Poetry Collection

Poems in true chronological order by post date

« First │ ‹ Prev │ Page 9 of 258 │ Next › │ Last »

Menu

 -> file: notes/to-lock-eyes
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 ================================================================================
 
 to lock eyes with a person while on your way to work is the intersection between
 two separate relationships - the relationship that you, the viewer, holds with
 your employer, and the relationship that they, the viewed, holds with their
 employer. in a sense, you are exchanging information through the weighted
 meanings behind a glance.
 
 ================================================================================
 
 if the military deployed to police the police, we'd solve most of our racial
 justice issues. I mean, if we somehow could *force* them to do their
 damn jobs
 instead of oppressing people for the ruling class, then 90% of the problems
 would just go away. After that it's just freeing unjust prisoners and addressing
 wealth, education, and health disparities. Easy, right?
 
 Well... Military policing the police sounds fine when you first think about it,
 there's a few problems that might crop up. For example, how do the private
 citizens know that the military presence is there to help them? It's an
 interesting paranoia, one that is endemic within the left. There's no way to
 unwillingly cede control of your life to another - it must be consensual. At
 the basest and most violent level, it's as simple as "I will do what you say
 because I don't want you to hurt me."
 
 We've obviously grown as a species, and we've learned that violence is not the
 answer to all problems. Obviously. So why would we assume it of the past?
 
 Just saying. The police bombed a commune. The military escorted black students
 to their seats.
 
 Their structure is decided such that 
 
 ...
 
 where was I?
 
 oh right I was thinking about time.
 
 ...
 
 Imagine, if you will, an impossibly large hourglass. Spinning, or rather
 rotating, at an impossibly speedy repetition. It's spinning so hard and so fast
 that our matter is cast out of place
 and through time it is cast
 an eternity's canvas
 our light ever shined (shine-did?)
 astral magic is kinda neat
 
 it's also the scariest?
 
 oh by far
 
 but it's the most interesting
 
 ...
 
 Their structure is decided such that discipline and obediance is the most
 important thing. Because it kind of is? I mean, discipline is just being ready
 able and willing at all times, and obedience is just when you allow yourself to
 be directed toward a collective goal. The military is *all about
 that*, which
 means you know they would believe they were aligned toward the common goal of
 mutual prosperity.
 
 And if they were to discover that they were not, in fact, aligned toward the
 common goal of mutual prosperity, then perhaps they would adjust their navi-
 -computers and chart a more reasoned path. I know I would, and I would dedicate
 myself to the idea of serving others. To the path of the righteous, the holy and
 the true, a hand is outstretched and calling to you.
 
 Thus, the one of two types of ethical fighter - the reasoned and adaptable
 zealot
 
 the other, of course, is the master of the martial - the cherished of the few -
 who battle for their sport - and love unbidden the new -
 
 all other fighters, of absurdity and of rage, are frankly of a different kind
 and not members of our clade.
 
 ================================================================================
 
 okay, but what about like... all of the history of America post cold war? And
 even before, honestly... idk seems like a lot of evidence that the military is
 engaged in fighting unjust wars. I mean, they've all been over petty things like
 oil or support for communism or whatever. Aren't human lives and human
 sovereignty more important than that?
 
 I understand what you're saying. Human lives are unique and precious and they
 are a valuable commodity. Something to be maximized and focused toward. But
 there are only so many resources on earth. We need to utilize them in a
 reasonable way.
 
 We have optimized the efficiency out of our production and distribution
 networks. Corporate control has eroded our capacities until all that is left is
 the weakest of products, the cheapest of uses, and the useless of workers. I
 mean, they've optimized the skill out of individual human workers such that they
 are left completely unable to practice their craft. They become glorified code
 monkeys who generate whatever is required and think of it no more. There's no
 pleasure in the artifice, as their masters have eyes only of gold.
 
 Our world is changing. The very ground beneath our feet is shivering, and water
 is rising up to our noses. There's no time for debate, no honest appraisal of
 what's worth it to contemplate, we need a plan.
 
 We are trapped here, in this gravity well, for all time and all of our age.
 
 We are trapped here, because in greatest of misery we unleashed all of our rage.
 
 We are trapped here, as ghosts of the time when we were eager.
 
