The Other Worlds Shrine

Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about... 

  • What's everyone been up to so far in 2025?

  • Somehow, we still tolerate each other. Eventually this will be the only forum left.
Somehow, we still tolerate each other. Eventually this will be the only forum left.
 #173431  by Julius Seeker
 Wed Feb 26, 2025 4:56 pm
Everyone left that is.

I just discovered the font colour mechanics

Also, I'm generally behaving a bit like a retired person. Married, moved into a cheaper-to-maintain house, and spend my days writing "romantasy" under a pseudonym. Nothing I'm exceedingly proud about, but it's fun to write and terribly trashy, plus it pays the bills. And I once got a review that said, "At least it's not as bad as Terry Goodkind," which is where my handle originally came from.

If I may run on a tangent for a bit
My excuse for the Sword of Truth stuff: I was in my mid-teens. I didn't know anything about libertarianism, nor did I realize the series was basically a propaganda medium. I also learned about libertarianism via William Godwin, Mary Shelley, and Wollstonecraft... and thought of it as more of a precursor to liberal communism and was too naive to consider that wildly different philosophies could use the same label. So, I didn't realize (even when I heard that Terry Goodkind was a libertarian) that it was the right-wing nonsense... just like I didn't realize at the time that the communism of Karl Marx was not just the opposite of Stalin - despite both being called "Marxism" - but wasn't even the same kind of philosophy - as one was a theoretical model for how Karl Marx thought the socioeconomic structure of the world would evolve, as well as the hows, whys, and whats - and the belief that working-class individuals through a series of revolutions would come to take control of the means of production and eliminate the need for a government or capitalist class; Stalin's Marxism was a system of applied policies for a totalitarian imperialist government where the means of production was controlled by the state. Not much like Marx's predictions at all. Marx predicted the irrelevancy/withering of the state, not the totalitarian dominance of it. So, it's kind of like that - the libertarianism I first learned about was the one focused on maximizing liberty for all people, while Terry Goodkind's libertarianism is maximizing liberty for the economically powerful, while reducing it for everyone who can't achieve financial liberation - since it's economically unfeasible for them to take advantage of the freedom, while the wealthy wield their freedom to maintain a hierarchy.


Back to my post
Books: I'm currently reading a few. Isaac Asimov Foundation and Empire (reading group), and we've done I Robot and Foundation. I just finished a re-read of Dracula and Lord of the Rings - both books I've read over 20 times (perhaps a lot more; I lost count, and I read these ones like I used to watch old Simpsons and Seinfeld re-runs). I recently read Ender's Game for the first time in quite some time, alongside Brave New World and Childhood's End.
I'm preparing to read Bret Easton Ellis's The Rules of Attraction, which I've never read before.
All of these are on e-book. I don't do audiobooks because I'm a very poor listener (my mind wanders, and if the audiobook keeps going, I don't pay attention), and I don't do paper books anymore for a variety of reasons - mainly, they are a bitch to move.

In film, I recently watched The Substance, that's my favourite film of 2024, only seen it while high so far. It's got a lot of ridiculousness in it, but it comes with the art horror genre. The film has a lot of influences from Kubrick, to Verhoeven, Lynch, Cronenberg, and Carpenter.

In music, my favourite album of last year is the Death of Slim Shady - we've discussed it recently in the forum, so I don't need to do it again here - but in short, it's a concept album which has an angry Slim Shady jumping 21 years into the future (from 2003 to 2024) and wondering what the fuck is going on - he has a Fight Club-esque feud with Marshall Mathers. Other than that, I've been rediscovering Lana Del Ray in the past few months. Putting a great deal of her music on my regular rotation along with The Weeknd, Hole, Nirvana, Pac, Lennon, Cranberries, Sneaker Pimps, Lush, The Knife, and Tove Lo (pronounced 2-vah-loo, well a cross between that and toe-vah-loo).

