The Best Options Trading Simulators (For You To Practice ...
The Best Paper Trading Options Platforms for Beginner to ...
Trading Binary Options In MetaTrader 4 (MT4) Binary Today
No gods, no kings, only NOPE - or divining the future with options flows. [Part 2: A Random Walk and Price Decoherence]
tl;dr - 1) Stock prices move continuously because different market participants end up having different ideas of the future value of a stock. 2) This difference in valuations is part of the reason we have volatility. 3) IV crush happens as a consequence of future possibilities being extinguished at a binary catalyst like earnings very rapidly, as opposed to the normal slow way. I promise I'm getting to the good parts, but I'm also writing these as a guidebook which I can use later so people never have to talk to me again. In this part I'm going to start veering a bit into the speculation territory (e.g. ideas I believe or have investigated, but aren't necessary well known) but I'm going to make sure those sections are properly marked as speculative (and you can feel free to ignore/dismiss them). Marked as [Lily's Speculation]. As some commenters have pointed out in prior posts, I do not have formal training in mathematical finance/finance (my background is computer science, discrete math, and biology), so often times I may use terms that I've invented which have analogous/existing terms (e.g. the law of surprise is actually the first law of asset pricing applied to derivatives under risk neutral measure, but I didn't know that until I read the papers later). If I mention something wrong, please do feel free to either PM me (not chat) or post a comment, and we can discuss/I can correct it! As always, buyer beware. This is the first section also where you do need to be familiar with the topics I've previously discussed, which I'll add links to shortly (my previous posts: 1) https://www.reddit.com/thecorporation/comments/jck2q6/no_gods_no_kings_only_nope_or_divining_the_future/ 2) https://www.reddit.com/thecorporation/comments/jbzzq4/why_options_trading_sucks_or_the_law_of_surprise/ --- A Random Walk Down Bankruptcy A lot of us have probably seen the term random walk, maybe in the context of A Random Walk Down Wall Street, which seems like a great book I'll add to my list of things to read once I figure out how to control my ADD. It seems obvious, then, what a random walk means - when something is moving, it basically means that the next move is random. So if my stock price is $1 and I can move in $0.01 increments, if the stock price is truly randomly walking, there should be roughly a 50% chance it moves up in the next second (to $1.01) or down (to $0.99). If you've traded for more than a hot minute, this concept should seem obvious, because especially on the intraday, it usually isn't clear why price moves the way it does (despite what chartists want to believe, and I'm sure a ton of people in the comments will tell me why fettucini lines and Batman doji tell them things). For a simple example, we can look at SPY's chart from Friday, Oct 16, 2020: https://preview.redd.it/jgg3kup9dpt51.png?width=1368&format=png&auto=webp&s=bf8e08402ccef20832c96203126b60c23277ccc2 I'm sure again 7 different people can tell me 7 different things about why the chart shape looks the way it does, or how if I delve deeply enough into it I can find out which man I'm going to marry in 2024, but to a rationalist it isn't exactly apparent at why SPY's price declined from 349 to ~348.5 at around 12:30 PM, or why it picked up until about 3 PM and then went into precipitous decline (although I do have theories why it declined EOD, but that's for another post). An extremely clever or bored reader from my previous posts could say, "Is this the price formation you mentioned in the law of surprise post?" and the answer is yes. If we relate it back to the individual buyer or seller, we can explain the concept of a stock price's random walk as such:
Most market participants have an idea of an asset's truevalue (an idealized concept of what an asset is actually worth), which they can derive using models or possibly enough brain damage. However, an asset's value at any given time is not worth one value (usually*), but a spectrum of possible values, usually representing what the asset should be worth in the future. A naive way we can represent this without delving into to much math (because let's face it, most of us fucking hate math) is: Current value of an asset = sum over all (future possible value multiplied by the likelihood of that value)
In actuality, most models aren't that simple, but it does generalize to a ton of more complicated models which you need more than 7th grade math to understand (Black-Scholes, DCF, blah blah blah). While in many cases the first term - future possible value - is well defined (Tesla is worth exactly $420.69 billion in 2021, and maybe we all can agree on that by looking at car sales and Musk tweets), where it gets more interesting is the second term - the likelihood of that value occurring. [In actuality, the price of a stock for instance is way more complicated, because a stock can be sold at any point in the future (versus in my example, just the value in 2021), and needs to account for all values of Tesla at any given point in the future.] How do we estimate the second term - the likelihood of that value occurring? For this class, it actually doesn't matter, because the key concept is this idea: even with all market participants having the same information, we do anticipate that every participant will have a slightly different view of future likelihoods. Why is that? There's many reasons. Some participants may undervalue risk (aka WSB FD/yolos) and therefore weight probabilities of gaining lots of money much more heavily than going bankrupt. Some participants may have alternative data which improves their understanding of what the future values should be, therefore letting them see opportunity. Some participants might overvalue liquidity, and just want to GTFO and thereby accept a haircut on their asset's value to quickly unload it (especially in markets with low liquidity). Some participants may just be yoloing and not even know what Fastly does before putting their account all in weekly puts (god bless you). In the end, it doesn't matter either the why, but the what: because of these diverging interpretations, over time, we can expect the price of an asset to drift from the current value even with no new information added. In most cases, the calculations that market participants use (which I will, as a Lily-ism, call the future expected payoff function, or FEPF) ends up being quite similar in aggregate, and this is why asset prices likely tend to move slightly up and down for no reason (or rather, this is one interpretation of why). At this point, I expect the 20% of you who know what I'm talking about or have a finance background to say, "Oh but blah blah efficient market hypothesis contradicts random walk blah blah blah" and you're correct, but it also legitimately doesn't matter here. In the long run, stock prices are clearly not a random walk, because a stock's value is obviously tied to the company's fundamentals (knock on wood I don't regret saying this in the 2020s). However, intraday, in the absence of new, public information, it becomes a close enough approximation. Also, some of you might wonder what happens when the future expected payoff function (FEPF) I mentioned before ends up wildly diverging for a stock between participants. This could happen because all of us try to short Nikola because it's quite obviously a joke (so our FEPF for Nikola could, let's say, be 0), while the 20 or so remaining bagholders at NikolaCorporation decide that their FEPF of Nikola is $10,000,000 a share). One of the interesting things which intuitively makes sense, is for nearly all stocks, the amount of divergence among market participants in their FEPF increases substantially as you get farther into the future. This intuitively makes sense, even if you've already quit trying to understand what I'm saying. It's quite easy to say, if at 12:51 PM SPY is worth 350.21 that likely at 12:52 PM SPY will be worth 350.10 or 350.30 in all likelihood. Obviously there are cases this doesn't hold, but more likely than not, prices tend to follow each other, and don't gap up/down hard intraday. However, what if I asked you - given SPY is worth 350.21 at 12:51 PM today, what will it be worth in 2022? Many people will then try to half ass some DD about interest rates and Trump fleeing to Ecuador to value SPY at 150, while others will assume bull markets will continue indefinitely and SPY will obviously be 7000 by then. The truth is -- no one actually knows, because if you did, you wouldn't be reading a reddit post on this at 2 AM in your jammies. In fact, if you could somehow figure out the FEPF of all market participants at any given time, assuming no new information occurs, you should be able to roughly predict the true value of an asset infinitely far into the future (hint: this doesn't exactly hold, but again don't @ me). Now if you do have a finance background, I expect gears will have clicked for some of you, and you may see strong analogies between the FEPF divergence I mentioned, and a concept we're all at least partially familiar with - volatility. Volatility and Price Decoherence ("IV Crush") Volatility, just like the Greeks, isn't exactly a real thing. Most of us have some familiarity with implied volatility on options, mostly when we get IV crushed the first time and realize we just lost $3000 on Tesla calls. If we assume that the current price should represent the weighted likelihoods of all future prices (the random walk), volatility implies the following two things:
Volatility reflects the uncertainty of the current price
Volatility reflects the uncertainty of the future price for every point in the future where the asset has value (up to expiry for options)
[Ignore this section if you aren't pedantic] There's obviously more complex mathematics, because I'm sure some of you will argue in the comments that IV doesn't go up monotonically as option expiry date goes longer and longer into the future, and you're correct (this is because asset pricing reflects drift rate and other factors, as well as certain assets like the VIX end up having cost of carry). Volatility in options is interesting as well, because in actuality, it isn't something that can be exactly computed -- it arises as a plug between the idealized value of an option (the modeled price) and the real, market value of an option (the spot price). Additionally, because the makeup of market participants in an asset's market changes over time, and new information also comes in (thereby increasing likelihood of some possibilities and reducing it for others), volatility does not remain constant over time, either. Conceptually, volatility also is pretty easy to understand. But what about our friend, IV crush? I'm sure some of you have bought options to play events, the most common one being earnings reports, which happen quarterly for every company due to regulations. For the more savvy, you might know of expected move, which is a calculation that uses the volatility (and therefore price) increase of at-the-money options about a month out to calculate how much the options market forecasts the underlying stock price to move as a response to ER. Binary Catalyst Events and Price Decoherence Remember what I said about price formation being a gradual, continuous process? In the face of special circumstances, in particularly binary catalyst events - events where the outcome is one of two choices, good (1) or bad (0) - the gradual part gets thrown out the window. Earnings in particular is a common and notable case of a binary event, because the price will go down (assuming the company did not meet the market's expectations) or up (assuming the company exceeded the market's expectations) (it will rarely stay flat, so I'm not going to address that case). Earnings especially is interesting, because unlike other catalytic events, they're pre-scheduled (so the whole market expects them at a certain date/time) and usually have publicly released pre-estimations (guidance, analyst predictions). This separates them from other binary catalysts (e.g. FSLY dipping 30% on guidance update) because the market has ample time to anticipate the event, and participants therefore have time to speculate and hedge on the event. In most binary catalyst events, we see rapid fluctuations in price, usually called a gap up or gap down, which is caused by participants rapidly intaking new information and changing their FEPF accordingly. This is for the most part an anticipated adjustment to the FEPF based on the expectation that earnings is a Very Big Deal (TM), and is the reason why volatility and therefore option premiums increase so dramatically before earnings. What makes earnings so interesting in particular is the dramatic effect it can have on all market participants FEPF, as opposed to let's say a Trump tweet, or more people dying of coronavirus. In lots of cases, especially the FEPF of the short term (3-6 months) rapidly changes in response to updated guidance about a company, causing large portions of the future possibility spectrum to rapidly and spectacularly go to zero. In an instant, your Tesla 10/30 800Cs go from "some value" to "not worth the electrons they're printed on". [Lily's Speculation] This phenomena, I like to call price decoherence, mostly as an analogy to quantum mechanical processes which produce similar results (the collapse of a wavefunction on observation). Price decoherence occurs at a widespread but minor scale continuously, which we normally call price formation (and explains portions of the random walk derivation explained above), but hits a special limit in the face of binary catalyst events, as in an instant rapid portions of the future expected payoff function are extinguished, versus a more gradual process which occurs over time (as an option nears expiration). Price decoherence, mathematically, ends up being a more generalizable case of the phenomenon we all love to hate - IV crush. Price decoherence during earnings collapses the future expected payoff function of a ticker, leading large portions of the option chain to be effectively worthless (IV crush). It has interesting implications, especially in the case of hedged option sellers, our dear Market Makers. This is because given the expectation that they maintain delta-gamma neutral, and now many of the options they have written are now worthless and have 0 delta, what do they now have to do? They have to unwind. [/Lily's Speculation] - Lily
ASIC Regulation Thread - Regarding the proposed changes ( Australians effected the most )
I'm hopeless at formatting text, so if you think you can structure this post better take everything i write and put it into an easy to digest way. I'm just going to type out everything i know in text as fast as possible. I'm not a legal expert, I'm not somehow who understands every bit of information in the PDF's below, but i know I'm a retail trader that uses leverage to make profit which is why I'm posting this, in the hope that someone who can run a charge better than me, will. Some of you are already aware of what might be happening, this is just a post to educate retail traders on changes that might be coming to certain brokers. This effects Australian Customers the most, but also effects those living in other countries that use Australian brokers, such as Pepperstone and others. Last year in August 2019, ASIC ( Australian Securities and Investments Commission ) was concerned about retail traders going into Forex and Binary options without understanding these instruments properly and started sticking their noses in for tough regulation. ASIC asked brokers and anyone with interest in the industry to write to them and explain what should and should not change from the changes they proposed, some of the proposed changes are very misguided and come from a lack of understanding exactly how OTC derivatives actually work. I will provide the link to the paper further down so you can read it yourself and i will provide a link to all the submission made by all parties that sent submissions to ASIC, however the 2 main points of debate are: 1, To reduce the overall leverage available to retail traders to either 20:1 or 30:1. This means people who currently use leverage such as 100:1 to 500:1 and everything in between will be effected the most, even more so are those traders with relatively small accounts, meaning in order to get your foot in the door to trading you will need more capital for it to be viable. ^^ This point above is very important. 