries, I let people walk all over me and I do not know how to stand up for myself. It is eating me from the inside out. I've always been a polite person and I would rather cut off my own arm than tell someone no. I am so gullible and trusting and I dig myself deeper and deeper each and every day and nobody has any idea. Everyone is telling me I'm too soft, but I am deathly scared to offend someone or to step on other people's shoes. I know it stems from my childhood, I feel like my life is falling apart, yet I do not know where to go to first, what to fix first, what to hold onto... I am so lost, but I fear the look in my mother's eyes, I fear the disapproval, the fear that she will have for both of us, I fear that anger, cause why are you so unable to be cut throat in a situation that requires you to be that way? I am not cut out for this, I wanna give her the world, I want her to have everything, I want her to have a beautiful home, I want her to enjoy her life. Instead she has to worry if we'll have anything to eat by the end of the month. I don't want her to have a daughter that is a failure, a daughter that let's others dictate who she is... I am ashamed of myself. I am scared, I am constantly shaking and I feel like I am at my wits end... I have no one to turn to, I don't want to burden anyone. I was a poor little baby long enough, please help me, tell me, how do I survive in this world? How do I make the people that I love happy?

Link for all the chapters available here: Engines of Arachnea on Royal Road
“That’s strange,” Exar said a minute later, “I’m not picking up any of the satellite constellations. If it was just one of them knocked out, I’d put it down to a scheduled maintenance. But all of em? Fishy, that’s what it is.”
“I don’t understand,” Rene’s spirits plummeted at the news. He should have known it wouldn’t be so easy.
“Me neither, chief. But take it easy!” Exar assured him, “There’s an easy fix for that. Just hike me up someplace with better reception. Any place where we can get above all these damn trees is good.”
“I’m afraid that’s not exactly an option, noble Exar.”
Rene briefly summarized the situation, filling in the details whenever Exar interrupted him with a question, which was not often.
“Got it,” Exar said after listening attentively, “In short, you’ve got a tribe of devolved humanoids on your tail, also infected by the same parasitoids as our young miss over here. Comms are down, and our closest exfil point is at least thirty-nine klicks due southeast, where our friends, ‘the Fleet’, will be waiting for you.”
“How did you measure the distance so precisely?” Rene asked.
“The T.O.R.U. you were piloting is currently in power cycling mode, but it’s still sending out its mayday message for the repair crews. Judging by the fact that it ejected us via safety pod, the unit must’ve suffered potentially catastrophic damage to its subsystems. Not to worry, though. My inbuilt Geiger counter just gave the all-clear, so there was no meltdown in the reactor core.”
“The most pressing issue is that you have less than 72 hours’ worth of fungicidal doses left, and nothing with which to defend yourself but the monomachete from your kit. In addition, this young lady—”
“Zildiz,” Rene supplied him.
“My bad—Zildiz. I like it, very exotic. Zildiz belongs to a culture which behaves aggressively towards Exodus Industries development projects here on the ground. That everything?” Exar briskly concluded.
Rene nodded. Exar then immediately began outlining a plan of action. Their first priority was to gain altitude and establish communication with ‘Exodus Industries’, an entity which Rene assumed was the ancestor-gods’ equivalent to Fleet Command.
Exar would then signal for help using the spinning bowl (which it referred to as an ‘allcomm antenna’) and an interstellar shuttle would be sent to transport them to the one of the moons.
The moons! Rene was giddy at the prospect of becoming the first man to have returned to mankind’s celestial origin. He tried not to get his hopes too high, however, knowing life’s avowed fondness for ruining every dream a man ever had.
Failing that, Exar would use the high vantage point to triangulate their position using nearby geographic landmarks. Once they had their bearings, it would be a simple matter of hiking over to the nearest hardened base and knocking on the airlock doors.
“I must say, you’re taking all this bad news remarkably in stride, wise Exar,” he told the beeping sphere.
“Oh, puh-leeze! This ain’t my first rodeo, pardner. We E.X.A.R. units have dealt with far worse in our time.”
“Really? Worse than Arachnea?”
“Oh, is that what the kids are calling this place these days? Sure is catchier than 65 Syngman Bb, lemme tell ya. But yeah, this here is nuthin.”
Exar chuckled, a child amused by the backwardness of his senile grandparents.
“Alien plague strains from the thawed-out heart of an asteroid. Cosmophage armadas unleashed by rogue A.I. Not to mention all those privateer raids on the fringes of Pact space. We’ve dealt with them all, helped people survive through the worst the galaxy can throw at them. And with 95% success rate, too, if I may add,” Exar said somewhat immodestly, “Anywho, that’s enough of me jawing. Let’s go mobile, chief.”
“What, right now?”
“The mist’s our best shot, bo-sing. Natural concealment. No telling how long it’ll last.”
Before they left, Rene had Exar explain the functions of all the tools in the kit. The sphere confirmed what Rene had suspected: the slate fed on the radiance of the suns. Exar called it a ‘solar cell panel’. In turn, the pronged cords attached to the solar cell could transfer energy to artefact he wanted to use.
He connected the panel to the mysterious gauntlet with the underslung pipe, which Exar informed him was a ‘laser designator’, a tool meant for guiding in airdropped supplies or flying machines.
“It also doubles as a heat source. Just up the wattage on that sucker with the slide wheel on the edge of the hand. See it?”
Rene put on the gauntlet and activated it by means of a green switch under the thumb. A tight needle of red light shone from the tube, and Rene understood that it was basically like the electrochemical torches that miners used. When he adjusted the slide wheel the needle of light narrowed and grew brighter. Where it touched the granite walls of the burrow there, sour-smelling wisps of smoke rose.
Hot enough to scorch stone? He would have to be careful where he pointed this.
“Go easy on it, though,” Exar advised him, “That kinda power output will drain the juice in a jiffy.”
“The juice?” Rene repeated stupidly.
Exar made it clear to him that the artefacts could store ‘the juice’ from the panel. Moreover, the panel could be mounted on the front or the back of the jumpsuit by means of the same backpack rigging that held the breathing apparatus, allowing the user to collect the juice and charge up to two devices (Exar included) even while on the move. Even the bulky survival kit could be could be fastened to his loadout with a set of clasps at the bottom of the pack which Rene hadn’t noticed.
“As for me, I can hitch a ride on your backpack as well,” Exar told him brightly. And indeed, there was a spherical indentation above the breathing apparatus where Exar could fasten himself in with his stubby spike legs.
Rene whistled appreciatively at the compact nature of the jumpsuit’s design; the entire survival kit was so cleverly put together, a testament to the ancestor-gods’ practical mindset.
He secured his gear, choosing to split the juices between Exar and the gauntlet, and got ready to leave. Rene crouched at the hatch of the burrow like a man in a trench waiting for the shrill whistle that would propel him up and over into the desolate no-man’s land.
Then he noticed Zildiz still huddled in place, not even daring to look at him or the talking sphere. Rene had originally been grateful that Exar’s appearance had shut her up, but this state of catatonic shock of hers worried him.
“Coming?” he asked her.
“I’m not going anywhere with that…that thing!” she stated categorically.
“Was it something I said?” Exar sounded hurt.
“The simulacrum said it would cut me out of my exomorph. That would kill me, Fleet-man.”
“Madame, I got no intention of hurting you!” Exar protested, “But the fact is, you’re sick. The parasite’s attached to so many of the organs in your body, that I fear that it’s totally coopted their functions. Our people have the technology to reverse all that.”
“I will not heed the promises of a slaved intelligence!” she snapped.
Their argument was interrupted by a chorus of hair-raising screams from the jungle beyond. Even in those guttural, inhuman voices there was no mistaking the notes of grief and rage.
“They’ve found Kryptus,” Rene surmised, “Just like you said they would.”
“I take it the natives are restless,” Exar tittered nervously, “Tailo, methinks we gotta go.”
Rene saw Zildiz hesitate, weighing the balance of her fears and forming an internal consensus. He made a move to tip the scales in his favor, and spoke to her from the heart:
“Zildiz. I swear to you that as long as it is within my power to protect you, I will not allow you to come to harm. You are a prisoner of penultimate importance to the Fleet. I’d sooner die than fail in my mission to get you back to civilization. If you doubt my intentions, consider the fact that nobody in their right minds would’ve tried so hard to keep you alive, not unless they have very good reasons to do so.”
“I am not like the Leapers or your people, the Gallivants. I am a soldier of the Fleet, and my priority is the continuation of my species—our species,” he added firmly, “Now, I can’t begin to imagine what horrors and depravities your kind have suffered these past few centuries, or what the Vitalus has taught you to believe. But in my mind, we are all one people under the same god. If that god is the Vitalus, then it is clear that he hates us. Why else would he, in all his supposed omnipotence, condemn us to live in this unending state of warfare and ignorance? Why does he forbid the full use of the human intellect, the sole source of our comfort and security in an uncaring universe? Why must he despise us so?”
“I don’t know the answers to those questions. But I do know this: I do not hate you, Zildiz of the Gallivants. In fact, I would very much like to help you. Will you let me do that?”
Rene stood up and lifted the hatch, turning to offer her a hand.
“Besides! If you come with me, we can go ask the gods in person.”
This is certainly new, Zildiz thought, unsure of what to make of Rene’s offer. His suggestion of a pan-kindred alliance bound together by their shared ancestry was ridiculous, of course. She knew enough of the mathematical models and the general principles of nature to know that such an undertaking was doomed by definition. And yet here was an opportunity unlike any other.
Rene meant to take her to one of the last remaining holdfasts of the Betrayers. Who would have thought that those ancient demons were still clinging on to life, lurking in some nameless abyss, waiting for their chance to wreak one final act of vengeance upon an unsuspecting Arachnea.
And here she was, uniquely placed to destroy them all in one fell stroke. Once she was nestled in that abode of evil, a single transmission from her magnetosynaptic organ to the Vitalus was all it would take to bring Its righteous fury down upon them.
The rewards would be immense. At the very least they would make her a Matriarch. Her gilt helix would live on forever in the generations to come, her legacy enshrined in the undying architecture of the genome. Her children would never go hungry or cold for the rest of their lives. She and her brood could have their pick of exomorph grafts.
Infrared eyes for night stalking, hypo thorax stabilizer tendons for prolonged flight, extra waste ducts, subdermal heat signature regulators, biochemical afterburners to add thrust, not to mention a whole slew of offensive weaponry—nothing would be off the table!
All she had to do was take Rene’s hand.
She did. The Fleet-man lifted her up out of the burrow, trying not to look too surprised at her acceptance.
A very naïve race, she decided. He caught her calculating gaze and must have mistaken it for the beginnings of friendship, for he said:
“Glad to have you aboard, Zildiz. Now let’s get the hell out of here.”
Link for all the chapters available here: Engines of Arachnea on Royal Road

