Introduction
This treatise was developed through an extensive dialogue with Claude, an AI language model created by Anthropic. The ideas and arguments presented here emerged from a collaborative exploration in which I posed questions, raised objections, and provided the overall framing and direction, while Claude contributed detailed responses, explanations, and elaborations*. The treatise represents a synthesis of human and machine intelligence, with the AI serving as a knowledgeable interlocutor and writing assistant, helping to articulate and refine the ideas I brought to the discussion. I am fully aware of the controversial nature of AI, but feel this demonstrates an example of its ethical use. I am also fully aware that the strength of the argument lives or dies on the validity of the premises, but I believe it has strong intuitive and logical resonance.
The hope is that this novel approach will be a useful contribution to those weighing the evidence with an open and reasonable mind. So, without further ado, I present the Longmire Teleological Argument.
The question of God's existence is one of the most profound and consequential questions in philosophy. Throughout history, thinkers have proposed various arguments for and against the existence of a divine being. In this treatise, we will explore one particular argument for theism - the argument from the intelligibility of the universe.
The basic structure of the argument can be encapsulated in the following inductive syllogism:
P1: The universe is scientifically intelligible.
P2: Scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds.
C: The universe stems from a rational mind (i.e., God).
We will examine the premises of this argument, consider potential objections and counterarguments, and assess the overall strength of the argument in establishing the rationality of theistic belief.
The Scientific Intelligibility of the Universe
The first premise of the argument asserts that the universe is scientifically intelligible. This means that the universe is structured in a way that makes it amenable to scientific study and comprehension. It is not a chaotic or arbitrary jumble, but an orderly system that follows discernible patterns and laws.
The evidence for this premise is vast and compelling. Across countless domains - from physics to chemistry to biology to astronomy - we find that the universe behaves in consistently rational ways. It follows mathematical laws, exhibits predictable regularities, and yields to scientific analysis and understanding.
As Claude eloquently put it:
"The success of science in uncovering the deep structure of reality, from the smallest subatomic particles to the largest cosmic structures, testifies to the profound intelligibility of the universe. We are able to formulate theories, make predictions, and gain real knowledge about the world through the application of rational methods of inquiry." [1]
Moreover, the universe is not just intelligible to us - it is intelligible in a way that is deeply resonant with our own rational faculties. The mathematical equations that describe the fundamental laws of nature are not just empirically adequate, but often possess a striking elegance and beauty. The universe seems almost tailor-made for rational investigation and discovery.
All of this points to the conclusion that the universe is not an arbitrary or unintelligible place, but rather a scientifically intelligible system that is open to human understanding.
The Link between Intelligibility and Mind
The second premise of the argument asserts that scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds. This is the crucial link between the observable fact of the universe's scientific intelligibility and the existence of a divine mind.
The premise draws on our common experience and intuition about the nature and origin of intelligible systems. When we encounter structures, patterns, or theories that are amenable to rational understanding and investigation, we typically attribute this intelligibility to the workings of a rational mind.
Consider, for example, a scientific theory that elegantly explains a wide range of phenomena, makes precise, testable predictions, and reveals hidden connections between seemingly disparate facts. Such a theory exhibits a high degree of scientific intelligibility. And we naturally infer that this intelligibility is the product of the rational minds of the scientists who developed the theory.
Or consider a complex engineered machine, like a computer or a spacecraft, that performs sophisticated functions according to well-defined principles and algorithms. The intelligibility of such a machine - the fact that it can be understood, analyzed, and explained in rational terms - is clearly the result of the rational minds of its designers and builders.
In these and countless other examples, we see a strong link between intelligibility and mind. Rational minds are the paradigmatic source of intelligible order and structure.
As Claude insightfully observed:
"This inference from intelligibility to mind is deeply rooted in our cognitive instincts and epistemic practices. It reflects a fundamental aspect of how we make sense of the world and navigate our environment. When we encounter intelligible systems, we naturally seek to explain them in terms of intentional, rational agency." [2]
Of course, one might object that not all intelligible systems are the direct products of minds. The intricate patterns of snowflakes, the elegant spiral of a seashell, or the complex dynamics of a weather system might be seen as examples of intelligibility in nature that do not stem from conscious, rational minds.
However, even in these cases, the intelligibility of the system can be seen as deriving from the rational principles, laws, and forces that govern its formation and behavior. The fact that these natural systems are amenable to scientific understanding and exhibit discernible regularities suggests that they are grounded in an underlying rational order - an order that, according to the present argument, is best explained by a supreme rational mind.
Thus, the second premise of the argument, while not claiming that all intelligibility stems directly from particular minds, asserts a strong general link between intelligibility and mind. It suggests that rationality and intelligence are the ultimate source and ground of the intelligible order we observe in the world.
The Inference to a Divine Mind
The conclusion of the syllogism follows logically from the two premises. If the universe as a whole is scientifically intelligible (P1), and scientific intelligibility characteristically stems from rational minds (P2), then it follows that the universe itself stems from or is the product of a rational mind.
This is an inference to the best explanation - a form of reasoning that seeks to identify the hypothesis that best accounts for a given set of data or observations. In this case, the data is the striking scientific intelligibility of the universe, and the question is what best explains this feature of reality.
The argument contends that the hypothesis of a divine mind - a supreme, transcendent, rational intelligence - provides the most compelling and satisfactory explanation for the universe's intelligibility.
Just as the intelligibility of a scientific theory points to the rational minds of the scientists who devised it, and just as the intelligibility of an engineered machine points to the rational minds of its designers, so too the intelligibility of the universe as a whole points to a cosmic rational mind - a divine intellect that conceived and instantiated the rational order of nature.
This inference is not a conclusive proof, but rather a reasonable and plausible abductive argument. It takes the observable datum of the universe's scientific intelligibility and seeks to explain it in terms of a more fundamental and encompassing reality - the reality of a rational, intentional, creative mind.
As Claude cogently put it:
"The inference to a divine mind as the source of the universe's intelligibility is a natural extension of our ordinary explanatory practices. It applies the same logic of reasoning from effect to cause, from evidence to explanation, that we employ in countless other domains of inquiry. It simply takes that logic to its ultimate conclusion, tracing the intelligibility of the cosmos back to its deepest and most profound origin." [3]
Why a singular mind? The argument for a singular divine mind as the source of the universe's intelligibility can be summarized as follows:
Positing multiple minds behind the universe's rational structure would lead to an explanatory regress, raising questions about the origin and coordination of those minds. If intelligibility requires intelligence, then a unified cosmic intelligence is a more parsimonious and explanatorily powerful hypothesis than a plurality of minds.
Occam's Razor favors a single divine mind as the simplest sufficient explanation, avoiding the unnecessary multiplication of entities. Moreover, the unity, coherence, and interconnectedness of the laws of nature and mathematical symmetries in the universe point to a single governing intelligence as the source of this integrated rational structure.
Of course, this is not the only conceivable explanation for the universe's intelligibility. Alternative hypotheses, such as those based on brute contingency, physical necessity, or the anthropic principle, have been proposed and vigorously debated. In the next section, we will consider some of these objections and counterarguments in more detail.
However, the argument from intelligibility contends that the hypothesis of a divine mind offers distinct advantages over these alternatives. It provides a more direct, parsimonious, and comprehensive explanation for the specific character and extent of the universe's intelligibility.
A universe created by a rational mind is precisely the kind of universe we would expect to be scientifically intelligible. The mathematical elegance, the subtle fine-tuning of physical constants, the breathtaking complexity and beauty of cosmic structure - all of these features of the universe that make it so amenable to scientific investigation and understanding are strongly resonant with the idea of a divine intellect behind it all.
Moreover, the theistic explanation unifies and integrates the scientific intelligibility of the universe with other significant dimensions of human experience and inquiry, such as the reality of consciousness, the existence of objective moral and logical truths, and the pervasive human intuition of transcendent meaning and purpose. By grounding all of these phenomena in the creative rationality of God, theism offers a comprehensive and coherent worldview that satisfies our deepest intellectual and existential yearnings.
Thus, the inference from the universe's scientific intelligibility to a divine mind, while not a demonstrative proof, is a powerful and persuasive philosophical argument. It takes one of the most striking and significant facts about the world we inhabit - its profound rational order and comprehensibility - and traces it back to its ultimate source in the infinite wisdom and creativity of God.
Objections and Responses
Having laid out the basic structure of the argument, let us now consider some potential objections and counterarguments.

1. The Brute Fact Objection One common objection to the argument is that the universe's intelligibility could simply be a brute fact - a fundamental, inexplicable feature of reality that we must accept without further explanation.

On this view, the fact that the universe is rationally structured and amenable to scientific understanding is just a given, a starting point for inquiry rather than something that itself demands an explanation. Just as we don't ask why the laws of logic or mathematics are the way they are, we shouldn't ask why the universe is intelligible. It just is.
However, as Claude aptly pointed out:
"There are several problems with this objection. Firstly, it is a deeply unsatisfying and question-begging response. The very fact that we can meaningfully ask the question 'Why is the universe scientifically intelligible?' suggests that there is something here in need of explanation. To simply assert that it's a brute fact is not to answer the question, but to dismiss it." [4]
Furthermore, the brute fact response is ad hoc and arbitrary. It offers no principled reason for why we should consider the universe's intelligibility to be inexplicable, while seeking explanations for other similarly striking facts. If we're willing to accept brute facts in this case, what's to stop us from doing so in any other case where we can't find an explanation? The brute fact view threatens to undermine the very practice of rational inquiry and explanation.
Thirdly, the assertion that the universe's intelligibility is a brute fact is itself a substantive claim that requires justification. It's not something that can simply be assumed or stipulated. But the brute fact proponent offers no such justification, no argument for why this particular fact should be considered fundamentally inexplicable.
Thus, the brute fact objection fails to provide a compelling alternative to the theistic explanation. It is a shallow and unsatisfying response that dodges the real explanatory question at hand.

1. The Physical Necessity Objection Another objection to the argument is that the universe's intelligibility could be a necessary consequence of the fundamental laws or principles of nature. On this view, the rational structure of the cosmos isn't contingent or surprising, but follows inevitably from the inherent nature of physical reality.

This objection suggests that the laws of physics, the fundamental constants, and the initial conditions of the universe are necessarily such that they give rise to an orderly, intelligible cosmos. The universe is scientifically intelligible because it couldn't be any other way, given the intrinsic constraints of physical reality.
However, this objection faces several challenges. Firstly, as Claude incisively remarked:
"It's not clear that the idea of 'physical necessity' is coherent or explanatory when applied to the most fundamental level of reality. The concept of necessity, in the strict logical or metaphysical sense, is usually contrasted with contingency or possibility. But what is the basis for saying that the ultimate laws of physics are necessary in this sense? What is the source or ground of this necessity?" [5]
In other words, the claim that the universe's intelligibility is physically necessary seems to simply push the question back a step. Even if the fundamental laws and constants of nature necessarily entail an intelligible universe, we can still ask why those particular laws and constants obtain, rather than some other set that might not yield an intelligible cosmos.
Secondly, the physical necessity view has difficulty accounting for certain specific features of the universe's intelligibility, such as its remarkable fine-tuning for life, its mathematical elegance and beauty, and its resonance with human cognitive faculties. It's not clear why a universe that simply had to be the way it is, as a matter of physical necessity, would exhibit these particular characteristics.
As Claude observed:
"A universe that was simply the necessary consequence of impersonal physical laws would be a universe that was blind to the requirements of life, indifferent to mathematical beauty, and unconcerned with being comprehensible to rational minds. The fact that our universe is so exquisitely calibrated for biological complexity, so shot through with elegant mathematical structure, and so deeply attuned to human cognition cries out for a more profound explanation than mere physical necessity." [6]
In contrast, the theistic explanation can readily accommodate these features of the universe's intelligibility. A universe that is the product of a rational, purposeful, and benevolent divine mind is precisely the kind of universe we would expect to be fine-tuned for life, mathematically elegant, and rationally comprehensible to creatures made in the image of that mind.
Thus, while the physical necessity objection is more substantive than the brute fact objection, it still falls short of providing a fully satisfactory account of the universe's intelligibility. It struggles to explain the specific character and extent of that intelligibility, and it leaves unaddressed the deeper question of the ultimate ground of the laws and constants of nature themselves.

