to attempt to "measure" seems... inappropriate for such a wonder. it is. it's wonderful. that's all it needs to be.
thinking in terms of quantities, maybe not helpful?? enjoy it, whenever and wherever it appears. always!
My first go at honey fermented garlic 👩🏼🍳
If anyone has experience doing this let me know your tips!
I have scary red flag warnings tucked-away in my kitchen "files" (unavailable to me now...) about garlic and botulism and that's why we don't... ?? do anything anaerobic with garlic??
might be worth your while to check??
ozone. kills odors. maybe overkill in this situation?
nut butters made from nuts with "bad oils" (high PUFAs) don't appeal to me.
but macadamia nut butter! macs have the best-possible fats (of all nuts, imo). that one is hard to find!
there's a compromise. there are electric "bottles" that run a short heating cycle, you unplug it and then you just use the bottle "normally" as it slowly cools. no juice.
this means no "risky" pouring hot water into tiny bottle necks. that's an easy task, normally, but not always...
have you considered exploring Tidal?
I see potential use to create a flirtation device with an upgrade of those "your table is ready" lil flashy units, in a bar setting... could help with the very local, anon-but-not Q...
even w/o that, I think there's fun potential for "facilitating connections" in venues like that!
Below is a mind-bending Guest Post by nostr:npub1ltt9gry09lf2z6396rvzmk2a8wkh3yx5xhgkjzzg5znh62yr53rs0hk97y
**Protected: Does Bitcoin Break The Simulation?**
After thinking deeply about physics, reality, simulation theory, and proof-of-work for a long time, I came to some insights that sound wild, but quite plausible. While many others have already written about simulation theory, I have something new to add: the interaction with Bitcoin and ***the distinct possibility that Bitcoin destroys The Simulation.***
**Are We In A Simulation?**
I’ve accumulated many arguments suggesting we’re in a simulation – and one pesky argument against it. Here are some from the “for” side:
**1. Bostrom (“Game Power”)**
There has been a difficult-to-read short paper published on this (Bostrom, 2003), but Elon Musk has been the one to bring it to popular attention recently. Slight paraphrasing him:
A dense but influential paper on this was published by Bostrom (Bostrom, 2003), but Elon Musk brought it into the spotlight. To paraphrase him:
*“If you assume any rate of improvement over time – 1%, 0.1% – just extend the timeframe, and games will eventually be indistinguishable from reality. Either that happens, or civilisation ends. One of those two outcomes. Therefore, we are most likely in a simulation.”* —Elon Musk, Joe Rogan Experience, episode 1169
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQi2KC6jKjg
Musk extrapolates that if civilisation isn’t destined to destroy itself, then given enough time, there should be billions of simulations indistinguishable from reality because simulations continuously get better. It’s a very compelling argument, but there is a critical flaw which I’ll come to later.
**2. Quantum Mechanics is Too Weird**
**Copenhagen Interpretation:**
The more we learn about reality, the stranger it appears – almost to the point of being unbelievable. At the subatomic level, particles and light are described by a wave function, which represents a probability distribution over all possible states.
This wave function evolves smoothly over time. However, when a measurement is made, the wave function appears to “collapse” to a single outcome.
For example, a particle might exist in a superposition of being in multiple places at once, but upon measurement, it is found in only one location.
So the key idea is: reality is undefined until measured, and quantum mechanics only predicts probabilities of outcomes, not underlying reality itself.
**Competing interpretations:**
I personally don’t know a lot about the mathematics of quantum physics, but there are competing explanations about the nature of what is observed. For completeness, I give you a list that is safe to skip over:
**1. Many-Worlds Interpretation (Everett)**
- No collapse, and all outcomes happen, but in different branches of the universe.
- Reality is the full multiverse of wavefunctions.
**2. de Broglie–Bohm Theory (Pilot-Wave)**
- Particles always have definite positions.
- The wavefunction is real and guides them (like a hidden GPS).
**3. Objective Collapse Theories**
- Collapse is a real, physical process, not just from observation.
**4. Quantum Bayesianism (QBism)**
- The wavefunction isn’t reality — it’s a tool for *personal belief* about outcomes.
**5. Relational Quantum Mechanics**
- Reality is relative: properties exist only *in relation to an observer.*
- No absolute state of the system.
