Fez

I ended up having to lower the difficulty to story to beat the boss I was stuck on. Then I went back up to Expeditioner and had no trouble the rest of the game (though I didn't do every optional boss). I think (ending spoilers)

Having a hell of a time trying to beat a boss near what I think is the end of Act II of Expedition 33... That frustration aside, I think its an incredible game so far. I've managed to avoid spoilers on what comes next too, which is exciting.

Wish you hadn't told me this. For me, it's $8833. Of which, $659 is being classified as "OldSpend," meaning it was more than 10 years ago. And the other $8174 has been since then. That sounds about right since I only started using Steam in 2012 and very sporadically until late 2014 (basically when new games stopped releasing for the 360/PS3 generation). There's 491 games in my Library, so it's an average of $17.99 per game. And since I really hate myself, I just checked and 35 of those games I never started even once; and another 60 I played under an hour total. So, looking at games I actually gave a fair shot to, it's more like $22.30 per game. Not the best. I have gotten better at not buying I won't play though; a bunch of those 95 are from the days when Steam sales got really deep. I also have gotten better at not buying full-priced AAA games. At least, I think so. I'd be curious if there's a way to see the spend per year to see if I actually have gotten more discerning. There's also a few games where I know a spent a fair bit on DLC, which would skew the averages too. Ugh. In actual gaming, I've been playing a lot of Blue Prince recently. It's a puzzle rogue-like game (sort of like if Myst reset each day, except with a few permanent unlocks and changes that carry over). I'm not 100% sure it totally works, but it is very compelling. And they did a really good job at hiding puzzles in plain sight that you might not realize for hours are puzzles. It's on game pass and I think worth a check out for anyone who likes puzzle gaming.

Also, the number of American who OD on fentanyl has come down: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm In September 2024 (most recent data available), it was estimated there'd been ~53k fentanyl ODs in the past year. In September 2023, it was estimated there'd been ~80k fentanyl ODs in the past. It's been a dramatic decline actually. Granted, we don't know why the decline happened, but certainly Canada has nothing to do with it either way (One of the more morbid theories is that so many of the people using fentanyl have now died that there's just not as many people left to OD).

Theoretically, I believe the President can suspend a lot of types of funding for up to 45 days. But the funding has to be obligated after that unless Congress decides to approve the suspension. So it's possible the EO is legal. Though its been written and implemented in such a slap-dash manner that it's likely at least some funding that legally couldn't be suspended has been caught up in the moment. Certainly a shitshow though.

That's where I am too. Though, to be honest, at this point I'm willing to give HTS slightly more benefit of the doubt than Israel. They've at least made noises of reform over the past few years, whereas Bibi's government just keeps getting worse all the time.

In that vein, https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2024/11/21/rfk-physician-payments/ I don't see this actually succeeding, too many conservative (and liberal) physician groups would revolt. And if it did succeed, I don't see this being a legitimate "clean" reform that's not riddled with conservative policy goodies. But if RFK Jr. somehow succeeded at doing this properly, it would likely on its own balance the scales from all the bad he does; and probably also make up for all the bad a few of the other cabinet secretaries do.

Not having Like a Dragon: Infinite Wealth feels like a major snub, Tactical Breach Wizards was also fantastic, though as a real indie it got less exposure. DA: Veilguard has flaws, but I'd take it well before Wukong. And I assume early access games aren't eligible? Otherwise, where is Hades II? Those are all games I think will make my personal top 10.

The Onion has won the court-ordered auction of InfoWars https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/11/14/infowars-auction-alex-jones-sandy-hook-the-onion/ At least the absurdity of the timeline continues unabated.

He has co-sponsored bills multiple times to eliminate standard time and stick with daylight savings time year-round, so he's a-okay in my book!

Thune wins. First ballot was Thune 23, Cornyn 15, Scott 13 Second ballot was Thune 29, Cornyn 24 Least bad of the options at least (and glad that only 13 were okay with the "literally anything Trump wants we'll give, including all of our own power" option).