I was considering going no-contact with my family minus a brother I’m close to 3 years ago and was almost out until my father died in a freak accident and I got roped back in. My sister has spent the last 30 years making my life a living hell and my parents never stuck up for me or protected me from her. My mother, now alone, is terrified of her. We had a shitty childhood and all have different survival tactics, but after going to therapy for four years now, I’ve gotten away from those and surround myself with happy, healthy, amazing, supportive people. In regard to family, I keep my distance when I can (living 3.5 hours away helps), but often am the one everyone turns to when shit goes sideways to fix everything, calm people down, figure out what to do next. I’m tired of it, especially now realizing no one does the same for me.
I recently got married and had a 40 person head count, with 38 yeses. After a bunch of random crap, 13 of my 20 invitees flaked 3 days to 2 hours before the party, all of which were very, very close family members including a brother and two of my BILs. Had I known this, with ample timing, I would have invited more friends who WOULD have shown, but due to family taking up so much of the headcount, I couldn’t extend invites to them all. I vented to my mother who said at least I have my sister coming, who I said was only invited since the others were and she has never been nice to me or my husband - which my mother agreed with and said was a self-centered survival thing. I said she should learn a little kindness which would get her far. She despises my husband, who is genuinely as nice as can be, even to a fault. Doesn’t have a bad bone in his body, god bless him. But he supports me and loves me and we do well off each other and thrive, which she doesn’t like. Other siblings have commented on the fact she treats him so poorly when he is nothing but so kind to her.
Come party, 2 hours in and she’s nowhere to be seen. We’re waiting around to cut cakes since her household consisted of 5 people and we didn’t want to have people randomly walk in on it and ruin the photographs, miss the momentous moment, etc. My brother gets in touch with her and relays the message that I’m a monster, I’m childish and horrible and never welcome her to anything and I’m irrelevant and no one likes me which is why everyone bailed on me and I should be embarrassed. The only person I said those things to was my mother (who couldn’t come to party due to health reasons). I spent a majority of my wedding party crying on a fire escape because I was so upset by her words, so upset that everyone bailed, and so upset I didn’t follow my gut inviting other friends who would have come over obligatory family invites. I blocked my sister and her friend who joined in on her meanness. She has taken to emailing and texting me under spoof emails and phone numbers. Calling me irrelevant, embarrassing, disgusting, ugly, childish, greedy, no one showed up because they don’t like me, never been liked, etc.
My mother has spoken to her, but hasn’t reached out to me since the party when I said I was hurt at what she shared in confidence and need to think about what I want from this family anymore. My mother swears she went through her phone and saw the messages, but other parts of her (mothers) story don’t align. My mother historically has victim mindset over everything and could do no wrong. I try to do nothing but support my mother but she can never ever see how she’s in the wrong - ever. For example, she put her electric bill under my name and SS and defaulted on it for years. When I called her out on it after the company started reaching out to me, she said it’s always been like this, I didn’t say anything years ago so what’s the difference now, she’s doing no wrong and if I want her to go without electric and ruin the family then by all means go ahead and shut it off if I want.
I’m hurt, I’m upset. My husband has been amazing, but he doesn’t have any family that we could lean on ever. I’m torn between going fully no contact between my siblings who enable my sister, my mother who is emotionally abusive and enables her and doesn’t protect the rest of us, and calling it a day. Or going no contact with siblings, low contact with my mother, and never returning until they get their shit together and go to therapy. I just don’t know what is best anymore since I know my mom will never stand up to her. Family is all I’ve ever really had outside a close knit group of 3 friends, so it’s hard to go from everything to nothing in the blink of an eye.
Ever since my dad died and my sister took over, I have felt like I don’t have a spot in the family anymore. My sisters best friend of 15 years has always wanted to be apart of our big family since she had a dysfunctional one herself, and joins us on family vacations, Christmas, every waking moment. She is just as bad as my sister, and my sister is her only friend so she bows down to her. Since dad died, it’s like my sister and her friend don’t want me in the family and want to give the bff my daughter spot and to ostracize me. All of this is making me spiral and spiral and spiral. I haven’t been this bad mentally in a really, REALLY long time and it’s triggering me a lot.
I feel like as a woman, I’m held to a different caliber than the others. My brothers could do whatever they damn well please, and they do, and everyone turns a blind eye. With my sister being the oldest, she gets the same treatment. I am overwhelmed with what this family puts me through. My husband doesn’t have any family anymore for us to lean on, spend holidays with, etc. How do you move on? How do you find peace? How do you be okay with the fact nothing will ever change in this dynamic so it’s all or nothing?
FWIW - have an amazing therapist, amazing support group. Am ok, just sad and upset.

I always make somebody else (family, friends, etc.) do the talking for me whether it's in person or by phone.
I try my best to avoid interacting with people and stay inside my house most of the time.
But the older I get, the more pressure I feel to do the talking myself.
Another problem is that, I have trouble being polite, so a lot of the time I come off as quite rude. I have even been told off by people for being this way (once by phone and once by email).
This makes me just not want to talk to anyone.
It also doesn't help that I live in a non-English speaking country and despite having lived here for more than 10 years, I still cannot speak the local language(s).
I hate that we live in a world where we have to talk to people to survive.
I would much rather just stay home for the rest of my life and avoid as much interaction as possible.
Not sure how I'm going to get a job like this.
How do you guys deal with situations where you need to socialize? Do you have somebody who does the socializing for you, do you avoid them completely, or do you just grit your teeth and suffer through them?
Also, if you guys have a job, how did you get one? How did you pass the interviews?
Any comment will be greatly appreciated :)

I have been with my husband for almost 7 years, married for 3. We have 2 young toddlers (we chose the 2 under 2 life), and this definitely plays a huge role in our situation. I love him so much, he's so kind and genuine, but we have a lot going on and it's honestly overwhelming.
TLDR: I feel extremely unfulfilled in my marriage and am worried we are better off divorced. We have no sexual chemistry, no intimacy or passion, I basically have to mother him into doing anything around the house and have to hold his hand when he has hard conversations with his parents. He's a great dad to our kids, but he isn't a great husband to me and I'm worried we're headed to a divorce.
Before we got married, we had so much fun together. We went on so many dates and were always out and about doing something fun and exciting. We were very much attracted to each other, but the sex was never that great. I was very experienced and had a lot of sexual partners in my college years, and he could probably count his on one hand. I always thought it was a work in progress and was willing to continue on with him because I cared for him in so many other ways than just being sexually compatible that I found it refreshing. I had never been with anyone where I didn't care about how our sex was because they were so great as a person.
It didn't take long for me to notice he never went down on me. He did it once and his eyes were so red and I was so embarrassed but moved on. The second time, same thing! And yes, I care a ton about my hygiene so I know it's not that. I confronted him about it and he told me he just didn't know how to do it really and isn't good at it and told me he would do some research (which he never did). One day we were talking oral sex and how I loved going down on him but didn't think he did to me, and that I wanted him to WANT to do it and that I want him to learn to love my downstairs. He said "well I don't have to LOVE it", and I sincerely feel like that was foreshadowing into our entire relationship because those were the only 2 times he has ever done it.
Our sex life is pretty lame. We probably had sex once a month before getting married, and now it's basically 2-3 times a year it seems like. I've always been unfulfilled with how often this happens and doing it this infrequent makes it really hard to get in the groove. So each time we do have sex, it's pretty rocky and awkward, and while I usually am pretty confident in the bedroom I am absolutely self conscious and worried about how he liked it or how it went for him. I know we lack that passion and sexual chemistry, and this has always bothered me, but I always thought we could create that as time went on (still thinking the inexperience played a factor here).
Right before we get married we move in with his parents for several months while our house was being build which ended up being the worst decision. I discovered how much my MIL gossips, how opinionated my MIL and FIL were and it created a lot of issues with my husband and I. I'd hear my MIL talking badly about other family members or saying something really strange to me and would bring it up to him and he always gave her the benefit of the doubt saying she means well, or that he knows she'd never mean something in a certain way, etc. We ended up having major trust issues with them and needing to take lots of breaks from them when we got pregnant with our first (and had moved into our house), which lead to even more trust issues when our first was born. They were extremely defensive with each and every boundary/ask/rule/etc regarding our LO we'd bring up and there was always something negative with every interaction I would have with them. It was so exhausting, and my husband would always give them the benefit of the doubt. It really weighed on me as time went on and this continued. I realized that his gut reaction was always to prioritize his parents comfort over mine, whether that meant talking to them in a certain way so they wouldn't have a reaction, not say anything at all, or contort what they were saying in order to make it seem less bad. This went on through my second pregnancy as well.
I basically had to teach him how to have boundaries with his parents. We would have so many damn conversations about it and it was a lot of hand holding which I was understanding with. It was a lengthy process and we're getting to a better point with that aspect, as in, he can kind of hold his own and stand up for our family, but the amount of resentment I have towards him for feeling so isolated all the time over the years is crazy.
In addition to this, I basically mother him at home and I hate it. He can't do anything without being told! He doesn't help out around the house unless I make him or ask him 100 times, he does 0 deep cleaning or projects. I feel like the man of the house. It has gotten to the point where I have to clean the entire house every single day, and before doing so I get so mad at him for his lack of assistance with it when he's at home. I am a SAHM now and recognize this as my "job" while he is at work, and then we share responsibilities when he gets home - or at least we agree that this is how it should be.
Back to our relationship and lack of intimacy; I know that after having kids things can really take a turn for the worse but I am really struggling to see the light at the end of the tunnel and am worried that HE married the wrong woman. I've always understood men to do anything for someone they like/love and I just don't feel it from him. He doesn't compliment me ever, he doesn't take any pictures of me which hurts considering I have 500,000 of him and the kids on my phone. When I confront him about basically nagging him and his lack of initiation or effort for literally any type of intimacy, it's always that he doesn't know why he's like that and that he wants to change and that he promises he'll make more efforts but never does. It's like he manipulates me by saying he wants to change and he wants the same things I do, but then does nothing. Just like how he did absolutely no research on oral sex/sex in general before getting married.
Now that I'm 1 year postpartum with my second and finally starting to feel more like myself and look like myself, he's still the same. It's making me feel like things will never change and I'm starting to wonder if I'll be able to survive in a basically sexless/loveless marriage in which I have to continue mothering my husband. I just feel like a bunch of nothing in this relationship. I don't feel beautiful, I don't feel respected, and i think I might feel contempt towards him.
He is very understanding when we talk about everything and empathetic and wanting to change (manipulative is how it feels though because of the amount of empty promises), and I'm worried. He doesn't want a divorce, but that has been on the table for the last few months and still no change from him. Do I continue down this path of hoping he will finally change this time or move on? Ultimately, a happy mother is the best thing I can give my kids so divorce isn't off the table in that regard, but it's such a hard decision.
Our relationship has been so complex so it's been kind of hard to sum it all up, but I'm hoping for some advice on whether we can save this marriage. That would be extremely appreciate! Or even similar stories would be helpful! He has been reluctant to go to couples therapy with me or even himself until now, but I worry it's too late at this point.

