Alejandro Jara

180 posts

Alejandro Jara

@AjerInbound

Sumali Mart 2017

196 Sinusundan15 Mga Tagasunod

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·16m

@Acheval345 @ChristianHeiens I'm actually concerned abolishing property taxes will make it impossible for non-homeowmers to afford a home. Investors can just buy up homes and have it sit on ultra expensive selling prices forever. They already do that now but it could get even worse.

English

Acheval@Acheval345·15h

@ChristianHeiens I like a lot of your views but this is one of those "I spend too much time on x" bad takes that reek of envy. I am 33 and own a home. I promise you property taxes will not make it easier for you to own a home. Young people who can't afford a home will never be most of tax revenue

English

241

Christian Heiens 🏛@ChristianHeiens·17h

You’re already seeing the propaganda campaign ramp us to justify our it. Boomers are going to vote themselves one last taxpayer funded subsidy as a final “fuck you” to the American people because they have the numbers and political power to make it happen. This is what happens in an aging society. Older people vote at rates far higher than zoomers or millennials, and that combined with sheer dead weight of numbers guarantees that you’ll see more and more politicians pop up to propose increasingly insane policies that cater to the over 55 crowd. That’s what all this talk about ending property taxes is about. It’s an attempt to offload the tax burden on people who don’t own houses, which essentially makes it a giant wealth transfer from poorer and younger people who don’t own assets to older and richer ones who do.

English

139

125

1.4K

37.8K

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·13 May

@AlBuffalo2nite x.com/i/grok/share/1…

QME

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·13 May

@AlBuffalo2nite Guys calm down. Grok confirmed that none of the athletes pictured or any for that matter have actually endorsed this message. This is just something some guy wished happened.

English

170

A Gene Robinson@AlBuffalo2nite·13 May

So let me understand this correctly… Athletes who became millionaires because fans in those states bought tickets, merchandise, hotel rooms, food, airline seats, and TV packages… are now threatening to punish entire populations unless they vote the “correct” way politically? That is not courage. That is Democrat ideological coercion wrapped in emotional theater. Nobody is stopping legal citizens from voting. That’s a Democrat lie. The real debate has always been about election integrity, voter verification, residency standards, ballot security, and constitutional process. But Democrats continuously repackage basic election safeguards as “oppression” because fear is their primary political fuel source. And notice the pattern… The same activists demanding boycotts never threaten states with: failing schools… fatherlessness… crime waves… drug epidemics… or collapsing literacy rates. No. The outrage magically appears when political power is challenged. Sports used to unify Americans. Now activists keep trying to convert every arena into a campaign office for the Democrat machine. Many fans are exhausted by it. Average Americans want: safe neighborhoods… stable families… fair elections… lower costs… and opportunities based on merit. Not endless political ultimatums from celebrities and athletes who live behind gates and security. #SilentMajoritySpeaks #AStoneGroove

Dr. Jackson-Edwards@Harvarddoc32

Word is Out!

English

275

10.6K

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·26 Nis

@jankulveit Also if this was done thousands of times and if red wins even once why would red vote blue in the next vote? We would just get people voting red over and over again like how they have been doing before, especially since they have seen the consequences.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·26 Nis

@jankulveit The reason blue wins online everytime is because they actually don't have to bet their life on an online poll, that's blue game theory. Things are going to look completely different when their lives are actually on the line.

English

Jan Kulveit@jankulveit·25 Nis

Funny little illustration of levels of understanding of game theory and rationality, or: why basic game theory is evil 1. Non-sociopaths going by intuition: blue sounds pro-social, blue 2. People who reason explicitly and use some naive game theory or naive rationality: red! 3. People who actually understand game theory: blue (if you want an explicit reason, because of trembling hand, Schelling points, theory of mind) A simple explanation of "why 3." is ...imagine you are forced to play the game tens of thousand of times, at random points of your life from birth to death. What strategy you want to play? "1." being in agreement with "3." often makes sense if you think about the origins of "1.". Unfortunately there are few pieces of knowledge which in expectation makes you more dumb and more evil if you don't progress beyond the basic level; some of the more prominent I know about are basics of game theory, especially prisoners dilemma; basic econ; Elephant in the brain

vittorio@IterIntellectus

why would anyone even press blue?!?

English

165

807

164.9K

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·11 Nis

@JesseLucasSaga @TomStringham @melonakos If you can't recognize the spirit, I urge you to repent so your life reflects closer and closer to a celestial life so you can have a happy life, be filled with knowledge, and you won't be confused when more and more teachings are expounded.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·11 Nis

@JesseLucasSaga @TomStringham @melonakos You can't expect prophets whether ancient or modern to micromanage your daily life. They can offer a macro level of guidance but the micro amount of inspiration you receive from the spirit just fills the holes that are left.