2, The removing of Binary options trading, which basically includes products like "Bet if gold will rise to this price in the next 30 seconds" This sort of stuff. So far from all the submissions from brokers and individuals nobody really cares if this changes as far as i know, though if you have concerns about this i would start voicing your disapproval. Though i would not waste your time here, all is pointing to this being eradicated completely with brokers also supporting the changes, I've never used such a product and know very little about them. ^^ This point above isn't very important and will probably be enforced in the future. Still to this day i see retail traders not understanding leverage, they think of it as "dangerous and scary", it's not, position size is the real danger, not leverage. So ASIC is aiming to limit retail traders access to high leverage, they are claiming it is a way to protect traders who don't really understand what they are getting into by attacking leverage and not the real problem which is position size relative to your capital. If it was truly about protecting retail traders from blowing up their accounts, they would look for ways to educate traders on "understanding position sizes and why it's important" rather than attacking leverage, but their goal is misguided or has an ulterior motive . I will give you a small example below. EXAMPLE - We will use 2 demo accounts for demonstration purposes. If you don't understand my example, i suggest you try it for yourself. - Skip if not interested in examples. Lets say we open 2 demo accounts with $1000 in both, one with 20:1 leverage and one with 500:1 leverage and we open an identical position on both accounts ( say a micro lot '0.01' on EURUSD ). You are safer on the 500:1 account as you don't need to put up as much margin as collateral as you would on the 20:1. If the trade we just opened goes against us and continues against us, the account with 20:1 leverage will run out of free margin a lot faster than the 500:1 account. In this simple example is shows you that leverage is not dangerous but safer and gives you a lot more breathing room. This trade was a small micro lot, so it would take hundreds of pips movements to get margin called and blow up that $1000 on each account. Lets now use a different position size to truly understand why retail traders blow up accounts and is the reason why trading can be dangerous. This time instead of opening a micro lot of '0.01' on our $1000 dollar demo accounts, lets open a position size much larger, 5 lots. Remember we only have $1000 and we are about to open a position much larger relative to our capital ( which we should never do because we can't afford to do that ) the 20:1 probably wont even let you place that trade if you don't have enough margin as collateral or if you could open the position you would have a very tiny amount of free margin left over, meaning a small pip movement against you will instantly blow up your $1000 account. On the 500:1 account you wouldn't need to put up as much margin as collateral with more free margin if the trade goes bad, but again a small movement could blow up your account. In this example, both accounts were dangerous because the lack of understanding position sizes, opening a position you can't afford to open. This is what the true danger is, not the leverage. Even in the second example, the higher leverage would "margin call" you out later. So i would go as far to say that lower leverage is more dangerous for you because it margin calls you out faster and just by having a lower leverage doesn't stop you from opening big positions that can blow you up in a 5 pip movement anymore, any leverage size is dangerous if you're opening positions you can't afford to open. This is also taking into consideration that no risk management is being used, with risk management higher leverage is even more powerful. ASIC believes lowering leverage will stop people opening positions that they can't afford. When the reality is no matter how much capital you have $500, $1000, $5000, $50,000, $500,000, $5,000,000. You don't open position sizes that will blow that capital up completely with small movements. The same thing can happen on a 20:1 or 500:1 account. Leverage is a tool, use it, if your on a lower leverage already such as 20:1, 30:1 it means your country has been regulated and you already have harder trading conditions. Just remember higher leverage allows you to open larger position sizes in total for the amount of money you own, but the issue is NOT that your using the higher leverage but because you are opening positions you can't afford, for what ever reason that is, the only fix for this is education and will not be fixed by simply lowing leverage, since you can just as easy blow up your account on low leverage just as fast or if not faster. So what is going on? There might ( get your tinfoil hats on ) be more that is involved here, deeper than you think, other agendas to try and stop small time retail traders from making money via OTC products, theories such as governments not wanting their citizens to be traders, rather would prefer you to get out there and work a 9 to 5 instead. Effective ways to do this would be making conditions harder with a much larger barrier of entry and the best way to increase the barrier of entry for retail traders is to limit leverage, lower leverage means you need to put up more money, less breathing room for trades, lower potential. They are limiting your upside potential and the downside stays the same, a blown account is a blow account. Think of leverage as a weapon, a person wielding a butchers knife can probably destroy a person wielding a steak knife, but both knifes can prove fatal. They want to make sure your holding the butter knife then tell you to butcher a cow with it. 30:1 leverage is still workable and can still be profitable, but not as profitable as 500:1 accounts. This is why they are allowing professionals to use high leverage, this gives them another edge over successful retail traders who will still be trying to butcher a cow with a butter knife, while they are slaying limbs off the cow with machetes. It's a way to hamstring you and keep you away rather than trying to "protect" you. The real danger is not leverage, they are barking up the wrong tree, how convenient to be barking up the very tree most retail traders don't fully understand ( leverage) , pass legislation to make trading conditions harder and at the same time push the narrative that trading is dangerous by making it even harder. A full circle strategy to make your trading conditions worse, so you don't succeed. Listen carefully especially if you trade with any of the brokers that have provided their submissions to ASIC. Brokers want to seem like they are on your side and so far some of the submissions ( i haven't read them all ) have brokers willing to drop their leverage down to 30:1 because they know by dropping the leverage down it will start margin calling out their clients at a much faster rate, causing more blown up accounts / abandoned accounts with residual margin called funds, but they also know that if they make trading environments too hard less people will trade or even worse move their funds elsewhere offshore to unregulated brokers that offer higher leverage. Right now it's all just a proposal, but as governments expand and continue to gain more control over it's citizens, it's just a matter of time till it's law, it's up to you to be vocal about it, let your broker know that if they drop their leverage, you're out, force them to fight for you. If you have any more information related to this, or have anything to add, post below. I'm not an expert at this technical law talk, i know that i do well with 500:1 leverage and turn profits with it, it would be harder for me to do on a lower leverage, this is the reason for my post. All related documents HERE CP-322 ( Consultation paper 322 ) & Submissions from brokers and others. https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/consultation-papers/cp-322-product-intervention-otc-binary-options-and-cfds/
A list of suggested improvements and updates for ACNH
So this is an adaptation of a recent post I made elsewhere, but the gaming community on that site is basically dead so I figured it might get more interaction here. I've played ACNH every day since release, and I think we can all agree that parts of it feel frustratingly unfinished. Several features are inexplicably a step down from New Leaf, or lack obvious improvements that someone surely could have thought of in the past 7-8 years. Many mechanics are totally arbitrary and add unnecessary tedium. The UI has been kept mostly traditional to the series, without taking into account that the new crafting elements are a massive departure and create new problems to solve. All this stuff creates a friction between the player and game that's almost certainly going to make people get bored and stop playing prematurely, and in a multiplayer game, active players are themselves game content. You need the extra polish in this genre. I've gotten tired of whining about these things individually on various platforms so I decided to just smash them all into a big list and chuck it out into the void. Disclaimers: I am not a professional game designer, just an enthusiast. I recognize that this is unlikely to end up on a CEO's desk or whatever so… consider this just me venting, if that's what blows your skirt up. There is of course also a nonzero chance that all of this has been in the works for months and will suddenly drop into the game next update, who knows. Also, while I kept wanting to derail and spend six hours talking about theoretical shiny new features, I tried to edit it down to either basic quality-of-life stuff, things that have precedence somewhere in the series, or things that are so standard in other games that they really should have been obvious to include at launch. Feel free to discuss, dispute, or add on. Inventory management: - To get the obvious one out of the way: craft multiple items at once, using a counter or number input. Crafting beyond inventory limits should send the extras to your storage. I'm still astounded that this wasn't in the base game on release. - Wood, bamboo, stone, etc. should be picked up automatically when in range of the player. Only if it has been previously dropped by the player should it require manual pickup. Enable or disable with a toggle in the settings menu. Nearly all crafting games have this. - MUCH higher stack limits for fruit, turnips, tickets, and crafting materials. All duplicate items should stack, including critters, furniture, clothing, and recipe cards. I wouldn't complain if tools stacked as well. Add a "place 1", "drop 1", and "split" option on stacks. - ADD A QUICK SORT BUTTON IN THE INVENTORY. Lines up your tools in the last remembered configuration, stacks and sorts items, and puts away bells. - Boom, Nookphone now has a handy payment app and we can pay from and get paid to our bank account instead of having to carry cash around (obviously still with the option to carry cash for planting money trees, etc.) Dear God, what year is it? Is Daisy Mae allergic to technology? You wanna tell me Flick doesn't have cashapp? They're gen Z! - Ability to pay bells to increase home storage. Make the price scale with each purchase if you like. - In storage, add a “special” category for limited edition furniture, Saharah items, etc.. Give us the ability to tag items as special, in case we decide that random shirt is a keepsake or whatever. - All items should be compatible with storage. Why can I fit an entire T-rex skeleton in my closet, but not a single solitary little turnip? Or a 3x5 index card with a recipe scribbled on it? - The wardrobe functionality is cool, but every container shouldn't be a wardrobe. Give us usable, separate containers to stash and sort our stuff. Players could put a crate full of fish bait by the shore, make a drop-off for fossils until they're ready to get them appraised, make a tool shed, keep their seeds by garden areas… - Select multiple items from inventory in any context, not just during sales. Drop up to 9 items simultaneously, release multiple fish/bugs, store multiple items at once. - The wetsuit shouldn't have to sit in the inventory when it's off. There are unused buttons, which is a shame--just let it sit in the apparel window and let us toggle it on and off with a button press. If we want it in our inventory we can remove it from the apparel window. - Give us a separate bar for tools that doesn't eat into regular inventory space. Sell it for nook miles as a toolbelt, if you like. - CRAFT DIRECTLY FROM STORAGE. If you have 758 wood stashed away, the game shouldn’t act like you have zero just because none of them are in your pockets. Nearly all crafting games have some support for this, because having to move items around may be logical, but it's also boring busywork and should be abbreviated. (Disabling this on other islands and NMT islands is fine.) - ASSUMING THE ABOVE IS IMPLEMENTED: Auto-sort items at the moment they are obtained. If all your stone is in your storage at home, then picking up a stone should send it to your storage at home--where, again, it should still be accessible for crafting. (Disabling this on other islands or NMT islands is fine.) - Let us just buy a nook ticket for immediate use at the airport counter. ("Oh, you don't have a NMT? Would you like to purchase one for 2000 nook miles?" Boom.) Shopping UI: - Again, getting the obvious one out of the way: fitting room allows purchase of more items at once, including duplicates if desired. It's already integrated with home storage--why shouldn't I be allowed to buy ten of everything in one go? - Similarly, Kicks, Leif and Nooklings should allow multiple purchases at once. Highlight this, that and the other, then buy--done. Give Sahara a real shop window instead of an annoying dialogue branch too. No vendor should have her weird text-based interface, it's soooo clunky. - Names of items not yet in your catalogue should be displayed in different font color, and they should be marked on the shelf via a visual indicator, like a small placard. - Bring back carpet/wallpaper previews in the shop. - When entering the fitting room, the wetsuit comes off automatically. - Bulk purchase items (e.g. plants, wrapping paper) should have a counter or number input, not just a binary choice between one and five. Allow more items to be bought in bulk, such as nook tickets. - The Gamecube release included a player shop feature--using your house gyroid, you could set out items for sale to other players for any price you wanted. The feature never appeared again, even as multiplayer and vastly increased networking capabilities made it more and more of a useful feature to have. Bring this back! Maybe an item-trade function too! Decorating and Landscaping: - Ability to move a building only a short distance, overlapping with the old location. It shouldn't freak out over collision with itself. - Bigger and more house rooms. Why on earth have houses gotten smaller since New Leaf? Layout control would be awesome too (so I could link up the ground floor rooms in a different way instead of being stuck with four doors in my main room, etc.) and is pretty typical of games where you can build and customize a house or homestead. - Faster animations during construction, and while scooting and rotating furniture. Quicker movement of furniture is especially a must outside, where we don't have the advantage of decorating mode. - Ability to put more items on tables. I want to put my wands on display! There's no reason they should have to sit on the floor. Same for instruments. - Let me put fences inside, and put wall-mounted items on my cliff faces. - "There's no room to put anything here"--well there WOULD be if you would interpret what I'm trying to do and push me back two pixels. Work with me here. Other: - SAVE. FILE. BACKUP. Let me copy to SD card, let me keep six months of backups, let me roll my town back as I please. There's already been one game-breaking bug that forced people to delete their five-hundred-hour towns; there's no telling when there'll be another. "But people will hack and sell save files and"--bad news, Buttercup, they already do. They probably also do naughty things with their joy-cons. Whose business is it? - Multiple towns per switch. As many as I can stuff into the memory. There is absolutely no reason not to do this. - More color options for hair and eyes. Many games have had RGB sliders for this for years, but at minimum the addition of a decent purple and another shade of green wouldn't go amiss. And where are my wacky colored contacts?? - Built in island-hopping. Finish up on one island, talk to the dodo, say "New island please", spend a nook ticket and go directly to your next destination. - I know people adore Isabelle but if she doesn't have anything to say, I don't really wanna hear about her exciting life every single morning. Maybe if it was about her fun weekend slaying demons with Doomguy, but not so much her extended thoughts on the sad decline of the Discovery channel. Sorry. - Optional “silent” bug-catching, fossil collection, etc., controlled with a toggle in the settings. You know how when you pull a weed or dig up a flower, it just goes into your inventory with no fanfare? Do it like that--after your first ever unidentified fossil, or first critter of a given species, your character just nabs 'em and pockets 'em. - Likewise, "silent" tool breakage. Give the full heads-up the first time it happens, but from then on just show the break animation and move on. Yeah someone might miss it when a tool breaks, but presumably they'll intuit what happened when they later realize it's gone--it's not rocket surgery. - How many times is Sahara going to introduce herself to me? How long does Gulliver really need to realize his phone is broken again? Edit visitor dialogue WAY down after first encounter. "EEK A GHOST! Oh no I explosively shat my immortal soul in all directions again, you know the drill" - And on the flipside, edit and expand normal villager dialogue. I'm not sure if I'm imagining it, but Lazies and Normals in particular seem to say the same things to me constantly. Normals' dialogue is also so bland that it feels like it was churned out last-minute for a Nick Jr. show to teach your toddler vocabulary words. "Today is fun" OK Savannah. Grow a personality. - Individual control over sfx and music volume in the settings menu. Actually, the settings menu in general is so bare I'm not sure why it's there at all honestly. How about giving us some settings? Y'know, in the settings menu, where you're supposed to be able to set the settings... those things you can set? - More pattern space, with separate space for separate player characters. A new tab specifically for shared patterns would be fine. - Let me order more items, and receive them with faster turnover via two daily mail deliveries instead of just one, as in ALL previous games. - If my pockets are full, I don't need a sloowwwww text box about it. Just jump straight to the inventory so I can drop-or-swap. - Nix the phone call every time I use the drop-off box. A quick ka-ching noise and a ticker showing my bank balance for a second is fine. - Balloon presents shouldn't just disappear when they fall into a flower bed. Finding the nearest empty square and bouncing it there is really easy. - Build in island-hopping. Go to a NMT island, talk to the dodo when finished, say "New island please", and go directly to your next destination. Either pull the ticket from inventory or storage, or pay for a new one on the spot. - And finally: TOUCH/STYLUS SUPPORT, especially for item menus! Let me touch and drag items, let me select menu options with a stylus! This is one of the reasons that NL feels so much better to play, it's a very basic accessibility feature, and besides, you're paying extra manufacturing costs to have a touch screen. Why wouldn't you use it?? I feel like this is one of the things they skimped on to get the game out in March, because some contexts allow touch and others don't, seemingly at random. Woooooof I think that's it for my megathread of kvetching. If you're still here, thanks for reading and have a cookie!