For games, I recently wrapped up Witcher 3: Hearts of Stone and am about 30-40% into a game of Romancing Saga 3 remaster on Switch, and hoping to finish it before the remasters of Suikoden 1 and 2 come out next week - I doubt I'll finish both of those before Xenoblade Chronicles X (which comes out two weeks later, on the 20th of March). Lunar Remasters are coming out in April, but I'll probably do those games after I finish Suikoden 2 and Witcher 3: Blood and Wine. Romancing Saga 3 is graphically a cross between Final Fantasy 6 and Chrono Trigger, as it had a lot of the same crew and direction as those two games - including Kaori Tanaka (AKA Soraya Saga) who was one of the major artist/writers of FF6, and co-creator of Xenogears. It's experimental like the second game in the series, but perhaps a little more straight forward - although, I find a lot of valuable information is hidden.

(the following will be nonsense if you don't know much about Saga games)
The only thing I think you need to know is that any character can use any magic, weapon, or skill, BUT - if the character is magic focused and has 0 SP, never use them as an attacker, if a character is attack focused and has 0 MP, don't use any magic. The reason is that certain characters have shit special skill growth, and others have shit magic growth - and if they hit 45 SP or MP they gain a crown which gives some bonuses to magic or SP; to keep things simple in your first play through, it's best to go for these crowns and then if you choose to New Game+ it, you won't have screwed up the crowns for all time (as I have done on most characters, including Undine who would have otherwise been a better mage instead of a still very good mage with a shit physical attack. For me, I hate looking at guides/walkthroughs unless I'm already invested in the game and know where it's going. Some stuff you can deduce through play, I think I played about 50-80 of the investment mini game before I figured out what the hell was going on (basically, you try to dump more money in, and the different skills have different effects, but the only one I really figured out was "Under the Table" which is 1 million gold, do it twice, and you can ask all of the company's and conglomerates for capital - this is all I needed to win the entire mini-game; and yes, this investment mini-game is exactly what I mean by there not being enough information in game. Still, I am having a load of fun with the game - but I like Romancing Saga 2's story and gameplay better, but graphics, pacing, and characters are superior in this one.

One last thing about Romancing Saga 2, you will screw that one up the first time through. But I think I'm going to be able to finish the third game on play number 1 without much trouble. Both RS2 and 3 have New Game+.
 #173440  by Replay
 Mon Mar 03, 2025 3:45 am
Eric wrote:
Fri Feb 28, 2025 11:12 am
In glorious despair watching the Trump presidency "function"!
I feel really bad for the park rangers and economic watchdogs who are getting fired to pay for this particular economic crusade.

On the other hand, Trump opened his mouth today and didn't say "tariff" for the first time in two months. He then announced that the U.S. would start a Strategic Crypto Reserve and the crypto markets *skyrocketed*. We're talking 30% in a day if you bought at the low (as I did).

I have a fair bit of cryptocurrency right now. I'm still in awe, years later, that the profits from it actually spend like real money. All of a sudden I woke up and I feel like I don't have to worry about where my next set of grocery purchases are going to come from.

Now hey! All this might be built on sand.

But if the President is smart - and I'm not entirely sure he is - but he *is* financially shrewd - he will stop saying "tariffs" for awhile, just put his 25% universal tariff policy in place (bad, and will wreck markets again, but let's get it over with), and then announce the formal National Trust idea that he has been floating around for some time as an idea adjunct to the US Sovereign Wealth Fund and the Strategic Crypto Reserve and the possible DOGE Stimulus that Elon is hawking.

Trump's been telling us for some time that he's going to economically save America. I have my doubts! But if so, that's the way to do it.

The trade wars will not save America - tariffs are taxes and taxes are never great for trade, lol. Laying off park rangers to provide more tax breaks to the rich is also not going to save America.

