I was banned from r/soapmaking because I refused to accept that buying soap that someone else made, melting it and adding glitter and perfume, and putting it into moulds was making soap.
I raise the pigs, render the lard, and turn the lard into soap using lye. I make soap. They do arts and crafts using soap.
My son just got a soapmaking kit. He had a great time adding dye and glitter to his “homemade” soaps. And that’s great… for a seven-year-old.
Yup. I have no issue with people doing arts and crafts with soap, especially 7 year olds.
Seriously?! I had no idea people did that, assumed they were doing like me, lye and fat. Saw an idiot woman on YouTube post:
“NOT using lye on MY skin!”
Replied:
“It’s no longer lye after the chemical reactions. And this is why we need better science education for small children. You would have failed my 4th-grade science class.”
Yes. Melt and pour soap uses glycerine soap that people buy in huge blocks at the craft store, like Michael’s. They melt it, add colour, trinkets, glitter, and perfume, and pour it into moulds. Arts and crafts.
Actively adding glitter to our waterways really seems to be the dumbest thing about all of this.
That is very true. I would hope that they use edible or biodegradable glitter instead of the horrible plastic stuff.
I’m not even mildly part of the hobby, and even I am of the firm opinion that “soapmaking” involves the actual making of soap.
Nobody would call me a cook if I ran to the closest restaurant, grabbed some dish, added some spice and herbs on the way back, and “Voilla, steak de Neidu!”
Also, soap has a melting point?
Glycerine soap does. It’s called melt and pour soap.
As long as you’re not saying you have to raise pigs to be a soap maker I agree with you.
A soap maker makes soap. I make soap. If you don’t make the soap you are doing arts and crafts with soap that someone else made. Both are fine and fun but you’re not a soap maker if you don’t make the soap.
I mean like store bought lard and such not pre-made soap. I know a lot of people that “make” soap and a few people who do actually make soap and they usually do it for allergen reasons because even the fragrance free products irritate their skin.
As long as you’re buying oil or fat and lye or potash and making soap that’s soap making. You’re making soap. Most of our soaps are lard based but use other oils to improve the texture. Some, like our shaving soap, have no lard in them. I’m just taking about the people who buy big blocks of soap at the craft store, melt it and pour it, and call themselves soap makers.
If you did 99% of that and added 1% of premade oils/scents, is it still soapmaking? 80%? 40%? Where’s the arbitrary line? I can see your point but I wouldn’t die on the hill. I’d rather distinguish my product by virtue of exactly your process. That’s far more valuable than the label.
The process of making soap separates the state where soap does not exist from the state where soap does exist. If your process begins with fats and a base and ends with soap you are making soap. If your process starts with soap and ends with soap with color, trinkets, perfume, and glitter in pretty shapes you are not making soap, you are doing arts and crafts with soap that someone else made.
Sometimes, we use tomatoes, peppers, and onions that we grow in our garden to make spaghetti sauce. Sometimes, when we’re pressed for time we open a jar and pour sauce into a pot. In one case we are making sauce. In the other we are not. If I take that jarred sauce and add sliced sausage I am enhancing the sauce but I am not making the sauce.
So, in your question, if 99% of my process is buying soap that someone else made and 1% of it is adding oil to that already made soap then, no, that is not making soap. If you saponify that 1% of oil into soap then the 1% of soap did not exist before and does now so you made that 1% of the soap.
As I’ve said repeatedly, there is absolutely nothing wrong with doing arts and crafts by buying melt and pour soap, adding trinkets, glitter, colour, and perfume and pouring it into interesting moulds but there is no saponification and therefore no soap making happening. You’re making pretty bars of soap but you’re not making soap.
Just because you’re so passionate about it I feel like arguing you, but I can’t come up with any soap-specific arguments.
We could argue about something else.
No we couldn’t!
So I am on your side. What they are doing is not making soap as much as accessorizing existing soap.
Is a tab four spaces or two?
Neither, it’s an actual tab character
This is the correct answer. Also it’s going to depend on whether your environment (i.e. is it an actual word processor vs. a text editor?) allows for margins and tabs to be set.