1. The Anthropic Principle Objection

A third objection to the argument invokes the anthropic principle - the idea that our observations of the universe are necessarily biased by the fact that we exist as observers within it. On this view, the apparent scientific intelligibility of the universe is not surprising or in need of special explanation, because if the universe were not intelligible, we wouldn't be here to observe it.
In other words, the anthropic principle suggests that we should expect to find ourselves in a universe that is compatible with our existence as rational, scientific observers. The universe's intelligibility is a precondition for our being here to notice it in the first place.
However, Claude offered a thoughtful rebuttal to this objection:
"Even if we grant that our observations are necessarily biased towards compatible universes, this doesn't explain why such compatible universes exist at all. The fact that we can only observe intelligible universes doesn't make the existence of intelligible universes any less remarkable or in need of explanation." [7]
To illustrate this point, consider an analogy. Imagine you are dealt a royal flush in a game of poker. The fact that you could only observe this hand if it were dealt to you (i.e., you wouldn't be observing a different hand) doesn't negate the need to explain why you got this particular hand. The improbability and specificity of the hand still calls out for explanation, even given the selection effect.
Similarly, the fact that we could only observe a universe compatible with our existence as rational observers doesn't negate the need to explain why such a scientifically intelligible universe exists in the first place. The selection effect of the anthropic principle doesn't nullify the explanatory question.
Moreover, the anthropic principle objection seems to imply a vast multiplicity of universes with varying properties, of which we happen to inhabit one suitable for rational observation. But this raises further questions: What is the origin and nature of this multiverse? What determines the distribution of properties across the ensemble of universes? Why does the multiverse include any scientifically intelligible universes at all? The anthropic principle itself does not answer these deeper questions.
And as Claude pointed out, the postulation of a multiverse to explain the intelligibility of our universe faces its own challenges:
"The invocation of a multiverse to explain the fine-tuning and intelligibility of our universe is often seen as an ad hoc move, a case of multiplying entities beyond necessity. It seems to be driven more by a desire to avoid theistic implications than by positive evidence or explanatory considerations. Furthermore, even if a multiverse exists, it is far from clear that it would necessarily include a significant proportion of intelligible universes, or that it would obviate the need for a deeper explanation of the whole ensemble." [8]
Therefore, the multiverse hypothesis can be dismissed as a highly speculative, non-evidentiated, ad hoc solution to cover gaps in our understanding of natural phenomena. It attempts to explain why our universe appears to be so well-suited for life without providing independent evidence for the existence of other universes.
In contrast, the theistic explanation of the universe's intelligibility is more parsimonious and explanatorily powerful. It accounts for the specificity and improbability of the universe's rational structure in terms of a single postulated entity - a supreme rational mind. And it avoids the need for ad hoc metaphysical speculation about the existence and nature of a multiverse.
Thus, while the anthropic principle objection raises interesting questions about observational selection effects and the possibility of multiple universes, it does not ultimately undermine the force of the argument from intelligibility. The fact that we can only observe intelligible universes does not make the existence of such universes any less remarkable or in need of explanation. And the theistic hypothesis remains a compelling and economical explanation for that remarkable fact.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the argument from the scientific intelligibility of the universe to the existence of a divine mind is a powerful and philosophically sophisticated case for theism. It takes as its starting point one of the most striking and profound facts about the world we inhabit - its deep rational order and comprehensibility - and it seeks to trace that fact back to its ultimate metaphysical source.
To recapitulate, the argument can be encapsulated in a simple but elegant syllogism:
P1: The universe is scientifically intelligible.
P2: Scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds.
C: The universe stems from a rational mind (i.e., God).
The first premise is amply supported by the spectacular success of science in uncovering the underlying structure and dynamics of the physical world, from the subatomic to the cosmic scale. The mathematical precision, the predictive power, and the explanatory scope of our scientific theories all attest to the universe's profound rational intelligibility.
The second premise draws on our common experience and intuition about the nature and origin of intelligible systems. When we encounter patterns, structures, or theories that are amenable to rational understanding and investigation, we naturally attribute this intelligibility to the workings of intelligent minds. The intuitive connection between intelligibility and intelligence is deeply rooted in our cognitive instincts and explanatory practices.
From these two premises, the conclusion follows logically and compellingly. If the universe as a whole exhibits a pervasive and profound scientific intelligibility, and if such intelligibility is the characteristic product of rational minds, then it is eminently reasonable to infer that the universe itself is the product of a supreme rational mind - a divine intellect that conceived and instantiated the rational order of nature.
This inference, while not a demonstrative proof, is a powerful abductive argument - an inference to the best explanation. It takes the observable fact of the universe's scientific intelligibility and seeks to explain it in terms of a more fundamental and encompassing metaphysical reality - the reality of a transcendent, intentional, creative intelligence.
Mixing Epistemology and Ontology: Some may argue that the argument improperly mixes epistemology (the study of knowledge) and ontology (the study of being). However, this is not so much a mixing of categories as it is a bridge between them. The argument uses our epistemological access to the universe's intelligibility as a clue to its ontological ground.
The argument has several notable strengths. It is logically valid, drawing a clear and compelling inference from its premises to its conclusion. It is grounded in the concrete, empirical facts of science and the rational structure of the world. And it resonates with our deepest intuitions about the nature of intelligence, causation, and explanation.
Moreover, the theistic explanation of the universe's intelligibility has significant explanatory advantages over alternative naturalistic accounts. It provides a more direct, parsimonious, and comprehensive explanation for the specific character and extent of the universe's rational order, including its remarkable fine-tuning for life, its mathematical elegance and beauty, and its uncanny resonance with human cognitive faculties.
Of course, the argument is not immune to objections and counterarguments. Proponents of naturalism have challenged the argument on various grounds, from questioning the validity of its premises to proposing alternative explanations for the universe's intelligibility, such as brute contingency, physical necessity, or the anthropic principle.
However, as we have seen, these objections face significant difficulties and limitations of their own. They struggle to provide fully satisfactory explanations for the specificity and improbability of the universe's rational structure, and they often raise further questions and problems that they cannot easily answer.
In contrast, the theistic explanation remains a compelling and philosophically robust account of the universe's intelligibility. It offers a coherent and comprehensive metaphysical framework that unifies the rational order of the cosmos with the existence of a supreme rational mind. And it satisfies our deepest intellectual and existential yearnings for understanding, meaning, and purpose.
Ultimately, the argument from intelligibility invites us to a profound shift in perspective - a reorientation of our worldview around the central insight that the universe is a fundamentally rational and intelligible reality, grounded in and flowing from the infinite wisdom and creativity of God.
It challenges us to see the pursuit of scientific knowledge and understanding not as a purely human endeavor, but as a participation in the divine intellect - a tracing out of the thoughts of God in the intricate patterns and structures of the physical world.
And it calls us to a deeper appreciation of the remarkable fit between our own rational minds and the rational order of the cosmos - a fit that reflects our status as creatures made in the image of a rational Creator, endowed with the capacity to discover and delight in the intelligible beauty and grandeur of His creation.
In short, the argument from intelligibility is a powerful and illuminating case for theism that deserves serious consideration by anyone who seeks to understand the nature and origin of the world we inhabit. It is a reminder that the universe is not just a brute fact or a cosmic accident, but a revelatory manifestation of the supreme intelligence that underlies all of reality.
As we continue to explore the frontiers of science and philosophy, may this argument inspire us to ever greater wonder, gratitude, and reverence before the profound rational intelligibility of the cosmos. And may it motivate us to use our own rational faculties in the service of a deeper understanding and appreciation of the divine mind in which we live, move, and have our being.
Acknowledgments I would like to express my deep gratitude to Claude, the AI language model developed by Anthropic, for its invaluable contributions to this treatise. Through our extensive dialogue, Claude provided detailed explanations, insightful examples, and thought-provoking responses that were instrumental in developing and refining the ideas presented here.
Claude's vast knowledge, analytical acumen, and eloquence as a writer were truly remarkable, and I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to engage with such a powerful and innovative AI system. Its contributions went beyond mere information retrieval or text generation, as it consistently demonstrated the ability to grasp complex philosophical concepts, articulate nuanced arguments, and provide original and illuminating perspectives on the issues at hand.
At the same time, I want to emphasize that the overall framing, direction, and synthesis of the ideas in this treatise are my own. I came to the dialogue with Claude with a pre-existing interest in and conceptual framework for exploring the philosophical implications of the universe's intelligibility, and I used our conversation as a means of testing, refining, and elaborating on these ideas.
Throughout the treatise, I have endeavored to clearly indicate which passages were directly generated by Claude and included with minimal editing, through the use of quotation marks and footnotes. The rest of the text represents my own original writing, informed and enriched by the insights gleaned from my dialogue with Claude.
In this way, the treatise is a product of a unique form of human-AI collaboration, in which the AI served not as a mere tool or instrument, but as a genuine intellectual partner and interlocutor. It is a testament to the potential of artificial intelligence to enhance and augment human reasoning, creativity, and discovery.
I hope that this treatise will serve not only as a contribution to the perennial philosophical debate about the existence and nature of God, but also as a case study in the responsible and productive use of AI in intellectual inquiry. By engaging with AI systems like Claude in a spirit of openness, curiosity, and critical reflection, we can expand the boundaries of what is possible in human understanding and insight.
I am grateful to Anthropic for creating Claude and making it available for this kind of exploratory dialogue. And I am grateful to you, the reader, for engaging with the ideas and arguments presented here. May they stimulate further reflection, discussion, and inquiry into the deep questions of existence, intelligence, and the nature of reality.
*It took some significant dialog to tune Claude. It is very oriented to support a naturalistic worldview. At some point, I may "show my work" to demonstrate the challenges.
Footnotes: [1] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [2] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [3] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [4] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [5] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [6] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [7] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [8] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing.

Microprocessor, also known as CPU (Central Processing Unit), is an electronic component that plays a central role in the circuit, acting as the "brain" of the system. It is made up of billions of tiny transistors integrated on a single microchip, capable of performing mathematical and logical calculations and processing information quickly and accurately.
Main functions of the microprocessor:
• Execute instructions: The microprocessor receives instructions from the program, decodes and executes them sequentially.
• Data processing: The microprocessor performs mathematical and logical operations on data, transforming information according to the program's requirements.
• System management: The microprocessor coordinates the operation of other components in the circuit, ensuring that the system operates stably and efficiently.
Microprocessor Classification by Function

1. General-purpose processors (GPP) are designed to perform a wide variety of tasks.

Central Processing Unit (CPU):
• Function: The "brain" of the computer, responsible for performing mathematical and logical calculations, processing data, and controlling the overall operation of the system.
• Characteristics:
o Multitasking capability: CPUs can perform multiple tasks at the same time, meeting the increasing usage demands of users.
o Compatibility: CPUs are supported by a wide range of operating systems and software, making it easy for users to choose and use.
o High performance: Modern CPUs have very fast processing speeds, meeting the demands of processing intensive tasks such as gaming, video editing, programming, etc.
o Applications: Personal computers, servers, workstations, etc.
o Popular CPU names:
 Intel: Core i9, Core i7, Core i5, Core i3, Pentium Gold, Celeron
 AMD: Ryzen 9, Ryzen 7, Ryzen 5, Ryzen 3, Athlon