A week ago, a family friend sent us a link to a facebook group. The host is a mom of 2 kids (and has a working husband) who sells things like earrings, bracelets, hair accessories, bags, key rings etc on a live stream.
Here are some of the prices: £1.50 for a pair of socks £1.50 for a pair of earrings £3.50 for a furry unicorn pen £0.40 for a hair bobble £1.50 for a necklace £3.50 for a bag £0.75 for a hair clip £1.50 for a spoon with text on it (this is only a small list of the things she sells)
We (mom and me) bought some things and were satisfied until one day my mom gets an ad for an item she bought from the host’s live.
We then download the app that the ad was on, and see a ‘lightning sale’ area and lo and behold all the stuff that she has been selling in the live is there, but significantly cheaper.
These are the prices on the app: £0.94 for 5x pairs of socks £0.17 for a pair of earrings £1.17 for a furry unicorn pen £0.57 for 50x hair bobbles £0.27 for a necklace £1.37 for a bag £0.50 for a pack of 5 hair clips £0.79 for a spoon.
These prices aren’t too different but when you buy in bulk some of the stuff that she sells, it quickly adds up.
In the group there is a woman we’ll call ‘C’. ‘C’ is a BIG contributor to the group and spends £150 at a time on orders. The most recent order makes me feel very bad for her. She bought 115x pairs of socks for £86 from the host. We found the pairs of socks she bought on the ‘lightning sales’ section and they’re there for £0.56 to £0.76 for a pack of 5…
I don’t think ‘C’ knows that she’s being absolutely ripped off. She’s very happy with how “cheap” everything that the host sells is.
The host could easily sell the items for cheaper and still make good profit too. Instead she buys items and then sells them for around 5-8x what she bought them for.
I feel so bad for ‘C’. She’s spent so much money on things she could’ve gotten sooo much cheaper..
The worst thing is that in the lives, the host says things like: “wow this is such a good deal” or “ooh i might keep these for myself” and “more socks for you ‘C’!” She’s also made posts about how she’s been able to afford carpets, sheds and other nice and expensive things out of the money she’s made from the group.
WIBTA for letting ‘C’ know that she could be saving so much money by buying straight from the source?
The only problem i have is that if i let ‘C’ know, the group would probably grind to a halt which would mean no income for the host and her kids from the group. As well as the fact that the host knows our family friend and it might “rock the boat”.
I’m all for people earning money, but i feel like the host is taking advantage of the fact that we don’t know about the app she buys her stock from…
Thanks for reading if you made it this far and any advice would be greatly appreciated!
EDIT: Bit of context i forgot to add is that the family friend who told us about was under the impression that the host buys the stuff from amazon mystery boxes. The items being sold look like stuff from local stores (which sell said items for 2x as much) so it looked like a good deal until we realised it was from another place that sells them for 1/8th of the price she sells them from.
I realise that a business needs profit but we’re under the impression that she’s doing this for us and that she’s giving us such good bargains, but in fact we wouldn’t need her. It would be a different story if she was making 2-3x profit but 5-8x can DEFINITELY add up. Considering ‘C’ paid £150 for something that cost £20…

Welcome to Reading The Big Book of Cyberpunk!
Each week we (u/FarragutCircle and u/fanny_bertram) will be reading 5-ish stories from Jared Shurin’s The Big Book of Cyberpunk, which includes a curated selection of cyberpunk stories written from 1950 to 2022! We’ll include synopses of the stories along with links to any legally available online versions we can find. Feel free to read along with us or just stop by and hear our thoughts about some cyberpunk stories to decide if any of them sound interesting to you.
Every once in a while, we reach out to people who have more insight, due to being fans of the author or have some additional context for the story. (Or we just tricked them into it.) So please welcome u/RuinEleint who will be sharing their thoughts on "The Yuletide Cyberpunk Yarn, or Christmas_Eve-117.DIR" by Victor Pelevin!
“Deep Eddy” by Bruce Sterling (published 1993; also available in his collection Ascendancies: The Best of Bruce Sterling)
Deep Eddy is acting as a data courier to the Cultural Critic in Düsseldorf, right as the city goes through a Wende (a sort of anarchist “Purge”).

• Farragut’s thoughts: We’ve read Sterling before in Science Fiction. Eddy is a misguided libertarian creep who won’t stop hitting on his German bodyguard and is too dumb to understand the philosophical points that the Cultural Critic is making (for that matter, I’m too dumb to understand, too). He survives his time in Germany, but has learned nothing of value for his punk attitude. What’s the point of rebelling if you don’t understand why? The naivete and creepiness were a little too much for me.
  
• fanny’s thoughts: This did not work for me. Eddy is creepy and annoying. He keeps hitting on the bodyguard and she makes it VERY clear she is only there in a professional context. Eddy also seems to generally not have any clue what he is doing. He is libertarian and against something but no one seems to know what. He doesn't even seem to know what he delivered to the Cultural Critic.
  

“The Yuletide Cyberpunk Yarn, or Christmas_Eve-117.DIR” by Victor Pelevin (1996, translated from Russian by Alex Shvartsman)
A corrupt mayor’s computer is infected by a virus that causes chaos in Russia.

• Special Guest Ruin: This was a fascinating story to read. The way the narrative segued from a discussion on poetry to a darkly comedic look at a Russian city was remarkable. The author seems to like to start or lead with a theme or themes which seem to be only tangentially related to each other such as for example the name of the computer virus, or Gerasimov and his dog. But both elements circle back into the story and are crucial to its structure. As for the content of the story itself, I amused myself by imagining the events as being a movie that blended the stylistic elements of Tarantino and Wes Anderson. So we have brutal, bloody violence in increasingly absurd settings and the way it is all described makes it easy to imagine it all taking place amidst the highly stylized sets and characters we would expect in a Wes Anderson movie. Overall, I really enjoyed this story.
  
• Farragut: We’ve read Pelevin before in Modern Fantasy. First of all, this is a fantastic title for a story, period. Second of all, I just enjoyed Pelevin’s style here (via Shvartsman’s translation), with an omniscient narrator telling us about a completely ridiculous situation. It gets a little cagey with the identity of the perpetrator and the ending, but I’m very curious as to how darkly I should read it (now that I think about it, it’s directly connected to the original, so I should read it very darkly indeed). Shvartsman’s occasional footnotes were very helpful, however, especially with the context surrounding Gerasim(ov) and Mumu.
  
• fanny: Ruin's review is so good, I am not sure what to add. The style of this story fit the elements so well. It starts with a poem whose themes carry through the story. The footnotes were a really great addition and helped contextualize. The narrator keeps upping the ridiculousness until we get to the end and everything gets wrapped up.
  

“Wonderama” by Bef (1998, translated from Spanish by the author)
Lalo (or is it Eduardo?) wakes up every day in the most awesome life in 1974, but it’s revealed to be a lie and ends tragically.

• Farragut: Bef is a Mexican SF writer, a crime writer, and a graphic novelist, and honestly his whole bibliography sounds cool as heck. Told in a series of diary entries with some small interruptions, we follow a kid whose life is like a Mexican kid’s sugar-fueled dream. The reason for its inclusion in this thematic section of the anthology becomes clear however, and I yelled, “Noooo!” at the ending. Sigh. It’s very good!
  
• fanny: I am a sucker for diary entry style stories and this was no exception. Lalo’s life seems almost perfect, but it feels so off. The story feels progressively more off until we start to question everything. Also, yelled “Nooo!” at the ending. Very good. Absolutely loved.
  

“comp.basilisk FAQ” by David Langford (1999) (link to story)
A FAQ-style story that clearly describes a bizarre future where images on the web and TV are banned due to the risk of death.

• Farragut: Langford is famous for having the most Hugo wins (29), mostly for the Fan Writer category, but also Short Story (not this one) and Best Related Work (not this one either). This is a delightful story that made me think of it as a precursor to qntm’s later story “Lena” from Week 5 (though obviously only in general form). Apparently I love the faux-nonfiction style where some of the horror and plot is between the lines. The final FAQ about Microsoft was darkly funny.
  
• fanny: This was fun and very short. The FAQs related to basilisk and writing were great. It goes between funny, dark humor, and just dark. I liked the commentary on technology and software. I also really appreciate the standard response answers explaining they should post someone else. This is something I deal with often and this was great.
  

“Spider's Nest” by Myra Çakan (2004, translated from German by Jim Young; also available in the anthology The Apex Book of World SF 3 edited by Lavie Tidhar)
Spider, uh, does something? Is looking for drugs, maybe? But something else happens instead?

• Farragut: Çakan is a German writer from Hamburg, and after reading this story, I’d say Shurin made hamburger out of me, too. The main thing I got out of this story was that Spider really wanted something, maybe. I thought it was drugs, but he got angry at his dealer and then got super weird with his friend’s girlfriend? And then there was a Silver Spider, who wasn’t him, but maybe he plugged himself in to replace her? What is happening?
  
• fanny: Spider definitely wanted drugs from his dealer, Ant. I think. Ant got annoyed at something then Spider got into a voyeur situation (maybe). There is a Silver Spider in his dreams that makes him feel better. I couldn't tell if this was dream or drug induced or technology induced. The end is super weird and makes even less sense than the story. Spider might have done a murder on himself? I have been confused before in this anthology, but not to this level.
  

That’s it for this week! Check back the same time next week where we’ll be reading and discussing "The Last American" by John Kessel, "Earth Hour" by Ken MacLeod, "Violation of the TrueNet Security Act" by Taiyo Fujii, "Twelve Minutes to Vinh Quang" by T. R. Napper, and "Operation Daniel" by Khalid Kaki.
Also posted on Bochord Online.

https://preview.redd.it/d6seuio01s1d1.jpg?width=780&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ce2ca4248e68ce5a3c6cfe7d9c18b120c503cc1
Amazon Web Services (AWS) stand as a formidable giant in the dynamic landscape of cloud computing, where agility and scalability are supreme. Organizations worldwide have embraced AWS to power their digital infrastructure, leveraging its vast array of services to drive innovation, enhance customer experiences, and accelerate growth. However, amidst this technological marvel lies a critical challenge- cost management.
As businesses scale up their AWS usage, the associated expenses can spiral out of control, impacting profitability and hindering strategic initiatives. Let’s explore some insights on AWS cost optimization and how to transform your cloud expenditure into a strategic advantage. Whether you’re a startup, a mid-sized enterprise, or a global corporation, these insights will empower you to make informed decisions, streamline operations, and propel your business forward.