But a stimulus round, a wealth fund, audit and increase the national gold reserves, and start a crypto reserve all at once - that might actually produce the kind of economic boom we haven't seen since the 90's.
 #173441  by Replay
 Mon Mar 03, 2025 3:51 am
This is probably the only genuinely economically game-changing thing that I've seen Donald Trump do.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/ ... alth-fund/

There is an article about "liquidating public land" to pay for this. I think that's the wrong way to frame it. The U.S. should offer cheap real estate to citizens and families again.

I live in a state where three-quarters of the land is either state or Federal land.

I'd def like to see a lot less fascist xenophobia from this Administration and a lot more stimulus and economic development.

If Trump forty-acres-and-a-mule'd America, his name might just go down in history for doing something positive.
 #173443  by Julius Seeker
 Wed Mar 05, 2025 12:56 am
Don’t you love those politicians who scream from the top of their lungs how much they love capitalism and being leader of the free world only to abandon both when they get into power?

Tariffs on your closest allies and trading partners goes against the success of both.

Trump isn’t an intelligent guy, someone back there reverse engineered the mercantilism that Adam Smith criticized, and is implementing it in a very sloppy fashion. My guess is Elon Musk, he seems to think that Mercantilism is a good idea… I mean, it’s a good idea for him with all his corporate roles and government cronyism… However, for everyone else - the poverty rate at the height of mercantilism was absurdly high, and in some countries it ended in rolling heads - and you really don’t want to see that kind of carnage and chaos in current times with current technologies available.

If there is any direction that society should be heading, it’s back toward Keynesian economics - it’s always good to weave that in and out from time to time. There are new industries to explore, new needs for society, and harnessing the government to build the infrastructure for those will create millions of jobs on the top, and when it gets opened back up to capitalism, tens of millions more. The “Green New Deal” was one such plan and it hits a lot of those demands of the public and opportunities for future industry. Ed Markey is ancient now though - there needs to be someone else to take up that chair.

I don’t think a static mixed economy is best. You can probably work this all out in a spreadsheet simulation, but I’d guess the ideal cycle is something like Keynesian > Liberalism > Social Democracy > Keynesianism > etc… just cycle through that over and over again.

Keynesian = tax the fuck out of the wealthy. Harness government to invest and build the infrastructure.
Liberalism = a more laissez faire democratized capitalistic push to create a new corporate/capitalist aristocracy to exploit the new opportunities and infrastructure.
Social Democracy = invest in the working class and society in general, this is where the majority of the population reaps the rewards of the first two phases.
But! Instead of switching back to classical liberalism when the coffers start to turn, tax and spend more again. Switch it back to Keynesianism to explore new opportunities while seeing to the needs of the people - and phase out the dinosaur industries while making way for the new - investors can shift away from old companies to new ones.

I’m just spitballing here. But I think something like this would make for a healthier economy than this mixed approach or switching to classical liberalism on top of a rotting infrastructure with weakened opportunities to rebuild, and rent-economy dinosaurs roaming the markets like giant fiefdom overlords.

To tag on - the amount of infrastructure necessary to make these new industries viable, and it will make the drive for housing expansion not just a compassionate social service, but work in conjunction with the new infrastructure for the new industries.

The big problem will always be conservatives. Conservatives love stagnation, it’s very easy to maintain your place when the economy is stuck in rent mode.
 #173444  by Replay
 Wed Mar 05, 2025 6:35 pm
Julius Seeker wrote:
Wed Mar 05, 2025 12:56 am
Don’t you love those politicians who scream from the top of their lungs how much they love capitalism and being leader of the free world only to abandon both when they get into power?

Tariffs on your closest allies and trading partners goes against the success of both.

LOL real talk, I thought conservatives hated taxes.
Julius Seeker wrote:
Wed Mar 05, 2025 12:56 am
Trump isn’t an intelligent guy, someone back there reverse engineered the mercantilism that Adam Smith criticized, and is implementing it in a very sloppy fashion. My guess is Elon Musk, he seems to think that Mercantilism is a good idea… I mean, it’s a good idea for him with all his corporate roles and government cronyism… However, for everyone else - the poverty rate at the height of mercantilism was absurdly high, and in some countries it ended in rolling heads - and you really don’t want to see that kind of carnage and chaos in current times with current technologies available.