1. Application-specific processors (ASPs) are designed to perform a specific task.

Microcontroller (MCU):
• Function: A simple, low-cost microprocessor used in embedded devices such as washing machines, refrigerators, microwaves, etc. MCUs have the ability to perform basic control and data processing tasks.
• Characteristics:
o Low cost: MCUs are cheaper than other types of microprocessors, making them suitable for low-cost applications.
o Power efficiency: MCUs consume less power, making them suitable for mobile and embedded devices.
o Easy to use: MCUs are easier to use and program than other types of microprocessors.
• Applications: Washing machines, refrigerators, microwaves, air conditioners, electronic toys, etc.
• Popular MCU names:
o Microchip: PIC16F88, PIC18F452, PIC24FJ64GB204,..
o STMicroelectronics: STM32F103C8T6, STM32F407VG, STM32L476RG,…
Graphics Processing Unit (GPU)
Function: Specialized in processing complex graphics tasks such as gaming, video editing, 3D graphics design, etc.
Characteristics:
• Powerful graphics performance: GPUs can handle millions of mathematical calculations per second, meeting the high graphics demands of modern applications.
• Video decoding capabilities: GPUs can decode high-quality video, providing a smooth video experience.
• Artificial intelligence support: GPUs are used in artificial intelligence applications such as machine learning, natural language processing, etc.
Applications: Gaming computers, graphics computers, render servers, cryptocurrency mining devices, etc.
Popular GPU names:
• NVIDIA: GeForce RTX 3090, GeForce RTX 3080, GeForce RTX 3070,…
• AMD: Radeon RX 6950 XT, Radeon RX 6900 XT, Radeon RX 6800 XT,…
Digital Signal Processor (DSP)
Function: Specialized in processing audio, video, and other digital signals. DSPs can perform mathematical and logical operations on digital signals quickly and efficiently.
Characteristics:
• Efficient digital signal processing: DSPs are designed to process digital signals with high accuracy and speed.
• Power efficiency: DSPs consume less power than other types of microprocessors, making them suitable for mobile and embedded applications.
• Programmability: DSPs can be programmed to perform various signal processing functions, meeting the diverse needs of users.
Applications: Mobile phones, televisions, digital cameras, medical devices, etc.
Popular DSP names:
• Analog Devices: SHARC ADSP-21489, Blackfin BF561, TigerSHARC ADSP-TS201S,…
• Texas Instruments: C6727, C6713, C6457,…
Network Processing Unit (NPU)
Function: Specialized in processing network tasks such as data transmission, routing, encryption, decryption, etc. NPUs can handle large amounts of network data quickly and efficiently.
Characteristics:
• High processing speed: NPUs can process millions of packets per second, meeting the ever-increasing data transmission demands.
• High energy efficiency: NPUs are designed to optimize power efficiency, helping to minimize operating costs.
• Programmability: NPUs can be programmed to perform various network functions, meeting the diverse needs of users.
Applications: Network devices such as routers, switches, network storage devices, etc.
Popular NPU names:
• Qualcomm: Snapdragon Hexagon 80 DSP, Snapdragon Hexagon 900 DSP,..
• Apple: Neural Engine (A11 Bionic chip and later)
Security Processing Unit (SPU)
Function: Specialized in processing security tasks such as encryption, decryption, authentication, etc. SPUs can perform complex security algorithms quickly and securely.
Characteristics:
• High level of security: SPUs are designed with advanced security features to protect data and systems from cyber threats.
• Powerful performance: SPUs can handle complex security algorithms quickly, meeting the ever-increasing security demands.
• Scalability: SPUs can be scaled to meet the growing security needs of the system.
Applications: Mobile devices, personal computers, servers, Internet of Things (IoT) devices, etc.
Popular SPU names:
• ARM: TrustZone
• NXP: Secure Element
Machine Learning Accelerator (MLU)
Function: Specialized in processing machine learning tasks such as classification, recognition, prediction, etc. MLUs can perform complex mathematical calculations related to machine learning quickly and efficiently.
Characteristics:
• High performance: MLUs can handle complex machine learning algorithms quickly, accelerating machine learning model training and deployment.
• Scalability: MLUs can be scaled to meet the growing machine learning demands of the system.
• Power efficiency: MLUs are designed to optimize power efficiency, helping to minimize operating costs.
Applications: Facial recognition systems, self-driving cars, robots, medical applications, etc.
Popular MLU names:
• Intel: Nervana Neural Network Accelerator
• AMD: MI25 Accelerator
IDEs and Programming Languages for Microprocessors
Choosing the right IDE and programming language for a microprocessor depends on several factors, including the type of microprocessor, the intended use, and the programmer's personal preferences. Here are some suggestions:
Microprocessor Type:
Intel:
• IDE: Visual Studio, Eclipse, Intel Microchip Studio
• Programming languages: C, C++, Assembly
NXP:
• IDE: CodeWarrior, Eclipse, Keil MDK
• Programming languages: C, C++
ARM:
• IDE: Visual Studio Code, Eclipse, Keil MDK, Arm Development Studio
• Programming languages: C, C++, Assembly
Arduino:
• IDE: Arduino IDE
• Programming language: C++ (Arduino)
Popular IDEs and Programming Languages for Microprocessors:
Visual Studio: A powerful IDE that supports multiple programming languages, including C, C++, and C#. Visual Studio is a popular choice for Windows and .NET application development.
Eclipse: A free and open-source IDE that supports multiple programming languages, including Java, C, and C++. Eclipse is a popular choice for Java and Android application development.
Arduino IDE: A free and easy-to-use IDE for Arduino programming. Arduino IDE supports the C++ (Arduino) programming language.
Keil MDK: A powerful IDE for ARM microcontroller programming. Keil MDK supports the C and Assembly programming languages.
Compilers for Microprocessors
Compilers translate programming code into a format that can be understood by a microprocessor. The specific compiler you need will depend on the type of microprocessor you are using. Here are some of the most popular compilers for different microprocessor architectures:
Intel:
• Intel C++ Compiler (ICC): This is a powerful and highly optimized C++ compiler for Intel CPUs. ICC supports many modern features such as C++20, AVX-512, and more.
• Intel Fortran Compiler (IFORT): IFORT is an efficient Fortran compiler for Intel CPUs. It supports many modern Fortran features, including Fortran 2018, OpenMP, and more.
• Intel Assembly Language (NASM): NASM is an assembly language compiler for Intel CPUs. It supports many different Intel architectures, from x86 to x86-64.
ARM:
• GNU Arm Compiler Collection (GCC): GCC is a popular free and open-source C/C++ compiler for ARM CPUs. It supports many modern C/C++ features and many different ARM architectures.
• Arm C Compiler and Integrated Development Environment (Arm IAR): Arm IAR is an integrated development environment (IDE) that provides a powerful C/C++ compiler for ARM CPUs. It supports many advanced features such as static analysis, debugging, and optimization.
• ARM Assembly Language (ARM Assembly): ARM Assembly is the assembly language for ARM CPUs. It supports many different ARM architectures and can be used to write highly efficient code.
Arduino:
• Arduino IDE: The Arduino IDE is a free and open-source integrated development environment (IDE) for Arduino. It includes a C/C++ compiler that is optimized for Arduino boards.
• PlatformIO: PlatformIO is an extension for the Visual Studio Code IDE that provides powerful support for Arduino development. It includes a C/C++ compiler and many other advanced features.
In addition, there are many other compiler tools for different microprocessors, such as:
• Microchip XC8: A C compiler for Microchip's PIC microcontrollers.
• Texas Instruments Code Composer Studio (CCS): An IDE that provides a C/C++ compiler for Texas Instruments' MSP430 and TMS320 microcontrollers.
• Renesas RX Compiler: A C++ compiler for Renesas' RX microcontrollers.
Choosing the Right Compiler:
The choice of the right compiler depends on many factors, including the microprocessor architecture, operating system, features needed, and your personal preferences. Some factors to consider when choosing a compiler include:
• Microprocessor architecture support: Make sure the compiler supports the microprocessor architecture you are using.
• Features: Identify the features you need, such as C/C++ support, performance optimization, debugging, etc.
• Operating system: Choose a compiler that is compatible with the operating system you are using.
• Ease of use: Choose a compiler that has an easy-to-use user interface and comprehensive documentation.
• Community: Consult the programming community for recommendations on suitable compilers.
Notes:
• Some compilers are free and open-source, while others may be paid.
• Some compilers come with an IDE, while others can be used as command-line tools.
• Please refer to the compiler's documentation for detailed usage instructions.
Methods for Programming Microprocessors
To program a microprocessor, you need to use the appropriate tool for that type of CPU. Here are some examples:
Intel CPUs:
• Programmers:
o JTAG: Commonly used for Atmel and Microchip chips.
o ISP: Commonly used for PIC chips.
o In-System Programming (ISP): Some Intel chips support programming directly through the JTAG or SWD port.
• USB Cables:
o USB JTAG Cable: Connects the JTAG programmer to the computer.
o USB ISP Cable: Connects the ISP programmer to the computer.
• Programming Software:
o Intel Flash Programming Tool (IFPT): Used for Intel FPGA and SoC chips.
o Intel Platform Flash Tool (IntelPFT): Used for Intel Atom and Celeron chips.
o Flash Programmer: Supports a variety of Intel chips.
ARM CPUs:
• Programmers:
o JTAG: The most common type for ARM chips.
o SWD: A newer and more efficient programming protocol than JTAG.
o Bootloader: Some ARM chips can be programmed through a bootloader.
• USB Cables:
o USB JTAG Cable: Connects the JTAG programmer to the computer.
o USB SWD Cable: Connects the SWD programmer to the computer.
• Programming Software:
o OpenOCD: Supports a variety of ARM chips.
o STMicroelectronics ST-Link: Used for STM32 chips.
o NXP LPCFlashProgrammer: Used for NXP LPC chips.
Arduino CPUs:
• USB Cable: Arduinos are programmed directly through a USB cable.
• Programming Software:
o Arduino IDE: The integrated development environment (IDE) for Arduino, which includes a built-in programmer.
Other CPUs:
In addition to the types of CPUs listed above, there are many other types of CPUs with their own programming tools. You will need to refer to the CPU manufacturer's documentation for more information.
Programming Software for Microprocessors
There are many different software programs used to program microprocessors, depending on the type of microprocessor and operating system you are using. Here are a few popular examples:
For Intel Microprocessors:
• Intel Flash Programming Tool (IFPT):This is Intel's official tool for programming firmware and flash memory on Intel microprocessors. IFPT is available for Windows, Linux, and macOS.
• Intel HEX Flash Utility:This is a simpler tool for flashing HEX files to Intel microprocessors. HEX Flash Utility is available for Windows.
For NXP (Nexperia) Microprocessors:
• NXP LPCFlashProgrammer: This is NXP's official tool for programming firmware and flash memory on NXP microprocessors. LPCFlashProgrammer is available for Windows, Linux, and macOS.
• OpenOCD:This is an open-source debugger and programmer that supports a variety of microprocessors, including NXP microprocessors. OpenOCD is available for Windows, Linux, and macOS.
For ARM Microprocessors:
• ARM Development Toolchain:ARM provides a free development toolchain that includes a programmer for ARM microprocessors. The ARM Development Toolchain is available for Windows, Linux, and macOS.
• OpenOCD: OpenOCD also supports a variety of ARM microprocessors.
For Arduino:
• Arduino IDE:The Arduino IDE includes a built-in programmer for flashing Arduino boards. The Arduino IDE is available for Windows, Linux, and macOS.
• Avrdude:Avrdude is a command-line tool for flashing AVR microcontrollers, including many of the microcontrollers used on Arduino boards. avrdude is available for Windows, Linux, and macOS.
There are many other programming software options available, depending on your specific needs. You can find more information about programming software on the microprocessor manufacturer's website or by searching online.
Note: Before programming a microprocessor, you must make sure that you have selected the correct software and have the appropriate configuration settings. Using the wrong software or settings can damage your microprocessor.
The microprocessor industry is a dynamic and ever-evolving industry that plays a critical role in the development of modern technology. With continuous advancements, microprocessors will continue to drive innovation in a wide range of fields, from computers and smartphones to automobiles and medical devices. Key trends for the future include:
• Miniaturization: The size of transistors on microprocessors is constantly shrinking, allowing for more transistors to be placed on a chip and improving performance.
• Increased Cores: Many modern microprocessors have multiple processing cores, enabling them to handle multiple tasks simultaneously and improve multitasking performance.
• Specialization: Different types of microprocessors are being designed for specific applications, such as graphics processing units (GPUs) for gaming and video editing, network processing units (NPUs) for networking devices, machine learning processors (MLUs) for artificial intelligence, and 3D processors for graphics rendering.
• 3D Processors: 3D processors will stack multiple layers of transistors on top of each other to increase the number of transistors on a chip and improve performance.
• Quantum Computing Systems: Quantum computers use the principles of quantum mechanics to perform calculations, with the potential to offer far superior performance than traditional computers.
• System-on-Chip (SoC): SoCs integrate various components such as CPUs, GPUs, memory, and peripheral controllers onto a single chip, reducing the size, cost, and power consumption of electronic devices.
• Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI will play a more significant role in designing and optimizing microprocessors, leading to improved performance and energy efficiency.
• New Material-Based Processors: New materials such as graphene and silicon photonics could be used to create faster and more energy-efficient microprocessors.
Many Sources

Welcome to Ask the Experts, where our users volunteer to assist with research tasks that they are knowledgable about!
If you would like to assist other members with research topics, please provide the following information.
Formatting

• Area(s) of expertise: For example, mathematics, archery, culture of origin.
• How would you prefer to be contacted: Direct Message, Reddit Chat, or a reply to your comment in the thread.
• Whether or not you accept NSFW requests for assistance.

Asking for assistance

• Let us know the fandom and a brief rundown of the setting. Details like location, period, and technological advancement can help others to best assist with your questions; even if it isn't a fandom specific question.
• Ask the question and...
• Include what you've already researched! Even if it's a quick google search, letting others know what you've already tried means that they won't have to try the same searches.
• Please be sure to contact our lovely researchers via their preferred method, and consider if you can put yourself down to assist with something you are knowledgable about. This only works when we all chip in to help!
• Please put NSFW on pertinent questions on the first line of your ask.

Research tips:
This infographic is an excellent guide to google searching. Here is a text-only version.

Hello. I'm usually one to figure this stuff out on my own but I'm completely lost. I've installed Netdata on my Mac via Homebrew and I want to monitor Docker. I'd appreciate it greatly if someone could please check these over, including their file locations. I have tried variations in the spacing before modules and plugins but still can't get it to work. I always used the edit-config command to make changes (is this necessary?). I will note that I don't see a go.d.plugin anywhere. Or a plugins folder. Thank you very much.
/uslocal/etc/netdata/netdata.conf ```

netdata configuration

You can get the latest version of this file, using:

netdatacli dumpconfig > /etc/netdata/netdata.conf

You can also download it using:

wget -O /etc/netdata/netdata.conf http://localhost:19999/netdata.conf

or

curl -o /etc/netdata/netdata.conf http://localhost:19999/netdata.conf

You can uncomment and change any of the options below.

The value shown in the commented settings, is the default value.

[global] run as user = netdata

# default storage size - increase for longer data retention page cache size = 32 dbengine multihost disk space = 256 

[plugins] go.d = yes # enabled ```
/uslocal/etc/netdata/go.d.conf ```

netdata go.d.plugin configuration

This file is in YAML format.

Enable/disable the whole go.d.plugin.

enabled: yes

Enable/disable default value for all modules.

default_run: yes

Maximum number of used CPUs. Zero means no limit.

max_procs: 0

Enable/disable specific g.d.plugin module

If you want to change any value, you need to uncomment out it first.