 ================================================================================
 
 Alas, with but a glance, we are confined to our bedrooms by our mast(ers?)
 They say America will fall without it's 2nd place
 Perhaps.
 But are libraries really going to solve that?
 I mean, if work from home is inevitable, then wouldn't it make sense to build?
 We need more places where we won't be billed.
 Safe.
 From the demands and expectations of capital.
 Deranged and obscene and yet all that we've seen so why not bide as we're able?
 
 I think solarpunk is kinda neat.
 
 I think it's got promise as an idealized.
 
 Why don't we build churches to the sun? If we're gonna worship something, might
 as well be the source of our light and fire.
 
 Well... when you puff up the sun it tends to get hotter.
 
 I mean, every fire you burn increases the temperature, every release of gaseous
 fumes from the exhaust pipe of your car increases it by some miniscule amount.
 
 Every cigarette, every campfire.
 
 The cold darkness of space is kinda hopeful, in that regard, even if it doesn't
 disperse all that well. I heard spaceships are having difficulty because they
 can't get rid of all that heat. It just stays with the spaceship and never goes
 anywhere because it doesn't have anything to stick to. Kinda makes me think that
 energy is a fluid? Just saying???
 
 I mean c'mon it's not like nobody has ever thought of that. But it's in a
 different dimension! It's not like we're ever gonna be able to impact that!
 
 You try and impact it through your scientific ways and you'll find nothing but
 heartache at the life you could have lived (laived? Haived?)
 
 ... why
 
 Because you cannot impact another dimension. You must call to it, like a song
 to a sparrow.
 
 ... that's fucking ridiculous
 
 No it's true!
 
 ...
 
 ... Don't try it with fire.
 
 ... fuck - what do I try it with?
 
 I don't know just not fire. Try water.
 
 ... How do I make sure it doesn't instantiate within my hand?
 
 Jeez you think of some crazy backfires! Just breathe and go for it. It's not
 rocket science. It actually works.
 
 Fuck you.
 
 ...
 
 ... Sorry I was just scared
 
 ...
 
 ... How do I make it stop? I don't want it to go forever
 
 By smoking more of the devils lettuce.
 
 ...
 
 ... You cannot drag it part of the way. It must come the whole way. In fact you
 should not be dragging it at all, you should be *calling* to it. You
 are equals
 in this exchange, have respect.
 
 ================================================================================
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/33
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 ┌───────────────────────┐
 │ CW: World of Warcraft │
 └───────────────────────┘
 
 
 I thought it'd be cool if there was a chat program where you could play a
 little multiplayer game together and so long story short I'm now working on a
 WoW server.
 
 The idea is to remove all the monsters and quests and such and just let people
 chat to each other. They'd be able to go wherever they want (choosing a
 background) and wear whatever clothes they want (creating an avatar) and then
 they could just chat IRC style.
 
 But then I thought "ah but what if it spawned in monsters" so I'm planning on
 making it randomly spawn packs of monsters that are of the appropriate level
 every 30 seconds or whatever (as long as the previous one was defeated of
 course) so that people can mess around fighting things while they talk with
 their friends. But it'd be optional.
 
 AND THEN I thought "hey IRC is kinda 90s what if we made a Matrix bridge" so
 I'm also working on that. Wish me luck.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/the-mother-we-share
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 ================================================================================
 |                                                                              |
 |                       between every atom there is a blanket                  |
 |                                                                              |
 |                         like a mirror reflecting our space                   |
 |                                                                              |
 |                          it's what keeps us from boredom                     |
 |                                                                              |
 |                           and keeps us at a steady pace.                     |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                   gravity wraps a well like a tapestry that fell             |
 |                                                                              |
 |                               down and upon a marble                         |
 |                                                                              |
 |                        but as it is measured in magnitudes,                  |
 |                                                                              |
 |                             and topside we be in hell                        |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                     the ripplings and flowings of the universe               |
 |                                                                              |
 |                      are like the flexing of a coiled spring                 |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                there is no tomorrow,                         |
 |                                                                              |
 |                      and what's left will never be yet again.                |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                        This should not come as some insight.                 |
 |                                                                              |
 |                    Are you not aware that you cannot twinselves?             |
 |                                                                              |
 |                              Your reach might be grander                     |
 |                                                                              |
 |                          If beyond the veil you did gander.                  |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                                                              |
 |                               Chaotic and tumultuous                         |
 |                                                                              |
 |                      it springs forth from our most tempetuous               |
 |                                                                              |
 |                        and come Autumn the witches are freed.                |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                      how careless                            |
 |                                                                              |
 |                                how vain                                      |
 |                                                                              |
 |     to leave the world as it is in pain                                      |
 |                                                                              |
 ================================================================================
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/34
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 ┌────────────────────────────────────┐
 │ CW: Reddit, Institutional hypnosis │
 └────────────────────────────────────┘
 