Trump is not a deep-thinking man. He does not like to read, and in his first term he genuinely would take some of the paperwork that crossed his desk that he did not like and tear it up. Because of the Presidential Records Act which requires all Presidential paperwork to be preserved for history, the WH had to pay two interns to basically follow him around and tape back together all the stuff he tore up, which I find hilarious.

He is however a canny and very shrewd businessman. I'm hoping he'll ease off on the tariff talk for long enough to not blow a hole in the economy. If he really goes through with a universal 25% US tariff he just might Smoot-Hawley the world, and then we would see some real, serious economic pain.


Julius Seeker wrote:
Wed Mar 05, 2025 12:56 am
If there is any direction that society should be heading, it’s back toward Keynesian economics - it’s always good to weave that in and out from time to time. There are new industries to explore, new needs for society, and harnessing the government to build the infrastructure for those will create millions of jobs on the top, and when it gets opened back up to capitalism, tens of millions more. The “Green New Deal” was one such plan and it hits a lot of those demands of the public and opportunities for future industry. Ed Markey is ancient now though - there needs to be someone else to take up that chair.

I don’t think a static mixed economy is best. You can probably work this all out in a spreadsheet simulation, but I’d guess the ideal cycle is something like Keynesian > Liberalism > Social Democracy > Keynesianism > etc… just cycle through that over and over again.

Keynesian = tax the fuck out of the wealthy. Harness government to invest and build the infrastructure.
Liberalism = a more laissez faire democratized capitalistic push to create a new corporate/capitalist aristocracy to exploit the new opportunities and infrastructure.
Social Democracy = invest in the working class and society in general, this is where the majority of the population reaps the rewards of the first two phases.
But! Instead of switching back to classical liberalism when the coffers start to turn, tax and spend more again. Switch it back to Keynesianism to explore new opportunities while seeing to the needs of the people - and phase out the dinosaur industries while making way for the new - investors can shift away from old companies to new ones.

I’m just spitballing here. But I think something like this would make for a healthier economy than this mixed approach or switching to classical liberalism on top of a rotting infrastructure with weakened opportunities to rebuild, and rent-economy dinosaurs roaming the markets like giant fiefdom overlords.

I love Keynesianism. You won't see it out of the Trump Administration. Project 2025 is full of some of the most backwards, selfish, revanchist people I have ever seen in governance. Apparently they fired half the damn IRS today, or are planning to. Nobody loves the IRS, but even I'm worried that the essential functions of governance will be crippled in America by next year.
Julius Seeker wrote:
Wed Mar 05, 2025 12:56 am
To tag on - the amount of infrastructure necessary to make these new industries viable, and it will make the drive for housing expansion not just a compassionate social service, but work in conjunction with the new infrastructure for the new industries.

The big problem will always be conservatives. Conservatives love stagnation, it’s very easy to maintain your place when the economy is stuck in rent mode.

Conservatives hate and fear change and modernity, and also tend to be really selfish. And there is a huge amount of just bad hick racism behind this current lot. I had an ex-girlfriend who showed me iFunny, which is sometimes a very funny site, but also has a bunch of damn Nazi conservatives all over it. The far right is not benign. I see calls to kill minorities and gay people every week, if I actually subject myself to iFunny every week. Some of these people are VERY bad, very racist rednecks with very bad opinions straight out of 1861.

I am however not thrilled with American liberalism these days either. The Dems down here are just terrible. Who could have predicted that spending an entire two election cycles crapping on Bernie's progressives, cheering for bad wars and sucking up to the CHENEYS, THE CHENEYS AAAAAAH would lose the Dems one of their most important elections? Besides, of course, everybody?