**Explanation of WHY – The Simulation**
The simulation comes into this when we ask, “Why should it be this way?”.
If you were designing a computer simulation of the universe, would you need to accurately calculate every position of every subatomic particle in every star in every galaxy for the total of the universe? Why would you when you can create a probability function and save your computer’s computation power? Especially if no one is looking. Why not do that for all subatomic particles until someone makes a measurement and “checks”?
Another way to think of it, if you have ever played exploration games, a map of the game world exists, but you only have lit up the areas you have explored. The rest of the map is dark. It’s there, but no calculations, and no graphics rendering until you need to look. The universe is behaving like this.
**3. Fermi Paradox**
We’ve found no conclusive evidence of aliens. Why? With an estimated 10²⁴ stars (that’s 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000), and countless planets in “Goldilocks zones,” life should be common – carbon based or not.
One explanation: the universe isn’t actually as vast as it appears, and the Simulation may impose limits that prevent us from ever verifying its scale.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNhhvQGsMEc
**4. Limits in Physics**
The speed of light is limited to 300,000,000 m/s. So is the speed of INFORMATION travel. Maybe this is some physical computer cycle limit?
404 Error: no more information can be processed
When pushing the limits of the speed of information transfer, time gets dilated. Maybe this is a way for the simulation’s computer to handle its limitations?
**5. Every Variable is Too Perfect**
I admit I have not studied the math, and can’t check, but apparently every variable about reality is astronomically precisely perfect such that even if the strength of gravity were different by one in 10 to the power of 50 or something ridiculous, then existence wouldn’t be possible.
Some argue this proves our reality was designed by God. Others argue that many possibilities “existed” and never came to deliver conscious thought. We were just selected out to notice the only combination that can produce us.
Another possibility is that we have a creator who’s the simulation master – Our creator. But not necessarily “God”, who would be the creator of base reality. Whether that makes a difference to the simulation argument doesn’t matter, but it is a subset of religious argument.
Some might call God whoever it was that created us, simulation creator or not, and others would prefer to reserve that title for the creator of all reality.
**6. Crazy Conspiracies**
There are a lot of crazy conspiracies. I would like to call to your attention the Flat Earth theory. It sounds completely bonkers. So many people would have to be trying to fool you for no apparent reason that the Earth is flat, all in on it together. And so much of our understanding and accumulated knowledge of the sciences needs to be reworked to make Flat Earth work.
Then comes along one measurement across an icy lake, with laser precision showing no Earth curvature. Hmm. Who’s prepared to throw everything they think they know about reality over some guy’s potential hoax YouTube video?
But if that, and other similar demonstrations, were real – how to explain it?
Well, if we’re in a simulation, almost anything is possible, even crazy conspiracy theories. Even dinosaurs being implanted into the Earth’s crust to “trick us” could be a thing. It’s not hard for a simulation creator to do that.
These theories only sound ridiculous if we assume reality was normal.
**Summary of Arguments and One Main Counterargument**
Argument 1 is the strongest case for Simulation Theory – it can stand on its own. Argument 2 is also compelling, but not as decisive.
I only need to poke a hole in argument 1 to put a flaw in Elon Musk’s question, “Games are getting better, allowing billions of simulations (given enough time), then the chance we are not in a simulation is 1 in billions. Where is the flaw in the logic?”
My response – Why assume there is enough energy to sustain billions of worlds “nesting” each other?
There is no evidence that our reality has limitless quantities of energy to create a computer simulation, and for the beings inside our created simulation to create their own simulation – using our energy! That can’t cascade indefinitely if energy is limited.
But if energy is limited, it explains why it appears energy is being conserved (argument #2 for Simulation Theory). While the apparent need for energy conservation exists, it still undermines Elon Musk’s specific reasoning.
**Bitcoin Might Break The Simulation**
Let’s assume that energy is being conserved by the Simulation “computer”. This might be by not calculating the positions of every single atom in all the stars of all the galaxies throughout the entire universe, but instead averaging it out with wave functions, and presenting a blob of light to our eyes if we look. The nature of our reality seems to be behaving this way, as discussed.
Now, consider the enormous amounts of energy Bitcoin consumes, and the increases that will be happening in the future. This energy expended by miners hashing is also energy expended by the simulation computer.
