97 karma · joined May 20, 2013
https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb202326/funding-sources-of-acad...
Most flicking/dexterity games are pretty abstract: lightly themed, if they're themed at all. And a lot of the ones that are themed, somehow don't get it "right". Flickwars is pretty cool in that it's got a light space battle theme with asymmetric team powers. It also has a neoprene board which, while not being as satisfying as polished wood, makes a surprisingly satisfying flicking surface. There's a modular setup to the game, where players place obstacles on or (because of the neoprene surface) UNDER the board. This meshes nicely with the space theme as you can consider these obstacles as gravitational anomalies. All-in-all, it's a pretty lightweight game, but it's a fun diversion from heavier board games.
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/192278/awesome-four-player-...
I like carrom a lot, but I'm terrible at it. I'm at least a reasonable player at crokinole, and it's a lot easier to introduce others to the game without them getting too frustrated by it.
Also note that you'd never use actual sand on a crokinole board or tabletop shuffleboard. Sand, wax, or powder is what the shuffleboard products are referred to as and are made of specially formulated silicone beads (much less abrasive than, say, beach sand) or cornmeal, or even sometimes ground walnut shells.
My understanding is that the efficiency loss is strictly limited to delivering electrical power back to mechanical power via motor instead of via the chain drive. The problem with this design is that it completely eliminates the ability to deliver mechanical energy directly. The rider pedaling charges the battery which then powers the motor. Going from mechanical energy to stored electrical energy is going to introduce a much greater loss in efficiency than a mere 5%. In a more standard e-bike model, when the rider pedals, my understanding is that they are delivering mechanical energy directly, bypassing the conversion to electrical energy. I may be wrong as I am not very familiar with e-bikes, but, if this is the case, the 5% figure seems highly misleading.
You could also check out some of the tooling and APIs around openlibrary.org. Unfortunately, I think it's basically a moribund project, but may have sufficient tools for your needs. I know they have a list feature, but I don't think ingestion is particularly easy; nor am I sure of the import/export functionality around their lists.
edit: I'd forgotten about librarything (mentioned in another comment). They have better tooling that openlibrary.
I've considered something like Solus-based laptops for them, but I haven't gotten around to testing out a configuration yet.
I suppose part of it is a matter of definition, since there is a spectrum of belief in unproven "conspiracy theories". Is a "conspiracy theorist" one who believes in a conspiracy theory, or one who creates conspiracy theories? Is someone who believes that there may have been a conspiracy associated with the JFK assassination a "conspiracy theorist"? They're certainly not on the same level as someone who willfully defies all evidence and logic to continue to assert that the Earth is flat. There's a spectrum of the amount of deviance from logic and evidence as well of a spectrum of the strength of one's belief in these "theories".
I think that a large number of people subscribe to some sort of unproven "conspiracy theory" and that it is incorrect to assert that this population is overwhelmingly mentally ill.
If you use people who go to a flat earth convention as your basis for a representative sample of the mental health of conspiracy theorists, I think you're going to get a very skewed result. You're skewing very high on the spectrum of deviance from evidence and logic, as well as very high on the spectrum of strength of belief.
I would probably agree with your assertion if my definition of what constituted a "conspiracy theorist" met a minimum criteria of a certain threshold value on those two spectrums, but I think that the term "conspiracy theorist" is very nuanced and therefore problematic and even dangerous, especially when we start throwing around phrases like "conspiracy theorists are overwhelming[ly] just mentally ill to begin with". Here's an interesting article on the topic of "conspiracy theory" as a dangerous misnomer:
http://theconversation.com/in-defence-of-conspiracy-theories...
I like this quote from Michael Shermer: "Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons." Smart people frequently get involved in conspiracy theories through a combination of confirmation bias and the spinning-wheels-in-the-sand effect where they become more entrenched in their beliefs by being forced to defend them.
Being illogical is not necessarily mental illness. Sometimes, it's just pig-headed stubbornness.
https://michaelshermer.com/2002/09/smart-people-believe-weir...
Additionally, there is a plugin for Firefox called "Available Reads" that allows you to enter your Overdrive account information for your various library cards. Then, when browsing goodreads, the plugin will show you the Overdrive availability of the books you are browsing at all of the libraries at which you are a member, and provide links out to the catalog entry for those libraries' copies of the ebooks/e-audiobooks.