AWS cost optimization: Top tips and best practices to reduce your bill
Optimize your AWS cloud investments with cost optimization services & tools. Learn AWS cost optimization best practices & tools to reduce costs, improve performance & avoid unexpected bills.
Read More

​

Here are some key cloud statistics:

• According to the Flexera State of the Cloud report, 82% of 750 cloud decision makers consider managing cloud spend as their primary challenge, ranking security second at 79% and lack of resources/expertise third at 78%.
• Migrating your business to the public cloud can lead to a reduction in total cost of ownership (TCO) of up to 40%, according to Accenture.

Moreover, organizations adopting AWS report significant advantages:

• 27.4% reduction in cost per user
• 67.7% increase in terabytes managed per administrator
• 56.7% decrease in application downtime
• 37.1% reduction in time-to-market for new products and services

5 Common mistakes that increase cloud bill and how to avoid them

1. Unmonitored AWS Instances

Failure to monitor unused AWS instances can lead to unnecessary costs in cloud infrastructure. Neglecting to track idle, aging, or inactive AWS instances results in poor resource utilization, known as cloud sprawl. Organizations face inflated AWS bills due to uncontrolled instances from development testing or shadow IT projects.
How to tackle: To tackle this, a Cloud Center of Excellence (CCoE) can manually track AWS instances or use automated cloud management software, such as AWS Config or AWS Trusted Advisor, to identify and decommission unused instances regularly, optimizing resource utilization and reducing unnecessary expenses.

2. Lack of instance size management

The challenge of improper instance sizing in cloud computing disrupts budgets and performance. Over-provisioning wastes resources and costs, while under-provisioning leads to performance issues. Efficient instance size management involves analyzing workloads, automated scaling, and continuous optimization to align resources with actual needs, ensuring cost-effectiveness and optimal performance.
How to tackle: To tackle instance size management challenges, IT teams or CCoEs customize AWS instance configurations, implement scheduling using AWS Auto Scaling, monitor performance metrics with Amazon CloudWatch for continuous optimization, and leverage AWS offerings like AWS Reserved Instances for cost-effective scaling and predictable billing.

3. Failure to implement a multi-cloud strategy

Failing to implement a multi-cloud strategy means missing out on opportunities to optimize costs, performance, and resilience across various cloud platforms. It limits the ability to compare services and pricing models from different providers like AWS, Azure, and GCP. Without a multi-cloud approach, organizations may face vendor lock-in, higher costs, and reduced flexibility in adapting to changing business needs.
How to tackle: To address the challenge of not implementing a multi-cloud strategy, organizations should prioritize evaluating services and pricing from various providers. Embracing a multi-cloud approach allows for cost optimization, improved performance, and reduced dependency on a single vendor, ensuring flexibility and resilience in cloud deployments.

Suggested: Cloud migration guide: Your strategic path to AWS migration

4. Neglecting orphaned snapshots

Neglecting orphaned snapshots, which are created when instances are terminated without properly managing associated volumes and snapshots, can lead to unnecessary charges in cloud environments. These orphaned volumes and snapshots continue to incur costs even though they are no longer actively used, contributing to wasteful spending and inflated bills. It’s crucial to regularly review and clean up orphaned resources to avoid unnecessary charges and optimize cost management in cloud infrastructures.
How to tackle: To tackle the issue of neglecting orphaned snapshots, implementing backup strategies is crucial. This includes taking snapshots before deleting volumes, which reduces costs by billing only for snapshots at lower rates rather than full volume charges. Additionally, it’s essential to monitor orphaned snapshots regularly and manage them efficiently to avoid unexpected cost surges. This proactive approach, coupled with leveraging AWS services like Amazon EBS Snapshot Lifecycle Manager, ensures optimal cost management and prevents unnecessary expenses in cloud environments.

5. Lack of automation

Not embracing automation for tracking cloud resources hinders efficiency, especially at scale. Manual methods are time-consuming, prone to errors, and often lack real-time insights. Automation streamlines resource management by automatically monitoring, provisioning, and optimizing cloud assets. It reduces human intervention, ensures accuracy, and enables quicker responses to changing workload demands, leading to improved operational efficiency and cost-effectiveness in cloud environments.
How to tackle: Tackling the issue of not embracing automation involves leveraging automated tools and workflows to streamline processes and improve efficiency in cloud operations. Automation enforces best practices, maintains consistent performance standards, and reduces the burden on operations teams by handling repetitive tasks and ensuring accuracy. This enables teams to focus on critical aspects of cloud management, such as optimizing costs, enhancing security, and supporting business innovation, with the assistance of AWS services like AWS Lambda and AWS CloudFormation.
​
https://preview.redd.it/thidd7171s1d1.jpg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=973477644943c87ea1476d780dfb8742da69f08c

Explore the best strategies to migrate to the AWS cloud

The cloud serves as a tool, not a destination. For insights on leveraging AWS services and cloud migration strategies, explore the whitepaper on migrating to AWS cloud.
Download

The strategic benefits of AWS cost optimization

It is imperative for modern organizations to leverage, cost optimization in AWS since it isn’t merely a tactical exercise – it’s a strategic imperative. As businesses harness the power of Amazon Web Services to drive innovation, enhance customer experiences, and scale their operations, understanding the profound impact of cost optimization becomes paramount.

Let’s delve into the benefits of cost optimization that resonate across organizations, from startups to multinational corporations:

1. Enhanced profitability
At its core, cost optimization is about maximizing value. By meticulously managing AWS expenses, organizations free up capital that can be reinvested strategically. Whether it’s funding R&D initiatives, expanding market reach, or fortifying the balance sheet, every dollar saved contributes to the bottom line. In a competitive business landscape, profitability isn’t a luxury – it’s survival.
2. Agility and scalability
Cost-optimized architectures are inherently agile. They allow businesses to scale up or down seamlessly based on demand fluctuations. Whether it’s handling a sudden surge in user traffic or accommodating seasonal spikes, optimized AWS resources ensure operational flexibility. Agility isn’t just about speed; it’s about adaptability – the ability to pivot swiftly in response to market dynamics.
3. Strategic resource allocation
Cost optimization forces organizations to scrutinize their resource allocation. It prompts questions like: Which workloads are mission-critical? Where can we consolidate? What’s the optimal mix of reserved instances and on-demand capacity? By aligning resources with business priorities, organizations optimize performance, reduce waste, and drive efficiency.
4. Competitive edge
In a digital economy, time-to-market is a critical differentiator. Cost-optimized AWS environments expedite development cycles. Whether it’s launching a new product, rolling out features, or responding to market shifts, streamlined costs translate to faster execution. Organizations that move swiftly gain a competitive edge – edge that can make or break success.
5. Sustainability and corporate responsibility
Cost optimization isn’t just about financial gains; it’s about responsible stewardship. By minimizing resource consumption, organizations contribute to environmental sustainability. Efficiently managed AWS workloads reduce energy consumption, carbon footprint, and e-waste. In an era where conscious consumers and investors prioritize eco-friendly practices, cost optimization aligns with corporate social responsibility.
6. Empowering innovation
Lastly, cost optimization liberates resources for innovation. It fuels experimentation, encourages risk-taking, and fosters a culture of continuous improvement. When teams aren’t bogged down by unnecessary costs, they can focus on ideation, prototyping, and disruptive solutions. Innovation isn’t a luxury – it’s the lifeblood of progress.

AWS cost optimization best practices

• Use the right-sized resources
• Use Spot Instances
• Use Reserved Instances (RIs) and Savings Plans
• Use Auto Scaling
• Use AWS cost management tools

How Softweb Solutions can help organizations with AWS consulting services

Softweb Solutions specializes in crafting personalized AWS cost optimization strategies tailored to your business needs. Our expert team analyzes your AWS environment, identifies cost-saving opportunities, and implements efficient resource management practices, ensuring maximum ROI and performance optimization for your cloud infrastructure.

Ready to optimize your AWS costs? Reach out for personalized cost optimization assistance today!

Talk To Our AWS Experts

Navigating the cloud cost horizon

Optimizing cloud costs is crucial, especially with AWS dominance. This blog highlighted common mistakes and provided solutions like addressing unused instances, improper sizing, and lack of automation. The strategic benefits include enhanced profitability, agility, competitive edge, and innovation empowerment. By following best practices like using right-sized resources and AWS tools, organizations can drive long-term success.
So, let’s reduce AWS costs and optimize not just for today, but for the tomorrows we envision. Together, we’ll sculpt a future where innovation thrives, sustainability blooms, and your business yields exponential returns.
Originally published at softwebsolutions.com on April 12, 2024.