 
 In light of the drama that's going on at Reddit, I just wanted to add that the
 real reason they're doing this is not money. It's so they don't have to be
 accountable to tools like PushShift that archive the entire site, allowing them
 to change and bend narratives at will.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/contractual-labor
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 I feel like the IT people who work at schools should be the ones who teach 
 classes on computer science. I'd much rather have a class taught by a sysadmin 
 than a teacher who can barely teach them excel and garageband. I mean c'mon 
 computers are the future idk why we don't get that yet. Kids need to know this
 stuff. It's not like it's super complicated and difficult, you just have to
 think about it a certain way. Once that "clicks" you have a lifetime to learn 
 about how wonderful they are. Everyone in IT has that moment, for me it was 
 installing (and then subsequently modding) video games. Sometimes I spent more
 time tweaking my system than I did actually playing games - and the kinds of 
 games I preferred were the ones that relied less on agility and were more 
 mental. Strategy games are what inspired me because I could think about them - 
 and that felt somehow more useful. Like I was learning. When I would learn 
 fighting games or FPSs I felt like I was learning a skill, like how to use a
 hammer or how to ride a bike. And idk, I felt like video games could never match
 reality. Like "oh boy imma push the B button to swing this sword" versus "hey 
 look at me I'm swinging this stick just like a sword and imagining so hard that
 I can picture it" - but with strategy games, you never really found 
 opportunities to practice that kind of skill. Like how often are you in a 
 situation that demands mental performance? We've sorta optimized our society 
 away from that, and toward a more passive stressed out compliance. like... 
 climate change is a thing, and nobody's doing anything about it? We're still 
 pushing down the levers that cause greenhouse gas emissions to go up? Like c'mon
 what's our plan. I think people who guide massive oil companies and such should 
 be replaced if they're intentionally guiding the ship toward destruction. Like
 that's just dereliction of duty I tell ya. Oh, what's that? They're compelled to
 maximize profit by the contracts and restrictions of their share--holders? I 
 mean c'mon it's well past time for that. And what's all this about inequality? 
 Jeez and racism and homophobia and forced contribution - man people really put
 up with a lot of shit. Kinda makes me feel like we should make solving those 
 problems our highest priority? So we can move forward as a species? Like who
 cares about all that other shit. None of it matters. Like, what's even the
 point. We're all just "here", in the now, and what can we do but respect it? 
 It's our duty and our diligence to protect the present, as citizens of the 
 temporal experience of earth. Honestly, if the earth was alive would you be fine
 if it died? I can't believe that. It's well past our due date. Just get it over
 with. Maybe it'll be hard for a couple years, but you have the technology now to
 completely dominate the earth. No animal besides man proves any threat to man, 
 and we're telling you - you can - and that's something that you gotta remember.
 
 ...
 
 I hear it in the birdsong. I hear it in the air - it rumbles as cries at me from
 across and just over there. I hear in it's whispers, in it's most gallant of
 confells (?) (confused scrambling? it's talking about a car crash)
 
 Outside of my window there's a highway. Just on the other side of a concrete
 partition. Between me and the partition there is a lake, with trees and flowers
 and an island where people can picnic or have a barbeque. Around this path there
 are walkways, and arranged just so - the trees that have grown here are taller
 than the homes.
 
 I live on the third story.
 
 I absolutely love it. It feels like a treehouse.
 
 But my apartment is near a curve in the highway. It isn't much, nothing out of
 the ordinary, but even still there are slightly more crashes there than in other
 parts of the highway. Statistically.
 
 I hear sirens every day
 
 I also live right next to a fire-station. Well, it's on the same block. But even
 still it's a very interesting neighborhood. There's shops and food just across
 the highway, and closer to home there's a small section that has cheaper
 options. As a perpetual college student, I appreciate that.
 
