Avatar
nextwave
8b3c90561bc3cdae3757e780ae989bedd28683543f2012ecc30a3e904acd3558
Just making sure everyone is having a good time on the Merry-go-round.

All good. Just need to deal with a couple of haters first. You? Everything good?

So, here it is, I'm giving you the opportunity. The opportunity to air your grievances. To say what you need to say to me. I'm listening intently. I will hear you with grace. I will take what you have to say seriously. I will reflect. So just say it. Or shut the fuck up and stop being a bitch.

If we have a disagreement, and you can't muster up the courage on a public forum to plant your two feet firmly on the ground, and say, out loud, directly to me and everyone else willing to listen, what is bothering you, you're a bitch.

AND YOU WANT ME TO RESPECT YOU? Why the fuck should I respect you when you're incapable of granting that to yourself. Carry yourself with some fucking decorum first.

If you rely on social games to get across what you think or feel, you are a fucking coward. Say what you mean.

I'm sorry. You are all the real ones. πŸ€—β€οΈ

It was a nice litmus test for people who speak before they think.

"My flavor of moralism for all" is missing the point so hard.

Why not ask if imagining it in a mind (be it natural or artificial) should be illegal? It's pretty much the same premise, though closer to the point imo.

Nietzsche got it wrong, it should have been:

Whatever kills me makes me stronger.

What I mean is, removing the hunter from the board is actually the move, but because you can only do that by taking them on your side, that's the decision to make. It just so happens that the rats compliment that choice very well, as does the rest of the choices being animals, imo anyway.

I don't think it matters. If you're thinking in terms of what's most likely to kill you the fastest, it's a bullet from the rifle of a marksman. You have to pick them as a defensive move moreso than an offensive one.

Probably the hunter and the 10,000 rats.

GM. βœŒοΈβ€οΈβ€πŸ”₯β˜•β˜€οΈ

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1686x544&blurhash=Q2SY%7Bq00%7Eqt7_3M%7B-%3Bxuxu00_3%3FbIU-%3B%25M%25MRjt7xu9FIUxu-%3BM%7BM%7BxuM%7B&x=dbbe913525322b512af9f70c4e3d95098690c252f8fd6abe1c5cd7a79b15500c

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1920x1084&blurhash=iFE%7B2%2C%7EV0100IAt8%3D%7CxuEL00Vs%25fS%23oI%25L%25gt8M%7CXStRR6spt7NHE1IUs%3AaKNGWX-pRjIVs.xubHI%3AoexuR%25e.%252bIM%7Bjs&x=6ac4a963c8ed371628c5e313936cd1bf1ef97bdb3d2d7ae9b233a9309c4c61af

I can't tell if the "it looks like a boob" part of that landed..oh well. ✌️

Can it be in the form y = x^3 + ax + b? I hear those are voluptuous.

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=216x144&blurhash=r6S%3FANxv_NxuIUxusmxvD%25%25MfQj%5BjuayfPjufQay%3Fbt7IURPRkV%40ofx%5DWB%25Mj%5Bj%5Bayayf7f6j%5BjuS%24WBR5ozxuj%5Bt7RiM%7B%25Mj%5Baxayj%5Djsj%5Bj%5Bae&x=c8dd86a348bd2eecfd91c2626eaf5a90dd09c96d9668a4ac59abee52220c27f1

Might be an unpopular opinion, but I think they're doing a public service to Nostr rn. As are you too by raising awareness about it.

Thanks to you both tbh. ✌️

Whenever I see anyone praising federated chaumian mints.

(This whole project is about eliminating counterparty risk)

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=551x453&blurhash=%23KD%2B-%5BnM9vNIIAxun%25s.bIx%5DRjofxas%3AkCNGofRj_Nt8MxjZM%7CjYWCWVjsxuf6t7kCR%25WBV%40ofWB.7ozRjjZRkWVays%3Aj%5BxvfRjZj%3FWBWBRjayayofoffkR*ayofj%5Bj%5Baz&x=9ae0714420b4f1835c71b03707bd3d79f270a0356324a7cc3bb7d22f5baaa13a

Good morning. ❀️‍πŸ”₯

#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=480x302&blurhash=r2B3%3D%7B%7Eq9HRjxcIU%25N9F%5E%2C-%3AIVM%7C%25fRjRkofWBj%5BD--%3Aj%3FM%7C%25LWBt7M%7B%25MM%7BofM%7BoeWCxtaya%7Ct6%5E%2CIU%25MWBt7t7oe%25fRjIUxut7Rjt7Rjj%3FRjWB&x=38b3774c51f34b2f80fb85a9ce91bdea8b4a732c57c16123255848ff53b0661f

Yea, and that we could be unconsciously selecting specific kinds of imagery or symbolism that may appear to us individually as just "interesting" at certain times in certain cycles, and we may not even understand why ourselves, but serve a role in signalling for the group.

I find myself mostly agreeing with Jung.

Of all his ideas, I think synchronicity is the most the hand wavy and difficult to prove scientifically. But in principle I do think it would make sense, considering mammals are social creatures, there would be certain aspects of our programs and imprints that are collective in nature, and that perhaps a subset of the group would express parts of a larger program that may appear as synchronicity to individuals at certain points in time.

The archetypes would be the base programming that is primed in us unconsciously through our sensing of our environment. The act of playing out reality under the activation of the archetype will reinforce it. It's essentially evolutionary programming that plays out across the group. I do think it's funny that it may make more sense to

call it an asynchronicity if you were to take a holistic view over an

individual one.

They can also come directly from nature too, of course. Like how the spinning earth creates a projection of day-night

cycles, which in turn reinforce programming in us for when to sleep or eat. Or even just the darkness being a scary unknown where anything can happen/signals potential danger, and therefore we make associations with light and darkness having an up-down meaning for us. Like, for example knowledge and brightness being related.

Anyway, If we take the consciousness of nature into account, I think it makes more sense to call it asynchronicity, but maybe that's just me. :D