“Will you look at that,” Captain Yontan marveled from the observation deck. They had arrived in the Solar System at long last, the old bastion of knowledge mankind had abandoned many millennia ago.
“Such a basic tech, yet so beautiful, so… poetic,” Lezlybe uttered, gazing at the constant flux of Sunfire Conduit pulled from the sun to one, two, three relays, and finally to the surface of Pluto, where its energy was being harnessed inside a crater. “And you’re certain that’s where the Ultimate Knowledge is stored?”
“Yes,” Yontan nodded. “Every clue leads to Pluto. Can you imagine? The Ultimate Knowledge, lost for millennia, on this planet out of all places.”
“Ready to descend at your command, captain,” announced Ghenna.
Yontan turned to his crew and smiled. It was the first time they had seen him do that in months. “Hover around the south-south-eastern quadrant of the crater. That’s where the entrance is supposed to be.”
“Yes, Sir!”
Lezlybe’s turned to face the captain, her long black hair swirling around with her.
“Wouldn’t that energy burn us on approach?”
“It might be basic tech, but not that basic, Lez,” said Yontan. “It’s safe up to a distance of 100 meters. Don’t underestimate the intelligence of our ancestors because they built this thing in the distant past. They were as smart as us. Smarter even, in certain aspects, I’m sure.”
“Found the entrance, captain,” said Ghenna. It was a pale peach colored door built on the craterside.
“Land near it, wherever it’s stable.”
“Yes, Sir!”
The ship touched down next to the Hollis Crater. Yontan and four others suited up and left the craft. Before heading for the door, the team stopped to gaze at the Sunfire Conduit from their position. It went up, up, up as far as the eye could see.
Jmerr was awestruck.
“I can’t believe we’re able to look at it with basic sun visors. Do you think our ancestors purposefully designed it like that?”
“Of course,” said Yontan, mesmerized by the spiraling blaze swooshing down the crater. “Aesthetics have always been important, especially since it used to be connected to three planets, two dwarf planets, and eight moons. Many renown painters have depicted the Conduits in their art. Although no physical portraits survived, their works have been well documented over hundreds of books.”
Lezlybe approached Jmerr and put her hand over his shoulder.
“I kind of wish we could hear its thunderous sound. I imagine it’d be a satisfying swoosh, kind of like a blowtorch.”
“You’d be deaf before you’d hear a thing,” laughed Yontan. “We’re speaking of extremely powerful jets coming from a star, after all. I can’t wait to see why they’re pulling so much energy on such a small planet. It’s totally excessive in my view.”
“Maybe it’s not,” said Lezlybe. “Especially if the Ultimate Knowledge is behind this door.”
The team approached the door, a small black panel to its side. Yontan placed a round device on top and, seconds later, it retracted into the ground.
“A Grampus?” frowned Jmerr, even though no one could see his face behind the visor. “Why do you use this old AI?”
“Because I don’t know the code,” explained Yontan as they stepped inside a long hall. “So I brought this device with me to crack the password. Don’t forget that this here is also old tech. Newer devices could break something.” He glanced over his shoulder at the wide-open entryway with the ship not too far behind. “But it looks like the Grampus broke it anyway since it doesn’t slide shut.”
At the end of the wide turquoise hall, another door was easily popped open with Yontan’s device. This time, however, the heavy door closed shut when the last person stepped in.
“I hope we’re not trapped in this small room,” gulped Lezlybe.
“Don’t worry, we can ask someone on board to cut it open if needed,” said Yontan. “After all we –”
PSHHHHHHHH
A burst of gas sprayed them from all sides, followed by a shower of heavy liquid. A few moments after it stopped, the door in front of them opened, and a gentle male voice greeted them.
“Welcome to U.K. ONE. The current air pressure is at 101.3 kilopascals, with a temperature of 22.4 degrees Celsius and a humidity level set at 60% RH.”
The voice then proceeded to inform them about the room’s condition among other sets of data.
“I see. We were inside a basic decompression chamber,” muttered Jmerr.
The tallest crewmate, Lessandre, popped his helmet off and took a deep breath.
“Ah, historical fresh air,” he boomed, looking around the oval room. “It brings a tear to my eye.”
“What are you doing?” Yontan shouted. “We don’t know what particles or microorganisms could linger in here.”
“Relax, captain. Tyche analyzed the air and told me it’s fine. Why don’t you all retract your visors and experience this multimillennial-old air? You’ll never have the chance to do that again, you know.”
Yontan checked with his own version of his AI, Tyche, and everything seemed to be fine, so he retracted the visor of his helmet as well, just in time to scratch an itch on his beard. The rest of the crew followed, except for Jmerr.
“Come on, Jmerr. It’s a unique experience, my friend,” beamed Lessandre, tapping on his shoulder.
Jmerr scowled at Lessandre. “I refuse to take unnecessary risks.”
“As you wish,” Lessandre grinned, loudly sniffing the air. “Ahhh. The air in here is exceptionally… how to describe it?”
“Dusty?” Lezlybe chimed in. “I think the auto-clean on the filter stopped working long ago.”
Yontan was ignoring his crew, inspecting the walls of this oval room for clues. But the room was pretty much empty, outside of the air conditioning holes and lights flickering on the ceiling.
“I know there’s another door on the other side of the crater, but that one’s the entrance to the accumulator and workspaces,” he muttered to himself, caressing the wall in the hopes of finding a button or a gap of sorts.
“Is that place also turquoise?” asked Lessandre. “I really hate this color. Reminds me too much of my ex.”
Lezlybe rolled her eyes.
“Then why don’t we go there?” asked Ghenna, who had closed her visor since she didn’t like the smell.
“Because,” began Yontan absent-mindedly while brushing his hands over the wall, “every document points to this place. We’ll check the other site if we don’t find anything here. Now if only I – aha! A button. This might be it.”
Yontan pushed it with his finger. Instead of clicking, like any other button would, his index finger sank completely in. He immediately withdrew it, fearing something might cut his finger off. But the button came back, except it was now white and protruded out of the wall. Yontan hesitantly pressed it.
An oval pedestal emerged from the middle of the floor, gradually rising until it reached chest height. The left side slid open with melodious clicks, and out came a small table with a round black object on it with a sky-blue center. Before they had the time to guess what it was, a hologram rose from it, displaying the head of an old balding man with a lazy eye.
“Greetings, future humans,” said the feeble voice. “And welcome to K.U. ONE. What is your purpose here?”
Yontan glanced at his crew, who gave him a nod and shrugs. He cleared his throat and spoke clearly, “We’ve come here to gain access to the Ultimate Knowledge, which is said to contain the answers to our purpose within the universe.”
“I see. And you are one, two, five. Oh! That is good news, good news indeed. I’ve been waiting for you. Well, not me per se, since I’m long dead, I suppose,” the hologram laughed, “but my digital image. And five? Oh, proof that nothing happens at random.”
Yontan was slightly taken aback.
“Wait. You’re not a simple recording?”
“No, no. I’m enhanced with artificial intelligence. It speaks as I would speak, saying what I asked it to say – with a bit of panache. Now, move to the other side of the pedestal. It will pop open and contain a box.”
The other side popped open, displaying a silver box embossed with gold on the edges. It was beautiful. Lessandre grabbed it and tried to pry it open.
“Tut-tut! You need the key to open the box. I’ll hand it over only of you accept to eat its contents.”
“Eat it?” Yontan uttered in excitement. “Will it alter our brains? Give us the knowledge we yearn for?”
“Not quite. But it is a necessary step.”
“I won’t touch it,” Jmerr stated firmly. “I don’t trust this man. Whatever’s inside, it’s been in there for thousands of years. There’s no way it’s still edible.”
“Oh but it is,” grinned the man. “What do you think the Sunfire Conduit is used for?”
“What?” uttered Lezlybe. “The power of the sun used for… food?”
“Of course, there’s more to it. But a lot of energy is necessary to cool it down to near zero kelvin and keep it that way until it’s very slowly reheated to the ideal temperature for you to savor.
“Now, will you eat its contents or not?”
“Why don’t we bring it back to the ship and study it?” suggested Jmerr.
“The moment you leave the room with the box, its contents will be destroyed, and so will the key to Ultimate Knowledge.”
Yontan exchanged a glance with his crew. Lessandre gave him thumbs up, Ghenna nodded and Lezlybe shrugged. Jmerr was the only one to firmly shake his head.
“Fine, we’ll eat its contents,” said Yontan, upon which Jmerr put his hands up in the air in frustration.
A key appeared from the front of the pedestal. Yonan used it to open the box Lessandre was holding. Five dark-brown spherical objects were neatly placed within fitting molds, resembling the five dots on a die.
“Behold the Five Orbs of Knowledge,” the hologram said solemnly. “I recommend one for each of you.”
Jmerr crossed his arms. “There’s no way I’m touching this.”
“What if someone eats two?” asked Yontan, eyeing Jmerr.
“It would sadden me, even though it might be beneficial to grasp the Ultimate Knowledge.”
Without hesitation, Lessandre popped the middle one in his mouth. Every other crewmate was staring at him. A few bites in, he suddenly froze, eyes wide open. His gaze slowly shifted from Yontan, to Lezlybe, to Ghenna – whose visor was now lowered – and finally stopped on Jmerr.
“Awl eash ‘em bofh,” he rapidly chewed, popping a second one in. “Awl eash ‘em owl ihf you guysh downt.”
Yontan’s hand was shaking as he picked his Orb. Lezlybe and Ghenna also chose one.
“On the count of three,” gulped Yontan, as he noticed the horrified look on Jmerr. “One… two… three!”
The shell of the Orb had a slight crunch, with a rather soft, creamy inner core, gently melting on their tongue. Sweet with a zest of bitterness. Each bite, each movement of their tongue was another moment they savored, dreading the end of this unique flavor. It was an explosion of exoticism, a sensory overload inside their mouth; the richness of the Orb filled their taste buds and souls alike with pure bliss.
Then there was the aroma, dissolving the dusty odor of the room with its arboraceous perfume. It reminded them of Terrestrial woods, now planted across various planets in the Milky Way. Comforting, ancient, nostalgic, and so raw at heart.
Fortunately, this jolly adventure didn’t end after they swallowed it, no, each residue, sticking to the various corners of their mouths, lingered like a fleeting memory soon to disappear forever. Yet it was still there, to grasp with the palm of their hands. But when they tried to, it became vapor, dwindling, yet etched in their brains with such strength it would be impossible to ever forget this moment. Ever.
Their minds were still floating on a cloud of ecstasy when Yontan stared at Lessandre.
“You ate two,” he breathed. “And you,” he turned to Jmerr, “you have no idea what you’ve just missed. It’s… indescribably delectable.” Yontan faced the hologram. “Please, give us one more, for Jmerr. He has to try this… Orb.”
The hologram grinned widely, creasing the old man’s entire face.
“These were the last five. There are no more.”
“WHAT?” everyone shouted at once.
“Th– that’s it? No more?” Yontan’s shoulder slumped. “Why didn’t you tell us earlier? We could’ve taken it back to the ship and try to recreate it.”
“It’s impossible without the recipe.”
“A recipe? Give it to us, I don’t care about Ultimate Knowledge anymore,” Lessandre laughed.
“But you had two,” Lezlybe scowled.
“And I want more,” he chuckled. “I’ve never felt better in my life. Even two were far too few!”
“Yes, hand us the recipe so we can share it with the rest of the crew,” pleaded Yontan.
The hologram seemed more and more pleased with itself.
“Even if I gave you the recipe you couldn’t make it when the main ingredient’s missing.”
“What’s the main ingredient?” Ghenna asked.
“Cacao. And these were chocolate truffles, which I made myself utilizing the very last cacao beans to ever exist. I’m sorry. You’ll never eat chocolate ever again.”
Jmerr seemed disappointed upon hearing it, especially after seeing how everyone reacted to it.
“B – but… why?” Yontan asked. “Why offer us a delicious treat only to punch us in the gut right after?”
The hologram smiled. “Think. What is your purpose here?”
“To acquire Ultimate Knowledge… But I fail to understand…”
“If my clock is correct, 3622 years have passed since the last human – which is myself – set wheels in this room. 3622 years of technological advancement, of accumulated mastery of various sciences and understanding of the universe. Yet you believe Ultimate Knowledge is to be found in the past?”
The crewmembers looked at each other, dumbfounded.
“So… it doesn’t exist?” suggested Lezlybe. “We’ve come this far for nothing…”
“Haven’t you just experienced the ultimate delicacy of humankind? Therein lies everything you need to know.”
“It’s not about the knowledge,” began Yontan, “but about the experience we savor?”
“Exactly!” Clapping hands appeared in front of the hologram’s face. “Instead of looking for something that may not be, learn to cherish the transient nature of existence through every experience you encounter. Who knows what happens once you’re dead? Constant hesitation leads to a life of lost opportunities. One of you has learned this lesson the hard way, I’m afraid. However, the tall man over there has greatly benefited from this lesson. Balance in all things!”
“No data is ever lost,” snorted Jmerr scornfully. “Death is simply the temporary loss of information until it’s retrieved.”
“The no-hiding theorem,” smiled the hologram. “Of course. But you wouldn’t be here if you could completely determine the state of the entire universe. Thus, my rhetoric stays valid. For as long as this is beyond our grasp – likely until humanity’s extinction – you ought to cherish every experience and lose your fear of consequences within reason.”
The room went silent, the subtle taste of chocolate still lingering in their mouths like the fading words of an old love letter.
“What do we do now, captain?” Ghenna asked shyly.
“Take your new-found knowledge and share it with others,” the hologram said before Yontan could open his mouth.
“So… there really is nothing else here?”
“Nothing at all.”
The hologram fluttered for a moment.
“Were these really the last pieces of chocolate?”
“Yes.”
“Then why didn’t you eat them yourself?”
“Because sharing is the quintessential attribute of humanity. And I’m glad to have contributed my part, even though it took several millennia.”
“So why use all that energy from the sun?” asked Lezlybe.
“It’s twofold,” said the hologram. “Partially to keep this chocolate in pristine state, as I said before. You’ll understand the second reason soon enough. Let’s say it’s a parting gift, for that man who hasn’t eaten his Orb.”
“I don’t understand.” Yontan was running his fingers through his hair. “You speak of sharing, yet we won’t be able to share this exquisite experience. There’s no chocolate left.”
“Share the wisdom you’ve acquired. Or perhaps you shall find something unique to share with others as I did. Even the stories of your adv–”
The man disappeared for a few seconds.
“–entures – Ah? We’ve been cut. Soon I shall be free, just like your minds. Swiftly return to your ships, and sail t–”
It flickered again and stopped for nearly ten seconds.
“–he vast empty space to… wherever your heart leads you. Farewell. Fare well indeed.”
The hologram zoomed out to show an old man sitting on a wheelchair, waving both hands. It flickered one last time before completely fading out with a hum.
Suddenly, a familiar voice spoke from everyone’s earpiece.
“Captain, is everything all right?” asked one of the crew left on the ship in a panic.
“Why? Did the entrance crumble down?”
“No, Sir. It’s the Conduit. You need to see this for yourself.”
The crew put on their visors and hurried out of the room, through the hallway, out on the freezing surface of Pluto. They gasped upon staring up.
“The Conduit!” Ghenna uttered.
It was oscillating, slowly shrinking until the last flames swooshed back and forth from the relay to the crater, and then, it retracted entirely.
“It’s… it’s gone…” sighed Yontan.
“The parting gift,” Jmerr sobbed. “He knew. He knew someone might not try out the chocolate truffle, and he purposefully shut down the entire system.”
Lessandre turned to Jmerr. “Consider this your incredible experience. We must be the only humans to ever see this happen in real time.”
“But we can reconnect it, unlike the chocolate, can’t we?” said Lizlybe.
Yontan shook his head. “Do you know of the ancient pyramids in the northern African continent?”
“Yeah…” she hesitated. “Vaguely.”
“Do you know why they’ve never been rebuilt?”
Lezlybe shrugged.
“Because there’s nothing to gain in doing so.” He pointed his finger at the vast expanse above him. “We’ve never rebuilt the ancient pyramids – not due to complexity, but due to loss of time and resources involved without any actual benefit. I’m afraid this is the last time anyone has admired this old tech at work.”
Upon their return on the ship, they told the rest of the crew what inside the U.K. ONE.
“So the Ultimate Knowledge doesn’t exist?” one of the crewmember asked.
Yontan took one last glance at the crater as the ship took off.
“I believe it does,” he beamed, looking at the bemused faces of his crew. “Not here.” He gently tapped his temple. “But here.” His hand rested on his chest. “And there.” His arms were wide open, as if trying to embrace his whole crew at once. “Acquired wisdom is the Ultimate Knowledge. And the ability to share experiences with others is our greatest gift.”