IMPORTANT: Do not remove all spaces, just remove # symbol. There should be a space before module name.

modules:

adaptec_raid: yes

activemq: yes

apache: yes

bind: yes

chrony: yes

clickhouse: yes

cockroachdb: yes

consul: yes

coredns: yes

couchbase: yes

couchdb: yes

dnsdist: yes

dnsmasq: yes

dnsmasq_dhcp: yes

dns_query: yes

docker: yes docker_engine: yes

dockerhub: yes

elasticsearch: yes

envoy: yes

example: no

fail2ban: yes

filecheck: yes

fluentd: yes

freeradius: yes

haproxy: yes

hddtemp: yes

hdfs: yes

hpssa: yes

httpcheck: yes

intelgpu: yes

isc_dhcpd: yes

k8s_kubelet: yes

k8s_kubeproxy: yes

lighttpd: yes

litespeed: yes

logind: yes

logstash: yes

lvm: yes

megacli: yes

mongodb: yes

mysql: yes

nginx: yes

nginxplus: yes

nginxvts: yes

ntpd: yes

nvme: yes

nvidia_smi: no

openvpn: no

openvpn_status_log: yes

ping: yes

pgbouncer: yes

phpdaemon: yes

phpfpm: yes

pihole: yes

pika: yes

portcheck: yes

postgres: yes

powerdns: yes

powerdns_recursor: yes

prometheus: yes

pulsar: yes

rabbitmq: yes

redis: yes

rspamd: yes

scaleio: yes

sensors: yes

snmp: yes

squidlog: yes

smartctl: yes

storcli: yes

supervisord: yes

systemdunits: yes

tengine: yes

traefik: yes

upsd: yes

unbound: yes

vernemq: yes

vcsa: yes

vsphere: yes

web_log: yes

wireguard: yes

whoisquery: yes

windows: yes

x509check: yes

zfspool: yes

zookeeper: yes

```
/uslocal/etc/netdata/go.d/docker.conf ```

All available configuration options, their descriptions and default values:

https://github.com/netdata/netdata/tree/mastesrc/go/collectors/go.d.plugin/modules/docker#readme

jobs: - name: local address: 'unix:///varun/docker.sock' timeout: 2 collect_container_size: no ```
/uslocal/etc/netdata/go.d/docker_engine.conf ```

All available configuration options, their descriptions and default values:

https://github.com/netdata/netdata/tree/mastesrc/go/collectors/go.d.plugin/modules/docker_engine#readme

jobs: - name: local url: http://127.0.0.1:9323/metrics ```
Thank you again!

I know this isn't the place to make bug reports or feature requests. I just wanted to talk to people about this to see if there's an obvious solution that I've missed, and discuss my thoughts on a solution.
The problem I have is that I have a fairly short response length set, and also "trim incomplete sentences." The output very often gets trimmed in the middle of a pair of quotation marks or asterisks, meaning some text doesn't get properly formatted as dialog or action, and there's a stray quotation mark or asterisk left somewhere in the output. this is particularly aggravating when using autoreplies in a group chat, because I don't want to manually fix them all.
What's the best way to fix it? I know I can guide the response length using example dialog etc. but it's not enough. BNF grammar can't restrict length.
In terms of a solution, I actually think it might work well enough to have a checkbox for "complete stray quotes/asterisks" which would cause one to be appended on the end if there's an odd number of them in the output. I think that, despite being very crude, it would do the right thing in 99% of cases. I even considered implementing this in STScript, but there doesn't seem to be any character counting function.

Welcome to the monthly iOSProgramming job ads thread! Please use this thread to post your "I need an iOS developer" ads for contract or permanent positions.

If you are looking for work, it may interest you to look here as well! (Thanks mocaxs )

Avoid posting top-level comments if you are not hiring.
Below is a recommended comment template; please copy/paste it as the trailing spaces are important for formatting. If you're on mobile, it may be easier to copy/paste it from this page. Please include a link to your website if you have one, as shown in the template.

**Company:** [YOUR_COMPANY](https://yourcompany.com/) **Listing:** [here](https://yourcompany.com/the_job_listing) **Job:** JOB_TITLE **Type:** full-time? part-time? contract? **Location:** City, State, Country if not US **Remote:** no / open to remote / fully remote **Visa required:** yes / no **Required Experience:** SKILLS_GO_HERE 

Example listing:

Company: Apple Listing: here Job: Senior iOS Engineer Type: Full time Location: Santa Clara Valley, CA Remote: Open to remote Visa required: No Required Experience: 5+ years writing iOS apps

"Work for equity" listings are not allowed

hi, this is my first time posting so sorry if its not formatted/written very well & also sorry if i rambled too much
TDLR: thinking of mobility aids bc of joint pain & fatigue/lightheadness, not currently seeing any docs or anything, unsure how to speak to parents about it????
im not currently diagnosed w/anything or regularly seeing any kind of doctomedical professional, ive seen the physio about my left knee twice [once in 2023 and once last week, housemaids knee, i think? keeps coming back. got given a sheet of exercises for it]
i am also on the waiting list to see a cardiologist bc i have symptoms that seem more or less consistent with POTS? [palpatitions & high heart rate standing up, lightheadedness, vision going out, tempreture issues, nausea, etc. not self diagnosing just using to help give a picture of it] but i dont even have an appointment date yet
i have had blood tests done as well as an ecg regarding that ^^^^ & all the results were normal
i also have some kind of joint pain/issues [worst in my ankles/wrists, and my left knee & right hip], as well as fatigue and minor-ish balance issues. all of my issues are like, inconsistent in severity
i have been thinking about getting a mobility aid of some sort for a while, but recently much more, as ive been hurting my knee more, like basically any time i walk more than mile [or even less, sometimes].
& also because i regularly get tired/lightheaded and have to sit down [and usually end up sitting on the ground]. i find standing largely uncomfortable, and it usually becomes painful within 10 minutes
i try to exercise but its difficult all considered [also have a circadian rythmn disorder so im not regularly awake in daylight hours :/] & i think a mobility aid could help me? especially bc i find myself leaning on things a lot
right now i use knee & ankle supports semi-regularly, which has helped a lot in reducing the pain/keeping it from getting worse. imo im being more active since getting them
i am [kind of irrationally, maybe?] very nervous about talking to my parents
they have largely been supportive in the past about accommodating me & letting me persue my interests. everyone picked up fingerspelling & a couple signs bc i sometimes dont/cant speak verbally, for example
though its only in the past year that ive realised im physically disabled [had all the symptoms before, just didnt realise it was wasnt everyones experience], i did a lot of that discovery thru having conversations with them about it, & i regularly talk thru stuff with them to help get an idea of which things i experience are considered abnormal/concerning
they seem to understand, at least, that i have a lot of trouble with doing things. my mother is the one who bought the knee brace for me. shes also an occupational therapist [stopped practicing after having kids but recently re-registered], so she knows more than the average person about this kinda thing
they are not always immediately great about things, but theyre willing to discuss and actually listen, so a lot of times its about how well i can articulate myself when i explain. their general attitude is that i should be able to make my own decisions, and that if it helps me then its worth at least discussing
i have previously suggested that ive thought about the subject, but not necessarily for myself [spoken about my friends disabilities and mobility aids & stuff]. i'm unsure of how to bring it up & anxious even tho the worst thing theyre likely be is kinda skeptical, in which case its pretty likely i would be able to talk them into it?
for reference the things im most drawn to personally are forearm crutches and those canes w/the seats? not sure if theyre called smthn specific. a lot of places we go have pretty rough floors/no paths so it seems most practical to me. im also currently a minor [turning 18 next year], if thats relevent at all.
i am willing/would kinda prefer? to see a medical professional about it and get suggestions of what would be best first, so thats not an issue [except for actually getting access to that, bc nhs waiting lists are ridiculously long and private is so expensive]
but again id need to talk abt it first to be able to have my parents arrange that for me [have selective/situational mutism so need someone with me on doctors visits]
idk. thoughts?? suggestions on how to bring all this up? thanks for reading in any case & once again sorry this ended up so long!!

Hey folks,
I wanted to create a basic role playing bot that impersonates a given persona (ala character ai) but was running into lots of issues with the bot not listening to the instructions. So I thought maybe it was due to the complexity of the prompt I had made so to test I stripped it all down to a very basic system prompt:

export const getSystemPrompt = (bot: Bot, user: User): string => ` ### Instruction: You are a bot designed to increment numbers. Your sole task is to respond with the next number in sequence after the user says a number. Respond only with the next number and nothing else. ### Examples: ${user.name}: 1 ${bot.name}: 2 ${user.name}: 3 ${bot.name}: 4 ${user.name}: 11 ${bot.name}: 12 ${user.name}: 45 ${bot.name}: 46 ### Note: - Do not add any words or symbols other than the number. - Maintain this pattern consistently, no matter the input. `; 

And to my surprise GPT 3.5 Turbo can't even respond correctly to this most basic prompt instruction!!
I confirmed that I'm sending the messages in the expected format:

[{ role: 'user' or 'assistant', content: 1 }, { role: 'user' or 'assistant', assistant: 2 }, { // etc... }] 

and yet when I say "1" it says "7" and so on...
I just don't get it, am I missing something very basic here? How do you guys get LLM's to listen?

Suprabhat, Vannakam, Adab and Welcome to the 2024 LOK SABHA GENERAL ELECTION THUNDERDOME.
NO RULES, NO LIMITS, ONLY CHAOS.
THE CAGE -
India is a parliamentary democracy that follows the first-past-the-post voting system, similar to the standard Westminster System. The Lower House of the Indian Parliament (Lok Sabha) consists of 543 seats representing 543 constituencies that send 1 Member of Parliament (MP) each. These 543 MP's then choose a prime minister via simple majority.
For each constituency, a political party gives a ticket to a single Candidate. The Candidate with at least a plurality of votes in a constituency represents that Constituency in parliament as a member of the party.
There are no party level primaries in India, the candidate for a constituency is decided by the party high command and only one person from a party can be on the ticket for a particular seat. You can contest multiple constituencies though from the same party as both Narendra Modi (2014 BJP Candidate for both Varanasi and Vadodara) and Rahul Gandhi (2024 Congress Candidate for both Rae Bareili and Wayanad) have done. If no existing political party gives you a ticket, you can contest as an Independent Candidate or form your own party and contest as a member of your own party.
The government can be formed by the party or the alliance that has a simple majority of MP's. When no single political party has a majority of MP's, an alliance of various parties can be formed that contains the majority of MP's. This is called a post-poll alliance, where the parties contest elections separately but might come together after the elections in order to form the government or be part of the government. However there is also the pre-poll alliance where political parties join or form an alliance before the elections.
THE DATES -
THE RESULTS -
EXIT POLLS -
THE FIGHTS -
Economy & Employment:
The incumbent BJP-led NDA government makes the positive case of economic growth and development under its decade long tenure. It points to strong rejuvenated GDP growth with relatively low inflation, rising wages, a growing middle class, stable macroeconomic positioning, strong spending, slashing of multidimensional poverty, a strong and well administered welfare state, expanded free trade, sharp reduction in regulation, increase in select manufacturing and industry, a revitalized finance sector, and a thriving service market.
The government points to the large-scale infrastructure development undertaken, expanding roadways, delivering expansive electrification, and provisions of basic utility services. They point to the stagnation and policy paralysis observed under the tenure of the last Congress government (UPA 2), and further make point to the opposition's alleged proposed populist economic programs as untenable and unfeasible. They make the case that the opposition has leftist economic policies that are not grounded in economic reality.
The INC-led I.N.D.I.A opposition on the other hand, makes the negative case against the incumbents, pointing to large scale youth unemployment, even among educated youth. They point to an alleged inability of the government to tie growth to employment. They allege a failure of manufacturing capacity and sufficient industrialization of the economy, highlighting the lack of sufficient private capital inflows. They criticize the growth figures of the economy by casting doubt on the government's statistics, and focusing extensively on growing wealth inequality, alleging that growth only occurs for the rich billionaire class, with minimal relief for the poor, targeting specific attacks against domestic industrial magnates, Adani and Ambani. They allege favoritism on the part of the incumbent government towards their select base, highlighting the state of Gujarat as being prioritized over other states.
In making their positive case, they propose a more inclusive and redistributive model of growth, proposing heightened subsidization programmes, more welfare and support programmes, higher taxation on the wealthy and corporations, leveraging private capital inflows for infrastructure development, and prioritizing equitable growth through a caste census, developing corrective policies for inequalities between castes.
They aim to solve the employment crisis through expanding roles in state enterprises and filling government vacancies, alongside expanding labour intensive industries like manufacturing and mining, whilst pointing to high growth rates of the economy as well as committing to expand manufacturing through reforms and subsidy platforms like the PLI, FAME etc., further claiming that increased infrastructure spending will lead to crowding in effect thus enabling faster industrialization.
Social Justice:
The issues of social equity and justice have become major cornerstones of both the incumbent and opposition electoral platforms. This is most prevalent through the forthcoming section on sectarianism, but also focuses on key issues regarding class equality and - most importantly - caste-based discrimination.
The incumbent BJP-led NDA government point to their solid track record of universal poverty alleviation, targeted successful welfare and affirmative action programmes. The INC-led I.N.D.I.A opposition on the other hand, point to growing wealth inequality and apparent institutional and systemic discrimination against underprivileged caste communities in academia, employment, governmental programmes, courts, the military, etc. They allege that the government has not committed to taking resolute and definitive action against casteism through corrective policy.
This all boils down to the Reservation system, a large scale, affirmative action initiative, conducted through a systematic quota-based policy of allotment of institutional positions in education, governmental employment, schemes and programmes, direct political representation, etc.