If it helps anyone at all, Trump's announced he wants Rubio as Sec. of State and Rep. Mike Waltz as national security advisor. Both have tried to better match Trump's rhetoric over the past year, but they aren't kooks. They're mainstream (for Republicans) foreign policy-focused congressmen, who easily could've been appointees of Nikki Haley or any other Republican if Trump hadn't run. So it seems we'll at least be starting out with a normal-ish seeming administration, rather than total chaos.

Ugh. I felt beyond sick last night, but so far today I feel surprisingly okay. Maybe I'm just in denial. But I'm thinking there's a certain comfort in knowing the bad thing has happened, rather than still hoping it might be avoided. The future's gonna suck, be good to each other.

Yeah, I'm a nauseous mess. It's not over, but it really doesn't look good. The fuck is wrong with so many people?!

Don't try to extrapolate results from exit polls or from partial county results. Neither is reliable.

So the anecdotal, entirely unscientific, should be ignored but I can't help myself, and extremely early turnout reports seem to be that PA, MI, and NV look fantastic for Democrats; while AZ looks bad (and FL looks awful). Haven't seen anything about WI, GA, or NC. Also, Guam's exit polls shows Harris +5 (down from Biden +14 in 2020) and Republicans flipping the state legislature after 16 years of Democratic control. Guam doesn't have electoral votes, so it doesn't actually matter though unless it is a useful proxy for other voting groups. I don't know if it is though. I know nothing about Guam's politics, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are very local issues irrelevant to the states that caused this shift. Assuming the exit polls there are correct.

The only part that surprises me about Rogan is what poor timing it is, waiting until last night to do it. Many of the voters it might actually sway (which isn't that many in the first place) are unlikely to even see it in time. If he wanted to maximize his impact, such as it is, he probably should've endorsed last Friday. That way there'd be all weekend for the news to spread.

It's working for me. And yeah, he's predicting Harris wins by 0.3%, Rosen wins by 5%, and all 4 house incumbents (3 D, 1 R) win their re-election.

I like your optimism! If Democrats do get the trifecta (which I don't think will happen, to be clear; the senate map is just too rough), the senate will be spending the first few weeks confirming her cabinet and other top appointments. And there will likely be work in the background on legislation that can pass, while the House passes a bunch of messaging bills. Legislation will take different timelines depending on what it is; since there's basically a 4-quadrant matrix of whether the bill is easy or hard to write (e.g., a bill codifying Roe could be a page long, a fiscal bill that isn't a CR will be 1000+ pages) and whether Democrats are in lock-step or not (e.g., there would be overwhelming pressure on Democratic senators to carve a filibuster exemption for abortion rights; there would not be for doing something about Israel) If a bill's hard to write, we likely wouldn't see it until late Spring at the earliest and if Democrats are divided on the issue we likely wouldn't ever see it (or we see it go up for a senate cloture vote that lets Republicans kill it). I think abortion and Ukraine bills would be passed relatively quickly, and a fiscal bill that has middle class tax cuts and wealthy tax increases would be passed in the summer. I don't think true supreme court reform will happen, although maybe an ethics bill of some sort passes. I think Harris would try putting diplomatic pressure on Israel but there won't be any legislation related to it. I'm not sure about DC statehood; though hopefully they can get that done too.

I've been playing Veilguard. I think its a pretty solid game. The moment-to-moment writing has a few rough patches, but is generally quite strong. The lore/worldbuilding writing is fine, but doesn't feel a ton like Dragon Age. It seems more like a soft reboot that sands off some of the rougher/grittier edges. The combat is fun. It's action rather than tactical, but that's the direction the series had been going anyway; and is way better than Inquisition. It's mission-based (with a large central hub) rather than open world, which I'm thrilled about. So tired of open world games. The environmental graphics look great. The character graphics (which I know some of the internet has been meme-ing on) generally look fine, especially in motion. The only time I've thought "that looks goofy" was the first time an Ogre appears. Voice acting ranges from fine to really good. Music is forgettable. To me, the biggest legitimate knock against it is the almost total lack of choice carryover from previous games. I get why they did it; it's been 10 years afterall. And Dragon Age was never as respectful of player choices as Mass Effect; lots of very big retcons in DA2 and DA:I to ensure the story moves forward. But it does feel kind of bad that none of the returning characters are "mine." This further contributes to the game feeling more like a reboot than anything else, even though its also trying to be the grand conclusion to the old games. So far, overall I'd put it on the same level as Inquisition (which I did like quite a bit). It's not the same strengths and weaknesses, but its another very good, not great, large RPG. Definitely a major improvement over Andromeda and Anthem, but its not Mass Effect 2.

