Theory Of Constraints Puns

The summer tour has been Dead & Company setting aside constraints.

• Set lists. Openers, closers, vehicles for jamming, all that's been thrown out the window.
• The Beam is no longer just for Drums.
• More "formless" jams, spacey and abstract, not just improvising on the melody.

And finally, last night there was "A guitar is not just strings you play." We saw John Mayer recognizing an electric guitar pickup is a kind of microphone you can sing into and that - I think this is what was going on - strings can be vibrated by the airflow of a stage fan.

My benchmark will be when Drums/Space isn't reliably 2:15-2:30 into a show. End Set 1 with Drums, start Set 2 with Space, or something like that.

Sure, Dead & Company has experimented before. I was at Fenway for that first set acoustic Dark Star, but the experimenting has become a consistent pattern. I, for one, can't wait to see what they do next.

I want to understand what justifies imposing constraints on human liberty and how we use that to make law. I have a basic idea of it but would like to discuss it further.

So, my objective while coming up with a theory for making laws and imposing certain constraints is justice and fairness. Secondary objective would be to maintain individual liberty.

###Definition of fairness and justice:

I believe it's a fair world when you face consequences which are brought about because of your own decisions and actions. And it's an unfair world when you face consequences which are brought about by events outside your control.

So, in this way, I am giving individual agency a lot of importance which ties in with my secondary objective.

###The Framework

Now, I would like to move our society in the direction that optimizes these beliefs and make laws accordingly. I also want to make sure that in accordance with that individual agencies of all individuals is optimized.

(Edit: Apart from this, there is also the underlying idea, that you shouldn't have to face consequences brought about by someone else's decisions and actions.)

So we collectively impose constraints on all actions that diminish individual agencies of others or affect others. (Criterion 1) (example: you are not allowed to injure or murder other people) This stops other people being responsible for events happening in your life.

But the world might still be unfair because of chance events (refer to the definition) which are outside your control. So laws and policy should be made to minimise the effects of chance in people's lives (criterion 2). So if you are born in a poor area or belong to a marginalised community, laws and policy should be made to help you overcome that disadvantage. Also, insurance schemes should be there to help you in case of chance events.

But in my objective of making sure that consequences in people lives are a result of their own decisions and actions, there was something implicit that needs to be said. I was assuming that people can judge for themselves what consequences of their actions would be and what its subsequent effects would be. But this might not be the case, which brings me to criterion 3. Laws should be made to make sure that people are capable of judging for themselves. (example: compulsory education and minimum age laws)

The set of these 3 criteria make up a framework which I believe is a good way to go about making policy and law maki

Are there any decent tools out there for collaboratively building things like Goal Trees, Current/Future Reality Trees, Evaporating Clouds, etc? I'm at a loss for finding anything that's likely to work in my environment.

I'm really fond of tools like Graphviz, which are very easy to render/preview (and I don't have to trouble myself with visual details nearly as much as the logical flow), and the source code is almost as easy to interpret from a logical perspective, and represents very well in source control.

But Graphviz doesn't handle grouping of edges within a bounding shapes, and setting up intermediate nodes to handle groupings doesn't work terribly well with the need to give unique names to each node (and no namespacing).

So I'm left wondering what kind of tools could work well for drawing these kinds of diagrams?

So this was just something funny I noticed. None of this stuff has any substantial proof, mind you, but I think it's a funny set of coincidences that can be looked at with a crackpot conspiracy viewpoint. So basically, this is just for fun. :)

Spoiler warning for basically all of the routes, to be safe.

Ladislava is a character with a painfully low amount of screen time for how interesting her set-up was. She's a soldier who is very close to Edelgard after the latter saved her at some point in the past, and she worked her way up to become one of Edelgard's Generals. Her past isn't elaborated on beyond this, sadly.

Ladislava first appears as an ally unit in Chapter 12 during Crimson Flower. However, in other routes she's an enemy unit. One curious thing is that while on other routes she's a Wyvern Rider, in Crimson Flower she's a Cavalier instead.

Post-timeskip, Ladislava is fought in other routes on the Great Bridge, where she ultimately dies. However, in Crimson Flower, she dies in the same assault that kills Randolph in chapter fifteen.

So that's all we end up seeing of Ladislava. However, a few things don't sit right with me, and the more I thought about it, the more the pieces started to fit together.

One interesting thing to note is that none of the Black Eagles characters are canonically flying units. Petra is the closest one, having a flying strength and keeping her canon outfit as a Wyvern Rider, but as an enemy unit she's instead an Assassin. Compared to the Blue Lions with Ingrid and the Golden Deer with Claude, I thought this was interesting. Perhaps Ladislava was meant to be the Canon Flyer here?

Ladislava makes her first appearance in chapter twelve, regardless of route, either as a cavalier on Crimson Flower or a Wyvern Rider on other routes. Coincidentally, on non-Crimson Flower routes, this is also the chapter in which Seteth joins your party. Seteth is also a Wyvern Rider...and possesses the certification for the Cavalier class.

What if Ladislava was originally meant to be Crimson Flower's replacement for Seteth?

We know Crimson Flower didn't have all of its planned content at first, if Jeritza is any indication, and the class mastery and join times would support her being a Seteth replacement. After all, Crimson Flower is the one route where you can't recruit Seteth.

Ladislava also meets her end on other routes on the Great Bridge, and if you don't recruit Ferdinand, he also appears there as an enemy general on Azure Moon a

Hello physicists of reddit,

I've recently been trying to work out the mean field theory for this antiferromagnetic Ising-type toy model, but I've run into some problems with conserving the spin in my system. The model is just an array of classical spins (s=+-1) sitting on a square lattice with a basis of 3 sites per primitive unit cell. 2 of the sites within the cell belong to sublattice A while the 3rd belongs to sublattice B.