How can we stop going around in circles with these corrupted nihilists? (basically an extreme religious-nut but in reverse; no meaning, no value, no good/bad, nothing matters) I've compiled some of my thoughts/comments.

But first If you are not caught up yet:
1 Re: Vegan Gains ...The Militant Vegan Raffaela Interview - (May 12, 2024)
2 Vegan Gains is a sub-Jerkivest [5/11/24]
3 Moral Realism Debate w/ Inmendham - (May 16, 2024)
4 WTF #899: The vegan gains debate ... Value realism - (May 19, 2024)
5 Vegan Gains ...Denialism is the only nihilism [5/19/24]
also saw this Controversial Topics with Vegan Gains (Horse Riding, Bivalves, Depression, and much more!) - (May 11, 2024) ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ (he thinks in terms of some dogmatic religious brain-rot morality source of right/wrong, but a kind of reversed/opposite conclusion of it's absence, nihilism)
the very reason religion was invented in the first place was because humans by nature had a value-engine driving them & NEED for meaning, that's the irony. value gave rise to religion, religion never needed to grant value. The fact people can't grasp this. 🤦 ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎

Now onto the various arguments, sorry how long and out of order it is But the idea is to provoke you coming up with better ideas/arguments, and if you can critic and strenghen my and ultimately inmendham's arguments. The GOAL should be to Create a formal argument AKA a syllogism, modus ponens. Something clear and concise that can't be taken out of context or misinterpreted, as happened with the debate...