A tab is not made of spaces, it goes to the next tab stop, which is as big as you set it to be.
This isn’t your argument, neighbor.
I’ll just wish you good day then.
Let’s all compromise on three spaces
Can we make it π spaces? It’s such a nice number.
recordscratch.wav
Ouch. This hurts. This hurts so much.
IT’S FOUR.
Hi, it’s your friendly nano user here to remind you that it’s actually 8.
It’s your right to be wrong.
No it’s not!
Wait…
Hot take: it depends on the language.
- Markup? 2 spaces
- Procedural? 4 spaces
- Natural? 8 spaces
Behold: HUML, a markup language so opinionated that it forces its users to use an indentation of exactly 2 spaces https://huml.io/specifications/v0-1-0/#indentation
Honestly I like the rest of the specification and being opinionated definitely has its advantages, but I hate using 2 spaces for indentation. Maybe the people who were using tabs for indentation were actually on to something …
Which IDE is best?
IDEs are for script kiddies, real programmers use vim.
Nah, real programmers use echo, cat, and pipes
Nah, real programmers use a magnetized needle and a steady hand
Vim is ok, useful when you don’t have an ide handy, but making a complex multiplatform distributed system across multiple teams and repos in such a limited application is just bonkers. Downright lunacy.
Do Balrogs have wings according to JRR Tolkein?
Really? Why is that even a debate? It’s been a little while since I’ve read the books, but I seem to remember Durin’s Bane as being described as having the shape of a man, thus no wings.
Other Balrogs are perhaps less clearly described. Unless there’s some line that explicitly describes a balrog with wings, I’d assume they don’t have them, and even then I’d assume it applies to only the particular balrog in question.
A better Balrog related debate would be determining the exact number of them and whether or not any survived in Middle-Earth into the fourth age. It’s possible there are two or more still kicking around.
Okay. First off, why would a creature that lives exclusively under a mountain have wings? Second, I’m now invested in this controversy I and want to know more.
They didn’t start under the mountain. They are, effectively, the same creatures as the wizards but corrupted. What makes the scene epic is that Gandalf was facing his match.
Oh, my naive friend. This is a rabbit hole that doesn’t end, one might call it a balroghole.
Now I’m even more invested. And I’ve absolutely taken sides.
I consider this matter settled.
10 minute video? Shit that’s barely scratching the surface. There are dissertations out there arguing both sides. I don’t think anyone has settled the matter.
What dissertations? Setting aside interpretation, were there factual errors in that video? I’ve read the books. I’ve now seen the video. The controversy seems to center mostly on a failure of reading comprehension and an ignorance of both literary devices and various uses of the word fly (which is particularly ironic given a certain exclamation made especially popular by the movies).
Now for my controversial take: This “controversy” is pretty emblematic of the many ways the films distorted and mutilated Tolkien’s stories and characters.
In Magic: the Gathering people are discussing “universe beyond” sets. Those are foreign IPs like Doctor Who, LoTR, Marvel, Fallout, Sonic etc injected into magic, which already had fucking good setting and lore.
It brings them lots of money, at least short term, while destroying the game we love.
MtG has become the Funko Pops of gaming.
How does it “destroy” the game? Aren’t they effectively existing cards with tie-in art/names? Pardon the lack of familiarity, I only played Magic for about a year with a friend group half a decade or so ago.
Or are they introducing entirely new carda/mechanics now? Or saying that these are somehow involved with the canon setting?
They aren’t involved in canon setting, at least yet. But there was a period of “hat set” in-universe sets when quality of art and lore of main sets dropped. Although last few were very decent.
Yes, they aren’t just reprints under new names now. They are full sets of some IP without in-universe cards to match them. They are cards that likely won’t be reprinted ever (because due to IP they don’t even own them, can’t reprint on-whim). Which means those “The One Ring” and the likes are only gonna grow in price. Heck, even playable commons like “Loriel Revealed”.
They also aren’t owning rights for digital distribution on some of those IP even and in Magic Arena those cards are replaced with something else in-universe-ish which doesn’t exist in paper.