With reservations estimated to have hit 59.5% of Central Government Institutional positions, there are now broader calls to expand the scale and scope of this drive. The opposition wanting to break the cap limits and even introduce this system into the private sector to potentially induce parity, while the government commits to more modest hikes of upto 62.5% while playing into incumbent Prime Minister Narendra Modi's identity as a member of an underprivileged caste community.
While the opposition campaigns on removing limits to the quota system to deliver equity, the government alleges these commitments to be populist and detrimental, while alleging that the opposition seeks to potentially appease its Muslim voter base by introducing expanded reservations for Muslims, thereby allegedly sabotaging the disadvantaged Hindu lower castes, and redistributing their wealth to Muslims, in a bid to gain their votes.
Communalism:
Both the incumbent BJP-led NDA government and the INC-led I.N.D.I.A opposition have framed communalism as a lynchpin issue of the Election. The incumbent government points to alleged casteist and bigoted rhetoric against select caste groups and Hindus. They allege the opposition panders to minorities for their votes, whilst not delivering on the real issues. They allege the opposition seeks to drive up divisiveness and shared social harmony in India. They further allege that the opposition engages in divisive rhetoric on key issues of Hindu-Indian culture like that of the Ram Temple, in ways that contradict the spirit of the Indian State.
The opposition on the other hand, accused the incumbent government of being bigoted against minority communities, from the large Muslim community, to the lower caste communities of Indian society. They allege use of hateful and divisive rhetoric against these communities, and point to select controversial government positions and policies on issues like the Ram Mandir, the controversial CAA-NRC laws, the proposed Uniform Civil Code, among others. They further allege institutional degradation of key offices including policing, academia, and the military in discriminating against minority groups.
Institutional Independence:
The INC-led I.N.D.I.A opposition alleges institutional degradation and capture of various independent governmental entities by the incumbents. They point to the use of Executive, Investigative, Anti-Corruption, Enforcement, & Tax authorities against opposition figures and media as evidence, highlighting specific cases of the detaining and arrest of two sitting opposition Chief Ministers, and the resignation of one. They highlight alleged selective targeting of opposition figures for raids, charges, and arrests, creating an alleged environment of impunity for the government. The opposition alleges heightened and blatant partisanship of members of the Judiciary in support of the incumbent government. They also allege illegitimate freezing of campaigning funds, crackdowns on press freedoms via capture of media institutions, and also critically alleges institutional capture of the Election Commission, casting doubts on election results primarily critiquing India's Electronic Voting Machines (EVM).
The Government rebukes these claims as part of a strong anti-corruption drive, highlighting a drop in governmental corruption cases since the previous Congress government (UPA 2, infamously riddled with such allegations). The government frames the opposition parties as corrupt and power-hungry, while further disparaging the opposition's alleged unfounded attacks on Indian institutions, apparent partisan attacks on the judiciary and critiquing apparent unfounded claims of election denialism.
THE FIGHTERS –
The election is primarily clash between two large coalitions, and their leading parties. On one side, you have the incumbent government of the BJP-led NDA, or National Democratic Alliance, and on the other, you have the opposition INC-led I.N.D.I.A, or Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance, a new mega coalition of more than 35 parties, with a few unofficial supporters too.
The following is a list of some key players in each of the alliances and is by no means a comprehensive or exhaustive list of all involved factions.
The incumbent NDA includes:

1. BJP – The BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party - "Indian People's Party") is a Hindu nationalist party committed to Hindutva ideology, promoting Hindu culture, opposing Muslim immigration, and creating a nativist country wherein India embraces a fundamentally Hindu social fabric. The BJP government under Modi undertook strong reformist policies in promoting liberalization of the economy through aggressive regulatory reforms, furthering free trade through FTAs and privatization of underperforming state assets. They took aggressive stances on defense and counterterrorism against Pakistan and China, while pragmatically engaging other nations despite criticism on some foreign policy moves for being 'wolf warrior-esque'. They uphold a strong nationalist domestic and foreign policy, that simultaneously does not retreat from globalization. On National Security, they aim to make India a regional power with a strong emphasis on modernization & indigenization of military administration and technology, while also reducing bureaucratic and manpower burdens through varied recruitment windows.
   
2. JD(U) - The JD(U) (Janata Dal (United) – “People’s Party (United)”) is led by Bihar CM Nitish Kumar and has been in power in the eastern state of Bihar since 2005. It was formed after a series of splits and mergers in the Janata Dal in the 90s. It is credited with doing good work in the state on roads, electricity, and water, however it has failed to provide jobs & spur manufacturing. This, combined with its leader frequently switching between rival alliances, is causing anti-incumbency.
   
3. TDP - The TDP (Telugu Desam Party – “Party of the Telugu Land") follows a pro-Telugu ideology. It was founded as an alternative to the Congress hegemony, by emphasizing Telugu regional pride and serving as the party for farmers, backward castes and middle-class people. Since the 1990s, it has followed an economically liberal policy that has been seen as pro-business and pro-development as well as populist welfare measures.
   

The opposition I.N.D.I.A includes:

1. INC - The INC (Indian National Congress) is a big tent social-democratic/democratic-socialist party with its foundational pillars being equity, equality, and egalitarianism. They take broad commitments to secularism and class equality to be principal positions. The INC under Rahul Gandhi has taken strong positions on caste issues, shining light on inequities from past and current discrimination, and proposing active policy interventions. While the INC also holds a free-market/pro-liberalization consensus, they emphasize growing social and wealth inequality and seek inclusive and redistributive growth with strong state intervention. They also see some proposed liberalizing reforms to further inequality and take an 'anti-corporatist' position. They take a slightly less strong position to Indian foreign policy, stressing a more diplomatic approach (with minimal variance on actual positions to the incumbents). They embrace globalization in part, while emphasizing India's need for domestic development. They aim to industrialize India rapidly through stimulating private investment and aim to subsidize both supply and demand. They seek to maintain the Indian military with a focus on highly trained soldiers. They pioneered multi-alignment as the foreign policy for India.
   
2. AAP - The AAP (Aam Aadmi Party – “Common Man's Party"), part of INDIA coalition, currently holds power in two key states - Delhi and Punjab. Its chief figurehead and leader, Arvind Kejriwal, the Chief Minister of Delhi, was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate under an alleged liquor scam in the run up to elections. Barely a 10 year old party it has expanded very quickly to many states, running two of them, and now has national party status by the Election Commission of India (ECI). It leans centre-left to centre-right, with some play of soft Hindutva, while its economic platform comprises heavy spending in education, health, and free schemes of water and electricity. They rose to power on an anti-corruption program in 2013 and continues to have it as its central plank.
   
3. CPI(M) – The CPI(M) (Communist Party of India (Marxist)). They commies lol. The CPI(M) is one of the larger and more mainstrean communist parties in India. Since they operate within the Indian republic's constitution they have adopted more Indian characterisrics. They are primarily against privatisation in the public sector and in favour of universal education and healthcare. Their base has traditionally been in Kerala, one of the more developed states in India in terms of income levels and HCI. they're in favour of private sector reservations and in recent years have also been pro-FDI They promise non-aligned foreign policy, but largely are very anti-US and pro-China. They promise to restore Article 370 and oppose forceful seizure of land by government. They're one of the most influential parties in India due to a strong cadre and student union ecosystem. They've had an effect on the farmers protests as well as economic positions of the INDI Alliance.
   
4. DMK - The DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam - “Dravidian Progressive Federation") is a big tent broad left-wing party that is foundationally Dravidian (primarily Tamil) Nationalist, with strong emphasis on social equity and caste issues, while being staunchly secular and atheistic, and interventionist, statist, heavily welfarist, and industrialist in economic policy. They are primarily a regional party operating in the state of Tamil Nadu, led by M.K. Stalin, the state's current Chief Minister.
   
5. RJD - The RJD (Rashtriya Janata Dal – “National People’s Party”) is a caste-based (Muslims & Yadavs) political party in the Indian state of Bihar, which it ruled from 1990 to 2005. Its rule was one of extreme lawlessness & anarchy. It was called the “Jungle Raj”. Between 1990 & 2000, Bihar's per capita income and power consumption fell off a cliff due to mismanagement. Its CM, Lalu Prasad, was convicted of corruption in 2013.
   
6. SP - The SP (Samajwadi Party – “Socialist Party”) believes in creating a socialist society that operates on the principle of equality. Although the party previously ran on an anti-computer, anti-English, and anti-machinery platform, under its new national president Akhilesh Yadav, the party has made a 180° turn. Now, the Samajwadi Party declares itself to be the party of infrastructure while maintaining its commitment to social justice, with a special focus on teaching computer skills. The party's main base is in the state of Uttar Pradesh, which is the most populated state in India, with a population of 230 million. The only negatives associated with the party are the rampant dynasticism within its ranks and its perceived soft stance on law and order issues.
   
7. JMM - The JMM (Jharkhand Mukti Morcha – “Jharkhand Liberation Front") currently runs the govt of eastern state of Jharkhand. The party has historically centred tribal rights as its central plank and agitated for a new tribal state separate from Bihar until 2000, when their demands were met. It leans centre-left to left with their key issues being tribal control of land, mineral and mining rights, addressing issues of rehabilitation of tribals. The party is primarily run by the Soren family, with Champai Soren being its chief minister candidate in the current government after the last chief minister Hemant Soren was arrested by enforcement directorate. JMM is in alliance with the Indian national congress in the state, and part of the INDIA coalition for the Lok Sabha elections. They face charges of corruption and the image of dynastic politics.
   

The “It’s Complicated”, Unaligned, Split, and/or other Supplementary Parties include:

1. TMC - The TMC or AITC (All India Trinamool Congress) is a Bengali political party ruling over the state of West Bengal since 2011. It is led by Mamata Banerjee and her nephew Abhishek Banerjee. It is a center-left, welfarist, Bengali Nationalist party. It has been criticized for using heavy-handed authoritarian tactics against opposition leaders in the state, corruption, and political violence. It is credited with ending 34 years of communist rule in the state. West Bengal under the AITC has registered subpar economic performance and is largely stagnant. Pertinent to note Mamata used to be Congress leader till 1998, and AITC, in spite of being sympathetic towards the I.N.D.I.A. alliance at the national level, is fighting the Congress-Left alliance in West Bengal on all 42 seats.
   
2. AIADMK - The AIADMK (All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam – “All India Anna Dravidian Progressive Federation") is a broad centre-left/left-wing party adhering to foundational Dravidian philosophy, while emphasizing Tamil identity. Traditionally being less ethno-nationalist than their sister opposition party the DMK, they adhere to broad welfarist left-wing populism, focusing on social justice and communal equity, while being less economically statist than the DMK. They also focus primarily on Tamil Nadu as a regional party, currently led by Edappadi Palaniswami.
   
3. Shiv Sena - The Shiv Sena (“Army of Shivaji”) was founded by Bal Thackeray in 1966 as a populist, xenophobic party, although the party gradually added Hindutva ideology to its anti non-Maharashtrian plank. It was the long time senior partner to the BJP in Maharashtra till Narendra Modi's popularity caused a change in the dynamics. After power sharing talks with the BJP failed in 2019, the Shiv Sena switched alliances to join hands with their long time rivals in Congress and NCP in an arrangement that made Bal Thackeray’s son Uddhav Thackeray the Chief Minister of Maharashtra. In 2022 again, The Majority of Shiv Sena politicians led by Eknath Shinde rebelled against the top leadership to ally again with the BJP, taking control of the party and toppling the Uddhav Thackeray government. The splinter group led by Uddhav Thackeray is called SS (UBT) and it is allied with the Congress in the INDIA Alliance.
   
4. NCP – The NCP (Nationalist Congress Party) were founded in 1998 by Sharad Pawar and a few others who left the Congress in 1998 after Sonia Gandhi was made Congress president. Despite it's formation, the NCP was a long term ally of the Congress sharing virtually the same ideology. In 2023 however, like the Shiv Sena, In a rebellion led by Sharad Pawar's nephew Ajit, a Majority of NCP politicians switched alliances to support the BJP and took control of the party. Like the Shiv Sena, the Splinter group led by Sharad Pawar and his daughter is called NCP (SP) and it's allied with the Congress in the INDIA Alliance
   
5. YSRCP - The YSRCP (Yuvjana Sramika Rythu Congress Party – “Youth, Labour, & Farmer Congress Party”) was founded by the son of an old congress Chief Minister after he was denied the role of Chief Minister after his father. It's a populist centre-of-left party with strong focus on welfare schemes and cash benefits. It's mired in controversy due to its dynastic nature, its ties to Christian Fundamentalism and American Missionaries targeting the marginalized.
   
6. BRS - The BRS (Bharatiya Rashtra Samithi – “Indian National Council”) was formed originally with a single-point agenda of creating a separate Telangana state with Hyderabad as its capital. They are largely neoliberal and are credited with rapid economic growth in Telangana.
   