Now for our antiferromagnetic ground state at 0T, sublattice A is occupied by all up spins while sublattice B is occupied by all down spins. Furthermore, to make this model useful for purposes external to this problem, we impose a background neutralizing spin/field which helps keeps the whole system actually spin neutral (analogies to be drawn with charge-neutral Coulomb systems, background charges in the jellium model). We will label the average magnetization of lattice sites A and B as mA and mB, respectively, and the background neutralizing field as m0.

With the picture I painted, we should have:

1. At zero temperature - (mA = 1) and (mB = -1)

2. At infinite temperature - (mA=mB=1/3) (we start with two spins up for sublattice A (2*1) and one spin down for sublattice B (1*-1) at 0T, so the average when thermally randomizing the spins is 1/3)

as limits we can take to check the results and see if this model is reasonable. To have our spins conserved, in fact, we should try to actively satisfy

2mA + mB = 1

for any temperature. However, we know that the standard mean field self-consistency equations of such lattice models are of the form

mA,B ~ tanh[(1/kT)(a*mA+b*mB+c)]

for some real numbers {a,b,c}, which are system dependent and for our sake, tunable parameters. Now we can clearly see that is incompatible with the second limit...at infinite T, the above tangent hyperbolic relations gives mA = mB = 0. This does not conserve the number of spins we have in our system -- a problem which led me to try and investigate this mean-field theory in the context of spin-conserving constraints as we've outlined.

I thought "maybe I'm missing some key concept or something here", so I returned to the classical example of AFM on a bipartite 2D square lattice. We can think of this lattice as comprised of equivalent sublattices A and B, and I just looked at what the effects of messing around with things like the external/neutralizing fields does. Unfortunately, nothing seemed able to solve the problem of spin conservation. Actu

If someone ever finds IKZ, let me know.

View Poll

Idk if it’s just me, but I’m so sick of the rigidity of online learning. I just took a quiz and made 2 mistakes because I was rushing to finish it. I looked back over my work after the fact and realized what I did and it pisses me off. If I was taking this during recitation, I would be able to relax and figure it out knowing my TA would allow me an extra minute or two to finish up. If anything we should be given more time because being home is not an ideal testing environment with cars beeping outside of my suburban home every 2 seconds for someone’s birthday, my family screaming to each other from different floors of the house, etc. My GPA is probably ruined as I am not sure how many classes I can S/U currently. I’m just so drained. Rant over.

I imagine the production schedule and therefore the writing has to be extremely quick, and therefore I imagine the writing process has to be streamlined. From a viewer's side, they're shoddily filmed and unimaginative, going for cheap scares and blowing the premise of their attention grabbing titles within 15 minutes, but the fact remains that writers still work on, and I assume they do so in good faith.

So how do you write under circumstances like a LifeTime movie? Is it a quick buck or an opportunity to get your foot through the door? They seem very cookie cutter, so how much of your work is pre - done for you, or heavily rewritten by the studio?

And finally, how have YOU personally tried to make them good, or is it not worth the effort? What did you learn from the experience?

The removal is something that everyone needs to be aware of in a new format. Knowing what options are availaible to destroy your opponent's stuff is incredibly valuable knowledge, and with a card pool as deep as Pioneer, there's a lot of things from the last few years that can be talked about. In my article I go over every piece of removal that I feel is relevant in Pioneer, which is quite a lot.

https://onlyontuesdays27.com/2019/10/29/constraints-of-the-magic-the-gathering-pioneer-format-part-2-the-removal-and-sideboard-options-in-pioneer/

I will never ask you to play a battle with the other members, never ask you to connect to the Team Speak / Discord channels. There are no compulsory tasks.

THE ONLY THING THAT YOU MUST DO **SOMETIMES** IS PLAY TIER X RANDOM BATTLES (ON YOUR OWN OR IN A PLATOON) , THATS ALL !!

By joigning you get :

- a free style to put in a tank (you lose it when you quit the clan)

- you don't receive invite from other clans every now and then

- you benefit from Clan bonuses (crew xp, tank xp, credits) every now and then (this depends on how many tier X RANDOM battles the clan members play)

My wife (stays at home) and I are late 20s with a 20 month old at home and one on the way. Financially, things have been tight the past couple of years. My paychecks come every other week so that means that two months out of the year, we have an extra paycheck. Additionally, I get a bonus of 15% of my paycheck in November of a given year. Last year, unfortunately, I received only 7.4% for a bonus.

We use mint to attempt to plan our budgets around what I make in a month without an extra check. Thus far, including the extra check I already got in May, we have lost a total of $2,161 dollars this year. On average, we lose about $400/mo (more expenses than revenue). I have no credit card debt, but our savings is down to $2000 and we have some medical expenses for a surgery on my son and the obvious medical expenses expected in November when I have #2. My bonus this year is expected to be pretty substantial, but my wife plans to return to school next year and we fear our childcare expenses might hit us hard. The plan is to pay off a car and a loan with the bonus.

Realistically, we will be fine once we hit November, but my wife complains that I am a hardass about spending, always asking questions, etc. Tonight, we had a big fight because I wanted to make food at home (I offered to drive to Kroger to even pick up items, make it myself and watch my son, anything to save the money), but she insisted on going to Chipotle. I ended up making dinner, but she is pissed at me. We spend ~$200/mo on eating out expenses, and she already had Piada for lunch at $14.

Am I the Asshole here? The constant drain of our bank account has me stressed out, and I know we will be fine in November, but the constant loss grinds on my mind.