New England New England 6 States Songs: https://www.reddit.com/newengland/comments/er8wxd/new_england_6_states_songs/ NewEnglandcoin Symbol: NENG NewEnglandcoin is a clone of Bitcoin using scrypt as a proof-of-work algorithm with enhanced features to protect against 51% attack and decentralize on mining to allow diversified mining rigs across CPUs, GPUs, ASICs and Android phones. Mining Algorithm: Scrypt with RandomSpike. RandomSpike is 3rd generation of Dynamic Difficulty (DynDiff) algorithm on top of scrypt. 1 minute block targets base difficulty reset: every 1440 blocks subsidy halves in 2.1m blocks (~ 2 to 4 years) 84,000,000,000 total maximum NENG 20000 NENG per block Pre-mine: 1% - reserved for dev fund ICO: None RPCPort: 6376 Port: 6377 NewEnglandcoin has dogecoin like supply at 84 billion maximum NENG. This huge supply insures that NENG is suitable for retail transactions and daily use. The inflation schedule of NengEnglandcoin is actually identical to that of Litecoin. Bitcoin and Litecoin are already proven to be great long term store of value. The Litecoin-like NENG inflation schedule will make NewEnglandcoin ideal for long term investment appreciation as the supply is limited and capped at a fixed number Bitcoin Fork - Suitable for Home Hobbyists NewEnglandcoin core wallet continues to maintain version tag of "Satoshi v0.8.7.5" because NewEnglandcoin is very much an exact clone of bitcoin plus some mining feature changes with DynDiff algorithm. NewEnglandcoin is very suitable as lite version of bitcoin for educational purpose on desktop mining, full node running and bitcoin programming using bitcoin-json APIs. The NewEnglandcoin (NENG) mining algorithm original upgrade ideas were mainly designed for decentralization of mining rigs on scrypt, which is same algo as litecoin/dogecoin. The way it is going now is that NENG is very suitable for bitcoin/litecoin/dogecoin hobbyists who can not , will not spend huge money to run noisy ASIC/GPU mining equipments, but still want to mine NENG at home with quiet simple CPU/GPU or with a cheap ASIC like FutureBit Moonlander 2 USB or Apollo pod on solo mining setup to obtain very decent profitable results. NENG allows bitcoin litecoin hobbyists to experience full node running, solo mining, CPU/GPU/ASIC for a fun experience at home at cheap cost without breaking bank on equipment or electricity. MIT Free Course - 23 lectures about Bitcoin, Blockchain and Finance (Fall,2018) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP63UUkfL0onkxF6MYgVa04Fn CPU Minable Coin Because of dynamic difficulty algorithm on top of scrypt, NewEnglandcoin is CPU Minable. Users can easily set up full node for mining at Home PC or Mac using our dedicated cheetah software. Research on the first forked 50 blocks on v1.2.0 core confirmed that ASIC/GPU miners mined 66% of 50 blocks, CPU miners mined the remaining 34%. NENG v1.4.0 release enabled CPU mining inside android phones. Youtube Video Tutorial How to CPU Mine NewEnglandcoin (NENG) in Windows 10 Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdOoPvAjzlE How to CPU Mine NewEnglandcoin (NENG) in Windows 10 Part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHnRJvJRzZg How to CPU Mine NewEnglandcoin (NENG) in macOS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj7NLMeNSOQ Decentralization and Community Driven NewEnglandcoin is a decentralized coin just like bitcoin. There is no boss on NewEnglandcoin. Nobody nor the dev owns NENG. We know a coin is worth nothing if there is no backing from community. Therefore, we as dev do not intend to make decision on this coin solely by ourselves. It is our expectation that NewEnglandcoin community will make majority of decisions on direction of this coin from now on. We as dev merely view our-self as coin creater and technical support of this coin while providing NENG a permanent home at ShorelineCrypto Exchange. Twitter Airdrop Follow NENG twitter and receive 100,000 NENG on Twitter Airdrop to up to 1000 winners Graphic Redesign Bounty Top one award: 90.9 million NENG Top 10 Winners: 500,000 NENG / person Event Timing: March 25, 2019 - Present Event Address: NewEnglandcoin DISCORD at: https://discord.gg/UPeBwgs Please complete above Twitter Bounty requirement first. Then follow Below Steps to qualify for the Bounty: (1) Required: submit your own designed NENG logo picture in gif, png jpg or any other common graphic file format into DISCORD "bounty-submission" board (2) Optional: submit a second graphic for logo or any other marketing purposes into "bounty-submission" board. (3) Complete below form. Please limit your submission to no more than two total. Delete any wrongly submitted or undesired graphics in the board. Contact DISCORD u/honglu69#5911 or u/krypton#6139 if you have any issues. Twitter Airdrop/Graphic Redesign bounty sign up: https://goo.gl/forms/L0vcwmVi8c76cR7m1 Milestones
Sep 3, 2018 - Genesis block was mined, NewEnglandcoin created
Sep 8, 2018 - github source uploaded, Window wallet development work started
Sep 11,2018 - Window Qt Graphic wallet completed
Sep 12,2018 - NewEnglandcoin Launched in both Bitcointalk forum and Marinecoin forum
Sep 14,2018 - NewEnglandcoin is listed at ShorelineCrypto Exchange
Sep 17,2018 - Block Explorer is up
Nov 23,2018 - New Source/Wallet Release v1.1.1 - Enabled Dynamic Addjustment on Mining Hashing Difficulty
Nov 28,2018 - NewEnglandcoin became CPU minable coin
Nov 30,2018 - First Retail Real Life usage for NewEnglandcoin Announced
Dec 28,2018 - Cheetah_Cpuminer under Linux is released
Dec 31,2018 - NENG Technical Whitepaper is released
Jan 2,2019 - Cheetah_Cpuminer under Windows is released
Jan 12,2019 - NENG v1.1.2 is released to support MacOS GUI CLI Wallet
Jan 13,2019 - Cheetah_CpuMiner under Mac is released
Feb 11,2019 - NewEnglandcoin v1.2.0 Released, Anti-51% Attack, Anti-instant Mining after Hard Fork
Mar 16,2019 - NewEnglandcoin v126.96.36.199 Released - Ubuntu 18.04 Wallet Binary Files
Apr 7, 2019 - NENG Report on Security, Decentralization, Valuation
Apr 21, 2019 - NENG Fiat Project is Launched by ShorelineCrypto
Sep 1, 2019 - Shoreline Tradingbot project is Launched by ShorelineCrypto
Dec 19, 2019 - Shoreline Tradingbot v1.0 is Released by ShorelineCrypto
Jan 30, 2020 - Scrypt RandomSpike - NENG v1.3.0 Hardfork Proposed
Feb 24, 2020 - Scrypt RandomSpike - NENG core v1.3.0 Released
Jun 19, 2020 - Linux scripts for Futurebit Moonlander2 USB ASIC on solo mining Released
Jul 15, 2020 - NENG v1.4.0 Released for Android Mining and Ubuntu 20.04 support
Jul 21, 2020 - NENG v188.8.131.52 Released for MacOS Wallet Upgrade with Catalina
Jul 30, 2020 - NENG v184.108.40.206 Released for Linux Wallet Upgrade with 8 Distros
Aug 11, 2020 - NENG v220.127.116.11 Released for Android arm64 Upgrade, Chromebook Support
Aug 30, 2020 - NENG v18.104.22.168 Released for Android/Chromebook with armhf, better hardware support
2018 Q3 - Birth of NewEnglandcoin, window/linux wallet - Done
2018 Q4 - Decentralization Phase I
Blockchain Upgrade - Dynamic hashing algorithm I - Done
Cheetah Version I- CPU Mining Automation Tool on Linux - Done
2019 Q1 - Decentralization Phase II
Cheetah Version II- CPU Mining Automation Tool on Window/Linux - Done
Blockchain Upgrade Dynamic hashing algorithm II - Done
2019 Q2 - Fiat Phase I
Assessment of Risk of 51% Attack on NENG - done
Launch of Fiat USD/NENG offering for U.S. residents - done
Initiation of Mobile Miner Project - Done
2019 Q3 - Shoreline Tradingbot, Mobile Project
Evaluation and planning of Mobile Miner Project - on Hold
Initiation of Trading Bot Project - Done
2019 Q4 - Shoreline Tradingbot
Shoreline tradingbot Release v1.0 - Done
2020 Q1 - Evaluate NENG core, Mobile Wallet Phase I
NENG core Decentralization Security Evaluation for v1.3.x - Done
Light Mobile Wallet Project Initiation, Evaluation
2020 Q2 - NENG Core, Mobile Wallet Phase II
NENG core Decentralization Security Hardfork on v1.3.x - Scrypt RandomSpike
Light Mobile Wallet Project Design, Coding
2020 Q3 - NENG core, NENG Mobile Wallet Phase II
Review on results of v1.3.x, NENG core Dev Decision on v1.4.x, Hardfork If needed
Light Mobile Wallet Project testing, alpha Release
2020 Q4 - Mobile Wallet Phase III
Light Mobile Wallet Project Beta Release
Light Mobile Wallet Server Deployment Evaluation and Decision
Q: What does the C++ committee need to do to fix large swaths of ABI problems?
A: Absolutely nothing
On current implementations, std::unique_ptr's calling convention causes some inefficiencies compared to raw pointers. The standard doesn't dictate the calling convention of std::unique_ptr, so implementers could change that if they chose to. On current implementations, std::hash will return the same result for the same input, even across program invocations. This makes it vulnerable to cache poisoning attacks. Nothing in the standard requires that different instances of a program produce the same output. An implementation could choose to have a global variable with a per-program-instance seed in it, and have std::hash mix that in. On current implementations, std::regex is extremely slow. Allegedly, this could be improved substantially without changing the API of std::regex, though most implementations don't change std::regex due to ABI concerns. An implementation could change if it wanted to though. However, very few people have waded into the guts of std::regex and provided a faster implementation, ABI breaking or otherwise. Declaring an ABI break won't make such an implementation appear. None of these issues are things that the C++ committee claims to have any control over. They are dictated by vendors and by the customers of the vendors. A new vendor could come along and have a better implementation. For customers that prioritize QoI over ABI stability, they could switch and recompile everything. Even better, the most common standard library implementations are all open source now. You could fork the standard library, tweak the mangling, and be your own vendor. You can then be in control of your own destiny ABI, and without taking the large up-front cost of reinventing the parts of the standard library that you are satisfied with. libc++ has a LIBCXX_ABI_UNSTABLE configuration flag, so that you always get the latest and greatest optimizations. libstdc++ has a --enable-symvers=gnu-versioned-namespace configuration flag that is ABI unstable, and it goes a long way towards allowing multiple libstdc++ instances coexist simultaneously. Currently the libc++ and libstdc++ unstable ABI branches don't have many new optimizations because there aren't many contributions and few people use it. I will choose to be optimistic, and assume that they are unused because people were not aware of them. If your only concern is ABI, and not API, then vendors and developers can fix this on their own without negatively affecting code portability or conformance. If the QoI gains from an ABI break are worth a few days / weeks to you, then that option is available today.
Q: What aspects of ABI makes things difficult for the C++ committee.
A: API and semantic changes that would require changes to the ABI are difficult for the C++ committee to deal with.
There are a lot of things that you can do to a type or function to make it ABI incompatible with the old type. The C++ committee is reluctant to make these kinds of changes, as they have a substantially higher cost. Changing the layout of a type, adding virtual methods to an existing class, and changing template parameters are the most common operations that run afoul of ABI.
Q: Are ABI changes difficult for toolchain vendors to deal with?
A1: For major vendors, they difficulty varies depending on the magnitude of the break.
Since GCC 5 dealt with the std::string ABI break, GCC has broken the language ABI 6 other times, and most people didn't even notice. There were several library ABI breaks (notably return type changes for std::complex and associative container erase) that went smoothly as well. Quite a few people noticed the GCC 5 std::string ABI changes though. In some cases, there are compiler heroics that can be done to mitigate an library ABI change. You will get varying responses as to whether this is a worthwhile thing to do, depending on the vendor and the change. If the language ABI changes in a large way, then it can cause substantially more pain. GCC had a major language ABI change in GCC 3.4, and that rippled out into the library. Dealing with libstdc++.so.5 and libstdc++.so.6 was a major hassle for many people, myself included.
A2: For smaller vendors, the difficulty of an ABI break depends on their customer base.
These days, it's easier than ever to be your own toolchain vendor. That makes you a vendor with excellent insight into how difficult an ABI change would be.
Q: Why don't you just rebuild after an ABI change?
A1: Are you rebuilding the standard library too?
Many people will recommend not passing standard library types around, and not throwing exceptions across shared library boundaries. They often forget that at least one very commonly used shared library does exactly that... your C++ standard library. On many platforms, there is usually a system C++ standard library. If you want to use that, then you need to deal with standard library types and exceptions going across shared library boundaries. If OS version N+1 breaks ABI in the system C++ standard library, the program you shipped and tested with for OS version N will not work on the upgraded OS until you rebuild.
A2: Sometimes, rebuilding isn't enough
Suppose your company distributes pre-built programs to customers, and this program supports plugins (e.g. Wireshark dissector plugins). If the plugin ABI changes, in the pre-built program, then all of the plugins need to rebuild. The customer that upgrades the program is unlikely to be the one that does the rebuilding, but they will be responsible for upgrading all the plugins as well. The customer cannot effectively upgrade until the entire ecosystem has responded to the ABI break. At best, that takes a lot of time. More likely, some parts of the ecosystem have become unresponsive, and won't ever upgrade. This also requires upgrading large swaths of a system at once. In certain industries, it is very difficult to convince a customer to upgrade anything at all, and upgrading an entire system would be right out. Imagine breaking ABI on a system library on a phone. Just getting all of the apps that your company owns upgraded and deployed at the same time as the system library would be a herculean effort, much less getting all the third party apps to upgrade as well. There are things you can do to mitigate these problems, at least for library and C++ language breaks on Windows, but it's hard to mitigate this if you are relying on a system C++ standard library. Also, these mitigations usually involve writing more error prone code that is less expressive and less efficient than if you just passed around C++ standard library types.
A3: Sometimes you can't rebuild everything.
Sometimes, business models revolve around selling pre-built binaries to other people. It is difficult to coordinate ABI changes across these businesses. Sometimes, there is a pre-built binary, and the company that provided that binary is no longer able to provide updates, possibly because the company no longer exists. Sometimes, there is a pre-built binary that is a shared dependency among many companies (e.g. OpenSSL). Breaking ABI on an upgrade of such a binary will cause substantial issues.
Q: What tools do we have for managing ABI changes?
A: Several, but they all have substantial trade-offs.
The most direct tool is to just make a new thing and leave the old one alone. Don't like std::unordered_map? Then make std::open_addressed_hash_map. This technique allows new and old worlds to intermix, but the translations between new and old must be done explicitly. You don't get to just rebuild your program and get the benefits of the new type. Naming the new things becomes increasingly difficult, at least if you decide to not do the "lazy" thing and just name the new class std::unordered_map2 or std2::unordered_map. Personally, I'm fine with slapping a version number on most of these classes, as it gives a strong clue to users that we may need to revise this thing again in the future, and it would mean we might get an incrementally better hash map without needing to wait for hashing research to cease. inline namespaces are another tool that can be used, but they solve far fewer ABI problems than many think. Upgrading a type like std::string or std::unordered_map via inline namespaces generally wouldn't work, as user types holding the upgraded types would also change, breaking those ABIs. inline namespaces can probably help add / change parameters to functions, and may even extend to updating empty callable objects, but neither of those are issues that have caused many problems in the C++ committee in the past. Adding a layer of indirection, similar to COM, does a lot to address stability and extensibility, at a large cost to performance. However, one area that the C++ committee hasn't explored much in the past is to look at the places where we already have a layer of indirection, and using COM-like techniques to allow us to add methods in the future. Right now, I don't have a good understanding of the performance trade-offs between the different plug-in / indirect call techniques that we could use for things like std::pmr::memory_resource and std::error_category.