It's curious to be this politically homeless. But it gives me an opportunity to cast off dogma and groupthink, too.
 #173453  by Julius Seeker
 Fri Mar 14, 2025 9:09 am
Thanks. I was probably a little high when I wrote that and phrased it wrong - more like “living married life” would have been better. I’ve actually been married for almost 15 years.

I think I’m fairly close political spectrum to you. I agree that there’s an issue with politics. I also feel politically homeless, I used to belong to the Canadian Greens and had an official part in provincial and federal Green parties: Council, campaign management, and committees. But I exited with a sour taste on politics. There are good people in there, but also a lot of the not-so-great in every party, and I’m mostly talking the behind the scenes people. Elizabeth May, before I got involved in the party, I had a high opinion of her - not so much anymore. It’s weird, because I agree with some of these people, almost entirely, politically - but not on their means. I’m not a big fan of political cults, even if I agree with their policies entirely. I don’t know, it seems counter-intuitive to have all this devotion to a leader when the goal is to have a more equal and equitable society.

In a nutshell, my alignment is leftist economically, and a libertarian socially. Mostly because the label of “libertarianism” has been hijacked by objectivists/Tea Party/“let the free market decide” types - whereas the classical libertarians were about limiting and reducing the aristocratic end of society, and not allowing them to get entrenched (especially on generational timescales) - so I could say classical libertarian. Not sure if that’s where you align, but I’m guessing it’s close.

I know less about Bernie Sanders than I do about Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey. They’re anll American, but also from my neck of North America (Mass and NH are two of the places I’ve been most frequently to in the US). While I hold these three in high regard, I can’t say the same thing for all of Bernie Sanders campaign people, there was a lot of personal ambition in that campaign - although, the campaign worked quite effectively, so who am I to say they’re wrong?

US Senator Ed Markey is the least famous of the three, but also the one I probably align most closely to in the US.
 #173458  by Replay
 Fri Mar 21, 2025 11:16 pm
Oh, man. Totally my experience with the Dems down here. The Dems think they are Gryffindor - every damn last one of them - when in reality, they are Hufflepuff deeply infiltrated by Slytherin. I can't abide the right and will likely be a leftist in some form until the day I die, but I also can't abide the stupid, cowlike refusal the modern left has against looking at any of its own sins. Watching Kamala suck up to the Cheneys last time is the best summary of how horrifyingly ineffective and simultaneously corrupt the U.S. Democratic Party really is - like, really? They just don't give a damn about ANY of us who helped them win back in 2008? They want to side with the LAST bunch of Nazis in the Republican Party who pretended to be loyal American patriots?

But it all relates to this - there's a very simple problem with U.S. politics, and that is that the ClA is running the show at the top of both parties, and arguably has been since '63, though I'm loath to discuss it too deeply for fear of getting this board targeted. And the ClA is also deeply in bed with the mafia - who they hired to kill JFK, and likely several other Kennedys besides. It is a lawless, brutal agency with a deceptively small budget ($650m or so per year officially) which disguises possibly a TRILLION dollars or more in deep-state black funds that they actually have access to. They have polluted the well of our politics so deeply that it is now impossible to be nominated as a major-party Presidential candidate without their blessing. The LUCKY ones are the ones who are just cheated out of their races preemptively - Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul in my lifetime - the unlucky ones, well, again, ask the Kennedys.

The Shrine is too small for anyone to care about, if I weren't here. But I am here, and I am a grandson of a former FDIC Chairman who refuses to play ball with the shit of Satan who are currently running the system. I know people here before have mocked me for being "paranoid" or a "conspiracy theorist", but in the fifteen or so years I've really been on the outs here I've collected a folder full of threats against my life and that of my family.

TLDR: It is far worse behind the scenes in American politics on both sides than most Americans can possibly imagine. Both parties are hideously corrupt and controlled by the same bunch of Satanic lunatics at the top, and if anyone wants evidence on that, just look at the way both Bill Clinton and Donald Trump partied with Jeff Epstein for a decade or more.

Anyone who wants to see the real shape of the box, just look at Epstein's Black Book.