Whew, Harris +3 in Iowa sure goes against my priors. I'm not ready to just blow it off as an outlier though. That's what I thought about her Trump +7 poll in 2016; so, lesson learned. It is "only" a 47-44 lead though and I imagine a lot of the undecideds will end up going for Trump. But even something like a 52-48 Trump win in Iowa would be shockingly bad for him and likely would mean Harris easily held the blue wall. And Selzer isn't entirely out on a ledge here. There was the Trump +5 in KS poll the other day, the CNN Harris +6 in WI poll, and just today there was a Trump +3 in OH poll. There may be something going on among midwestern whites that's being obscured by such pollster herding.

Guess I'll make my final predictions. I think things are locked in now and I really can't see the race changing in the final few days. Trying to not just go with what I want to see. President: Harris wins 286-252 with PA, WI, MI, NE-2, and GA. Which means that PA is the decisive state and there will be endless lawsuits and attempts to overturn the results. I don't think they'll succeed. As I've said though, I could definitely see Harris winning NC, NV, and AZ as well; and likewise could see Trump winning WI, PA, and GA (I legit feel good about MI and NE-2 for Harris though). Senate: Democrats lose WV and MT. They don't flip any seats and Republicans have a 51-49 majority. I'm not convinced that Brown wins in OH or that Cruz wins in TX, so +/-1 I guess. I'd be kinda surprised by any other changes, unless I'm wrong about President and a bunch of swing-state Dems fall too. I don't think Osborne in NE will be able to overcome the political gravity there. House: Democrats end up with a roughly 220-215 majority. But its so easy to see it go either way. Governor: The only competitive governor's race seems to be NH. I think Republicans hold it. State Legislatures: It's real hard to make predictions since there's so little info on them. AZ would be the best Dem pick-up, but I don't think Harris will do well enough to cause it (but maybe the district lines are such that she actually can do well enough in Maricopa for it). NH leg is so swingy that who knows what'll happen, maybe Dems get it again. Slim chance they get the PA senate for the trifecta there. As for Republicans, their best bets are the PA house or the MI house; which they might get even if Trump loses because the margins are so small. I tend to think they won't though.

Yeah, demographically NC seems like a better fit. I worry though that there's just too many rural voters and the Research Triangle cities aren't enough to counter them. Meanwhile, I put greater stock in there being enough McCain Republicans to maybe keep Arizona blue. WI usually is, but the Trump campaign has been way more focused on PA and I think that'll make a difference. I agree about NV. I still don't put much stock in early voting data, even there; but I don't see why the usually very effect Dem turnout machine would change tactics from past elections. Also NV is the rare state that's been trending right since 2016. It's certainly possible for there to be a surprise state. But its much less likely than in the past as things have gotten more and more polarized. In a modern landslide night for Trump or Harris, we generally know which safer states could also flip and there aren't many of them (TX for Harris; VA, NH, and MN for Trump). Everything else is pretty well locked up no matter what happens. Also, Indiana in 2008 was not a complete surprise, it was generally considered a lean-R state, or even a toss-up. It just wasn't talked about much because everyone understood if it flipped it meant there was a landslide and no state really mattered.

It's not a completely unreasonable map. Though personally, I think NC is the Democrat's white whale; always just out of reach. If I had to order them from best to worst for Harris at this point, I think it goes NE-2, MI, WI, GA, PA, AZ, NV, NC. My best guess is PA is the furthest right that Harris wins, but I could see her winning all of them for sure. Unfortunately, I likewise could see Trump winning all of them except NE-2 and maybe actually Michigan.

Of all the stretches of my imagination, I simply cannot conceive of an even semi-realistic scenario where Harris wins Florida. If it's a real good night, I could see her holding all the Biden states and flipping NC. In a great night, I could see her getting beyond-recount margins in all those states. In an astounding night, I could see her flipping Alaska, Kansas, or Texas. But I just can't see Florida flipping.