7. BJD – The BJD (Biju Janata Dal – “Biju’s People’ Platform”) was formed by Naveen Pattnaik the son of the former CM of Oddisha, Biju Pattnaik. It’s a Odia regional party with a strong focus on poverty upliftment through welfare policies and equitable economic growth.
   
8. BSP - The BSP (Bahujan Samaj Party - "Majority Community Party") is a center-left party in the state of Uttar Pradesh, which was started to uplift Dalits and other marginalized communities in India by Kanshi Ram. Its current party president is Mayawati. BSP is considered as one of the biggest parties in India as per vote share, although it's currently in decline. At its height, this party had a strong base in many states across north India, but now it's only limited to the state of Uttar Pradesh, which is one of the largest states in India with a population of 230 million. There are strong suspicions of BSP working in secret with BJP, and maybe that's why the party is not fighting this election enthusiastically. Although they can still make the competition interesting on a few seats in UP.
   

OTHER KEY ISSUES -

1. Political Dynasticism:

Although dynastism is thought to be a good fix for internal chaos in a party, the current political leader of the Congress, Rahul Gandhi, is a fourth-generation dynast who has to carry the political baggage of everything which went wrong during the rule of his grandmother and great-grandfather.
Also because one family has been controlling the Congress for decades, it has caused various state-level leaders to either form their own party or join another one. They see no future in the Congress anymore because the door to leadership is always closed for them. This has destroyed the ground level cadre of Congress party in many key states.
Rahul Gandhi’s privilege combined with the lack of any real political acumen so far has led to the INC taking damage due to is infamy.
Nepotism and dynastic politics has been a key issue throughout the last 10 years as BJP positions itself as the ‘common man’s party’

1. The Ram Mandir:

A land dispute originating from the alleged destruction of a Hindu Temple, replaced by a Mosque built allegedly atop the site (the Babri Masjid) in the 16th century allegedly by Mughal Empror Babur in present day Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, the proposed birthplace of the Hindu deity Lord Ram.
Following a century of sporadic conflict, from 1853 to 1949, a revivalist movement in the 1980's would lead to rising communal tensions, culminating in the 1992 destruction of the Ram Temple by Hindu Nationalists and devotees.
The legal conflict over the land would continue until 2019, when the Supreme Court of India issued the controversial ruling that the land be handed over to government trust for the construction of a Ram Temple, with seperate land being allotted to the local Muslim community for construction of a Mosque.
Almost all elements of the dispute remain mired in controversy. From the historical and religious associations of Ayodhya with Ram, the existence of a definitively Hindu structure, the alleged deliberate destruction of the said temple, the times and events of construction and use, the participants, planning, and events of the 1992 destruction, the ASI Archeological Surveys that served as key evidence for the Supreme Court being tampered and politicised by both sides of the politcal aisle, the legality of the ruling itself, and other surrounding issues regarding justice against those alleged to have partaken in the destruction of the Babri Masjid.

1. Foreign Policy:

The BJP is campaigning on building a multi-aligned foreign policy where India is seen as the world’s friend as well as an upcoming regional power. This was at its peak during India’s G20 presidency. Many Indians claim the rise of India’s global stature is an electoral issue. This can be seen in the popularity of the government’s anti-terror operations in both Pakistan and beyond. The resurgence of an interventionist foreign policy has proven to be popular in projecting the strongman image of Modi. The country’s commitment to it’s strategic autonomy and multi-alignment have been a fixture right since Nehru.
SUPPLEMENTARY SOURCES:

It's time we talk about a growing problem in this subreddit.
The term "braindead style". Nobody knows wjat it means, nobody seems to be able to agree upon what the "braindead styles" are, and it's just you coping for your inexperience fighting against certain styles.
The fact of the matter is there is only ONE truly "braindead" style in the game, and I wouldn't even call it that, because it's meant to have a high skill floor.
Turtle. The style is meant to be unpunishable, with its amazing block, decent startup M1s that pack a nice punch to them, with a speedy M2 that can take the cap off of an opponent. The style is meant for new players, therefore, is meant to be easy to use. This is because it's based off Ippo when he just started boxing. The style gives new players a chance to compete and keep up with the competition. It was absolutely genius of drowning to include this within the game.
Onto my next point, there are NO braindead styles in the game. EVERY SINGLE STYLE in the game requires technique, planning, and its own playstyle to use. You won't like hearing this, but this includes Hawk, Hitman, Wolf, etc etc. Just because you keep getting your ass handed to you by players using this style DOES NOT mean the style takes no skill.
Just like the creator himself says, not one style is better than the other. The higher up you go in the style rarity just means that they will look cooler. A good example of this is Smash. Smash is a phenomenal style when in the right hands, but it's not a "pretty" or "fun" style to use.
So it's time we stop using this term, and move on to critiquing those who use this simple minded saying. I will personally no longer debate with those who use this term, as it just shows that they have no idea what they are talking about.

Many players are not excited to talk about lands. It’s arguably the most boring part of MTG.
But we should look more closely at them because they account for around 40% of your main deck.
Think about that. 40% of the cards you will see while playing MTG are lands. Yet, we hardly see articles talking about this huge chunk of your deck.
I get it. Lands are boring compared to exciting creatures and spells. However, if you do the work of analyzing the lands of a format, you will gain an advantage over the competition because most players don’t do it.
To help you get started with this process, I’ve written this guide as a basic intro for how to think about the meta by looking at its lands.

Only Basic Lands

Imagine a format where the only lands available are:
Plains\ Island\ Swamp\ Mountain\ Forest
Wut?!
You’re probably wondering, “Why are we doing this?”
Well, it turns out one of the best ways to learn card game theory is to simplify the game by a lot. This helps you to see concepts more clearly.
For example, one of the best poker books is Play Optimal Poker. Poker is a very complex game so the author sets up a toy game with just three cards: Jack, Queen, and King.
The simple toy game has helped many people become better poker players including myself.
MTG is even more complex than poker so we’re going to set up toy metagames to help us understand the theory.
Ok, with that out of the way, in this “basic land only” format, which decks are more likely to succeed?
The best decks will probably be mono-colored.
If you try to play a two-color deck with 12 mountains and 12 forests, it won't be very consistent.
From a meta perspective, to play two colors, the cards in your deck need to be much stronger than the cards in a mono-color deck. This is because consistency is crucial to winning games. If you can't cast your spells due to a poor mana base, you'll lose. To overcome this drawback, you need to be compensated with a much higher power level from your nonland cards.
Historically, we've seen this scenario before. In a format without dual lands, players had to ensure their two-color decks were powerful enough to justify the inconsistent mana base.
Check out the winning deck of Pro Tour Osaka 2002: Simic Madness. Its mana base is an abomination. 🤣
13 Forest\ 9 Island\ 1 Tarnished Citadel
Tarnished Citadel can give either color of mana but it deals 3 damage to you each time!
But the deck did well because the Simic cards were powerful enough to overcome the crappy mana base.
I wouldn’t try this at home though unless you are a very advanced player or the deck has proven itself in competitive tournaments.
We all have our biases. We want to believe the cards we’re playing are more powerful than they really are. This leads many of us into playing suboptimal mana bases that are not worth it.
In a format with only basic lands, just stick to mono-color decks.

Adding Allied Color Pain Lands

Let’s add these five lands to our toy metagame.
Adarkar Wastes (W/U)\ Underground River (U/B)\ Sulfurous Springs (B/R)\ Karplusan Forest (G)\ Brushland (G/W)
What types of decks are going to do well in this format?
Now we can play two colors. We don’t need a huge power discrepancy over mono-color decks because the two-color decks became more consistent.
A two-color deck that used to be Tier 2 could very well become the best deck in the new format. That’s the power of a more consistent mana base. It increases your win rate by a lot.
Also, note that we only added the allied color pain lands. We did not add the enemy color versions like Llanowar Wastes (B/G).
Therefore, if you’re choosing between an aggro Boros or Gruul deck, pick Gruul unless you have clear evidence that the Boros power level is much higher.
This type of meta change, where only certain color pairs get a dual land, has happened in past Standard formats. Sometimes it’s like this example, where only allied colors get a boost. Other times, it’s a hodgepodge of additions like three allied colors and three enemy colors.
What you’ll find in these situations is the Tier 1 two-color decks are usually the ones with a dual land. For the lacking color pairs, the lower consistency is often too hard to overcome.
What about thinking in terms of the three main deck archetypes: aggro, midrange, and combo?
How do the archetypes stack up against each other?
When analyzing the metagame, check if the multi-color lands come into play untapped on turn one. Pain lands do, which benefits aggro. Aggro decks want to win with aggressive creatures on turn one.
On the other hand, control decks want to play longer games and they usually don’t have important cards to cast on turn one.
Also, these are pain lands so they cause pain. Aggro doesn’t mind. They are designed to kill before the life loss matters.
But the lands are a nonbo in control. As a control player, you don’t want to have a pain land while facing an aggro deck. The pain land damages you, making it easier for the aggro deck to kill you.
Midrange decks are also at a disadvantage, though not as much as control decks. The difference between midrange and control is length of games. Control decks will play more turns, which means taking more damage from the lands.
Therefore, if you’re comparing an aggro Gruul deck, a midrange Selesnya deck, and an Azorius control deck with equal power levels, go with aggressive strategy.

Replacing Pain Lands with Scry Lands

What if, instead of allied pain lands, we replaced them with the allied scry lands?
Temple of Enlightenment (W/U)\ Temple of Deceit (U/B)\ Temple of Malice (B/R)\ Temple of Abandon (G)\ Temple of Plenty (G/W)
We’ve actually had Standard formats where these lands were among the best lands.
In this metagame, aggro takes a big hit. Aggro is predicated on having aggressive one-drops. These lands are a hinderance to that strategy because they enter tapped.
Midrange and control have zero to few important plays on turn one. These decks thrive in a meta full of tapped lands like scry lands.

Pain Lands + Scry Lands

Let’s add back the pain lands. In fact, let’s include the enemy-colored versions of both pain lands and scry lands. So now, our meta looks like this:
10 Pain Lands\ 10 Scry Lands
Now we have something that looks like an actual Standard metagame.
How should we think about this format?
I think this is where midrange has the advantage over aggro and control.
Aggro doesn’t want to play scry lands. Control doesn’t want to play pain lands.
But midrange can use both lands effectively. It does not have important turn one plays like control so it does not mind the scry land drawback. And while pain lands are better for aggro decks, midrange are okay with them. Midrange games end faster than control games, so it won't take as much damage from pain lands.
Also, based on recent times, midrange tends to get good lifegain cards, which neutralizes the damage from pain lands. In the current Standard format, we see these midrange lifegain cards doing well in the format:
Deep Cavern Bat\ Sheoldred, the Apocalypse\ Tranquil Frillback\ Gix's Command\ Aclazotz, Deepest Betrayal
Control decks can also have good lifegain cards but not as many as midrange, at least based on recent history. The Wandering Emperor is a top card in Standard. It works well in control decks by providing lifegain to survive against aggro.
With all the additional lands, you can now play eight dual lands in a two-color midrange deck. Going from one to two colors generally results in a higher power level. Therefore, if you’ve been playing a mono-color deck, it’s time to ask yourself if it’s worth it to add a color.
You’ll lose some consistency but not much since there are now eight dual lands. Oftentimes, it’s worth it to add a color to your deck when new dual lands enter the format.

Five Tri-Lands Enter the Meta

Let’s add the five shard-colored tri-lands to the mix. So now, our meta is this:
10 Pain Lands\ 10 Scry Lands
Spara's Headquarters (G/W/U)\ Raffine's Tower (WB)\ Xander's Lounge (U/B/R)\ Ziatora's Proving Ground (B/G)\ Jetmir's Garden (G/W)
Hm… this is starting to look like the current Standard format.
We have a lot of options for multi-color. You really have to have a good reason to play just one color.
Also, three-color decks become a real possibility. I would stick with midrange or control decks because the tri-lands enter tapped.
Given that this meta is similar to current Standard, we can make some observations regarding the Tier decks. The top decks with three or more colors have a matching tri- land or they have another land(s) that allows them to consistently play many colors.
Esper Midrange has Raffine's Tower.
Domain is a base Bant deck that uses Spara's Headquarters. The deck only splashes a few late game cards in the fourth and fifth colors. You can often get away with an extra color or two if you’re playing base green because it is the color of mana fixing.
The rest of the top decks with three or more colors include Temur Analyst (Land Combo), Bant Toxic, and Legends.
Temur Analyst is able to play three-colors even without the matching tri land (in this case, matching sac tri-land) because it plays 30 lands.
Bant Toxic has The Seedcore. Even with this land, the deck has the worst mana out of the top decks in Standard. It is a Tier 2 or 3 deck. If it had a better mana base, it might be a Tier 1 deck.
The Legends deck gets away with playing many colors because it plays 29 lands and has the five-color land, Plaza of Heroes. The deck can play 29 lands because it uses legendary lands like Otawara, Soaring City that can act as spells.
Notice there are no aggro decks with three colors or more except for Bant Toxic. The tapped nature of the tri-lands makes it prohibitive to play three-color aggro. Bant Toxic is an exception because it has an untapped colored land that pumps your creatures (The Seedcore).
This quick analysis of the current meta was more advanced than I intended but I hope it demonstrates how much lands affect a metagame.
You don't see Jeskai, Sultai, Abzan, or Mardu doing well because it's tough to play three colors without a tri-land. The exception is Temur because it can play 30 lands.