Yuck, just what Magic needs, more mechanically unique limited release cards.
And if they can make “lore friendly” versions for digital, just publicly commit to releasing those some number of months/years after the tie in set. Make it part of the contract when initially making the tie in. This shouldn’t be difficult.
No, they are mechanically unique cards. There’s a handful of cards from past Secret Lairs that received Universes Within variants, but now they’re making whole Universes Beyond sets that are unlikely to ever receive those variants. Those sets are also Standard legal, and have resulted in the largest and most bloated Standard pool of all time. Thankfully, that hasn’t even mattered because Wizards balancing is still awful, so even with such a large cardpool Standard only has two competitive decks.
My biggest issue is just that all of these Universes Beyond sets are advertisements. It really sucks that in our capitalist hellscape, I can’t even escape from ads in a cardgame.
LEGO enthusiasts ( !lego@piefed.social ) are usually split on the “non-LEGO” compatible sets, especially since the basic LEGO patent went to the free domain. Some people think they’re “fake”, some other people think it’s a way to still afford the hobby when the prices have skyrocketed
My personal opinion is that if another brand can match LEGO’s consistent quality I’d be open to it but as long as the quality of the individual pieces remains so freaking low it’s not worth it (looking at you Mega Blocks!)
From what I heard there are quite a few brands now that reached Lego’s quality (indeed, definitely not Mega Blocks)
Okay that’s really cool actually! I remember back when I actually built with Legos there were some specialized pieces made by enthusiasts since Lego didn’t have a good equivalent yet, such as steam locomotive wheels for example, or replacement 9V Lego Trains tracks, but those were all different than full on Lego competitors
I’m more pissed about the proliferation of “non-standard” LEGO pieces showing up in actual LEGO sets. Things that aren’t standard windows, bricks, panels/slabs, wheels, and windshields. Kinda ruins the creativity of the set when there is some giant multibrick or custom curvature I’ve never seen before.
I’m conflicted. I prided myself as a kid on having exclusively on-brand LEGOs and always considered Megablox and such inferior in quality, aesthetic, “cool factor”, etc.
But on the other hand:
Plus I’m into 3D printing and like the “stick it to the man” aspect of 3D printing that might reduce people’s dependence on serving some company’s profit motive for things like shoes (Nike, etc), replacement parts (like parts for my washing machine, improving repairability), figurines (D&D miniatures, for instance), and, indeed, toys like LEGO-compatible pieces.
Maybe I should go 3D print me some Bionicles.
Honestly LEGO really hasn’t increased in price very much at all over the last ~20 years. They run about $0.10 a brick in the majority of cases (I think they are now closer to $0.11, but it’s close). I don’t really care for non genuine sets since the quality/tolerances I have found never to be good enough, but if folks like them then great; but to say prices have skyrocketed is just demonstrably false.
Mine is interest in retro gaming which oh boy, there’s a lot:
- CRT vs Line-doubler device like OSSC and RetroTINK
- HDMI Mods/Adapters
- Native hardware vs Emulation
- Grading mint game and the price for it (I still see it as snake-oils)
- If [Insert old game] hasn’t aged well or is that person simply not good at it.
Bonus points if that person happens to be Gen-Z and comments selection bitching about Gen-Z. I hate the weird elitism retro-gaming community have which as a Zoomer, it does put me off wanting to play older games if I be judge for being too stupid to not get it straight away.
Older millennial, grew up playing NES and after. Emulation is fine and allows everyone to play titles they otherwise might have missed. With you on the sbdke oil.
I mostly play emulation as it just good enough. I would only play on native if I really love the game or saw a game at a game shop that’s cheap and want to give it a try. Otherwise, I find if I play games on emulation, is often that I know or heard of a game that suppose to be good but want to try it for first time.