Q: What can I do if I don't want to pay the costs for ABI stability?
A: Be your own toolchain vendor, using the existing open-source libraries and tools.
If you are able to rebuild all your source, then you can point all your builds at a custom standard library, and turn on (or even make your own) ABI breaking changes. You now have a competitive advantage, and you didn't even need to amend an international treaty (the C++ standard) to make it happen! If your changes were only ABI breaking and not API breaking, then you haven't even given up on code portability. Note that libc++ didn't need to get libstdc++'s permission in order to coexist on Linux. You can have multiple standard libraries at the same time, though there are some technical challenges created when you do that.
Q: What can I do if I want to change the standard in a way that is ABI breaking?
A1: Consider doing things in a non-breaking way.
A2: Talk to compiler vendors and the ABI Review Group (ARG) to see if there is a way to mitigate the ABI break.
A3: Demonstrate that your change is so valuable that the benefit outweighs the cost, or that the cost isn't necessarily that high.
Assorted points to make before people in the comments get them wrong
I'm neither advocating to freeze ABI, nor am I advocating to break ABI. In fact, I think those questions are too broad to even be useful.
Fixing std::unordered_map's performance woes would require an API break, as well as an ABI break.
I have my doubts that std::vector could be made substantially faster with only an ABI break. I can believe it if it is also coupled with an API break in the form of different exception safety guarantees. Others are free to prove me wrong though.
Making constexpr will probably be fine. The ABI issues were raised and addressed for constexpr , and that paper is waiting in LWG.
Filters on recursive_directory_iterators had additional concerns beyond ABI, and there wasn't consensus to pursue, even if we chose a different name.
Making destructors implicitly virtual in polymorphic classes would be a massive cross-language ABI break, and not just a C++ ABI break, thanks to COM. You'd be breaking the entire Windows ecosystem. At a minimum, you'd need a way to opt out of virtual destructors.
Are you sure that you are arguing against ABI stability? Maybe you are arguing against backwards compatibility in general.
Hey there Modern people, For those that have never seen me around before, I love budget Magic. Over on the Pioneer sub, I have this series that I do where I develop budget lists and run them through some games to report back there. For a couple weeks now, i’ve been getting more and more interested in Modern, so I figured that you guys could do with some of that budget goodness as well, and that’s what i’m here for today. If you didn’t catch it, last week I posted up a link to my Incomplete Compendium of Budget Modern Decks. (You can find that [HERE]) I’ve been updating that list since posting it, and it’s getting to the point where it’s almost finished. I’m going to take a couple of decks from this list and run them through some games so we can talk about how the decks perform. All of these decks are around a $100 budget in paper, and typically significantly less expensive online. One thing that I see very frequently when discussing budget modern decks is that Midrange strategies are basically completely unplayable because “YoU cAn’T tUrN a GoOdStUfF dEcK iNtO a BuDgEt DeCk”. While this is a little true (You just can’t fit 4x thoughtseize 4x Liliana of the Veil into a budget list unfortunately), it’s definitely not out of the realm of possibility that you can play Midrange on a budget. Here, i’ve got three lists (Featuring some newly cheapened Double Masters cards!) that I think are totally viable as budget midrange options. Without anymore fanfare, let’s just jump in! --- Skred The first up for this one, we’ve got the first midrange archetype that I ever played in a tournament setting - Skred Red. For those that weren’t around in the stone age when this deck was popular, Skred Red is a snow based red midrange deck that looks to take advantage of its namesake as an extremely powerful removal spell, jam out a blood moon to lock out greedy manabases, and take over the game with difficult to deal with threats such as Koth or some Dragons. For this build in particular, i’ve decided to go for a suite of creatures that all provide Two for Ones (which will hereby be known as 2-4-1s) in some fashion, as well as going heavy handed on the card advantage spells that are within the budget range. One thing that i’ve learned is that Mazemind Tome is an amazing card, and if you’re playing a grindy deck that isn’t in blue you should definitely consider playing it. It helps to recover and stabilize in a color that otherwise doesn’t have access to lifegain, and drawing up to 4 cards is no joke. Other key synergies here include the combo of Eternal Scourge and main deck Relic of Progenitus to provide us with an “infinite” amount of 3/3 blockers or attackers while offering lines of disruption that most decks don’t have until sideboarding. Koth of the Hammer plus Mountains is also a very solid strategy for ending a game quickly, as the emblem is essentially unbeatable for the large percentage of the metagame. The main game plan here is to keep the board clear of creatures by any means necessary so as to not die, then jam out a threat that a creature deck won’t be able to deal with. This deck is basically the creature deck killer. Against non-creature decks, we’re really just hopeful that a blood moon or relic of progenitus is enough to slow them down so we can burn them out. Anyway, after playing some games, I ended up with a respectable 3-3. Modern is a lot more varied than it was in Skred’s heyday, which means that there’s a much smaller percent chance that you’ll go up against one of the deck’s stellar matchups. However, with astrolabe banned again Blood moon is definitely back on the menu as a real threat that people need to be concerned about. People pretty frequently seem to forget that blood moon is legal in the format; either that or they just don’t care enough about it and are willing to lose whenever it shows up. Janking people out with some stupid card that they aren’t prepared for is one of the cornerstones of building a deck on a budget, and Blood moon gives the Skred deck some major power. Overall, this seems more like a deck you take to an in-person event where you know that you’ll be facing up against creature decks and decks with greedy mana bases all night. I don’t think i’d take it to a large scale tournament with an unknown meta right now, but with some tuning it is certainly capable of pulling out wins. --- Hatebears Many people will look at a Death and Taxes or Hatebears list and think “Hey, this is an Aggro deck!”. While yes, on the surface this archetype definitely looks the way of a strictly aggressive creature beatdown deck, once you start reading the abilites and thinking about how they might play out over your typical game against any other random deck in the format, you’ll see that Hatebears is actually much more flexible, and able to adapt to become the control role in a large number of matchups. Hatebears was originally developed as a “Meta crusher” deck to beat up on jund decks by dropping a Loxodon Smiter on them when they went to play their discard effects. Since, it has existed in various forms, often being named interchangeably with Death and Taxes as they perform very similar roles in the modern metagame. The point of a Hatebears deck is to use efficient green mana dorks to jump ahead slightly into your powerful disruptive GW creature suite, and grind away at the opponent by having some kind of answer to anything that they’re doing while getting in for chip damage turn after turn. For my version, i’ve decided to supplement the removal suite with the combo of Containment Priest plus flicker effects to be able to exile any creature at will and keep them gone for good. This is supported by a small cat-tribal subtheme, as well as the typical litany of Taxes creatures whose job it is to throw the opponent off axis. The matches for this one went surprisingly well, ending on a 4-2 record. I played against a couple of combo decks who were completely hosed by the main deck hate cards I was packing, and I was also able to grind it out against a bant uro pile, keeping up with their creature threats as they struggled to answer my own. I’m pretty impressed with the deck in this small showing, and would love to see where this archetype can go in the hands of someone who really dedicates time to mastering it. The deck really rewards format knowledge, even in this budgeted incarnation, as it’s a deck that runs on very thin margins and making a wrong play somewhere can have devastating side effects a few turns down the road. Hatebears or Death and Taxes are in the category of decks where you grow as you play the deck, you tune the deck to perfectly fit against the overall metagame, and you’re rewarded for your dedication to the archetype. This isn’t a deck i’d expect to just pick up and start winning games with, there aren’t very many free wins here. If you like working for your glory, then Hatebears is definitely a deck for you. --- Delirium And now for the one we’ve all been waiting for. I promised midrange decks, and this is by far the most midrange-y of them all. Budget Son of Jund, the mac daddy itself, GB Delirium is here to kick tail and chew bubblegum…. And it’s all out of bubblegum. If i’m honest, I have no idea what that reference is even from. What I do know is that yes, GBx Midrange is in fact possible on a budget. For almost a decade, i’ve seen people ask “How do I play Jund on a budget in modern?”. It’s the most widely requested budget deck, and one of the most beloved playstyles. Magic as Richard Garfield intended, trading your resources with your opponent 1-4-1 in a true test of pilot skill and preparation. The deck with a 50/50 matchup against any other deck in the field not accounting for pilot skill. The deck that every man wants to be, every woman wants to be with, and every non-binary or asexual person looks at with the familiar fondness of a lifelong friend. The deck was just kinda fine. Another 3-3 record, I actually had much higher expectations for this one. I want to focus in on what the deck does well first, and that is approximate on a budget the playstyle and patterns of a non-budget GBx midrange deck. The choices feel almost the same, even though the card-for-card value is much less on our end. The deck offers an excellent stepping stone into GB Midrange decks in modern, and I feel as though if you’re looking for a first step into the format that this is one of the best ways to do it without playing aggro. Now, to what the deck does poorly. In building on a budget, we are limited severely by what we have access to, namely that we can’t build a “goodstuff” deck because all of the good stuff is heckin expensive. This means that we need to shift our focus onto synergy, because synergies exist at all levels in Magic. When we look for synergies in the GB colors, the most common theme we find is graveyard interaction, or playing around with our dead stuff. Going this route in modern without going all in on it means that we’re left weak to all the various graveyard hate that exists in the format without netting much of the benefit. While this means that we still get to play with some of the best cards we have access to, we’re left in a more vulnerable spot than if we were a non-budget build. Another area where we face difficulty is in the overall popularity of GBx as an archetype, meaning that we’re fighting against ourselves when trying to join in because anything of use to us is naturally going to be more expensive. While GB isn’t very pressed when it comes to making a mana base, we are pretty pressed in terms of removal as all of our best options are either $7+ or 3+ mana. We should also talk about timing in the metagame and what you should expect when taking a budget list for a spin. Right now, modern is dominated by Uro midrange piles, combo decks, highly efficient aggro decks, and prison style control decks. Not very many of these are excellent matchups for us when we’re not equipped with our strongest answers. Our small discard suite can keep the combo decks at bay long enough to sneak in some damage with our cheap creatures, and our removal can dispatch the early threats from opposing aggro decks, but when it comes to having better card for card quality than our opponents we’re just a little lacking. It doesn’t matter how solid your list is, budget or not, if the strategy overall just folds to an uro, and not all of your losses will be chalked up to your deck being cheaper than your opponents. It’s very easy to become discouraged when taking a budget list to an event and flopping, blaming your lack of investment for your lack of results. But sometimes its just a matter of your deck choice too, and that you picked the wrong deck to bring to an event. One thing that i’ve learned over my years of brewing with budget lists is that any deck, well enough tuned and piloted, can take down any tournament at any time. GB Delirium does a fantastic approximation of a midrange game plan in the modern format. It won’t net you the results that a full no-budget list might, but that isn’t the point of playing a budget deck. You don’t play budget decks to spike tournaments. You play them to get into formats, to learn, to get better, and to grow as a player. You’re meant to toss your budget deck to the wayside when you’re done with it, if you want. If you like the strategy, a majority of the time you can also use it as a base to build into the no-budget version of the archetype you wanted to play in the first place. If you take two players, both brand new to Modern UWx Control, and run them through series of tournaments with the only difference between the two players being that the first was playing a budget UW control deck for a year and the second is going in blind, the first will come out with a better record almost every time. They put in the time to learn the deck even before they could get their hands on it in full, and that practice will pay off. Moving 'round to the finisher, I just want to say that playing a budget deck doesn’t make you a bad player, it makes you someone who’s going to be a great player someday, and someone who recognises the value in investing time and learning. If you’re forced into playing on a budget, that’s alright. There’s options for you to play as competitively as possible. If you’re just unsure about whether you’d like the format you’re jumping into or not, that’s also alright, there’s room for you to grow. Budget deck building is a real passion of mine. I hope that you got something out of this, or at the very least had a bit of fun along the way. I have plans to make a whole bunch more content for budget modern, so stay tuned for that. If you’re curious and want to look through my whole catalogue of budget lists that i’ve made so far, you can do that [HERE] as well. Until next time, stay safe, stay smart, and thanks for reading!