But the computations of hashing cannot be “fudged” the way the computer might be fudging the computations of atom positions in the star, Betelgeuse. Calculations for stars might be minuscule compared to the sheer volume of verifiable activity happening on Earth, where most precise observations are happening.
Why can’t Bitcoin mining energy be “fudged”? PROOF of work. The work done is provably expended. Why is it provable? You have to understand a bit about how mining works. I explain in detail here, but briefly, hashes are produced with unpredictable results, each attempt at winning the block resulting in a completely new and random (but deterministic) hash. It’s not true randomness, because it’s a reproducible function, but a priori, it appears random and can not be predicted. So the work to find an eligible hash is done by trial and error, and cannot be guessed. So when winning hashes (currently with 19 leading zeros, astronomically improbable by chance) happen every 10 minutes, you know work is actually being done to find those hashes.
What if this work, which can’t be dodged, is draining energy from the simulation computer? What would happen? As the machine begins to fail, what might we see? Perhaps all the NPCs (non-player characters, ie not real people but simulated) in the world will start behaving more and more the same (to conserve energy), or maybe many NPCs might be killed off? Do I have to remind you of the insanity we saw during COVID? During this time, after observing collective human behaviour, I began wondering if these were real people.
One argument against this idea is that the Simulation computer might actually be able to paint any hash it wants at will, without doing manual trial and error hashes. No one can know either way, but it’s interesting to speculate.
it's Friday. I like silly. maybe it's time to share my take on this simulation stuff.
...you know, he's really a brilliant, deeply dedicated, much under-appreciated mind, truly creative and innovative. and the bored out of his f'n mind lab tech running our sim.
who?
Murphy. yes, he of 's Law fame...
some times he contentedly leaves you all alone, running your own little life as you wish. and other times, he can't resist _leaning_ in and _tweaking_ a few of your life's params... his bored thrill, and you have to just go along, in case he comes up with something even more "creative" for you.
hi Murph! lovely day, eh? 😏
>>social stigma to comply.
sounds exactly the kind of thing that a nostrich would just laugh about and then simply not accept. maybe not all the way out to a gfy! level of disdain, but come on, ooh! shiny is shiny is shiny. she'll have no big regrets if she happens to leave a moissanite delight on a bath counter somewhere.
if we're talking valuable "forever", I'm much more happier and excited to believe it'll be all these #coins we're transforming the world with.
celebrate the simple joys.
#flowers
well, the obvious: the HODL and the "we're so early" memes, for starters. .
a good Q would be to define (for yourself) what a "cult" is, and why it's not a good thing to be in one. is that really true?
can we reframe the cult v. tribe-membership aspect w/o it being seen as tainted by being an uncritical, unquestioned choice?
here's a thought experiment for you: if you didn't have the crutch of the concept of "generation" (which some of us can see as just a cruel manipulation tool inflicted on the unthinking masses by "Madison Ave" advertisers to divisively split us all into targetable "segments"), how would your views on this change?
what "historic" ills would you still attempt to blame on any one "other" group if you chose to actually think these complex issues through rationally? could you learn anything new, see things from a new point of view, if you relaxed your rant a bit? or would your commitment simplistic over-generalization and this divisive, blame-anyone-else narrative survive even that test?
it's disappointing to see you and others continuing to fuel this bogus narrative. but I don't expect to know you well enough to be able to claim "hoped for better from you"... maybe this is your best effort after all?
a browser-agnostic bookmarks tamer. my theory re: why so many tabs are kept open is that the nominal alternative, saving a bookmark into a browser's handling instead, does not get the job done, in terms of that "find it again" search process.
there's a big cache of potentially-"interesting" data in that messy pile of bookmarks and selected history-trails. and I have yet to find a good tool for making the most of it. for starters, I'd value more than just string-matches on the little bit of text available per site. I'd like to navigate by timeline more easily, bunch related ones together in multiple tag-sets, etc. any one who fights with tabs and bookmarks will have great ideas for improvements to our current tools.
defend btc.
it's great that we're winning new adopters, and yet... imo, the make-it-or-not threat to us is from the folks who will not _ever_ get it, the Sen. Liz's of the world. so I'd say: aim these coins at positive efforts toward countering their defeat-us moves. that is the most-valuable use of these coins, imo. and this can be fun! the push-back btc-edu initiatives need broader audiences. not just easy-win adopters. we need to look toward the harder-to-win-into mainstream groups, and how to defuse the FUD re: nonsense about energy, etc... to do that:
I'm in favor of making a sleek, slip-into-mainstream edu STEM module with lil demo miners and all the coursework needed to educate students about monetary systems. I'd put lessons from Lyn's awesome Broken Money, "distilled" (if need be!) into this module, and gift-seed as many public schools and home school groups as we could.