If it has PC Port and isn’t too bad (unless there’s mod to fix it), I would rather play that, especially if it’s a shooter games as I’m not too fond aiming on stick without gyro controls. Even if it natively doesn’t support it, I would try create controller layout via Steam Input which is super hacky
Okay, I personally don’t like the sound of a line doubler compared to just using a plain CRT. Had to look up what a line doubler is, and it feels like it kinda defeates the purpose of playing retro games, IMO, especially stylistically. Why would I want seemingly better graphics on a retro game?
Will absolutely agree that grading games, just like trading cards, is a cult adjacent scam, if not an outright cult.
Also, screw people that get uber defensive if you aren’t immediately a pro the first time you ever boot up a retro game. They can absolutely suck a lime for all I care.
I dont give a shiiiiit if you are using non-oe hardware or playing roms vs oe carts/discs. I use roms and I play on modded consoles because its easier and more consistent than emulating (generally) but I’m not gonna shame anyone for playing with their joystick differently.
I will say I don’t get the collecting aspect of it. For me, the sentimentality of it is the software not what the cart looks like. Krikizz for the win (imo).
Analogue needs to get their shit together though…
Ah, you’re my people and yeah, I find it can be too toxic in some communities. Some games age like wine, others age like milk, and even more were just… rotten to begin with, haha. People often have a hard time differentiating between nostalgia and objectively good (and bad) game experiences. I got a set of every game ever released up until PS2 and yikes, there’s a lot of garbage.
And people who want to make this a collection thing can fuck all the way off - I saw a Chrono Trigger cartridge priced at $350 in a local store, which itself was a kinda common game. If collecting is your thing, fine, but not all of us have the means (or desire lol) to invest in that, just like people who collect old figures.
Some games age like wine, others age like milk, and even more were just… rotten to begin with, haha. People often have a hard time differentiating between nostalgia and objectively good (and bad) game experiences.
This! Reminds me when I was playing OG Tomb Raider and the second game and while I love them, I be lying if I say that it doesn’t feel dated. The combat is my major pet-preeve of the game where I would rather cheese the combat selection as the guns doesn’t feel much special, the AI doesn’t feel either fair and it didn’t felt it took in mind of both Player’s tank control and also the automatic camera which is horrible. As soon as you fighting the Mummy in TR1, expect your camera jumping all over the place.
And people who want to make this a collection thing can fuck all the way off - I saw a Chrono Trigger cartridge priced at $350 in a local store, which itself was a kinda common game.
Reminds me when I was at CeX, seeing Slient Hill around £100 which upset me as I want to both try to it and also, I just love just owning a game and looking at it. Speaking of that, I need to boot up Duckstation and play Slient Hill as I played Resident Evil REmake on the Gamecube and I do want to try play more survival horror game
I’m into bicycles and there are plenty. This one seems mostly settled now but “disc brakes vs rim brakes” gets some people worked up. Rim brake fans see disc brakes as needlessly expensive and complex. Disc brake fans will point out the better stopping power, especially in wet weather. And it doesn’t slowly wear out your wheel rim.
Even a lot of the disc brake fans get heated at the mention of hydraulic disc brakes compared to cable-actuated. They see hydraulic brake-bleeding as the pinnacle of complexity. I used to do my own car maintenance. In that world, bleeding your brakes is considered a very beginner-friendly maintenance activity. I think cyclists are way too resistant to change.
Mechanical keyboards have several (clicky/thocky/tactile/linear/etc switches, Cherry MX Browns, etc), but if I had to choose one, maybe ortholinear vs staggered.
A picture will probably illustrate it best:
Ortholinear evangelists contend that the staggered layout was invented for mechanical typewriters exclusively to reduce the incidence of typebar collisions and is detrimental to optimal ergonomics. I, as someone who prefers staggered keyboards, just don’t want to be ruined for the majority of keyboards out there. (If my muscle memory “learns” that “m” is “here” because I use an ortholinear keyboard at home, I’m worried it’ll be awkward to use a standard keyboard on a laptop or whatever and I’ll be fat-fingering keys all over the place.) I might switch sides someday. Who knows. But for now, I’ll stick with staggered.
Been on a tiny ortho KB for months now. Just now ketting the hana ow it. Kinsa.