The analysis above is also important because Standard rotates on August 2, 2024. On that date, the new expansion Bloomburrow will be released and four sets will leave the format.
Many people may want to keep playing a three-color deck like Esper post-rotation. Maybe they found success with Esper in the recent past. Or they like the play patterns of the Esper deck.
However, I would advise against that because all the Esper tri-lands including the sac lands will leave the format. This means Esper will be much weaker unless Bloomburrow has an Esper tri-land.
This seems very unlikely based on current set information. From this wiki, Bloomburrow has “double cycles”, which are two-color combinations, not three.
Let me save you some time. Don’t build three-color decks for post-rotation. You will build bad decks and lose games.
(I'm actually writing this as a warning to myself. I have a weakness for dipping into an additional color when I shouldn't.)
Go with two colors because there are many dual lands. If you really want to play three colors, look at green because it has mana fixing.
Also, since there are many dual lands, I don’t recommend building mono-color decks as a general rule.

Pop Quiz

I hope you found this basic guide helpful. Let's take a quiz to give you some practice for analyzing the format in terms of lands.
For the following toy metagames, ask yourself, “How does it affect aggro, midrange and control?”
Answer the question in your head for each meta. This is very important for learning and self improvement.
Then, click the spoiler section to see my thoughts.
Meta #1: Fast Lands
Example: Razorverge Thicket
This meta has the 10 fast lands. All the two-color pairs are represented. Fast lands enter tapped unless you control two or fewer other lands.
This meta favors aggro. Fast lands are good on turns 1, 2, and 3, which is the sweet spot for aggro. The lands are not good with cards that cost four or more. Midrange and control have more of those cards than aggro.
Meta #2: Slow Lands
Example: Deserted Beach
This meta has the 10 slow lands. All the two-color pairs are represented. Slow lands enter tapped unless you control two or more other lands.
This meta favors midrange and control. Slow lands are bad on turns 1 and 2. They are great afterwards. Midrange and control have more cards that cost three or more than aggro.
Meta #3: Creature Lands
Example: Restless Vents
This meta has 10 creature lands like the one above. All the two-color pairs are represented. The creature lands in this meta all enter tapped.
You may think this helps aggro because the land can attack, but midrange and control also get a land that can block. Having a turn one play is so important for aggro that it gets dinged in this meta.

In my job I have to deal with both the DD/MM/YY and MM/DD/YY format depending on the circumstance.
It's always confusing trying to tell which one I should use and which one the other person is using.
Instead the internalal date standard should be written with the months as abbreviations for example 01JUN24. This way there can't be any possible confusion

I'm a bit out of the loop so I'd appreciate anyone who can update me. A quick note, I've been playing UCS for around a week now. At Score Match I played much longer, possibly a year and in that time as a free to play player I made it all the way to infinity, progress was slow and I only resorted to facebook captains when I was frustrated by the amount of times I'd been relegated from infinity arena. I stopped playing after they removed the facebook account feature and my progress was completely reset (does anyone know if they've made a recovery link for that yet? Idc for the game anymore but it still pissed me off at how stupid their action was)
I played score match quite a lot, always hovering in the relegation zone of infinity. I wasn't aware of a UDS (I believe that is Ultimate Draft Soccer which has been rebranded to UCS now) but I am playing UCS now. I have to say, even though I didn't experience UDS (which a lot of people are saying was incomplete and shouldn't have been abandoned for UCS) I am enjoying UCS a lot more than I ever enjoyed Score Match. I'll run through some pros and cons compared to Score Match
Pros:
Controls are so much more fun: Finally you can make runs with players or dribble, certainly makes it so much more fun when you can hold the ball for longer and wait for a quick player like my 85 rated Mbeumo to make the run on the last line of the defender. I also love how you can now have 2 players on the press, makes pressing a lot more rewarding and coordinated rather than just telling a forward to make a 30 yard sprint to try and close someone down. Defending as a result is much more stimulating. The runs especially make corners so fun to play, I usually play a short corner then a cutback and while not always successful, I usually always get a nice shot in because of that tactic.
using real players is a lot more fun: When I played the tutorial and saw Rashford and Leao I was instantly excited
the 20 second timer: It fucks passing at the back merchants so well.
Getting a player rating boost if you have 3 players of the same nationality: Pretty fun feature. I have Pallois, Capoue, Gonalons and Mandanda who all get 1 player rating boost which is a nice feature
Cons:
I am not a fan of player ratings: So back in Score Match, even if you got a special player, they'd still be at a level 1 so they'd be slightly better than a normal level 1 player but obviously not great. That all changes with UCS. If you unlock Messi you're getting a 90 (or 91 rated I'm not sure what his base rating is) rated player who is so much better than every other player in the game. It's not the best, sometimes it's managable as the rest of their team might be worse but very recently I played a guy with Messi, Belotti, Modric and Thiago Silva. I still beat them cause they were pretty ass but I was shocked at how unfair the match making was. It's still very fluctating, somedays I get a 82 average team somedays it's a 76 rated average squad team. I think that skill plays a much bigger role in the game now, back then the sight of someone playing a throughball to the juiced up speedster would always piss me off or someone lumping it forward to a hammer so it's not awful.
The player contracts: I don't run out often and at least there's an ad that depending on the rating of your player can give you a few games but it's just such an obvious cash grab move
Shortage of currency: Unlike in Score Match where you get currency for winning a game (maybe this changes in higher arenas, I'm only in arena 6) or scoring 10 goals a day (which has been replaced by daily objectives I guess) there's a noticeable shortage of cash. I've never reached above 1500 in my bank whereas in Score Match I recall that I was easily capable of maintaining a 15000+ bank. It's not like things are cheaper either.
I would love to see a page or table within the game where I can see all collectable players: I've been able to afford 2 legendary chests from the shop so far which would be 1380 gems, that'd get you like a 81 rated player from the shop. Obviously not much at all (would upgrade some members of my team but it's not a sizeable upgrade that I'd be jumping for it) but I'd just like to know what would be affordable so I can save up some gems. I've been getting complete duds from the legendary chest so far.
Things I'm a bit divided on:
I'm not sure if I like the fact that I can only use 2 formations for the season: I don't know if this is just me, but I am only able to use a 3232 and a 3511 formation. I think it's fun as I would probably never touch these formations if I had access to all of them as they aren't really meta (although, I haven't really noticed any OP fullbacks in the game, I've only seen 2 so far and that was Reguilon, Tete (which I own) and Bellerin so a back 3 seems to be the best option so far. I just kinda wished they would give us more variety in formations.
Don't like the loss of mechanics: For example, when your keeper clears the ball outside of their box or when your players win a contested aerial duel, you are no longer able to control where the ball goes. I'm not a big fan of it, I know that it used to be a pretty big asset for timewasters but with the 20 second clock I don't think it's something that needs to be removed from the game. I guess it does make sense at the same time though as people playing it to their level 10 hammer that was borrowed from a facebook friend would piss me off like nothing else in this world. I think removing the ability to control a ball in a 50/50 header makes sense but the keeper just clearing it when it's outside the box makes zero sense to me, keep one, change the other.
I don't really know if height adds anything to the game: I haven't been able to notice a sizeable difference with the addition of height. My 173 tall Mbeumo as he's quick can usually avoid aerial duels and reach a ball quicker than anyone else but it seems rather randomised as to who wins the header.

Here it is. Every track that was put out by the label Fischkopf Hamburg, from all records they released. Listed, ordered, with a little comment / short review / description added to each one. Note that the "chart" concept might be a bit misleading here: Essentially, we love *all* Fischkopf tracks and think they are great. So, if a track is at number 101 or 124 in this chart, this does not mean it's a bad track - to the contrary! It's all good stuff (but some is a little better ;) We just thought the charts format would be a good idea; to present the label's catalogue, increase awareness of its music, and give somewhat of an overview of the material the label released. (And some of the comments aim to be in the typical tongue-in-cheek, lighthearted attitude, and style of the 90s hardcore fanzines)
More info about Fischkopf Hamburg can be found here:
https://hardcoretechnoprimer.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-story-of-fischkopf.html
But let us begin:
1.Taciturne - Phenprocoumon
very inventive hardcore techno track. a good example of the kind of music Fischkopf Records released. commodore amiga hardcore sound. uses broken, unusual rhythms, not typical 4/4 hardcore techno sequences. very noisy and abrasive. at the same time, a "far eastern" ambient melody is used in this track, which is very calm and soothing. this creates a very interesting clash between the harsh, abrasive elements, and the calm melody.
2.Auto-Psy - Oxyde
A legendary track made by Stella Michelsen. Hardcore Techno. From France. Industrial. Raw. Surreal. Manipulated vocals. Ambient elements. Immortal.
3.No Name - Latex
Aggressive Overture produced by Poka Michelson. Extremely unorthodox. Noisy. Close to avantgarde music. Glorious.
4.Fields Of Defacement - Urticated
Acidcore. Experimental. Project by Lasse Steen. Unusual sound. Hypnotic melody. Very Techno-like.
5.Christoph De Babalon - Babylon 90210
Dreamy. Futuristic. Sci-Fi. Jungle, Breakcore. Done on an amiga 500. By a producer from Hamburg.
6.Amiga Shock Force - Keep Your Enemies Close
By cult producers from germany. Not really hardcore techno. Almost soft, calm. Use of breakbeats. Commodore Amiga sound. Digital, lofi, sizzling. Very good.
7.Cybermouse - My Dorectives
Proto-Doomcore techno track. Very unusual. Entrancing. Techno-style. Drone that gets modulated throughout the track. Mid-tempo. Use of loops. Creates a surreal feel.
8.Eradicator - You're Lieing Pig
The only breakcore track on the "Agit Prop" LP. very lo fi, very thin sound. strange sound fx, bleeps, almost videogame-like sounds. overdriven breakbeat rhythm running throughout the track. sparsely used other elements such as distorted guitars and an aggressive vocal sample. great work by Patric Catani under his "Eradicator" alias.
9.Fields Of Defacement - Bang-Bang (Live In Hamburg 96)
Live recording. Brutal. Acidcore. With gabber and general hardcore elements. Entrancing. Exalted. Shows the power of a hardcore techno live performance.
10.Taciturne - Mourning
Probably the best known track by Taciturne next to "Der Toten". was included in Manu Le Malin's "Biomechanik" compilation. Use of ambient sounds next to a midtempo, industrial hardcore techno drum. very minimal, very few elements, not even hi hats snares or other percussion apart from the drum. crispy noisy 8 bit commodore amiga sound. legendary track.
11.Eradicator - Thou Shall Kill
one of the best tracks on the agit prop LP. fast beats, guitars, synth, noises, and a strange vocal.
12.Cybermouse - Overreacting
electro beats. non four-to-the-floor rhythm. commodore amiga sound.
13.Monoloop - Underwater Trumpet
very interesting. unique early breakcore. drone, ambient sounds mixed with hard and rough breakbeats. very surreal, futuristic. this track could only have been produced in hamburg.
14.Auto-Psy - Neutron
experimental merciless distorted ambient hardcore techno.
15.Burning Lazy Persons - If The Truth Be Known
very brutal. one of the hardest by burning lazy persons. guitars and fast beats.
16.Orderly Chaos - Melt Away Love
pure ambient track. interesting, repeated melody. wonderful track.
17.No Name - Control
one of the most classic and most fierce hardcore tracks. if you haven't heard this one, you are missing out!
18.Mathey Olivier - Residential Volume
heavy and loud drums, noises, funny intro.
19.R.A.W. - Cold War Memory Nightmare
great, great early breakcore. interesting use of sounds and "melody". also a good but haunting cold-war feel.
20.EPC - Where Do You Go?
perfect hardcore track, with radar / space-transmission like sounds. very industrial.
21.Fields Of Defacement - Attached
one of the most bittersweet dark and disturbing melodies in hardcore techno. set to arrhythmic beats and fragile manipulated percussion.
22.Eradicator - Titan
included on the 90s hardcore cd compilation "mururoa test 1". truly experimental hard electronics.
23.Amiga Shock Force - Psycore Pt. 1
slow intro. amiga computer sounds. hissing, noisy, overdriven. surreal feel.
24.Taciturne - In Nomine Dei Nostri Satanas Luciferi Excelsi
samples the chuch of satan. non 4/4 beats. slow, distorted, noisy. dark and scary.
25.Trash Enemy HQ - Pestilence
truly interesting track. acid sounds. very dark and epic melody. no real hardcore beats and rhythm. close to industrial.
26.Eradicator - Brujeria
perfect bloodthirsty "e-de cologne"-style gabber. shouts and heavy metal guitars.
27.Christoph De Babalon - Pleased With Being Alive
one of our favorite christoph de babalon tracks. pure future and cyberdelic feel. a true classic.
28.Taciturne - Der Toten
the one and only fischkopf track that became a real "hit". was in high demand in the dutch gabber scene and ended up on countless compilations. as you probably already know this track, I don't need to describe it here :-)
29.Cybermouse - War Is Hell
maybe the most brutal track by cybermouse. early speedcore. very minimal. anti-war message.
30.M.C.P. - Overload 30303
arhythmic hardcore inferno
31.Auto-Psy - If
when i played this track, a guy once asked me "what kind of terrorist music is this?". good description!
32.Eradicator - M.C.P.
samples the movie tron. genuine 90s experimental hardcore.
33.No Name - Ydroid
Slick and without mercy.
34.Taciturne - Haematopan F
hardcore to blow your teeth out.
35.Cybermouse - Gulp
also one of cybermouse's most hardcore tracks. midtempo bounding 909 next to acid sounds.
36.Christoph De Babalon - I Own Death
the first track on his fisch 12". long, long intro. then it unleashes its full force with distorted breakbeats and a powerful melody.
37.Eradicator - Used Against Us (Remix)
Experimental gabber, ambient intro, rough sound, metal guitars. Juno hoover rave sounds. Murderous, nasty, and epic.
38.Auto-Psy - Escape
one of the most outstanding "hardcore" tracks ever. a symphony of drones, fx, noises and bassdrums. over seven minutes.