I believe that when the "oh!" light dawns for students from having had hands-on btc mining experience, it'll be a light that will stays lit. that's our win!
let's test this!
why not both? allow yourself a pocket voice recorder (even if only an airplane-mode'd phone) and pre-vibe a set of your prompts, let's-tests and other notions while you're out and about. then, when you have to be inside again, feed it into your system, and see if you caught anything interesting with your notes.
hi! I was trained in anthropology and am a longtime sci-fi fan. this colony / off-world stuff is one of my fav background thinking-puzzles, when I have spare think-time! I adore Neal Stephenson's Anathem!
I think we want to use care about choosing / fine-tuning which culture elements we export in our off-planet colonies. and the whole concept of "use care" to choose these details is so messy right off the bat that I'm not sure we'll manage even this basic challenge. can we even agree on core basics like shared ethical values?
how do we figure out what to give our colonists as the best possible "social life templates" for building a resource-poor, constantly hostile enviro-challenged first phase colony? I want to create pre-enactment colonies (like the historic re-enact ones) to run real experiments for how we imagine their future might be. running lots of long-cycle sims of colonies' economies, governance models and other details would be a worthwhile effort too, imo.
as for the most significant problem, I'm going with figuring out closed-loop, pressure vessel life cycle solutions. once we get that solved, I want to ask if a "deadly" planet (like Mars) is the optimal destination, or should we be thinking of how to master generation ships instead? they're both still "pressure vessel living" situations. which one (if either one) is the better vector for our long term species survival goals?
no clue! I'm kinda hoping for the most-optimistic take: that X.ai's B-corp status now also applies to X, and that shift will, in the long run, be a Good Thing, if X has "future plans" where _that_ legal difference will matter. like maybe boosting its use of self-chosen algos?? or, gasp, protocols?!
when a word, like "nostr" is new to someone, they may find that more stylish representations (in this case, elongated letter forms) are harder to parse into recognized letters, so they can decode them as letters, and assemble them into this-new-word-I'm-just-now-learning.
the extra parsing effort might add helpful friction, and the little decode win could strengthen their interest. or it may be too much, and their unrelenting content torrent just slides on, without them "getting it"...
that said, I like #3 best.
oh that's cool!
There’s no better food combination than dates and my pecan butter ✊🏼
https://btcpay.oshigood.us/apps/grea3DQF1Uqb3N4qFHAAXcYf139/pos
have not tried these. I would normally be quite cautious re: the high PUFAs in both pecans and peanuts. have you done a rough calc (or asked a chatty) for a fats break-down analysis?
sorry, yes, food-geek. some days.
if the situation is still salvage'able, highlight the common joys / values which are still shared among you all. gently remind them of the shared right to hold their own views, and still be connected. their right to enjoy that "your opinions are yours" freedom is naturally yours too.
or just tell 'em straight up that you miss them and value them. that we all make mistakes and misjudgments, and
depends where on the back. are you feeling a dehydration hey! whine-ache from your kidneys? do you need a legs-up on a wall lower back stretch? so many try-first before meds options. my fav remedy: tunes and joyful dancing, dumbbells optional. lift your mood, see how/if that helps!
#gm
g
(image credit: midjourney!)
#fearsfaced
woohoo! I am enjoying that lovely buzzy afterglow when you've faced down a big fear and "coped". this one: city night driving, with the extra special bonuses of intense rush hour traffic, sliding into full-dark in a new and foreign-to-me city, minimal host country language skills (enough, sorta), new rental car, new-to-me nav app (don't need 'em at home) and a "lane-fluid" driving culture, so you learn quickly to follow their examples. oh and rain (thankfully slacking to drizzle) and unseeable urban street potholes. fasting. woo f' hoo! yes!