i've just been thinking more about how to fit together the hindu and other religions concept of reincarnation, with the "eternal life" stuff in the bible

it's quite simple actually, and not any kind of necromantic craziness

if you know about the theory of how reincarnation works, then you would know that one of the elements of the process is that the rebirth process involves erasing the memory of past lives.

then you can say, that maybe what the biblical texts were talking about is a knowledge and technique whereby newly born individuals, who had a past history of previous lives, have that cloud of forgetting removed, and are born with the full memory of all of their past lives.

this would totally qualify as an "eternal life" because if all who are born, have this done, then even though they live the mortal life, they know all of their "eternal life" history, and it works out much the same. except for that process of the development of the body, the first 35 or so years of life the memory would be there but the capacities would not be fully developed yet.

the other thing is that according to those old texts, and other stories from ancient history, the capacity for lifespan of humans is actually around 800 years.

so, combined with full past life recall, and extended lifespan, you would have something as near enough to the actual realisation of this concept of "eternal life" while reconciling the apparent differences between reincarnationist model versus the eternal life model.

i know it would be quite shocking to have a baby and within a year it's telling you stories in fully adult language of their history, maybe even able to speak multiple languages, but i think this is what it actually means.

it happens occasionally, by accident, there is many accounts of this in recent historical lore about reincarnation. the buddhists select their Dalai Lama based on physical markings that transit between lives, it's a mark on the foot, if i remember correctly. some cases exist also of small children telling stories of their past lives that were verifiable, as well.

this synthesis resolves the apparent differences between the two, and hints at what is to come, when our branch of the human tree wakes up and starts to bloom as well.

I can't be friends with you if whenever The Kinks "Lola" starts playing you don't start singing Yoda.

It is a short post already, but I find it ungrounded.

Repost.

Nothing, its just my morning musings

Thank God the American people are smarter than their government. ☕

Was expecting a tie. Well done, this day is yours

I'll be vibe golfing for our annual family golf outing next weekend. What's vibe golfing? Swinging and hoping you just make contact with the ball without fucking your back up because you swing like a retarded animal (working on it).

To everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under Heaven.

The season will come back. Don't stress or strain over it. It'll be back in its own correct time.

Also that's awesome that you did that.

“16% of the network is permissionlessly asserting their right to relay what's in the interests of themselves and the network”

What’s the other 84% of the network doing then? Are they not also permissionlessly asserting their right to relay what *they think* is in the interests of themselves and the network?

except when they say a function is a variable. that's a powerful distinction. for which reason basically all languages support closures now.

also i think you can boil things down to constant, variable, type, function/method (the receiver is just a convenience) and pointer/reference. to make things easy for humans, you can then attach a symbol to these, which gives you debugging.

objects are shit because they are usually 3+ levels of indirection which opens up space for misinterpretation, long compilation times, and pernicious, hidden errors.

Yeah it only works for one-liners with no else clauses. Sure it can be "nice" but in my distant (15 years ago) experience Ruby gets so loaded up with sugar you can't figure out what the computer is even doing anymore.

I think half the reason that Ruby is dog slow is because the developers purposely write their code to hide implementation details to keep the interface "nice". Everyone ends up calling code with unknown costs that is doing a bunch of unnecessary magic.

Rails philosophy of "convention over configuration" is an example. If you do things in the conventional way it all just magically works. But to a developer unfamiliar with those conventions it is a black magic mystery why it works at all.

so, how does that work?

do something something if something ?

what about else clauses?

at least condition?true:false is sorta reasonable (C and javascript have this type of syntactic sugar).

yeah, I like consise code as well.

I've been playing with React lately and there is a awful lot of line noise.

Ruby is probably the best as far as code aesthetic, but ofc it's not statically typed, and has worse performance than go. But they are meant to be used in different areas, so they are complementary not competing.

#Wordle 1,506 3/6

⬛🟨⬛🟨⬛

🟨⬛🟨⬛🟩

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

At least in nostr with the outbox model, there is no routing, and nodes don't control which other nodes they communicate with. I imagined the thing just like browsers connecting to websites. But a completely different architecture could be routed, where a node connects to certain known and trusted neighbors only, and data is routed node-to-node. Such protocols are slower and less reliable, having so many middle-men, but of course if you use Tor under nostr you are pretty much doing that same thing.