Download any of these for free at https://oppfiles.com/585933 DM me if you have any requests for anything not on the list. If you want solution manuals/testbanks, you can also request them Almost all the books are in their latest editions and some of them are available in multiple editions too. Please subscribe the sub to find all the latest textbook releases. Enjoy! [Book] Art is an endangered species: a History of western art, Paleolithic Romanesque(self) 1 [BOOK] Above the Fray: The Red Cross and the Making of the Humanitarian NGO Sector by Shai Dromi(self) 2 [Book] Prehospital Emergency Care 11th Edition(self) 1 [Book] JAMA Guide to Statistics and Methods 1st Edition by Edward Livingston, Roger Lewis(self) 3 [Book] Annual Editions: Anthropology 42/e, Elvio ANGELONI(self) 4 [Book] Donnelly, Seth 2019 The Lie of Global Prosperity: How Neoliberals Distort Data to Mask Poverty & Exploitation. Monthly Review Press.(self)NSFW 6 [Article] "What's Your Title?" - 'The Turn of the Screw.'(self) 3 [Article] Risk and survival of patients with head and neck cutaneous melanoma: national perspective. Al-Qurayshi Z et al(self) 1 [Book] [Taylor & Francis] Maritime Disputes and International Law: Disputed Waters and Seabed Resources in Asia and Europe by Constantinos Yiallourides(self) 2 [Book] Computer Network Security by Ali Sadiqui(self) 1 [Article] [Brill] Several articles from The Australian Year Book of International Law Volume 34(1)(self) 2 [Book]The Cham of Vietnam: History, Society and Art(self) 1 [Book] (Taylor&Francis) Human Biological Diversity by Daniel E. Brown(self) 4 [Article] [tandfonline] Memory for emotional words: The role of semantic relatedness, encoding task and affective valence(self) 5 [Article] Please help me to find this paper :( Shippers' Transport Efficiency: The Balance Between Required and Available Capacity(self) 6 [Article] [Heinonline] Trusts in Mixed Legal Systems: A Challenge to Comparative Trust Law - Michael Milo and Jan Smits(self) 4 [Article] [Heinonline] Non-Variation Clause - A Further Postscript(self) 4 [Article] [Heinonline] Force Majeure and Hardship Under The Unidroit Principles of International Commercial Contracts - Joseph M Perillo(self) 4 [Article] [Heinonline] The Enforcement of an Oral Pactum de non Petendo Where a Contract Contains a Non-Variation Clause - Tukishi Manamela(self) 4 [Article] [Brill] Joint Development of Offshore Oil and Gas Resources in the South China Sea by John Abrahamson(self) 2 [BOOK] Med School Confidential: A Complete Guide to the Medical School Experience: By Students, for Students(self) 4 [Book] [Bloomsbury] The Hague Trusts Convention: Scope, Application and Preliminary Issues - Jonathan Harris(self) 4 [Article] The UNIDROIT Principles and the Arbitral Tribunals - Fabio Bortoli(self) 2 [Article] The Effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) on Idiopathic Hypersomnia: A Pilot Study(self) 4 [Book] [Bloomsbury] The South China Sea Arbitration Toward an International Legal Order in the Oceans by Yoshifumi Tanaka(self) 1 [book] International Law Commission and Future of Int. Law(self) 4 [BOOK] Mapping Populism. Approaches and Methods - Amit Ron, Majia Nadesan(self) 4 [Article] At the Type Archive(self) 4 [BOOK] Challenging Austerity Radical Left and Social Movements in the South of Europe - Beltrán Roca, Emma Martín-Díaz, Ibán Díaz-Parra(self) 4 [BOOK] The Right in Latin America. Elite Power, Hegemony and the Struggle for the State - Barry Cannon(self) 1 [BOOK] Latin America’s Left Turns: Politics, Policies, and Trajectories of Change - Maxwell A. Cameron and Eric Hershberg, editors(self) 1 [Book] Science Lessons: What the Business of Biotech Taught Me about Management by Philip Bashe(self) 1 [Book] Studies in Islamic and later Indian art from the Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Harvard University Art Museums(self) 1 [Article] The Beneficial Effect of Physical Exercise on Inflammatory Makers in Older Individuals Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets. 2020 Jun 6. Pablo Gómez-Rubio, Isabel Trapero(self) 4 [BOOK] Routledge Handbook of Global Populism - Carlos de la Torre(self) 1 [BOOK] Politics after Violence. Legacies of the Shining Path Conflict in Peru - Hillel Soifer & Alberto Vergara(self) 4 [Book] Emmanuel Levinas: Basic Philosophical Writings, edited by Adriaan T. Peperzak (et al.), 2008.(self) 1 [Article] Residual Flow Inside the Woven EndoBridge Device at Follow-Up: Potential Predictors of the Bicêtre Occlusion Scale Score 1 Phenomenon(self) 4 [Book] Who Reads Ulysses?: The Common Reader and the Rhetoric of the Joyce Wars(self) 1 [BOOK] 'Hegel and the Symbolic Mediation of Spirit' by Kathleen Dow Magnus, 2001(self) 2 [Article] THE CRIMINAL AND HIS SCIENCE: A Critical Account of the Formation of Criminology at the End of the Nineteenth Century(self) 1 [Book] Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory After the Interpretive Turn(self) 1 [BOOK] Intrepid Women: Cantinières and Vivandières of the French Army by Thomas Cardoza(self) 1 [Article] Star, Susan Leigh, By Adele E. Clarke(self) 1 Book: Classics of Philosophy by Louis Pojman(self) 1 [article] Schutz's semiotics and the symbolic construction of reality - Hanke(self) 5 [article] Alexandra Kollontai and revolutionary fiction - Sybil James(self) 2 [Article] Fears of an AI pioneer - John Bohannon(self) 2 [Article] Can not access this article.(self) 2 [Book] Can't access this book from archive.org(self) 1 [Book] 45 Tips, Tricks, and Secrets for the Successful International Baccalaureate [IB] Student(self) 7 [BOOK] Request well formatted "The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy"(self) 1 [Book] Doing Real Research: A Practical Guide to Social Research by Eric Jensen, Charles Laurie(self) 1 [BOOK] Chemoinformatics: Basic Concepts and Methods(self) 4 [Book] (Elgaronline) Concepts for International Law edited by Sahib Singh(self) 1 [Book] A concise history of Sweden from the Viking Age to the present(self) 1 [BOOK] Someone can share me "The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy Book pdf" please?(self) 4 [BOOK] Latin America In Comparative Perspective New Approaches To Methods And Analysis - Peter H. Smith(self) 1 [BOOK] Southeast Asia in Political Science Theory, Region, and Qualitative Analysis - Edited by Erik Martinez Kuhonta, Dan Slater and Tuong Vu(self) 4 [BOOK] A History of the Talmud David C. Kraemer(self) 1 [BOOK] Compendium of Intellectual Property Cases - Copyright and Industrial Designs Volume 2(self) 4 [Book] Peasant state and society in medieval South India by Burton Stein.(self) 6 [Article] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-time-to-take-delirium-seriously/(self) 1 [BOOK] Urbina, J. L (2000). Las malas juntas. Santiago, Chile: LOM Ediciones.(self) 5 [Book] Ince, Onur Ulas 2018 Colonial Capitalism & The Dilemmas of Liberalism. Oxford University Press.(self)NSFW 3 [BOOK] Hegel and Contemporary Practical Philosophy ISBN 978-0815383734(self) 3 [Thesis] An Overview and Performance Guide to Manuel Ponce's Sonata III for Solo Guitar(self) 2 [Article] New media simulation stories in nursing education: a quasi-experimental study exploring learning outcomes. Author: Robin Webb-Corbett , Melissa Renee Schwartz, Bob Green, Andrea Sessoms, Melvin Swanson(self) 4 [Book] Bell, Duncan 2016 Reordering the World: Essays on Liberalism & Empire. Princeton University Press(self)NSFW 4 [Book] Objective Measures in Cochlear Implants - Michelle L. Hughes(self) 1 [Book] Hands-on Scala Programming - Li Haoyi(self) 5 [BOOK] Ancient Sex: New Essays, Kirk Ormand, ed. Ruby Blondell(self) 3 [Article] The Impotence of the Causal Impotence Objection by Alastair Norcross(self) 1 [Article] Forsaking Wisdom, Author: David Benatar(self) 1 [Book] Encyclopedia of Insurgency and Counterinsurgency: A New Era of Modern Warfare - Spencer C. Tucker(self) 1 [BOOK] 'The cynic & the fool: the unconscious in theology & politics', Tad DeLay, Eugene, Oregon : Cascade Books (2017)(self) 1 [Book] The Crafts and Capitalism byTirthankar Roy(self) 3 [Book] Organic Chemistry By Cram, Hendrickson and Hammond. 3rd edition, 1970. Pls help.(self) 1 [BOOK] Measuring and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation. Authors: John Brazier, Julie Ratcliffe, Joshua Saloman, and Aki Tsuchiya.(self) 3 [Article] Recommendations to distinguish behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia from psychiatric disorders. Authors: Ducharme, S. et al(self) 1 [BOOK] Clinical Handbook of Psychotropic Drugs 23rd Edition(self) 4 [Article] Gardner, Martin MATHEMATICAL GAMES from Scientific American vol 209, No. 4(self) 3 [Book]Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography(self) 1 [Book] Encyclopedia of Insurgency and Counterinsurgency : A New Era of Modern Warfare - Spencer Tucker(self) 1 [BOOK] Second interim report on English collocations - Harold Palmer (Tokyo)(self) 1 [Book] Paul B. Miller, John Oberdiek - Civil Wrongs and Justice in Private Law - Oxford University Press(self) 8 [BOOK] Fateful Triangle: How China Shaped U.S.-India Relations During the Cold War by TANVI MADAN(self) 1 [BOOK] Tooth preparations: science & art (Clovis Pagani)(self) 4 [Book] (Taylor&Francis) Human Variation: Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups by Stephen Molnar(self) 1 [Article] Surgical techniques for adrenal tumors(self) 2 [Article] Three articles from ashpublications needed!(self) 1 [Book] The SCOPUS Diaries and the (il)logics of Academic Survival(self) 6 [Article] Untangling constructivism, knowledge, and knowledge-building for “future-oriented” teaching Author(s): Jane Gilbert(self) 1 [BOOK] Sentenciando Tráfico - Marcelo Semer(self) 4 [Book] Believing History: Latter-day Saint Essays(self) 1 [Book]Book of Mormon Authorship Revisited: The Evidence for Ancient Origins(self) 1 [Book] Genres Across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education(self) 1 [Chapter] William Ophuls, "Leviathan or Oblivion?" in Toward a Steady-state Economy edited by Herman E. Daly(self) 1 [BOOK] 99 Tips for Creating Simple and Sustainable Educational Videos(self) 6 [Book] Taylor, Christopher 2018 Empire of Neglect: The West Indies in the Wake of British Liberalism. Duke University Press.(self)NSFW 1 [Book] The emporium of the world : maritime Quanzhou1000-1400 , by Angela Schottenhammer, Leiden : Brill, 2001(self) 2 [Article] PRRT in high-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)(self) 1 [Book] The art of strict musical composition, by Johann Philipp Kirnberger, tr. David Beach and Jurgen Thym(self) 1 [Book] (request) Primate Evolution and Human Origins By Russell L. Ciochon & Fleagle(self) 10 [Book] (T&F) Sikhs in Asia Pacific by Swarn Singh Kahlon(self) 4 [Book] (T&F) Nation-state and Minority Rights in India by Tanweer Fazal(self) 5 [Book] The Path of Genocide: The Rwanda Crisis from Uganda to Zaire - Astri Suhrke(self) 2 [Article] Intergenerational social mobility and religious ecology: Disaggregating the conservative Protestant bloc(self) 3 [Book] ASTM E2847 - 14; Standard Test Method for Calibration and Accuracy Verification of Wideband Infrared Thermometers(self) 1 [Article] Country Life issue 86, from October 1939(self) 1 [Book] Understanding the Dairy Cow by John Webster(self) 4 [Article] The Struggle over Structural Adjustment: Socialist Revolution versus Capitalist Counterrevolution in Yugoslavia and the World by Johanna Bockman(self) 4 [Book] Shadowland : from Jeffrey Epstein to the Clintons, from Obama and Biden to the occult elite, exposing the deep-state actors at war with Christianity, Donald Trump, and America's destiny(self) 1 [Book] Refugee conversations by Bertold Brecht(self) 1 [Article] (requested) Alan Crozier, Beyond the Metaphor: Cursing and Swearing in Ulster, in MALEDICTA X, at 115, 122 (1988-89)(self) 3 [Book] A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition(self) 4 [Article] God as a White man: A psychological barrier to conceptualizing Black people and women as leadership worthy.(self) 1 [Book]The Truth about Mormonism: Illumination or Deception?(self) 3 [Book] Shorebird Ecology, Conservation, and Management(self) 10 [Chapter] De Anima et Resurrectione(self) 2 [BOOK] A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition(self) 5 [BOOK] 'Rulers, townsmen and bazaars : North Indian society in the age of British expansion, 1770-1870' by CA Bayly(self) 1 [Book] Middleton's Allergy 2-Volume Set 9th Edition by A Wesley Burks Stephen Holgate Robyn O'Hehir Leonard Bacharier David Broide Gurjit Khurana Hershey R. Stokes Peebles, Jr.(self) 4 [BOOK] 'Islamic Psychoanalysis and Psychoanalytic Islam:Cultural and Clinical Dialogues', 2018(self) 2 [Book] Research Handbook on the Economics of Intellectual Property Law(self) 4 [Chapter] Changing Ethnolinguistic Perceptions In The South(self) 2 [Book] Ethnographic Perspectives on Academic Writing, by Brian Paltridge, Sue Starfield, and Christine M. Tardy(self) 1 [Book] N. G. L. Hammond: A history of Macedonia. Vol. I: Historical geography and prehistory. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1972(self) 23 [Book] (request) Evolutionary Neuropsychology: An Introduction to the Evolution of the Structures and Functions of the Human Brain by Frederick L. Coolidge(self) 5 [Book] Cultural Heritage in the European Union: A Critical Inquiry into Law and Policy(self) 7 [Book] (T&F) State Interest and the Sources of International Law by Markus P. Beham(self) 1 [book][request] The Future Belongs to the Digital Engineer: Transforming the Industry by Jim Crompton(self) 1 [book][request] Where the Action Is: The Meetings That Make or Break Your Organization by J. Elise Keith(self) 1 [book][request] Work Smarter: Live Better: Practical Ways to Change Your Work Habits and Transform Your Life by Cyril Peupion(self) 2 [book][request] Bits, Bytes, and Barrels: The Digital Transformation of Oil and Gas by Geoffrey Cann(self) 6 [Article] Tax Revenues and the Fiscal Cost of Trade Liberalization, 1792-2006(self) 4 [Book] (T&F) Writing Diaspora South Asian Women, Culture and Ethnicity by Yasmin Hussain(self) 4 [Article] [HeinOnline] Request(self) 4 [Book] - The Routledge International Handbook of Forensic Intelligence and Criminology(self) 2 4 [Book] Optional Processes Theory and Applications, by Mohamed Abdelghani, Alexander Melnikov(self) 4 [BOOK] Tehrangeles Dreaming: Intimacy and Imagination in Southern California's Iranian Pop Music - Farzaneh Hemmasi(self) 4 [Book] (T&F) Sikh Religion, Culture and Ethnicity by Arvind-Pal S. Mandair, Christopher Shackle, Gurharpal Singh(self) 7 [Book] Crip Times: Disability, Globalization and the Resistance - Robert McRuer (Project Muse)(self) 2 [Book] Molecular Population Genetics by Matthew W. Hahn(self) 1 [Book] Mastering A&P with Pearson eText(self) 1 [Book] Lifespan Development - Denise Roberts Boyd, Helen L Bee(self) 1 [Book] AutoLISP und ADS für AutoCAD Version 11 Hans-Peter Rust (IWT Verlag 1991)(self) 4 [Book] Sacrifice Regained: Morality and Self-Interest in British Moral Philosophy from Hobbes to Bentham(self) 2 [Article] IEEE Xplore article: Single IMU Displacement and Orientation Estimation of Human Center of Mass: A Magnetometer-Free Approach, Stefano Cardarelli(self) 4 [Chapter] 10 - Interaction in L2 Learning(self) 2 [Book] An Introduction to Astrobiology (3rd Edition), edited by David A. Rothery, Iain Gilmour, and Mark A. Sephton(self) 7 [Book] Optical Nonlinearities in Chalcogenide Glasses and their Applications(self) 6 [Book] Principles of Economics by Joshua Gans, Stephen King, and Robin Stonecash(self) 3 [Book] European Slave Trading in the Indian Ocean, 1500–1850 by Richard B. Allen(self) 3 [Book] How to Parent by Fitzhugh Dodson(self) 7 [Article] A contribution to the theory of anxiety and guilt. Klein, Melanie. (1948). The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 29, 114–123.