On the subject of Efilism, tread lightly, the philosophy and argument extends beyond merely focusing on suffering; it also includes the critical issue of consent violation. Its proponent and creator, Inmendham, argues for value realism, which contrasts starkly with the notion of subjective morality which I find illogical. While objective morality is full of baggage... often linked to outdated religious doctrine so on face value it's not fun or easy subject to broach... many contemporary non-religious ethicists ground it in realism. Personally me, inmendham and others see no use for the term "morality" as it's tainted. value-realism is the subject. Is it a value-laden universe or not?
it is not necessary to call TRUE/REAL right or wrong Objective, because if objective is defined as mind-independent than without minds there's nothing right/wrong to happen to, therefore THE discussion should be just regarding what is TRUE or NOT, subjective doesn't necessarily mean mere contrived opinion or preference but can be logical conclusion, e.g. you can conclude 2 + 2 = 4 as we understand these concepts of numbers to model reality but can you call it objective or mind-independent 2 + 2 = 4, or that math exists? Not really. As you require a modeler to model reality, an observer to make the observation, a mind to come to such accurate conclusions. To me, claiming there is no real right or wrong is akin to asserting that moral standards and ultimately the subject of Ethics is as fictitious as religion or Santa Claus, you just believe it cause you want to or have preference to. Why maintain this pretense if it's all a mere fabrication / contrivance?
Regarding subjective judgments such as determining "What's the tastiest potato chip or the most beautiful painting?", these are not factual assessments about the things themselves, The question itself is misleading, because the thing itself has none of those qualities objectively, Instead, such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by the interaction of our bodies and minds with these INPUT items, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences. You might get off more on certain female body part than another, it doesn't matter, the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant... not what specific fun or hobby gets you or them off or pushes their buttons.
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to that personal individual, or gross to another, and we can talk about intersubjective truths with averages overall. But one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually, as you are likely not even sharing the same exact experiences to judge differently. And one's very perception or framing of the experience changes the experience itself, no way around this truth. Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
It's important to recognize that differing opinions of personal taste do not inherently conflict in the way ethical contradictions do. With ethical matters, asserting that two diametrically opposed views are equally valid is problematic, either one is right and the other wrong, or both might be based on flawed reasoning. Pretending 2 opposing ethical views can be both equally right/true/correct is utter contradictory mush, either one of them must be right / wrong, or both are contrived meaningless nothing opinions, just made up. you wouldn't say whether one believes in god or not IS mere personal opinion/preference and such 2 opposing views can be equally right at same time, that's utter contradictory nonsense, by saying 2 opinions that gRAPE is both good & bad at same time are equally right opinons, right loses all meaning and you might as well say neither is right and both are wrong, they each have their own contrived fairytale delusion.
Now with Ethics of right / wrong, it does not depend on one single individual's preference or opinion, but taken as the whole, if you violate one without consent you still have to account for that since you are seemingly putting the weight on the preference otherwise preferences are utterly meaningless and irrelevant.
ALSO, Do you call whatever you prefer what's right, or do you prefer to try to do what is right?
Do you prefer to seek out what is the right most accurate conclusion given all the facts of reality, or contrive right to be what's in your preference/interest or personal gain?
I don't think VG or most these talking heads understand value-realism (problematic events within subjectivity/a non-physical but REAL reality of the mind). Obviously there's no objective divine or otherwise prime-directive moral-rules we must follow. Unfortunately Religion has poisened the conversation so much with archaic ideas and mushy terms like 'Morality'. Understand there is no 'moral truth', let alone an objective one, ofc if you pigeon-hole me or all realists into defending such nonsense it's easy to refute them. What I'm interested in is subject of Ethics, and to start whether or not value/problematic events exist or do not exist.
Here's a silly question by nihilists: "why is suffering bad?"
Response: How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
Or this: "prove suffering bad, objectively"
Also question-begging, obviously it is subjective. If such badness cannot exist mind-independently by definition.
"Prove suffering is bad, objectively"
is begging the question, because...
It strawmans / assumes the badness must be bad mind-independently, it isn't therefore, it isn't bad.
Answer this, evolutionarily do animals PERCEIVE being tortured skinned alive nail in the eye as BAD, or does it impose torture which we RECOGNIZE and define as Bad by definition?
If true PAIN/torture isn't bad then why does it exist evolutionarily? Answer: (problem -> solution) mechanism which functions as ability to learn & improved survival, this mechanism was reinforced over time as it worked.
inmendham & realists like myself argue: it is the case Descriptively, Objectively evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-value-judgements onto animals which function as a learning/problem solving mechanism. Fact is, the invention of 'PROBLEM' is something I/we/animals had nothing to do with... (no-free-will-choice) but are simply byproduct in observation of this fact.
If real PROBLEM(s) didn't truly exist then Arguably the word and conceptual understanding it points 👉 to wouldn't exist either. As if beings could be truly blind never seeing colors/vision yet pulling the idea out of thin air and conceiving of such a thing, how preposterous, that'd be giving human creativity/imagination way too much credit. The only nihilist argument then is that by evolution we & all feeling organisms are somehow ultimately deluded or have illusion of problem where there is none, which I find deeply implausible. Run the torture study/experiment a million times putting people's arm in the fire "yep still bad". Filtering out people who lack ability to feel pain of course.
As evolutionary biologists even states pain is a message to the animal "don't do that again". Can't get descriptively prescriptive more than that.
Are You Getting It?
The Ought is literally baked in as an IS. The is-ought gap to be bridged is a complete Red-Herring, yes you can't derive an Ought from an IS, because if you oughtn't do something, then it can never be BAD... problematic/BAD/torture can't mean anything if it doesn't scream OUGHT-not.
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
This is Checkmate. These are irrefutable Facts & Logical deductions.
So much for it all being false-perception, the very fact placebo patients perceive an otherwise harmless laser as BAD/painful makes it so. It's the TRUE reality in their mind and you can't deny that fact. It's also a fact believing a pain isn't really all that bad can make it so, but this doesn't make these value-laden experiences NOT real/true.
As per evolution, your body/brain's mechanisms must generate & impose a prescriptive-value-judgement / problematic event within your mind,
It's nagging, complaining, telling you keeping your hand on the hot stove is a mistake/problematic/bad. (not in itself but as a consequence)
I believe this brain making me write all this... is making an accurate assessment when it observe certain events to be problematic/bad where it's happening which is within subjectivity, where's your evidence my perceptions are fooling me or I'm somehow deluded? I witnessed the crime take place and you were nowhere near the crime scene yet you have the authority to claim otherwise as fact? (You are not simply agnostic to my problem suffering but a De-nihilist)
Once one accepts this evolutionary fact we can move on to more complicated questions regarding ethics, like how do weigh the good & the bad, conflicting preferences, etc. Otherwise, it's all pointless & futile, like arguing bivalves or wild-suffering with a non-vegan. They're just not on that level yet and it's a waste of time.
revised version of my other comment: I believe that many discussions around morality miss a crucial point about value-realism, which acknowledges problematic events within subjectivity, a non-physical but real reality of the mind. It is evident that there are no objective, divine, or prime-directive moral rules we must follow. Unfortunately, religion has muddied the conversation with archaic ideas and terms like 'morality'.
There is no 'moral truth,' especially not an objective one. If critics pigeonhole realists into defending such notions, it becomes easy to refute them. My interest lies in ethics and whether value/problematic events exist.
Consider this question by nihilists: "Why is suffering bad?"
Response: Suffering is identified because it feels bad, subjectively. Just as we subjectively understand 2+2=4, we can recognize suffering through its unpleasant experience.
When asked to "prove suffering is bad, objectively," this is question-begging, as the question assumes that the badness must exist independently of minds, which it does not by definition. This question straw-mans the issue by requiring mind-independent badness, ignoring the subjective nature of suffering. As if the quality of it being BAD must be granted by something outside the experience itself.
Evolutionary Perspective: Animals perceive and react to torture (e.g., being skinned alive) as bad because evolution has imposed mechanisms that signal harm. Pain serves as a problem-solving mechanism, reinforcing behaviors that enhance survival. If pain and suffering weren't inherently problematic, they wouldn’t exist in the form they do.
Realists like myself argue that evolution has objectively imposed prescriptive-value judgments on animals. The concept of 'problem' or 'bad' arises from these evolutionary mechanisms, not from free will. The existence of these concepts indicates the reality of these problematic experiences.
If real problems didn’t exist, neither would the concepts describing them. This is akin to how beings blind from birth wouldn’t conceive of color. Suggesting that evolutionary processes have universally deluded all feeling organisms into perceiving problems where there are none is implausible.
As evolutionary biologists state, pain signals to the animal, "don't do that again," which is descriptively prescriptive. The 'ought' is embedded within the 'is.' Thus, the is-ought gap is a red herring because prescriptive judgments are evolutionarily ingrained.
Again, How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
Conclusion: By acknowledging that evolution created inherently negative experiences like torture, we accept that these experiences are bad by definition. Denying the badness of creating bad experiences is contradictory. Therefore, once recognizing the true reality of subjective experiences, only then we can move on to complex ethical questions about weighing good and bad and addressing conflicting preferences.
playing devil's advocate let's try Steelman their position and then arrive at the logical conclusions of it and then perhaps refute it. If they say: "veganism = right" realize there is no contradiction IF by 'right' they just mean it's literally nothing but their preference...
There's no goal to prefer to know/do what's right, RATHER what's right is whatever matches our personal preferences, so unlike flat earther vs round earth beliefs/CLAIMs which can contradict/conflict with each other since either 1 is right or both are wrong. Individual tastes don't.
Whereas if VG says 9 people gRAPE the 1 kid for fun is WRONG because he's a threshold-deontologist but Also RIGHT to a hedonistic utilitarian, Those views only contradict/conflict if they are making VALUE-claims or recognizing a problematic event take place. However, with VG apparently he would have to say he's not claiming or labelling anything as TRULY problematic at all but merely describing his preferences like flavor of ice cream...
Now, of course, as the realist, I find such a view more deplorable/worse than if they were merely agnostic on right/wrong. Cause it's one thing to say there's a right answer to questions of Ethics but we have no objective scientific basis to determine it yet or lack knowledge VS saying they have knowledge there is absolutely no right or wrong.
Under Anti-realism nihilism, what they mean by wrong/right, is just their preference, if I understand correctly (which I'm quite sure) Anti-realism nihilism reduces the Subject of Ethics down to nothing but you or someone else pontificating/opining (i.e "me no like torture") . It defends some sort of expressivism, emotivism, normative, prescriptive reduction of Ethics. Which I find lubricious and has to be a mistake,
I don't see anyone playing any different game even the nihilists invest their money and plan ahead for self-interest, no one truly signs up for torture for fun like it's no problem, and runs away from pleasure happiness as bad. Further, it stands to reason... since we can recognize objectively evolution created a punishment mechanism to enforce learning and survival, BAD/PROBLEM as a concept is something I/WE/Animals had nothing to do with. We didn't invent it, we recognize it and respond accordingly. Even evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins stated that pain is a message to the organism 'don't do that again!'
We must address further the flawed logic of VG and other nihilists reducing Ethics down to mere arbitrary preferences like potato chip flavor, or how much salt you prefer in the soup. As it is completely disanalogous & dishonest upon reflection. QUOTE: "There's no arguing against Efilism, it's just personal opinion. Like arguing what tastes better... ice-cream or potato chips?"
Say if you believe that the mona-lisa is beautiful, and I personally find it ugly, this conflicts/contradicts nothing because it claims nothing in terms about that object or reality outside of our own minds.
such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by body/mind from these INPUTs, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences.
it doesn't matter what specific fun or hobby gets them off or pushes their buttons in order for it MATTER, those differences don't make it any less real OR all mere subjective opinion. the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant...
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to some personal individual, or gross to another, one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually because it is the reality in their mind, Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
while one person may find a certain food delicious, another may find it repulsive, without invalidating each other's experiences because they are true for them individually. both experiences are valid/correct.
However, actions that disregard another's negative experience invalidate their reality. if you find being boiled alive problematic and I do it anyway believing it's ok, I am invalidating your experience as either not real, relevant, doesn't matter, or my preferences are more important (carry more weight) than yours. Or simply believe it's ALL equal or arbitrary and I just prefer to exploit you so I do that.
Positive or negative experiences are largely consistent among people, making them relevant, regardless of the specific stimuli. Individual truths about taste or preference coexist without contradiction, reflecting each person's value-generated reality.
This cannot honestly be applied to one's mere opinion it's fine to boil kids alive, as you are invalidating the fact that it matters to those victims. You saying it doesn't matter or your gain of pleasure outweighs their loss of pain, is a claim about the reality of events going on in their mind, so there is room for conflict/contradiction. They can't both be right/wrong at the exact same time.
A strong non-intuition argument/claim & facts presented render value-nihilism implausible:
It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Therefore, BAD/PROBLEM isn't mere subjective opinion but something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are mere by-product reacting to an observation.
This is pretty much the only base-axiom needed to ground my own torture as mattering as the original actual value-currency at stake. That paired with the fact I sampled consciousness and know it matters to me whether or not I am tortured, the fact that I personally observe it as problematic makes it the true reality for my own mind...