English

Tom Stringham@TomStringham·11 Nis

Lots of members think the church’s old teachings (on tattoos, Sunday shopping, working as a mom when you don’t need to, etc.) still apply, some others seem to think they don’t and maybe never have. I don’t blame either camp; the last 15 or so years have been genuinely confusing.

English

231

41.9K

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·11 Nis

@JesseLucasSaga @TomStringham @melonakos Also what am I supposed to understand from your response? Do you not rely on the spirit to guide you? I can't even say you have been doing what you have been told, because if you had, you would be seeking the spirit to guide you in your life already.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·11 Nis

@JesseLucasSaga @TomStringham @melonakos Yeah and Joseph Smith asked 3 times if he should let Martin Harris show the manuscript to his wife after getting no the first 2 times. Yeah there is a difference between striving for righteousness and aligning your will with God's than looking for God to accept your will.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·11 Nis

@JesseLucasSaga @TomStringham @melonakos Um no you don't, it can be all grey in the middle and you can just stay away from it. You want a line, let me give you one: can you feel the spirit frequently in your life? There you go, follow that and you're on your way to heaven. Where did I get that line? From the prophet.

English

Jesse Abraham Lucas 🌃@JesseLucasSaga·11 Nis

@AjerInbound @TomStringham @melonakos It's only possible to live past the line when there's a line!

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·11 Nis

@TomStringham @melonakos @JesseLucasSaga I think this is why general authorities have been saying you won't survive spiritually if you don't have the constant companionship of the spirit. Lately they said you will be deceived if you don't have the spirit. The confusion isn't their doing, it's people not listening.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·11 Nis

@TomStringham @melonakos @JesseLucasSaga Bruh they already gave you guidance, why do you need them to draw the line? So you can know what is the least you can do without sinning? So you can judge others? We're supposed to be living Celestially, staying far away from any supposed line, living by a higher standard.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·4 Nis

@LegendofH3r0 Let's be honest here, this is a downgrade from the previous movie. Bruh the characters are so bad here, Donkey Kong had better characterization. I don't think this will be a movie children will watch when they are older and say it aged well, unlike kids movies like Toy Story.

English

Limit Breakin Hero@LegendofH3r0·2 Nis

Not every movie needs a super serious, deep story with heavy emotional arcs or "important" themes. Some movies, especially animated family ones like these, are allowed to just be pure fun: colorful, fast-paced, packed with references, and built like a video game come to life. The critics keep treating the Mario movies like they’re supposed to be the next Inside Out or Toy y Story, demanding tight plotting, profound character growth, and cinematic "weight." But that’s not what this is. It’s a celebration of Nintendo’s world. These movies resonate perfectly with their target audience, the critics are just out of touch.

ScreenTime@screentime

Both Super Mario Movies' Rotten Tomatoes scores: The Super Mario Galaxy Movie ▪️ 92% — Audience (500+ Reviews) ▪️ 42% — Critics (110 Reviews) The Super Mario Bros. Movie ▪️ 95% — Audience (10,000+ Reviews) ▪️ 59% — Critics (288 Reviews)

English

138

142

1.1K

551.1K

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·4 Nis

@_Deez_Games Nah man, this movie is a downgrade from the first movie. Donkey Kong had better characterization than any of the new characters. As soon as any challenge appeared, the uplifting music played immediately and they defeated it flawlessly.

English

Deez Games 🎮@_Deez_Games·3 Nis

It's mental that people are heavily critiquing The Super Mario Galaxy Movie. It's a kids film, I took my 5yo son to see it today and he LOVED it. It's like they wanted shocking drama, gut wrenching monologues, life lessons, deep metaphors. It's a slightly chubby Italian plumber and his brother in their overalls, on an adventure with a screaming mushroom. That's literally all that matters. It was never intended to be Shawshank Redemption or Ben Hur, was it? I thought it was great, loads of fan service, and introduced a new generation to the amazing Fox McCloud/Star Fox 💙

English

471

482

5.9K

635.5K

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·24 Mar

@BarryDingleSak @SandyofCthulhu Why does it have to be physical? People exposed to media sometimes can't pay attention to a full length movie anymore or don't have literacy to understand it, all art has a barrier to entry. Why does a physical input disqualify it, when a mental or visual does not?