Also, the delete key is above the backspace. I had no idea how either key worked because I’ve been working on reflex for 30 years.
As an undergrad, I worked in the university’s tech support dept. We had one person come in–I think he was a computer engineer–and set his keyboard to Dvorak each day. Then he’d just leave and nobody else could use that computer until he’d come back and we’d yell at him.
As someone who has switched back and forth from a split ortho board and a “regular” keyboard depending on vibes it’s not actually that bad. I learned colemak dh on the ortho though and can not use it on the regular keyboard for some reason so you might have a point to some extent.
Reminds me it’s been a while since I posted to !mechanical_keyboards@programming.dev
How to best learn from AI in the game of Go.
AI is an extraordinary tool for game analysis because you can set it to analyze every move in ever game you play, and it’s stronger than any human teacher. It also overturned a lot of old school opening sequences and ushered in a new meta.
But there are limitations to it. AI can tell you that a move is bad and where it should be played, but it can’t explain why. AI plays on a razor’s edge, if it can find one specific line of play that works to live in an area, then it won’t bother trying to strengthen it, while a human player couldn’t read that far ahead. Human play depends on heuristics, like, “It’s generally a good idea to place your stones into this shape” but the AI doesn’t think in those terms at all, it tirelessly reads out a ton of variations every time.
Once, I was in a room at an event where a professional had flown in from Asia (I forget which country) to give reviews. One of the players getting a review started arguing about something he said, saying, “I ran this through AI and it said my move was good.” People have a lot of opinions on that sort of thing, some people would say that the AI is the ultimate judge of whether a move is good or not and that the student was in the right to challenge the pro saying something wrong, while others might say that student should be more respectful and consider multiple perspectives, like, “If you just want to go off AI, then why even bring it to the pro?”
Some people try to focus on playing the “top engine move,” seeing that as the best practice to reach optimal play. But others feel like that makes games too “same-y,” and leaves gaps in your knowledge against unconventional play, along with the problem that humans can’t match it’s computational power which that style of play depends on. But, everyone uses it to some degree, it’s just too useful.
Also, different online servers have implemented AI tools. The most controversial is Tygem, which introduced a feature where you can pay money to use AI analysis during a game, below a certain (relatively high) rank. Pretty much everyone hates this. Like, you could just run an AI locally, but that’s called “cheating” and it doesn’t stop being cheating just because you decided to pay microtransactions in a 4000 year old game.
Honestly, I could go on longer than anyone’s interested in talking about go controversies, like not too long ago there was a controversy between a Chinese and Korean player where the Chinese player was penalized for not keeping his captures visible, which was a new and kind of obscure rule.
So in rhythm games, chart reuse and “piracy” is… a surprisingly big issue that is related to copyright. This warrants a bit more explanation
For example, the IP of Dance Dance Revolution/DDR is owned solely by Bemani and Konami; both are Japanese companies which are not known for being generous with copyright, mind you. The DDR series produces lots of original music which are owned by the IP holders, and just about every chart (the thing you actually play) created for each piece of music in the game is also technically copyright protected
Problem is, DDR got wayyy too popular so there are a lot of clones out there; in fact most arcades in the US would have a “DDR” cabinet when it is actually a clone. Usually something like Stepmania (which is FOSS btw). Would it be considered piracy if someone else uses the official chart even though they are not running one of the officially licensed DDR cabs?
I don’t know the details as to how it ended up like this, but it seems like a lot of games strictly ban such “piracy”, whereas DDR is a bit of an outlier. Case in point, Beatmania series (one of the oldest rhythm game series) treats such acts as piracy, and the simulation community is onboard with this so all of the ripped official charts would be referred to as “illegal BMS”… but this is compensated by having a massive collection of community charts that have no affiliation with the IP holders of Beatmania whatsoever. DDR… seems to allow all of their charts to be released as simfiles, case in point.