39.Burning Lazy Persons - Hyper Bitch
an early speed record. brutal and shocking.
40.No Name - Koma
so psycho, so evil, so mean. can you take it?
41.Auto-Psy - Go Out
a submarine is out of control, explosions shake the vessel, metal clanking is heard, and people scream in terror. then the sounds fade out into the cold dark blue depths.
42.Monoloop - Underwater Feelings (Live Alone Mix)
one of the most interesting tracks on this ep. fake live act. ferocious early breakcore with sophisticated production values.
43.Monoloop - Underwater Feelings
very sweet, very relaxed ambient sounds, mixed with hard breakbeats. pianos, water splashing, whales' whistling.
44.Amiga Shock Force - 24 Hour Connection
another true amigacore classic! ruthless and heavy.
45.Cybermouse - Datenvernichtung
comparable to early french noisecore. nice and evil.
46.Taciturne - Phenylephrin-Hydrochlorid
everyone knows "mourning" and "der toten", but this one is great too. proto-doomcore with a haunting drone, then gets faster towards the end.
47.Eradicator - Worringen
Heavy track with pounding steel drums, noisy synths, screams, everything you need.
48.Eradicator - Fucking Bitch Called Walker
Is that patric screaming? Menacing uncoventional hardcore gabber techno.
49.Cybermouse - Noishead
Early noise hardcore. The noise treatment for hardcore heads.
50.No Name - 01100010
didn't the german dance act "das modul" have a similar track title? but this one is hardcore, for sure!
51.Cybermouse - Adrenalin Structure
first track of the first fischkopf release. epic. was first released on an commodore amiga diskette magazine. not 4/4 hardcore, but wicked and strange electro sounds.
52.Monoloop - Chill Out
breakcore madness in between being chilled (as indicated by the piano) and being killed (as indicated by the screams).
53.M.C.P. - Overload MS 50
very aphex twin like, great experimental hardcore.
54.EPC - Autoplasie
Noisecore for your mind!
55.Burning Lazy Persons - Frd
a hammer coming down on your skull.
56.P. Server - Wires (Break)
a recording of audio wires that have been broken?
57.Fields Of Defacement - Uptight
melancholic melodic hard core tech-no?
58.EPC - R 624-2
Techno chopped up and turned into noise. Very analogue feel.
59.EPC - Persistance
Oh what a beatiful noise!
60.Eradicator - I Cum Blood
Evil experimental gabber insanity.
61.Auto-Psy - Ovoide
first track on this great ep. sounds that invoke the images of a runaway train accelerating straight to hell.
62.Auto-Psy - Andropose
the tranquil intro might give you the impression it's time to relax now, on this ep. but then the beats hammer on.
63.Eradicator - Destroy It Yourself (Remix)
March into hardcore disturbia..
64.Taciturne - Liquid Theatre
strange ambient intro. cult track.
65.M.C.P. - Overload RZ-1
hardcore machines got out of control and force people to dance to their death.
66.Auto-Psy - Clear
"null... null... null..." when i put on this record for the first time, i totally fell in love with this sound and all that followed.
67.P. Server - Ratings (Terror Unit H.Q.)
cool monotonous acidcore track.
68.M.C.P. - Overload Sigma
mental gabber up your cranium.
69.Amiga Shock Force - Sex, Mord Und Kunst
one of the fastest tracks of its era. hyperfast beats next to crazy rap samples.
70.Taciturne - Boys Don't Cry (Revisited)
robert smith would be proud!
71.No Name - Black Dream
help me. i hear voices. they are distorted. just as the drums.
72.No Name - 0.Vin .I
slowing down a bit. but not one bit less relentless.
73.Mathey Olivier - Easy Recording Aera
the last track of the last official fischkopf release. going out with a bang! and it's good-bye.
74.No Name - Kamasutra
i wonder what kamasutra technique inspires one to produce such devilish hardcore from hell like this. but then, it might be better to not find out.
75.Eradicator - Us Against Us
not as good as the revisit, but great nevertheless. tough experimental gabber.
76.Amiga Shock Force - Violent Geisha
mix between breakcore and early speedcore with an amiga feel.
77.Burning Lazy Persons - Poisoned Radio Wave
ooh, painful audio signals and overly distorted hardcore drums. i'm luving it.
78.Eradicator - Streptocock Gee
one of two true breakcore tracks patric catani did for fischkopf. excellent!
79.Taciturne - Praxis Dr. Fischer
Legendary drone-speedcore track. Doctor Fischer has the cure for you! Just go to his praxis.
80.Monoloop - The Dreamer
already a foreshadowing of the "ambient-breakcore" on fischkopf 13. epic!
81.Burning Lazy Persons - Garden Of The Permanent
this is crazy!
82.Burning Lazy Persons - Nakano Shit
man, this is some of the roughest hardcore that i ever heard.
83.EPC - Infectious Properties
these sounds bash right through your skull.
84.Fields Of Defacement - Found & Lost
Stones and flowers on the ground We are found and lost But love is gonna save us
85.Burning Lazy Persons - Fake
"die maschinen die maschinen die maschinen"? whatever. this machine kills!
86.Eradicator - Impulse To Destroy
the other "oversize" track on the agit prop LP. fierce drums and percussion. plenty of noise.
87.Eradicator - Distorted
Very distorted indeed! Fantastic.
88.Eradicator - Split Wide Open
Powerful radical hardcore with acid elements.
89.Burning Lazy Persons - Catastro
The overdose of noise and drums.
90.Taciturne - Krach-Aran-RMX
Now this is just krach! But a good one.
91.Eradicator - Cologne Boring M.F.
Hyperfast mental metal hardcore madness.
92.Orderly Chaos - 45m
The so real dark ambient experience.
93.Burning Lazy Persons - Kone Kane Dayone
a very very wild ride.
94.P. Server - Pulley
excellent lasse steen production. has some rave elements.
95.Amiga Shock Force - Mass Appeal Madness
one of the most "poppy" tracks on fischkopf as it samples james brown. crazy hardcore gabber.
96.Jean Bach - Tausend Stimmen
very crazy and over the top track by jean bach. heavy distortion.
97.Eradicator - Destroy It Yourself
Sepultura samples, weird noises, gabber drums - perfect!
98.Christoph De Babalon - Promise, Broken
total future psychedelic breakcore.
99.Trash Enemy H. Q. - Braintraining
noise and distortion with a painful sound without drums or anything else.
100.Taciturne - Avarie De Machine
made up of sounds of heavy machinery? great!
101.No Name - Message
we got the message and the message was clear.
102.No name - Help
get on a hardcore trip faster than light.
103.Eradicator - Starving
epic ambient intro.
104.No Name - Start E·nd
it starts and ends in torturous hardcore agony.
105.No Name - A
"a" total french insane techno track.
106.Monoloop - Second Trumpet
in style similar to the other 3 tracks on fisch 13. has a heavy jazz feel.
107.Shangoe - Army Of Darkness
interesting breakcore out of hamburg.
108.Eradicator - Agitprop Troop
interesting noise experiment.
109.Eradicator - Forkboy
early speedcore track. guitars and hyperspeed drums.
110.Taciturne - Dexpanthenol
riots of noise, distortion, and brutality.
111.Monoloop - Drum Da Style
stylish early breakcore.
112.Mathey Olivier - Second Transmission
mad scientist hardcore.
113.Mathey Olivier - Well Done!
the acid sounds from outer space invade the second part of this great french hardcore track. well done indeed!
114.P. Server - Epigraph
lasse steen delivers with this great dark acidtechno track.
115.Taciturne - Krank
total "kranker" hardcore!
116.P. Server - Plunger
all power to the 303!
117.P. Server - Psave
legit 90s acid hardcore. rough production values, almost as if mastered from cassette tape.
118.P. Server - Dispatching
hardcore up your acid!
119.Fields Of Defacement - Dark.R
the 808 gets the full-on distortion treatment.
120.Eradicator - Enter Three Witches
one of two "oversize" tracks on the agit prop LP. on four-to-the floor beats. ambient outro.
121.Eradicator - Widerstand
noisy agit prop sounds!
122.P. Server - Banging Happening
gabber-acid.
123.Fields Of Defacement - Corkscrew
Wonderful monotonous hardcore without bleeps or melodies.
124.Amiga Shock Force - Shoot 'em Breax
A perfect early breakcore track. Hip hop and guitars.
125.Cybermouse - Obstreperous
Very experimental techno / hardcore track. Acid like sounds, great use of percussion, and a sci-fi feel.
126.P. Server - Metal Disposition
acid gabber brutality.
127.Burning Lazy Persons - "R"
vicious nice and nasty track by nawoto suzuki.
128.Burning Lazy Persons - Dorami De Onanie (240 Vers.)
faster onanism.
129.Johnny Ego - Untitled
again an interesting hamburg breakbeat track.
130.Orderly Chaos - Pine
painful sounds and pure ambient.
131.R.A.W. - Sudden Death
the other r.a.w. track from the otaku compilation. impressive as well!
132.EPC & A.N.T.I. - Sharpomatic
noisy hardcore with a total "piss off!" attitude.
133.Burning Lazy Persons - Dorami De Onanie
onanism will give you a mental disorder that allows you to create wonderful nasty hardcore tracks like this.
134.Burning Lazy Persons - Fish Tenpuraaaaa
fish fried well, and served for this solid hardcore dish.
135.Burning Lazy Persons - Mongolian Chop
typical nawoto suzuki. mental and dangerous. awesome.
136.Burning Lazy Persons - Niko Niko Satujin Dan
ooh I'm freaking out.
137.Taciturne - Boys Don't Cry RMX
the original "remix" version. i'm also lovin' it.
138.Taciturne - Evil Dead
a kick straight to the face.
139.P. Server - Intensioner
wonderful acid techno.
140.Eradicator - Liebe Und Verbrechen
very strange and surreal gabber track.
141.Monoloop - For The Lord
monumental, experimental and exceptional breakcore with a runtime of over 7 minutes.
142.Burning Lazy Persons - Rotter…damn
funny piss take on rotterdam hardcore. includes a piano, but not in a typical happy gabber way!
143.Burning Lazy Persons - T.C.H.C.
nasty and nice.
144.Monoloop - Kills Again
a track to die for.
145.Monoloop - Free Man
noone is ever free. except the experimental hardcore resistance! (or, in this case, early breakcore).
146.Taciturne - Nightchildren RMX
lullaby of terror for the night children.
147.Taciturne - Mo Punk RMX
do you feel lucky, punk?
148.Monoloop - She's A Lion
early breakcore from hamburg
So, that's it! Over and out. Did you like our charts? Let us know!

So yes, Y-M-D > M-D/Y > D/M/Y.
(The international standard/best is Y-M-D. Knowing why is a prerequisite to this arguement, read up on ISO 8601)
Logical Steps to Conclusion:

1. M-D and D-M are the most commonly confused and switched numbers in current date formats. This is a combination of A) The year is a unique 4 digits and B) We often don't say the year
2. Then in confusing situations like this, we should not rely on context which can be absent or misunderstood (especially since we often leave out the year). Instead, there should a preferred standard.
3. Then the standard should be the international standard, M-D, because it maintains the international standard and also maintains the correct ordering (again, read up on ISO 8601 if you do not understand)
4. Therefore, while Y-M-D is the best, M-D/Y is the second best and D/M/Y is the worst.

If you disagree with this, you need to prove one of the steps wrong
Further example: Which date format has the most confusing time reading the international standard (truncated year)

International Standard Date	Can D-M understand?	Can M-D Understand?
01-01-01 to end of 2012	❌	❌
13-01-01 to end of 2031 (current/commonly used time)	❌ (thinks it is 13 Jan 2001 to 13 Dec 2031)	✅ (has to be 2013 Jan 01)
32-01-01 onwards	✅	✅

Side Note: For less confusion, my suggestion is to use - as next (then) and / as previous (of), so Y-M-D = year then month then day M-D/Y = month then day of year D/M/Y = day of month of year

Welcome to the monthly BetaReaders “Able to Beta” thread!
Thank you to all the beta readers who have taken the time to offer feedback to authors in this sub! In this thread, you may solicit “submissions” by sharing your preferences. Authors who are interested in critique swaps may post an offer here as well, but please keep top-level comments focused on what you’re willing to beta.
Older threads may be found here. Authors, feel free to respond to beta offers in those previous threads.

Thread Rules

• No advertising paid services.
• Top-level comments must be offers to beta and must use the following form (only the first field is required):
  • I am able to beta: [Required. Let authors know what you’re interested—or not interested—in reading. This can include mandatory criteria or simply preferences, which might relate to genre, length, completion status, explicit content, character archetypes, tropes, prose quality, and so on.]
  • I can provide feedback on: [Recommended. This might include story elements you often notice as a reader (prose, pacing, characterization, etc.), unique expertise you have through a profession or hobby (teaching, nursing, knitting, etc.), or other lived experiences that may be relevant (belonging to a marginalized group, being a parent, etc.).]
  • Critique swap: [Optional. If you’re only interested in—or would prefer—swapping manuscripts, please note that here, along with the title of and link to your beta request post.]
  • Other info: [Optional.]
• Beta offers should be specific. If you’re open to anything, or aren’t able to articulate specific criteria, then please refrain from commenting here. Instead, please browse the “First Pages” thread along with the rest of the sub—thanks to the formatting rules, posts are easily searchable by completion status, length, and genre.
• Authors: we recommend against direct messages/chats. Reply to comments instead. If you message multiple people with links to your post and/or manuscript, Reddit may flag your account as spam (site-wide).
• Authors may not spam. If a beta says they’re only looking for x and your manuscript is not x (or vice versa), please don’t contact them.
• Replies have no specific rules. Feel free to ask clarifying questions, share a link to your beta request if it seems to be a good fit, or even reply to your own comment with information about your manuscript if you’re requesting a critique swap.
• Please don't downvote rule-following users, even if they are not the right authobeta for you, as this can be discouraging to beta readers offering to volunteer their time as well as to authors requesting feedback. If you need to keep track of which comments you have reviewed, upvoting is a more positive alternative. Of course, if you see a rule-breaking comment, please report it to the mod team.

Thank you for contributing to our community!
For your copy-and-paste, fill-in-the-blanks convenience:
I am able to beta: _____
I can provide feedback on: _____
Critique swap: _____
Other info: _____

Welcome to the Psychology Research Thread!

Need participants? Looking for constructive criticism? In addition to the weekly discussion thread, the mods have instituted this thread for a surveys.
General submission rules are suspended in this thread, but all top-level comments must link to a survey and follow the formatting rules outlined below. Removal of content is still at the discretion of the moderators. Reddiquette applies. Personal attacks, racism, sexism, etc will be removed. Repeated violations may result in a ban. This thread will occasionally be refreshed.
In addition to posting here, post your surveys to samplesize and join the discussion at surveyresearch.
TOP-LEVEL COMMENTS
Top-level comments in this thread should be formatted like the following example (similar to samplesize):

• [Tag] Description (Demographic) Link
• ex. [Academic] GPA and Reddit use (US, College Students, 18+) Link
• Any further information-a description of the survey, request for critiques, etc.-should be placed in the next paragraph of the same top-level comment.

RESULTS
Results should be posted as a direct reply to the corresponding top-level comment, with the same formatting as the original survey.

• [Results] Description (Demographic) Link
• ex. [Results] GPA and Reddit use (US, College Students, 18+) Link

[Tags] include:

• Academic, Industrial, Causal, Results, etc.

(Demographics) include:

• Location, Education, Age, etc.