(self) 6 [Book] Interaction of Media, Cognition, and Learning - Gavriel Salomon(self) 4 [Article] Oxygen and Diverse Nutrients Influence the Water Kefir Fermentation Process / Laureys D., Aerts M., Vandamme P., De Vuyst L.(self) 5 [Article] [HeinOnline] The Artificial Reason of the Law or: What Lawyers Know, by Charles Fried(self) 1 [Book] Structure And Mechanism In Protein Science: A Guide To Enzyme Catalysis And Protein Folding (Structural Biology) by Alan Fersht Reprint Edition(self) 3 [Article] Neurostimulation Therapies for Primary Headache Disorders: Present and Future(self) 3 [Article] Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation Reduces Nociceptive Behaviour in an Orofacial Pain Model(self) 4 [Article] Characterization of Degradation Behavior for PLGA in Various pH Condition by Simple Liquid Chromatography Method Yoo, Je Young | Kim, Jong Min | Seo, Kwang Su | Jeong, Yong Kyun | Lee, Hai Bang | Khang, Gilson(self) 1 [Thesis] Winton, Douglas Walter(self) 3 [Article] Denis Muzerelle, “Dating Manuscripts: What Is at Stake in the Steps Usually (but Infrequently) Taken,”(self) 1 Needs Digitizing [ARTICLE] Francesca Ferrari - Il fatto notorio e la rete Internet(self) 1 Needs Digitizing [ARTICLE] Francesca Ferrari - Il fatto notorio e la rete Internet(self) 4 [Book] Practising Italian Grammar(self) 3 [Book] Growth, Distribution, and Prices(self) 5 [Book] Conflict and Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific New Geopolitical Realities Edited ByAsh Rossiter, Brendon J. Cannon(self) 4 [Article] Combination of UV and MS/MS detection for the LC analysis of cannabidiol-rich products(self) 2 [Article] Economic Opinion when Britain Turned to Free Trade(self) 6 [Book] "Alienation" by Bertell Ollman (1977, 2nd ed.)(self) 2 [Chapter] An Introduction to Scientific Realist Evaluation(self) 4 [Book] (Brill) Regime Interaction in Ocean Governance edited by Seline Trevisanut et al.(self) 1 [ARTICLE] Practical issues of geostatistical reserve estimation in the mining industry - Guocheng Pan(self) 2 [ARTICLE] Erin G. Godwin - Judicial Notice and the Internet(self) 3 [Book] Kaiser Augustus und die verlorene Republik: eine Ausstellung im Martin- Gropius- Bau by M. Hofter (ed.)(self) 1 [BOOK] The Quest for Authority in Iran: A History of The Presidency from Revolution to Rouhani by Siavush Randjbar-Daemi(self) 1 [Book] Prolegomena to Ethics(self) 1 [book] The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age by Hans Jonas(self) 1 [Article] Left‐to‐right transfer of language dominance(self) 2 [Article] Research progress of laterally coupled DFB-LD / Guangli Yue(self) 4 [Book] Political Science: Volume 3: Indian Political Thought (ICSSR Research Surveys and Explorations)(self) 1 [Article] Adjunct-Predicate Licensing and D-Structure(self) 10 [Article] No evidence of racial discrimination in criminal justice processing: Results from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health(self) 1 [ARTICLE] "H. G. Wells and Ralph Ellison: Need the Effect of One Invisible Man on Another Be Itself Invisible?"(self) 2 [Book] Industrial Ventilation: A Manual of Recommended Practice for Design 30th Edition(self) 1 [Book] Disk recording. Vol. 1-2. An anthology of articles on disk recording from the pages of the Journal of the Audio engineering society Vol. 1-Vol. 28 (1953-1980). 1(self) 1 [Book] Cityscapes of Modernity: Critical Explorations by David Frisby(self) 1 [Book] Art and the Senses | Edited by Francesca Bacci and David Melcher(self) 1 [eBook] Mastering A&P with Pearson eText(self) 1 [Book] Emotionen: Eine Einführung für beratende, therapeutische, pädagogische und soziale Berufe(self) 3 [article] Conceptualizing Behavior Disorders in Terms of Resistance to Intervention(self) 1 [ARTICLE] 'Hegel, Hinduism, and Freedom', Merold Westphal, The Owl of Minerva, Volume 20, Issue 2, Spring 1989, Pages 193-204(self) 1 [Book] Machine Learning in Chemistry(self) 1 [Book] Youth and media(self) 7 1 [Article] The Beneficial Effect of Physical Exercise on Inflammatory Makers in Older Individuals Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets. 2020 Jun 6. Pablo Gómez-Rubio, Isabel Trapero(self) 2 [Article] On the Determination of the Number, Size, Spacing, and Volume Fraction of Spherical Second-Phase Particles from Extraction Replicas(self) 5 [Book] Remington and Klein's Infectious Diseases of the Fetus and Newborn Infant 8th Edition by Christopher Wilson Victor Nizet Yvonne Maldonado Jack Remington Jerome Klein(self) 1 [Other] (Monthly Newspaper in France) Le Monde Diplomatique (English Edition) June 2020.(self) 1 [Other] (Monthly Newspaper in France) Le Monde Diplomatique (English Edition) May 2020.(self) 1 [BOOK] Crime and Markets - Vincenzo Ruggiero(self) 2 [Book] The Search for Meaning by Dennis Ford(self) 1 [Book] The Acts of Jesus: What Did Jesus Really Do?(self) 1 [Chapter] Gustav Mahler, the Wunderhorn years: chronicles and commentaries Vol. 2 -- pp. 408-410(self) 4 [Article] [Heinonline] 2 old Articles from the African Journal of International and Comparative Law(self) 4 [ARTICLE] 'Ways of Prediction, Ways of Rhetoric' Philippe-Joseph Salazar, Philosophy & Rhetoric Vol. 50, No. 4 (2017), pp. 390-408(self) 1 [Article] [Needs Digitizing] Wells, J. C. (1986). A standardized machine-readable phonetic notation. In Conference Publication No. 258. International Conference on Speech Input / Output; Techniques and Applications, 24–26 March 1986. London: Institute of Electrical Engineers, 134–137.(self) 4 [Book] (BRILL) Indian Diaspora: Voices of the Diasporic Elders in Five Countries(self) 1 [BOOK] 'Hegel, freedom, and modernity' by Merold Westphal, 1992(self) 1 [Supplement] Panza MJ, Graupensperger S, Agans JP, Doré I, Vella SA, Evans MB. Adolescent sport participation and symptoms of anxiety and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of sport and exercise psychology. 2020 May 21;42(3):201-18.(self) 2 [Article] Cooley at al. (2019). Complex intersections of race and class: Among social liberals, learning about White privilege reduces sympathy, increases blame, and decreases external attributions for White people struggling with poverty(self) 4 [Book] [Brill] Resolving Conflicts in the Law : Essays in Honour of Lea Brilmayer(self) 1 [Book] Master Medicine: General and Systematic Pathology 3rd Edition(self) 4 [book] Islamic Societies to the Nineteenth Century - A Global History by Ira M. Lapidus(self) 4 [Article] [Heinonline] Conflicts between the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the International Court of Justice by Tullio Treves(self) 3 [Book] Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders(self) 1 [BOOK] 'Wrestling with Archons: Gnosticism as a Critical Theory of Culture' by JONATHAN CAHANA-BLUM, 2018(self) 1 [Other] XXI Century | Bullfrog Films(self) 4 [BOOK] The Oxford Handbook of Ethics of AI(self) 4 [Book] Figures of Southeast Asian Modernity (JSTOR) by Barker, Harms, & Linduiqst(self) 7 [Book] Health Informatics: An Interprofessional Approach, 2nd Edition(self) 2 [Article] Rapport and friendship in ethnographic research(self) 4 [BOOK] 'Žižek on race: Toward an Anti-Racist Future' by Zahi Zalloua, Bloomsbury, 2020(self) 3 [BOOK] Classical Antiquity in Video Games by Christian Rollinger(self) 1 [Thesis] Sandro, Paolo - Creation and application of law: a neglected distinction. ERA - Edinburgh(self) 3 [Article] belated: interruption(self) 4 [Article] Reusable and Recyclable Graphene Masks with Outstanding Superhydrophobic and Photothermal Performances(self) 8 [Article] Randomized Algorithms in Number Theory(self) 4 [Book] The Routledge Companion to Digital Humanities and Art History(self) 5 [Article] Regulatory cell therapy in kidney transplantation (The ONE Study): a harmonised design and analysis of seven non-randomised, single-arm, phase 1/2A trials by Sawitzki et al.(self) 0 1 [Book] Asian Freedoms: The Idea of Freedom in East and Southeast Asia (Cambridge), eds. David Kelly & Anthony Reid(self) 2 [Article] Local Mitochondrial ATP Production Regulates Endothelial Fatty Acid Uptake and Transport, by A. Ibrahim N. Yucel B. Kim Z. Arany(self) 4 [Chapter] Modeling Liquid–Liquid Extraction for Critical Elements Separations: An overview, (Chukwunwike O. Iloeje, 2020).(self) 6 [Article] Electrical stimulation in white oyster mushroom (Pleurotus florida) production, by I. Roshita, K. M. P. Nurfazira, C. Shi Fern, and M. S. Nur Ain(self) 1 [Book] Screen Adaptation: Impure Cinema by Deborah Cartmell and Imelda Whelehan(self) 4 [Book] Earth’s Insights (Callicott 1997)(self) 1 [Book] Viscosity of Pure Organic Liquids and Binary Liquid Mixtures 2017(self) 2 [BOOK] Needed: A comprehensive etymological dictionary of the Hebrew language for readers of English(self) 1 [Book] Hydrothermal chemistry of zeolites(self) 5 [Chapter] 2 chapters from A History of the United States Author: Philip Jenkins 3. Expansion and Crisis, 1825–65 6. Expansion and Crisis, 1825–65(self) 4 [Chapter] 8. The Fall of Actually Existing Socialism Authors: Prof. Geoffrey Swain, Dr. Nigel Swain(self) 5 [article] Sci-Hub didn't work for this article so I hope someone could help me !(self) 4 [Book] Evil Men, James Dawes(self) 1 [Chapter] from the book The Versailles Settlement Peacemaking after the First World War, 1919-1923 by Alan Sharp chapter 2. The Paris Peace Conference chapter 3. The League of Nations(self) 2 [Book] Macroeconomics(self) 1 [Article] "Eleutherna, the Orthi Petra Necropolis: Slewn by the Iron" by Nicholas Chr. Stampolidis.(self) 3 [Book] Contemporary Linguistics(self) 4 [Article](http://www.eurekaselect.com/137993/article)(self) 1 [Article](http://www.eurekaselect.com/137993/article)(self) 3 [Book] Chemistry: An Introduction to General, Organic, and Biological Chemistry(self) 1 [BOOK] Mastering Chemistry eBook(self) 3 [Book] The Oxford Handbook of Sovereign Wealth Funds(self) 1 [Book] "Marx, Marxism and Utopia" by Darren Webb (2000)(self) 5 [Article] "Law and Society", by Joachim J. Savelsberg, Lara L. Cleveland, in Oxford Bibliographies in Sociology(self) 2 [BOOK] Encouraging Pro-Environmental Behaviour - What Works, What Doesn't, and Why (2019)(self) 1 [BOOK] ''Guide for the economic design of circular metal silos'' by J.M. Rotter(self) 3 [BooK](JSTOR) The Evolved Apprentice: How Evolution Made Humans Unique by Kim Sterelny(self) 13 [Article] Matthews, Graham 2020 Pandemic, recession...: Capitalism is a Sick System. Green Left Weekly 1257, 2020.(self) 1 [BOOK]A comprehensive etymological dictionary of the Hebrew language for readers of English(self) 1 [Article] Sound Levels in Nursing Homes by Laura L. Joosse(self) 1 [Book] China Upside Down: Currency, Society, and Ideologies, 1808–1856 by Man-houng Lin(self) 3 [Book] The SAGE Handbook of Propaganda (2019)(self) 1 [BOOK] 'Lacan and Religion', by Aron Dunlap, Routledge, 2016(self) 2 [Book] Making It in the Market: Richard Ney's Low-Risk System for Stock Market Investors(self) 1 [Book] Comprendre les langues romanes(self) 1 [book] Derecho romano clásico, Betancourt(self) 6 [Book] The Oxford Handbook of Information Structure (2016)(self) 1 [book] pls help me find Physiotherapy in mental health and psychiatry(self) 4 [Article] Denationalization by Sir John Fischer Williams(self) 1 [BOOK] Statistical Methods for the Social and Behavioural Sciences - A Model-Based Approach (David B. Flora)(self) 1 [ARTICLE] Care as a Political Concept by Joan C. Tronto(self) 1 [Chapter] Agnieszka Uberman "English and Polish figurative language employing components of the frame of death" Cognitive Linguistics in the Year 2017. Peter Lang(self) 1 [book] Petroleum Contracts and International Law by Rudolf Dolzer(self) 1 [Book] A Short History of Persian Literature At the Bahmanī, the ‘Ādilshāhī and the Qutbshāhī Courts – Deccan(self) 4 [Book] A Japanese Advertising Agency: An Anthropology of Media and Markets (Routledge) by Brian Moeran(self) 1 [Book] The Way of Synthesis: Evolution of Design and Methods for Natural Products(self) 1 [book] ما في القرآن الكريم - دراسة نحوية(self) 6 [Book] (JSTOR) First Peoples in a New World: Colonizing Ice Age America by David J. Meltzer(self)
The C++ standards committee met in Prague, Czech Republic between Feb 10 and Feb 15. The standard is wording complete, and the only thing between here and getting it published is ISO process. As is typical for me at these meetings, I spent a lot of time doing freestanding things, Library Incubator (LEWGI) things, and minuting along the way (15-ish sessions/papers!).
I had three freestanding papers coming into this meeting:
P1641: Freestanding Library: Rewording the Status Quo
P1642: Freestanding Library: Easy [utilities], [ranges], and [iterators]
P2013: Freestanding Language: Optional ::operator new
The first two papers are pieces of my former "P0829: Freestanding Proposal" paper, and had been seen by the Feature Test study group in Belfast. During this meeting, I got to run them by the Library Incubator for some design feedback. The papers were received well, though some potential danger points still exist. Library Evolution can look at the papers as soon as they have time. P2013 is the first smaller piece taken out of "P1105: Leaving no room for a lower-level language: A C++ Subset". Exceptions are probably the most important thing in P1105, but there's so much activity going on in this area that it is hard for me to make good recommendations. The next highest priority was new and delete, hence P2013 being born. I also felt that P2013 was a good test paper to see if the committee was willing to make any language based change for freestanding. I had presented P2013 in a prior Low Latency / SG14 telecon, and received unanimous approval (no neutral, no against votes). I was able to present it in the Evolution Incubator, and received no against votes. Then, in a surprisingly quick turnaround, I was able to present to Evolution, and again received no against votes. So now I just need to come up with wording that accomplishes my goals, without breaking constant evaluated new.