English

BarryDingleSak@BarryDingleSak·24 Mar

Pretty much. They're not art in the same reason that a Monday-night football game isn't art. This isn't me saying that Red Dead Redemption 2 and a NFL game are equal in terms of the artistic qualities about them, but like the NFL, all these artistic qualities and features are window-dressing on what is essentially to its core, a game. The act of experiencing a book, painting, movie, or song isn't gatekept behind a physical skill that only a certain segment of the population possesses. If Saving Private Ryan or The Godfather were turned into videogames where they kept the exact same story by simply rewarding your completion of a level or mission with a cutscene showing ten minutes of footage from the movies, and the games end when you've watched the movies in their entirety, they would still be games and not works of art. Art exists in and of itself. It doesn't require a skill-based physical input to experience.

English

105

Sandy Petersen 🪔@SandyofCthulhu·23 Mar

Ebert’s reasons given for saying computer games weren’t art: 1) you can win a computer game. (To me, a non-sequitur.) 2) computer games are built by a team. (While movies only have a single person in the credits?) 3) Roger Ebert himself didn’t play video games. (Actual reason given.) Penny Arcade famously debunked this by saying, “If a hundred artists create art for 2 years, how is the end result NOT ART?”

exQUIZitely 🕹️@exQUIZitely

"Computer games are not art" One of the most prominent people to say this was film critic Roger Ebert in his 2010 article "Video Games Can Never Be Art". Then there are Steven Spielberg and George Lucas, both expressing that games aren't art. Spielberg specifically said something along the lines of "the second you get the controller something turns off in the heart, and it becomes a sport," arguing games struggle to create the same deep empathy or emotional connection as films because of the interactive/sport-like element. Hideo Kojima (the game designer behind Metal Gear Solid), doesn't consider videogames art, emphasizing that "true art radiates purely from the creator without the interactive compromises games require." "The second you get the controller something turns off in the heart" - probably the line I disagree with the most. I am not saying all games are art - just like not all books or movies or paintings are qualifying to be it. But how can you look at some of these games and say they are not art? Literally just looking at them, not even playing them. How is this not art? If it touches you on an emotional level, and stimulates your creative and playful mind, lets you remember and feel things - isn't that an essential aspect and key element of art?

English

645

28.5K

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·24 Mar

@spooptilyoupoop @nanabuyo @SandyofCthulhu Winning or losing is an experience intended by the developers, right?The satisfaction of overcoming challenges, that's a unique purposeful experience, don't you think? Wouldn't your own definition mean games are art?

English

father i crave cheddar@spooptilyoupoop·24 Mar

@nanabuyo @SandyofCthulhu Hard to define, but I generally feel if its purpose is to be an experience of some sort then it's art; if its purpose is to be a game that you win, it's a game. Not a hard rule but a good guideline.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·24 Mar

@BarryDingleSak @SandyofCthulhu Is that why? Just because it has input? By that definition movies, books, paintings, couldn't be art because you have to interact, watch, read, pay attention to, etc the product. No matter the medium, the output is the art. If it makes you feel something that's what matters.

English

108

BarryDingleSak@BarryDingleSak·24 Mar

I'm gonna play the Devil's Advocate here. I love videogames. Been playing them for a long time. But I absolutely get where Ebert is coming from and in some ways I agree with him. Games can certainly have artistic qualities about him. But Ebert is right in that the very nature of the medium itself prevents games from being art. Consuming art is a passive hobby that doesn't require hand-eye coordination skill. The very moment you had enough interactive elements to where it becomes a "game" it ceases being art.

English

822

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·19 Mar

@wndyW1LL0w So when I hear people advise against sin I'm all for it. I wouldn't want people to experience what I have, I want them to live happy and full lives. I want them to know joy.

English

Alejandro Jara@AjerInbound·19 Mar

@wndyW1LL0w If you had struggled with a grave sin, just remember when you were forgiven, or keep repenting. The joy I felt after repenting has kept me going all this time. The hope I have for his atonement and grace has made me feel as happy as was my sorrow.

English

La Luna 🌙@wndyW1LL0w·19 Mar

This made it so hard for me to feel like there was any hope at forgiveness or being worthy to even be a member of the church. I battled for years believing I was so disgusting and unclean that I couldn’t come back. I understand the weight this sin carries but how do we help those who have sinned and see the word “abominable” and think the worst of themselves?

Latter-day Truth@Latterdaytruth

Sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is an abominable sin.

English

7.7K

Tuklasin

@Acheval345 @ChristianHeiens @AlBuffalo2nite @jankulveit @JesseLucasSaga @TomStringham @melonakos @LegendofH3r0