...AND it's not mere opinion/proclamation / or idea humans creatively invented out of thin air... as if like everyone could be truly blind yet conceptualizing colovision, makes no sense. plus that's giving humanity way too much credit of imagination.
Can't really have thoughts about information that you don't have. The concept of bad/problem arguably wouldn't even exist if it never was so.
Yes, I agree very semantics. I am attempting to shed clarity on this topic. Looking at the word "BAD" purely in a descriptive sense (e.g., that which can be categorically applied to extreme suffering) it loses all meaning if it's not truly consequential (i.e., it matters whether one experiences bad or not). If it doesn't actually matter ("no problemo") then it can't be bad, only an illusion/delusion of it, yet it's an effective one evolution imposed on organisms as a learning/problem-solving mechanism. The value-realists like myself have every reason to believe evolution created the real thing, not some contrived pseudo-problem organisms feel compelled/obligated to solve.
One only requires the axiom of a Descriptive Bad to ground Ethics. Why? Because it can be argued that a descriptive statement of BAD/problem is prescriptive by it's very nature in the meaning the of word/language.(otherwise its psuedo-bad/fake langauge, redefines bad as aversion/mere preference against) Otherwise, it can't mean anything to be bad, torturously obnoxious, unwanted experiential events couldn't mean anything. Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins even state pain is a punishment signal/message to the animal: "Don't do that again!" If those aren't prescriptions imposed, then I don't know what is. The animal doesn't simply decide/prefer to avoid the event and finds it bad, it's told/finds it bad and so prefers to avoid the event/problem. If god or there were some logically or physically possible way it were to be invented how else would it exist?, or what you think evolution's reward & punishment mechanism accomplished? If it didn't synthesize problematic sensations to force organisms to solve?
Evolution prescribes Needs/wants, at the same time imposes a PAIN/PROBLEM of starvation/hunger which by it's very nature is a prescription for solution (i.e. sustenance/relief/comfort.)
By the very nature of "PROBLEM" it prescribes -> "SOLUTION" not merely a contrived or trivial-like on paper math problem, but the origin of why the word even exists: the problem of pain, a true whip/punishment mechanism, real currency to play with, real loss. Idk how you can describe something categorically as a PROBLEM in the true sense of the word if it doesn't come with it a necessary prescription for its solution. Because if there is no NEED for a solution, then it turns into no longer a problem again...
I don't see how it could be any other way because if there's no real game to be playing with value baked into it, then money would be worthless/not even exist, animals wouldn't bother evade standing in the fire, etc.
Saying It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Is the same as saying Evolution IMPOSED torture/BAD, as that's what torture/bad is... a prescribed need for solution to a problem which is some form of relief/comfort.
The prescription arises as a result of accepting step 1. (which nihilists reject/deny) problem solution. The latter does not follow/exist without the former. basic 2+2 = 4 logic. There's no point figuring out the answer to the math equation, if we don't agree first and foremost a problem exists. Nor how to solve a disease, if we don't first and foremost recognize a disease exists. And so, Any debate with nihilists on step 2: of determining what is the most likely solution / right answer becomes irrelevent and a waste of time. Arguing about whether x or y IS the right answer to fixing/preventing diabetes is pointless when they don't even agree the really disease exists. They don't believe an actual real BAD / Problem exists.
VG reduces it down to mere preferences, his reasonings that even if universally sentience prefers not suffebe tortured... Well, just because it is the case descriptively we prefer to avoid suffering doesn't mean we ought/should prevent suffering. He hasn't bridged the IS-OUGHT gap. But he got it backwards,
the claim/argument... ISN'T that because descriptively, sentience universally has a preference to avoid suffering, it is therefore bad,
the claim/argument... IS that it's descriptively bad/problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it,
Again you can't classify/label something as a problem if it's inconsequential whether it is solved or not. The word loses all meaning. If something NEEDs solving/fixing it means there's a problem, if there's a problem it means there's something NEED solving/fixing. Evolution manufactures these needy problems in organisms to manipulate and control them.
Merely what our preferences are IS NOT relevant, preference "frustration" arguably IS. (if preferences couldn't be frustrated "i.e., no value" than it wouldn't matter which way things turned out)
You can have a preference for some art style over another, if we were just programmed non-feeling robots that preferred to avoid standing in the fire, but there was no real kernel of value/bad, then it wouldn't matter.
Let's imagine something was Objectively PROBLEMATIC, an IS statement. What would a real problem look like? something in NEED of a solution. Again, why? because If it doesn't matter whether or not it exists or is Solved or not, it could never be a problem in the first place. So either this problem exists or it doesn't. (NOTE: it doesn't need to be an objective problem to be REAL, "i.e mind-independent")
Next, if ASI or sentient beings were to sample this "problem", would it not be the case they would logically deduce it's in need of a solution? And assign their preferences accordingly to solving it? Cause again otherwise then you just see it as "no-problemo" again.
"If Inmendham's argument is that sentient beings create value, and that the universe has no value without the presence of a sentient being generating it, would it not follow that the ought is inherently built into sensation?" yes but the way VG unfairly reframes it is that we subjectively place value on it, THAT it's entirely subjective, like you prefer salty or sweet, or certain ice cream flavor. emphasizing that it's entirely subjective opinion. Take a look at his unfair silly example: "we can't say pineapple on pizza is objectively tasty or not..." this shows a complete ineptitude in grasping the subject and misrepresenting the argument like crazy, no one is arguing whether Mona Lisa is objectively beautiful or some such thing.
What is being argued: the positive or negative mind-dependent event produced in response to the sensual or perceptual stimuli, the input (object) is irrelevant, only the output (experience) matters and what the value-engine (BRAIN) produced. What pushes your buttons so to speak, blue jelly beans or green jelly beans, could differ between 2 individuals but the shared experience is the same more or less. Whether you wired to find pineapple on pizza tasty or gross is irrelevant, some people find bricks edible.
Main issue is they talking past each other: what inmendham is arguing for was either not expressed as best it could be, and/or VG does not quite comprehend what is being argued... inmendham claims/argues evolution created the real bad/PROBLEM and we respond in recognition of this fact/truth with preferences that follow accordingly, Logic cannot be escaped, once you know 2+2 = 4, you can't will or believe it to be 79. If you know the right answer "torture be Bad M'kay?" obviously you won't act or behave otherwise and say you love it. What could it mean to have a preference against experiencing torture... does such a statement even make any sense? All that is required is a real BAD to exist... and then the preference to avoid it logically follows, an inescapable truth. Unless he thinks I also choose or prefer to believe 2+2 = 4 ?
Essentially VG keeps counter-arguing that: "yes we want to avoid torture, but that's just your preference... just cause universally sentience has a preference against torture (a Descriptive / IS statement) doesn't logically follow some Normative/Prescriptive claim/statement. That just because something IS the case it doesn't follow that we OUGHT / should do X, like help others, prevent suffering, etc. That's a non-sequitur he says. Ultimately it's just a preference." sure but...
His argument only applies/counters a strawman position in his head: Because of this I and other realists can account for / side-step it completely, we aren't attempting to derive an OUGHT from an IS. e.g strawman: "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore it's BAD." Or "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore we OUGHT prevent it"
The actual argument is that it's Truly Bad/Problematic by the very nature of the word, Therefore first-hand observation follows universally a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around.
"If the only thing that can have meaning in the universe is the experience of a sentient being, ought we not maximize its value just by nature of its experience being the only thing that can matter?" yes the ought is a further logical extension of recognizing it to be a problem, which denotes/demands a solution, otherwise if it doesn't matter to solve it or not then you've turned it into a non-problem again. So it can only be categorically one or the other.
Issue of semantics, different terminology and definitions: as long as VG defines objective as "mind-independent" and sets the goal-post to the realist to find a mind-independent "wrong/bad" as if somehow we need some divine-command or absolute rule in the universe that declares it so... then there is no fruit to the discussion. suffering/bad takes place in the mind/experience, so of course it's unfair to ask one to present a mind-independent suffering/bad in the universe, it is begging the question. To be fair inmendham uses the term objective and could have done better job with defining/pushing his terms "e.g. objective as truth/real/fact" and not let VG impose in his own. However, I don't ascribe a requirement to demonstrate an Objective BAD to ground a BAD as real, valid, and true; it can be entirely based on Subjectivist grounds/axiomatic foundations.
Just because the BAD takes place within subjectivity doesn't make it any less real (non-physical/immaterial sure... but not unreal). VG and nihilists can't understand this. 2+2 = 4 is subjective as is all science ultimately as a root axiomatic-fact... as an observation requires an observer. This doesn't mean realism can't be proven/grounded, it can just like we can know 2+2=4 and the moon exists. If anti-realism is gonna deny subjective truths because it's subjective, then one can't know much of anything and reduces to solipsism. I am more certain I exist and the reality of "perceived" BAD I experience is actually a real BAD... THAN that the moon even exists or any other scientific empirical claim.
PROBLEM is something I/we/animals had Nothing to do with, we didn't invent it.
If Anti-realism nihilism was True and Real "PROBLEMS" didn't exist the word wouldn't exist. It is like being born never knowing or seeing or experiencing vision & color, it's impossible to contrive or imagine it. Some knowledge & information is only accessible through experience.
Even Richard Dawkins stated, "pain is a message to the animal Don't do that again!"
If the ought exists within subjectivity, as preferences, why would them being Subjective vs Objective determine whether or not their violation matters? If one experiences disgust looking at something AND another finds beauty... both are true realities for them, they don't conflict or contradict like empirical or fact claims, but instead both are correct and relevant, not one or the other, BECAUSE when someone says the mona Lisa is beautiful they are just saying it arises in them a sense of beauty, the thing/input is irrelevant whereas the output in mind is what is relevant and true for their reality.
Subjective =/= not true, I don't understand the dichotomy between objective vs subjective ethics, as if there isn't facts to glean about subjectivity.
There's also definition or semantic problems:
objective (mind-independent) vs subjective (mind-dependent)
Under such definition does it make sense to say Objectively evolution created feeling experiencing organisms having sense of taste, smell, sound, hunger, pain, to survive. So can we apply word objective to mind-dependent experiences or not?
And of course under such definition there is no objective mind-independent ethics as without minds there is no feeling subject of concern to even talk about in first place. So how silly...
Yet they take objective to mean True & Subjective made up or mere contrived opinion.
For me these are semantic word games that distract, I just care about what's fact/true. What many don't get is Even science, math is subjective invention, byproduct of subjective tool of language, doesn't mean we can't create an accurate model and picture of reality.
I believe the Is-Ought gap is a red-herring, sure it's true you can't contrive an Ought from just what IS, but with evolution the OUGHT statement is built-in, it's descriptively a prescriptive value statement imposed on me, I/we/animals literally have nothing to do with it, I'm just by-product an observer. This is key understanding.
There exists no objective or divine commandment "you OUGHT do X" written into the fabric of reality, and therefore if you don't that's Bad, No. That's nonsense/impossible logically.
Rather an Descriptive IS statement of X is a real bad/PROBLEM, denotes/demands a solution by it's very nature of the word, otherwise if it doesn't need solving then it becomes into a non-problem again, so either x categorically IS a PROBLEM or it's not.
The claim/argument... Is that it's Descriptively BAD/Problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around. Our personal preference against torture forever doesn't make it therefore bad. The prescription is built in, forced onto us.
It's like "STOP!" & "GO" What do you say to a dog? "BAD dog!" This is saying it should or shouldn't do something. basically = "No!" "Stop!" That's a prescriptive statement/signal/conveyed message.
Or simply, alls required is Descriptively diagnose Torture as Problematic. Which implies Problem Solution Without necessity of solution there is no problem at all, likewise without problem solution means nothing.
​So you essentially boiled my position down to: "Evolution programmed preference to avoid torture." or "we evolved preference to avoid torture" Does that sound incoherent or what... as if I would make such a silly claim. Keep straw-manning.
Do you think animals have PREFERENCE by default to avoid being tortured burned alive and have sex, or logically preferences are born out of observing problematic negative / positive assigned accordingly through punishment & reward mechanisms aka prescriptions, think long and hard about this one...
This is why value or ethical nihilism is incoherent to me. IF torture be bad, how can it be NOT-bad/neutral to create BAD?
It either is truly BAD or it isn't. It's either real or it's an illusion/delusion and false perception.
Their position must reduce to there is no MEANINGFUL difference between Torture & Bliss. And evolution didn't create any problematic sensation or true punishment whatsoever. Instead, were somehow deluded to view being boiling alive as problematic sensation/BAD, and relief as good, we can't tell the difference or label which is which...
Vegan Gains or any anti-realist needs to substantiate these anti-realist nihilist claims & concede if he agrees with the statements below:
"The value-laden problematic BAD experience of being tortured boiled alive in a vat of acid indefinitely... isn't really bad, evolution didn't successfully impose a real negative punishment mechanism on animals, torture isn't something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are just byproduct observing the imposition, NO! Instead our opinion has everything to do with it... what's problematic torture, one is merely subjectively interpreting/inventing/proclaiming it to be so! Evolution failed!"
"Animals run from fire cause they irrationally unreasonably subjectively interpret it to be bad/problematic sensation or experience, not cause DNA molecule made it so objectively for evolutionary reasons"
"It is all subjective preference like flavor of potato chips, problematic torturous experience isn't bad you just think it's bad or have preference against it."
"You don't logically recognize intrinsic problematic torturous experience then logically assign solution to problem which is preference to avoid that experience, No, you merely have subjective delusional preference against a nail in your eye and there is no logic to it"
"Good is Bad, and Bad is Good depending on opinion, no right or wrong, all subjective tho"
value anti-realism nihilism. INSANE! WORSE than a flat-earth theory!