Errors and ABI
On Monday, we held a join session between Evolution and Library Evolution to talk about one of the C++ boogeymen, ABI. P1836 and P2028 have good background reading if you are not familiar with the topic. The usual arguments were raised, including that we are losing out on performance by preserving ABI, and that breaking ABI would mean abandoning some software that cannot be rebuilt today. We took some polls, and I fear that each person will interpret the polls differently. The way I interpreted the polls is that we won't do a "big" ABI break anytime soon, but we will be more willing to consider compiler heroics in order to do ABI breaks in the library. One ABI area that is frequently overlooked is the situation that I am in. I can rebuild all of my source code, but even despite that I still care about ABI because I don't ship all of it together. I build a library with a plugin architecture, and breaking ABI would mean updating all the plugins on customer systems simultaneously... which is no easy task. I also ship binaries on Linux systems. We would prefer to be able to use new C++ features, despite targeting the various "LTS" distributions. ABI stability is a big part of that. I am hoping to make another post to cpp with my thoughts in the next few months, tentatively titled "ABI Breaks: Not just about rebuilding". On Tuesday, LEWG discussed "P1656: 'Throws: Nothing' should be noexcept". This is a substantial change to the policy laid out in N3279, authored by Alisdair Meredith. That's why it is informally called the "Lakos" rule. We discussed the trade-offs involved, including how adding noexcept can constrain future changes, how noexcept can make precondition tests more difficult, and how this will change little in practice, because implementers already mark most "Throws: Nothing" calls as noexcept. Arguments about performance, code bloat, and standards guaranteed portability won out though. This paper was "only" a policy change, so a follow-on paper will need to be authored by someone in order to actually do the noexcept marking. Wednesday night we had a social event celebrating the impending C++20 release. The event was held in the Prague Crossroads, built in 927 A.D.. The large tables let us have conversations with people we may not have really bumped into during the rest of the meeting. I started talking exceptions with a few of the other people at the table, and one of the had some particularly in depth knowledge about the topic. As it turns out, I was sitting at the same table as James Renwick of Low-cost Deterministic C++ Exceptions for Embedded Systems fame. I ended up talking his ear off over the course of the night. Thursday in LEWG, we talked about Niall Douglas's "P1028: SG14 status_code and standard error object". This is the class that may one day be thrown by P0709 "Static" exceptions. Coincidentally, the most contentious parts were issues involving ABI. In several of the virtual interfaces in the standard, we've wanted to add things later, but haven't been able to do so. Friday, James Renwick was able to present his paper, and the room was very receptive of it. One of my concerns going in to the presentation was that the committee would be unwilling to change anything in the standard related to today's exceptions. After the presentation and discussion, I'm less concerned about that. There was definitely a willingness to make some changes... but one of the big challenges is a question of whether we change default behavior in some cases, or change language ABI, even for C.
This one is the "high level" linear algebra paper. There's a different, "lower level" linear algebra paper (P1673) that covers BLAS use cases. P1385 is intended to be something that can sit on top of P1673, if I understand correctly. For being a math paper, there was surprisingly little math discussion in Library Incubator. We were generally discussing general interface issues like object ownership, concept requirements, and how to spell various operations, particularly inner product and outer product.
We are still in the philosophy and goals stage of this paper. We got to discuss the finer points of the distinctions between "kilogram" and "1 kilogram"; the difference between a unit, a dimension, and a quantity; and the difference between systems and models. This paper is challenging in that there is significant prior art, as well as strong opinions about "the right way" to do things. This gets to one of the trickier parts of standards meetings... driving consensus. The interested parties have been requested to (preferably) work together outside of the three meetings a year, or failing that, to write a paper that gives some outline of what a solution should look like. This paper also has an absurdly awesome / terrifying metaprogramming trick in it. A base class uses a friend declaration to declare (but not define) a function with an auto return type and no trailing return value. The derived class then declares and defines the function (again via friend) and lets the definition of the function determine the auto return type. This lets the base class use decltype to pull type information out of the derived class without explicitly passing that information down in a template argument (sorcery!). The main caveat with this trick is that it only works with exactly one derived class, as otherwise you end up with multiple conflicting definitions of the same function.
It's amazing what a minor paper reorg will do for productivity. This pair of papers used to be a single paper in the San Diego time frame, and we had a difficult time understanding how the pieces worked together. With the paper split as it is now, we have a small, concrete piece to review, which we were then able to see how it fit in to the interfaces and concepts of the larger paper. We got to dig in to some corner case traps with exception safety, move semantics, and race conditions. There were implementers in the room that could say what their implementation did, and I feel that the room was able to give good feedback to the authors.
Antony Polukhin is secretly my accidental nemesis (well, not so secret anymore). Over the course of C++20, he sprinkled constexpr on many of the things. As it turns out, there is a large (but not 100%) overlap of constexpr and freestanding. Each thing that went constexpr turned into a merge conflict that I got to resolve in my papers. And he's still at it! In this case, 100% of the things that were constexpr'd were also things that I have previously identified as being potentially freestanding. So that's a positive. There were concerns about implementability though, as sometimes, the C library and the C++ library come from different vendors, and having forwarding wrappers is far from trivial.
A minute about minuting
For the wg21 readers out there, if you think you are bad at taking minutes, that just means you need more practice :) . If you find yourself in a room that is about to review a paper that you are not heavily invested in, volunteer to take minutes. That way you can make a valuable contribution, even for an area where you don't have domain expertise. As a bonus, you get to follow the minuter's code (something I just made up) about spelling other people's names. As the person taking minutes, you have license to change up to three letters in someone's name, so long as it isn't used maliciously. You can freely take any double letter in a name and convert it to a single letter (e.g. Connor -> Conor), turn a single letter to a double letter (David -> Davvid), or completely rearrange any consecutive series of vowels. And people will thank you for it! You are also given free license to interrupt people in order to ask them who they are. Give it a try!
I've got a bunch of papers to write for the next mailing, and I won't even be in Varna. So if you're interested in championing some freestanding papers, let me know, and I can coach you on the topics.
I was arguing with someone on the youtube comments... I have some thoughts. The original reply on Youtube was severely truncated because character limits meant I lost my comments and had to try a couple times. I'll expand a lot more here. I was also childishly accused of somethings, and I didn't want my efforts to go to waste. For context: Someone was taking an absolutist stance on the firearms with the second amendment, and was quite angry that 2nd amendment doesn't get strict scrutiny protections, and felt like it should be expanded across the board. This reddit post is based on an adaption on the original, with additional expanded commentary in case anyone wants to join in. Original youtube comments as follows: Other person: How come we never get a judge like this on a second amendment case! A constitutional judge I don't believe it!!!!! Me: well for one, the law is not clearly on one side. Religious rights get strict scrutiny protection. Gun rights get intermediate scrutiny. other person: does the Second Amendment get treated that way because it's number two on the list and not number one? Or should strict scrutiny be observed across the board when it comes to any enumerated right? Me: It does say well-regulated militia. and if the people are the militia, that means you do get to control who is in it and who gets a gun. Would you allow a psychotic person to have a gun? DC v. Heller said that people have a right to keep and bear arms, but that doesn't necessarily mean "a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner." Its generally given intermediate scrutiny, although that hasn't been spelled out. other person: you need to get your dictionary out. And after you're done with that go get the Federalist Papers. Where the genius gentleman who wrote the declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights talk about what they meant when they wrote what they wrote. Then come back and talk to me. Liberal talking points mean nothing to me only facts. I type out a huge wall of text that gets ignored, which was adapted into the meat and potatoes of this post other person: 😂🤣😊🤣😊🤣😂🤣😊🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂yea ok. NO 😂🤣😂 TRY AGAIN😁😂🤣ILL B WAITING!😂🤣😂 me: absolute no rebuttal. too many emojis. Suggestive of a troll. Seeing as there is nothing to discuss, I'm done here. other person: lol yea . No. You didn't read the Federalist Papers. And if you did. You obviously didn't understand what you read, and didn't use a dictionary either. So like I said try again!😂🤣😂 and oh yes I must be a bot because I don't agree with what you say! Liberals you guys are hilarious😂🤣😂 That triggered that part of me that insists on correcting everyone. now that I've copy pasted what was said so that I don't get accused of misrepresenting anything.... Arguing on the results The first problem with originalism to me at least, seems to be that its used to support certain political stances, the stance comes first, rather than the law stuff. That can be said for pretty much any way of interpreting to some extent however. What I don't like is how there seems to be a premise of our opinions don't really matter, we should start with what it actually meant originally. And the pretense of true neutral on modern day politics, since we are going with the original intent of back then. First step is showing that rights can be "limited." All rights are balanced against other rights. If my religion says I get to murder you just because, that doesn't excuse it. You have a right to not be murdered. The religion is not an excuse. Do not murder is a general thing we can all agree upon. There is a government interest in preventing murder. Another exception to free speech is defamation. You aren't allowed to spew false things to hurt someone, and hide behind free speech. So no right is absolute, despite what the law may say. Its absolute as far as tyrannical government intrusions. By creation of tort law, Did Congress a) abridge the right of free speech or b) such free speech right does not allow you to defame someone, because you are abusing speech to harm them, in such a way that is so unfair, it violates something big enough worth it. Ie Does free speech give you the right to defame someone else? If so, that means the person who you defamed must put up with defamation, the lies and reputation harm? Put another way, are you allowed to call anyone a pedophile/murdererapist regardless if its true? Its better to think of them as declarations of principles. It doesn't take too much effort to try to stretch out the rights and realize that they come into conflict at some point. Furthermore, due to 9th amendment, we get implied rights of a right to privacy and bodily autonomy, freedom of thought and conscience. it seems like one of the risks is forgetting the fact that just because it isn't written there, doesn't mean that it didn't matter to the original authors/framers. That would seem to possibly imply it was just a given. In a sense everything is a constitutional issue in that the question is why is the government doing this anyways and do they have the right to, due to the 9th and 10th. So there is nothing wrong with limiting in application a right. Its not that you don't have the right, its just that the right can be limited, not by the government, but necessarily because the absolute right goes against and overrides other rights. I reconcile the seemingly absolute right behind "Congress shall make no law..." with the reality that rights cannot be absolute. Because to him, originalism + second amendment => unlimited gun rights. So I attack the conclusion. It was the most immediate issue, and because attacking originalism is harder and longer. First premise - there is a single original intent that encapsulates what everyone thought about it at the time, and that this truth is the ultimate, fundamental, original, historically correct interpretation/theory/answer. The natural consequence is to say that the only way to change that interpretation is through an amendment, or at least explicitly in statute. But that's quite difficult/impossible due to Gerrymandering. Scalia calculated that 4% of the population, distributed correctly could stop an amendment from being passed. So yes, we must obviously fix that, but that's another rabbit hole. The framers were people, flawed people, politicians in fact. Since reasonable people can disagree, and they disagreed frequently, having genuine disagreements and difference of opinions, they would make compromises, and they did that frequently, since the disagreed a lot, including on big ticket items. See Federalist 1. Thus like good politicians, they would invent a good enough compromise and kick the can down the road, and hope the system they said would be able to adapt and address it. That turned out to be false when it came to slavery. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were full of these compromises (Great Compromise, No prohibiting slave trade until 1808 and fugitive slave act, 3/5's compromise *shudders*, no export duties, yes import duties, interstate commerce clause only, no intrastate). They were nothing but compromises, such as the Bill of Rights. It was a originally a political compromise offered by James Madison to get New York to ratify the constitution. Eventually, he realized there was more to it than that. It wasn't merely list of rights the people have and things the government can't do, but rather stood for the proposition that people have many rights, and that there are many things the government can't do, not just these. These were merely the ones that people were able to spell out through the amendment process. Compromise definitionally means that there are 2 or more sides, and everyone isn't completely happy. That means that there are 2 or more threads of thought that go into it, sometimes independent and contradictory. And sometimes you find that there are potentially more than one theoretical underpinnings, but they didn't agree on which one, although both of them led to same spot. So as an originalist which one do you pick? Holding that a single framer's opinion is the correct opinion, simply because they were the author, means saying that this person was right and the rest were wrong, and ignoring a whole bunch of other people, and somewhat arbitrarily saying the chosen one matters the most. I'd also remind you that sometimes there is no correct answer, in that there was no consensus or majority opinion. As in they agreed on the compromise, but there were no theoretical underpinnings they completely agreed upon, or at least the theoretical underpinnings they did at least partially agree upon, weren't as firm, thought out, or fully agreed upon. Due to this lack of super well thought out reasoning, when analyzing the constitution and laws, one must understand that something might just a placeholder answer for political expediency. Furthermore, different people can pass the same law, the same text, and come away with differing interpretations, with the descendants of both sides telling themselves we agreed to the same thing. The most horrifying examples can be find in the road up to the civil war. Two fundamentally different halves were developing. One constitutional interpretation was right, and one was wrong. They couldn't both be right at the same time. And lets not kid ourselves, the only reason why a certain flavor of interpretation developed, was because it protected a certain "domestic" or "peculiar institution." So you either need some kind of reasoned principle to say we can exclude this mess, or you pick a certain side. But picking both sides individually presents their own sets of problems as well. Premise 2 - we must be tightly bound to the original intent that people thought in the past because its correct and we must adhere regardless of everything else I was trying to illustrate the problems with originalism, using Jefferson as an example. *tangent incoming* I actually really dislike Jefferson, not just because he was racist and owned slaves, but he pretended to be this dangerous liberal radical, and made (perhaps recklessly) a bold declaration that he had no intention of keeping or actually meant it. He setup a high bar for himself, and I get to hold him to that high bar. that's not presentism at all. Presentism is the historian's sin of apply our modern day values and harshly imposing them on their times with disregard for their contextual era that surrounded them and that they were born into. In fact, when you do that, Jefferson's evaluation becomes even worse, because he's the least excusable for being deeply racist out of ignorance. Such virtues and ideas existed at that point on the fringes, and he and his contemporaries were well aware of it. In fact, one of the view points of that time was that slaves were inferior because of the condition imposed on them, that the planter class (ie they themselves) did. This would stay as quiet personal admissions. All this out of the way, lets continue. He's not an honored figure because he was a racist slaveholder, he's honored because he put to pen and paper the principle of fundamental human equality, despite the fact that he nowhere lived up to that, politically or in his personal life (potential rape of Sally Hemmings. As a slave, could she even have consented? She was arguable always under duress). This same stuff applies to all the historical figures including the founding fathers, I just used Jefferson because I think he's overrated and this illustrates my point well. What did Jefferson mean by "all men are created equal" in the Declaration of Independence. He excluded women, children, non-binary