I lean towards clients connecting to untrusted nodes. And clients being considered very difficult to develop because they must be security hardened. In the same way that browsers must be. In a similar way that computer hardware has to be bug-free before they tape out. Making nostr "simple" proliferates insecure half-assed software. I lean towards complexity as a way of weeding out developers who can't be trusted to make hardened software.

But this is just a current leaning. I'm interested in exploring architectures where clients don't have to talk to nodes they don't trust... I just don't see the big picture right now of how this could work without so many downsides.

nice.

He makes passing reference at people wanting control over data and metadata (point 4 in your list) but doesn't explain why, and counterpoints it with his best argument which is that centralized solutions can evolve faster.

Peer-to-peer means not having a 3rd node sitting in the middle of the communication in some data center. E.g. rather than client->server->client it is just peer->peer.

But I've run across people who think a client-server protocol necessarily isn't peer to peer. I'm just trying to argue that the p2p protocols are still client-server protocols. Nostr could be written as a p2p application without changing any of the NIPs, just by making every client also a relay.

Your point is the part I didn't discuss because it wasn't in my head at the time --- the middleman. You want direct communication over anything with no middleman. Fair enough. And I think that should be achievable, even if the communicating pieces are a client and a server.

#Wordle 1,505 4/6

⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛

⬛⬛🟨⬛🟨

⬛🟨🟨🟩🟩

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

I'll allow Orange Box

#Wordle 1,504 3/6

⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛

⬛🟩🟩⬛🟩

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

#Wordle 1,503 3/6

🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛

🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 I'm the whiz!

Funny on several levels. Bravo, might be the lone winner today!

I am going to have to ask my lawyer if this is legal.

I feel like you've grown distant since then.

#Wordle 1,500 4/6

⬛⬛⬛⬛🟨

🟩⬛⬛⬛⬛

🟩🟩⬛⬛🟩

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

new term i expect to start seeing more of on the internet:

KYCwall.

where a site blocks your access without getting a photo of your fucking identity card.

fun fact

linkedin now by default spams you with all kinds of promotional and begging emails and which ever category you can unsubscribe to them but it won't let you manage your other email preferences without KYC

just, absolutely, fuck linkedin.

i'm pretty sure someone is going to sue them for harassment over this. if i had too much money, i would do it myself.

Yes, I got it shortly after, as usual

Watched a bit of that yesterday. Didn't realize they were already in finals. I was prepared to like Alcaraz for the next decade, but I too am now second guessing my preferences. Sinner is not who I'd wanted to root for. Gangly, red-headed, and pale.

hello!

consciousness following from microtubules and zero point energy? or just the religious part of gnositicism

now i'm looking up gnostics. i thought that was a religion :D

so that's why sleeping next to magnets is a thing. the magnets look like paint cans.

someone i know swears by them, and her cat also prefers to sleep between the big "paint" cans even when they are on the floor.

i was supposed to test them out and document the sleep but it was unclear for me.

I sometimes feel out of place among the devs, on here. It's a big club, and I'm not in it. I'm not even a dev. I just build stuff because we don't have enough devs and I can't test stuff that doesn't exist.

But I still have so much work to do, so I just plow ahead, anyway, feeling sorta retarded and a bit depressed because I feel like everyone is wondering why the fuck I am here and what the fuck I am doing and if I didn't miss some memo. I am also sometimes wondering. I always miss the memos.

I just try not to think about it. There's so much work to do.

Searching For Bobby Fischer*

🙈⭕️😅

yeah, distribute stuff by taking it from people who earned it honestly. that's the definition of a communist.

God Eric is such a fraud.

Here's a fun fact. He used to claim Harvard (he loves to bring up his connection to that school) somehow didn't let him have his graduation day, implying somehow it was related to some agenda against him (and his very brilliant important work), but people learned they'd actually cancelled the ceremony for everyone that year (can't recall the reason). When confronted by this fact, he was flustered and kinda suggested yeah, but that was all done specifically to bury him somehow. 🤡

i hate UBI. they basically have had it for a very long time in australia and it distorts the labor marketplace to create permanent underemployed and unemployed classes.

i was in the former category, couldn't get a job because my productivity and qualifications were below the first rung of the ladder. since coming to europe, finding work has been, pretty much, easy.

even if my qualifications were not great, pretty much got into almost everything i tried to find a position in so far.

i'm rather qualified now though, but people have bad taste in programming languages so the positions are a little scarce anyway.