There’s also the funny case for Sound Voltex (SDVX). This game was also created by Konami, with lots of official songs/charts and a dedicated simulation community. Problem is that SDVX released a PC version of the game (don’t buy their official controllers they are ass), and all of the official charts were reuploaded and became available to anyone playing the simulators. These charts are in a very weird legal limbo as far as I’m aware… but everyone knows that simulator users play the official charts
After diving in and learning it this year, I fully believe learning Vim makes you a better developer and it should be commonly taught to developers. It has done far more for my dev skills than any single AI tool ever has, and I dont have to worry about it hallucinating.
Personally, I think Vim should be made into standard knowledge for anyone who consistently uses a keyboard for their work. A lot more software than I expected supports it, and it makes any form of text editting tremendously better.
I’d be curious to know why. I know just enough about vim that I can use it if I’m forced to (perhaps a barebones Linux system) but usually my default text editor is nano - what makes vim that much better for development?
For VIM development check out ctags (or LSP) with auto complete. It’s magic for large projects.
For me, its the massive range of editting manipulation it provides, and the reduction of dependence on using a mouse. For context, I have some level of wrist injury, so my complaints around mouse usage mostly stem from that.
I would love to explain in detail what makes Vim great, but I think noboilerplate on youtube did it best with this video: https://youtu.be/sqm4-B07LsE
But if I had to explain one of my favorite parts of vim, its the fact that I keep finding new solutions to improve my ability to edit code with an ease I had never felt before. Using ‘vf’ in order to easily highlight from where my cursor is to whatever character I want to get to has saved me so much time when rewriting variables or cleaning up code. Ive barely learned about what EX mode can do, but being a lot of work involves correcting other code or duplicating it for use with a different part of the code base, being able to use the substring command is drastically more helpful than your standard ctrl+H will do. Easy example :.,+5s/foo/bar/g Colon is what puts you in EX mode. Period is the current line, comma indicates this is a range, +5 means the next five lines, s means substring which is the command that we are using. “foo” is the word to search for, “bar” is what “foo” will be replaced with, and g means to replace all instances. Drastically more robust and useful than what ctrl+H does.
Vim just makes it easier to manipulate text. Its drastically reduced strain on my wrists, and puts me in a flow state far more often than I ever experienced before I used it. Its kind of like aiming in a first person shooter with a mouse instead of an analog stick. Both will get the job done, but a mouse is drastically more capable at being accurate. Thats what vim feels like for coding for me.
deleted by creator
I am either misunderstanding your post or you might be misunderstanding mine.
Vim is not the command line. It can be used in a command line, which is a nice feature, but I use Vim because it makes editting text a far smoother and more reliable experience than most text editting GUIs have provided.
I also would not say command line is superior to GUI. Both have their trade offs, and like you said, use the tool that works best for you.
As a developer though, I do fully believe devs should be taught how to use command line, and I believe they should be taught how to use Vim. Command line is near mandatory, because sometimes you cannot easily do something using a GUI, especially if that GUI is just buttons that run command line prompts like a lot of Git tools are. Solving Git issues without using command line frankly feels like a horrid scenario because you dont have the finer level of control required to unfuck yourself out of a Git issue.
Vim should be taught because it improves navigation and editting of text in much more efficient and faster ways than a GUI generally can. This is very useful in development, as editting code is often a bit tedious with a mouse and common keyboard shortcuts, and not needing to take your hands off your keyboard really lends itself to keeping focused on your code. It improves productivity while also being a useful skill to learn, as a lot of apps support Vim bindings that don’t necessarily involve code, such as Obsidian.
For other keyboard based professions, Vim would be useful but not mandatory.
If I misunderstood your post as bashing my post, then thats my bad. The way I read it felt like it was bashing my view of Vim by connecting it to the viewpoint of command line being better than GUI, which is not how I view Vim or command line at all.
This one is starting to sway one direction more than the other but: Using AI for indie game development. (For music, voice work, art, code, writing, gameplay, etc)
You’ve probably seen many arguments for and against AI at this point so I won’t harp on that too much. It is interesting/frustrating to see where some devs focuses are, and why this has contributed to an insane amount of AI art in games lately.