individuals (including George Washington who had Klinefelters syndrome and was XXY, for sake of simplicity sex = gender and men = XY, women = XX), the various native tribes, and Africans. We can tell that he was excluding most natives and Africans as nonhumans all of this from his writings (see Notes on Virginia) and behaviors. Jefferson was a huge racist, but we don't follow his actual original intent. For one, reconstruction amendments override him here, but secondly, we don't blindly follow the intent only. We extrapolate the important principle they got right, and try to apply it as best as possible to our modern context. That's why the Second Amendment doesn't apply to muskets only. That's why First Amendment protects this as speech. Jefferson called the constitution a living document. Its living because its interpreted in different ways and open to change. So where are the parameters and boundaries of this. Who gets to determine the boundaries of the living constitution? Due to Marbury v Madison, right now, its the courts, so I rather have them be more open about their bias. I'd prefer the least amount of bias possible, but we shouldn't pretend that they aren't biased at all. But with originalism, even less people's thoughts counts. Why does only certain individuals' thoughts count, and who are these people? Well they are the chosen people because they were born white, male, into a wealthy family, with the right last names. Originalist is ridiculous because its so restrictive on who counts. They are dead. There ideas are valid, but originalism means they don't get examined on their own. The whole point of jurisprudence is to work through these complexities, and to reflect the historical nuances. The problem with originalism is that it doesn't allow for this, and assumes a certain narrative is true already, and which narrative is that? Whatever is determined to be the "original," which due to the fluid nature as described earlier, could be whichever one is politically expedient. *tangent* I do however, agree that it shouldn't be overstretched because it would then break/tear. it does frustrate me that everything is a constitutional issue (not in the sense of why is the government doing this, how do they have the powepermission to do that), but in the fact that its gotten overstretched. Like on first impression, I had no clue that Roe v. Wade was a constitutional issue. I didn't know abortions were in there. (Yes I know there were privacy things too, but my point is still made) But adhering to strict originalism means naturally accepting this baggage of bigotry from a previous time along with it. Or you can say that this baggage wasn't the essence of it, but these accidental characteristics were just as much part of the original intent, quite sadly. So you need some kind of limiting principle that allows you to dump the baggage of bigotry, which means not being originalist, or you throw out the strict originalist option out (as in we MUST adhere to the original intent as opposed to saying history is a useful guide, but we have no obligation to copy what they thought. If we are talking about a specific well-written statute, then there is less wiggle room, but that's not the case here, these were a lot more of declarations of principle.) Arguably, you can avoid dealing with this uncomfortable implications by saying this questions are worthless because 13th-15th amendments, but that's not really a good system then, if its that rigid, that you need an amendment to escape the racist views of the past view. *tangent* here I go into the weeds of how one could be a super strict originalist and not be racist, more of a thought experiment and hypothetical. While the 14th and 15th amendments could be argued to provide a principal, it depends on how much of a textualist you want to be. 14th amendment establishes the a principle of don't discriminate for dumb reasons, but it doesn't spell out any protected classes. Some may look to the 15th amendment, since they were passed around the same time by the same Congress with the same context. It spells out race, color, or previous condition of servitude. So it depends, but I think might point still stands. Its scary to think about it. I don't know anyone who would take it this far, but is there any principle stopping it from going this far? Luckily enough John Bingham the primary author of both the 14th and 15th can serve as a save, since his original intent was more better, in contrast to the compromises on the 14th and 15th amendments, which muzzled it and made it more muted/toned down than originally desired by some, including John Bingham and Charles Sumner. A lot of things are missing like a ban on poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses, nothing on naturalized citizens born overseas (for the nativists), also women's suffrage. But another racist originalist may consciously or not emphasize a more conservative author and hold that up as the original intent. Thankfully, these problems not addressed there were fixed later legislatively, but never on an amendment level, so it could be changed. I'd remind you, we have no equal protection clause on the federal level, its read to be implied in the 5th amendment due process clause, so uninterpreting out is possible since its implied. Maybe the equal protection clause should be amended to spell out protected categories, or maybe the solution is another ERA. But the fact that I'm going into the weeds has another implication... do we really want to be held back by the failures of the past? I'm just going to mention briefly the subtext of conservatism in (Burke's sense) terms of tradition vs progressivism/revolution. Originalism basically solidifies these long dead people's points of view unless specifically contradicted by statute, but even contradicting via statute wouldn't work entirely because how would you go about doing that for a constitutional issue? And the problem is that in the context of the Constitution, tradition, is just peer pressure from the dead, but on a constitutional level, this solidifies their points of view, and requires an amendment to change. Is that really a wise idea. I'd remind everyone that we had a long and bloody path that led up to war. Adopting this approach makes the law too clunky to adapt. So arguably, that means adopting racist points of view that contradicts the 14th amendments. One of the compromise/balancing acts was the question of how much should the constitution be able to be changed? Keep in mind that its the scaffolding, the base structures and basic principles, and that's not something you want to change too often. For context, the Articles of Confederation required the assent of 9/13 states to do something, and unanimous 13/13 consent for other important things like amendments. The US Constitution requires a simple majority in both individuals Houses/Chambers of Congress, and the President to sign off, with a 2/3rds on both to override veto. The whole point of a republic is balance. Neither mob rule, nor tyranny of a dictator, popular sovereignty/majority rule, while still upholding minority rights and rule of law. It should be able to change with the times and reflect the people, but not too much, hence representatives and refinement. Fair laws created through a (representative) democratic process, and enforced and applied evenly in a way that actually makes sense. But if you are to go with originalism, that means that judges are to stick with the original (often bigoted) intent or more likely reconstitute/patch-together a modernish meaning and call it original, which is often a political issue. Originalism also means that judges inherently must be conservative, and cannot ever introduce a new interpretation or way of looking at the constitution, which can prevent necessary change, which then creates a need for more legislative changes or amendments to ensure the a functional government under the constitution. If this is a good or bad thing is neither here nor there, but I will say, its quite impossible because of stuff like gerrymandering. This felt like I was typing something for something more than a mere reddit post off of something more than just mere youtube comments.
Fairlearn - A Python package to assess AI system's fairness
In 2015, Claire Cain Miller wrote on The New York Times that there was a widespread belief that software and algorithms that rely on data were objective. Five years later, we know for sure that AI is not free of human influence. Data is created, stored, and processed by people, machine learning algorithms are written and maintained by people, and AI applications simply reflect people’s attitudes and behavior. Data scientists know that no longer accuracy is the only concern when developing machine learning models, fairness must be considered as well. In order to make sure that machine learning solutions are fair and the value of their predictions easy to understand and explain, it is essential to build tools that developers and data scientists can use to assess their AI system’s fairness and mitigate any observed unfairness issues. This article will focus on AI fairness, by explaining the following aspects and tools:
Fairlearn: a tool to assess AI system’s fairness and mitigate any observed unfairness issues
1. Fairlearn: a tool to assess AI system’s fairness and mitigate any observed unfairness issues
Fairlearn is a Python package that empowers developers of artificial intelligence (AI) systems to assess their system’s fairness and mitigate any observed unfairness issues. Fairlearn contains mitigation algorithms as well as a Jupyter widget for model assessment. The Fairlearn package has two components:
A dashboard for assessing which groups are negatively impacted by a model, and for comparing multiple models in terms of various fairness and accuracy metrics.
Algorithms for mitigating unfairness in a variety of AI tasks and along a variety of fairness definitions.
The Fairlearn package can be installed via: pip install fairlearn or optionally with a full feature set by adding extras, e.g. pip install fairlearn[customplots], or you can clone the repository locally via: git clone [email protected]:fairlearn/fairlearn.git In Azure Machine Learning, there are a few options to use Jupyter notebooks for your experiments:
a) Get Fairlearn samples on your notebook server
If you’d like to bring your own notebook server for local development, follow these steps:
Start the notebook server from your cloned directory.
jupyter notebook For more information, see Install the Azure Machine Learning SDK for Python. b) Get Fairlearn samples on DSVM The Data Science Virtual Machine (DSVM) is a customized VM image built specifically for doing data science. If you create a DSVM, the SDK and notebook server are installed and configured for you. However, you’ll still need to create a workspace and clone the sample repository.
Start the notebook server from your cloned directory:
3. What we mean by fairness
Fighting against unfairness and discrimination has a long history in philosophy and psychology, and recently in machine learning. However, in order to be able to achieve fairness, we should first define the notion of it. An AI system can behave unfairly for a variety of reasons and many different fairness explanations have been used in literature, making this definition even more challenging. In general, fairness definitions fall under three different categories as follows:
Individual Fairness – Give similar predictions to similar individuals.
Group Fairness – Treat different groups equally.
Subgroup Fairness – Subgroup fairness intends to obtain the best properties of the group and individual notions of fairness.
In Fairlearn, we define whether an AI system is behaving unfairly in terms of its impact on people – i.e., in terms of harms. We focus on two kinds of harms:
Allocation harms. These harms can occur when AI systems extend or withhold opportunities, resources, or information. Some of the key applications are in hiring, school admissions, and lending.
Quality-of-service harms. Quality of service refers to whether a system works as well for one person as it does for another, even if no opportunities, resources, or information are extended or withheld.
We follow the approach known as group fairness, which asks: Which groups of individuals are at risk of experiencing harm? The relevant groups need to be specified by the data scientist and are application-specific. Group fairness is formalized by a set of constraints, which require that some aspect (or aspects) of the AI system’s behavior be comparable across the groups. The Fairlearn package enables the assessment and mitigation of unfairness under several common definitions.
Fairlearn dashboard is a Jupyter notebook widget for assessing how a model’s predictions impact different groups (e.g., different ethnicities), and also for comparing multiple models along different fairness and accuracy metrics. To assess a single model’s fairness and accuracy, the dashboard widget can be launched within a Jupyter notebook as follows: from fairlearn.widget import FairlearnDashboard # A_test containts your sensitive features (e.g., age, binary gender) # sensitive_feature_names containts your sensitive feature names # y_true contains ground truth labels # y_pred contains prediction labels FairlearnDashboard(sensitive_features=A_test, sensitive_feature_names=['BinaryGender', 'Age'], y_true=Y_test.tolist(), y_pred=[y_pred.tolist()]) After the launch, the widget walks the user through the assessment set-up, where the user is asked to select:
the sensitive feature of interest (e.g., binary gender or age)
the accuracy metric (e.g., model precision) along which to evaluate the overall model performance as well as any disparities across groups.
These selections are then used to obtain the visualization of the model’s impact on the subgroups (e.g., model precision for females and model precision for males). The following figures illustrate the set-up steps, where binary gender is selected as a sensitive feature and the accuracy rate is selected as the accuracy metric: After the set-up, the dashboard presents the model assessment in two panels, as summarized in the table, and visualized in the screenshot below: https://preview.redd.it/juxlrmrkh5051.png?width=900&format=png&auto=webp&s=d92da30619369f5ab5109834ff7ff4ec3ad7f33d
6. Comparing multiple models
An additional feature that this dashboard offers is the comparison of multiple models, such as the models produced by different learning algorithms and different mitigation approaches, including:
As before, the user is first asked to select the sensitive feature and the accuracy metric. The model comparison view then depicts the accuracy and disparity of all the provided models in a scatter plot. This allows the user to examine trade-offs between algorithm accuracy and fairness. Moreover, each of the dots can be clicked to open the assessment of the corresponding model. The figure below shows the model comparison view with binary gender selected as a sensitive feature and accuracy rate selected as the accuracy metric.
7. Additional resources and how to contribute
For references and additional resources, please refer to:
In order to trade binary options, you need to engage the services of a binary options broker. Here at binaryoptions.net we have provided a list with all the best comparison factors that will help you select which trading broker to open an account with. We have also looked at our most popular or frequently asked questions, and have noted that these are important factors when traders are ... Paper trading options allow investors to trade risk-free in a simulated environment. A paper trading account can be employed as an excellent practice tool for developing your own trading strategy. Throughout this paper trade options guide, you will learn how to significantly speed up your learning curve and sharpen your trading skills. IQ Forex - Binary Options Paper Trading Risk-free Investing Simulator. Welcome to IQ Forex, a simple and easy Trading Game to learn how to trade with binary options on Forex and Cryptocurrency. You are free from financial risks and legal risks while enjoying binary options trading. Here you can check your winning rates and your rank among others. The best part is the chart is based on Real ... Most wont and you will often save money by doing paper trades to test a free binary options signal provider out before you trade using real money. It is best to allow for at least two months of paper trading before you star trading with real money. If you are very eager to start trading you can do so if the signal provider shows a stable and positive result after one month. If you chose to do ... Binary.com is an award-winning online trading provider that helps its clients to trade on financial markets through binary options and CFDs. Trading binary options and CFDs on Synthetic Indices is classified as a gambling activity. Remember that gambling can be addictive – please play responsibly. Learn more about Responsible Trading. Some ... Using Paper Trader, you’ll get $100,000 in fake money to trade both options and equities. The platform is completely customizable, so users can change the layout to suit their preferences. Trading Binary Options In MetaTrader 4 (MT4) Lately, a lot of people have been emailing and asking me about new and different ways to trade binary options. Most traders use platforms that all look very similar, like SpotOption, TraderSoft, Marketpulse etc. These platforms are used by many binary options brokers, but they aren’t the only option. Both offer $0 commissions on all options trades. Another way to trade options for free is through paper trading. With a paper trading account, you’ll be given Monopoly money in a simulated ... Binary Options; Forex Trading; CFD Trading; Day Trading; Trading Systems; Trading Software; Online Brokers; Investment Guides ; You are here: Home / Options / Best Options Trading Simulator in 2020. Best Options Trading Simulator in 2020. You’ve probably heard it all before: if it’s too good to be true, then it probably is – and to trade options without risking your money definitely ... The Best Free Paper Trading Accounts and Stock Market Simulators. A free paper trading account or stock market simulator is an excellent alternative to a brokerage account and a significant advantage for investors in general, but it's the ultimate benefit for any day trader. Whether you plan to trade stocks, futures, options, or forex - a paper ...
NEW 100% WIN BINARY OPTION FREE TRADING SIGNALS - YouTube
Do not miss! DEMO ACCOUNT: https://bit.ly/2Lq3NUt You can use this strategy in binary options to win every time but you have to keep following things in mind... IQ Options -https://affiliate.iqoption.com/redir/...Please subscribe and leave a like for more videos.Online trading is a very risky investment/profession. It i... http://tracking.bbinary.com/aff_c?offer_id=262&aff_id=1932 Click HERE To Start In Less Than 15 minutes Earning Money Today! GETTING STARTED IS VERY EASY! Reg... This is how I have traded Binary for the past 3 years. Thank you for watching my videos, hit the subscribe button for more content. Check out our members res... One minute strategy to trade price action trading signals. Watch how I use simple trading rules to increase win rate. Get 10x Trading System: https://trading... The road to success through trading IQ option Best Bot Reviews Iq Option 2020 ,We make videos using this softwhere bot which aims to make it easier for you t...