One of my hobbies is the sport of weightlifting (the snatch and the clean & jerk). There is a rule called the Pressout Rule that keeps lifters from pressing the weight out overhead - basically you can’t catch a weight overhead and then muscle it out to full extension. This rule is pretty unpopular with a lot of folks because the judges judging the lift may see your arm shake a bit and decide it was a pressout. I’m not a big fan of the rule.
Also the oscillation ruling on the North Korean recently.
Ugh, yes.
Olivia Reeves’ WR C&J had just as much oscillation. I hate to say that since I’m a big fan, but I could see it.
To make sure I understand: you should lift with such force that the weight is flying and that momentum is what lifts it up, not you using your muscle strength to push it to the full extension?
Yeah, but it’s a bit dumb since you’re theoretically trying to lift as much overhead in one movement (snatch) or two (clean and jerk). As long as it’s overhead it should just be allowed. Or at the very least, there should be no subjective rulings. These days you can use a camera to determine how much movement there is, etc.
Exactly. And if I press it out a bit, who cares? Anyone who’s depending on pressing strength to get it overhead is just not going to do well.
Yes, pretty much. The weight should go up because of the explosive movement from your lower body. The arms are just meant to catch it overhead.
Thanks, now I know.
I’m an amateur gunsmith. How long you got to read stupid gun controversies? Check out the 9mm vs. .45ACP videos. The testing and talk never fucking ends. Colt .45 for me. :)
I got a take that never comes up. Single-shot/break-action rifles and shotguns are wildly effective. Crack it open, remove spent shell, feed a fresh one, snap it closed, aim, fire, repeat. Shotguns that eject the spent shell are the bomb and some people break that function on purpose!
No one argues that automatic weapons are effective, only good for giggles and suppressing fire in combat. You can’t hold your aim point and just waste ammo. Single-shots are the opposite. You’re forced to slow down and really make the shot. Once you get the hang of your gun, you get in a rhythm and can unload lead like hell. Got to where my 1950s 12-gauge kick shells over my shoulder!
If I had to hunt or defend myself, prosecute any sort of violence, and NOT have my AR-15, and NOT be half awake at 3AM, I think I’d rather have my single-shot rifles or shotguns. I’m certainly better at target practice with a single-shot.
Best part? <slight exaggeration> They’re unbreakable, can’t malfunction or jam, no magazine to fuck up. Got explosives in it? It will go bang.
In electric guitar loony land, tone woods
I’m over here in acoustic guitar land, where we argue over the same thing. And even here I think it makes much less of a difference than people think. For electrics? Seems like a pointless distinction.
But if I didn’t spend hours online talking about the importance of an real ebony fret board and the blood moon mahoganynbody only producing good sounds when it has the blood of the innocent infused on the fourth new moon of the seventh equinox, what would you suggest I do with my time? You don’t actually expect me to play my guitar do you?!?!
I have many opinions, but I’m mostly leaning towards “whatever works for you”.
6 strings in standard E is fine if the music you play benefits from it. Same goes for any other combination.
The tube amp supremacy seems to have died down these past decades, but I never gave a shit. Solid state is also fine.
My new hot take is that modern mid priced equipment plays better and sounds better than a lot of high end stuff from the 90s/2000s. Most pickups have not significantly changed but sweet jesus, modern digital amps in the $300-500 range blow away most of the $1000+ digital stuff from then. The fit and finish on the $300-500 import guitars rivals or surpasses that of older $1000+. Yeah, its cheaper materials, but they are getting really well made with excellent setups out of the factory now.
All that said. I really want a guitar with a nitro finish. I love the way they smell, especially a hollow body…
Completely agree.
The topics for hot debate in guitar land are endless.
6, 7, 8 strings? 9? 4?
Should you even tune lower than E-standard?
How much scale length do you actually need for low tunings?
analog vs. digital effects
multieffect units vs. buying each effect separately
I really want a fan-fret-7string-headless-baritone-semi-hollowbody-t-style, just for the weird factor.
Fan-fret-7-string-headless-baritone is definitely something I’d go for! Miss me with hollowbodies and t-style, though. I like good ergonomics and low notes.