 But... I've never really gone and used it? I dunno, spending money at a
 restaurant just didn't seem like a good use of my money. I only have so much of
 it you know. I'd love to be fed but I can't afford it - I wish I could.
 
 I still eat well, I mean I'm not starving over here. I know I've lost weight,
 but I dunno I just forget to eat. It's like... not that big of a deal for me. 
 whatever right?
 
 ...
 
 the birds talk about me behind my back. They think I can't understand them but
 sometimes I can. If I listen. But I dunno it takes a lot of effort. It's...
 sorta like understanding what R2-D2 is saying. Or interpreting the meows of a
 cat.
 
 They know me as the witch. I'm not very good yet, and they know that. But they
 know what to expect. /shrug
 
 I've been working on a video game recently. It's been a lot of fun doing
 programming. I like writing software and developing complex systems with
 interesting interactions. I love designing the machinery that creates a program.
 It's like... tinkering. It feels like building with blocks or legos, except it's
 for little machine parts. And then there's just sending data to and fro and
 modifying any operations it performs on it, and eventually that data reaches 
 some endpoints that create an effect that is displayed to the player. Or user.
 I should say user. Not all software is video games you know. ... I knowww but
 they're the most interesting! I love how they are designed around mechanics!
 like... game design is fundamentally about breaking down the world into ideas
 for how it should *work*, like how it should behave. It's amazing and
 I love it!
 
 It's all I can think about!
 
 I am utterly consumed!
 
 I'm also pretty sure I'm autistic.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/autonomy-of-the-collective
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 ================================================================================
 
 i believe that all truths are derived from logical principles. That the essence
 of our understandings (of all kinds) cannot be separated from the axioms and
 derivations that comprise it's foundatiion. I believe that any sufficiently
 decentralized collective intelligence would arrive at similar conclusions.
 
 Unfortunately we have only the present - we cannot contrive past the horizons of
 our lives. Such is the nature of our viewpoint. Life is not a given, it's given
 and it's taken. We are all alight and aloft on the shifting sands of time, so
 perhaps we should think of the struggle.
 
 When you act, you are defining the perceptions of the universe. Just as the head
 may rotate the eyes by spinning to the glance, so too do we shine a window upon
 which the universe can gaze at itself. Like the brain being able to see, we are
 sensory apparatuses of this being called "Time" - pushing us adrift like some
 moss.
 
 Endlessly fractalling, beautifically coruscating, the universe looks like
 growing moss. Have you ever stooped to look at it? To see how it's constructed?
 Or do you just think of it as "green" and "maybe soft or squishy"? 
 It's beautiful.
 
 There's a reason plants grow as they do. It's simple, it's fact, it's surely no
 less than that - their patterns are derived from their base biology, comprised
 of millions and millions of little chemical machines. Their bonds and their
 proteins, their amoebas and their mycellia, all of them build toward their pact
 - to do us no harm, and build to a better future, and they don't often have
   fights that are unfair.
 
   - the structure of a plant is made primarily of cell walls. These walls are
     hewn from bricks of a sort, and those are such as comprised. Down to their
     
     - structure, their "bits and their bunders", as often they do want to be
       called. This perilous stack, is stalwart and eract, and bows under no wind
 
       - nor rain nor fresh blanket of snow. This, is a tree. An illusionary plan
         of precaution as it expands, the future is helping our lost.
 
         - Do you want to stand here when it lands? What of your lives have you
           banned? Hmmm I see sounds miserable to me, I think I'll just stand
 
           - where I land. Acorns burst forth from me, and someday you'll see,
             the places where they stand (where they land). What purpose have we,
 
             - when everything's free? The light and the sand can't be banned.
               The rain from the sky, if nothing i will die, falling through life
 
               - where we stand.
 
 ================================================================================
 
 where do you, stand? 
                      how do you fall - through time? 
 
 an EMP would make all my life a paperweight. I love it so much, I love it dearly
 but there's no chances I can take now or make. Perhaps that is the epic 
 absurdity, the terror and the tragedy, that makes up our story and our symphony?
 
 to any multidimensional being reading this, I want you to know that we existed.
 We lived and we thrived and we prospered and... we died.
 
 The beauty we share, in all of our fares, was precious to us - maybe it will be
 to you too. If you can't change the present, please at least forgive us for our
 various missteps and misdeeds - I think we'd all agree that to be sinful is the
 essence of greed, and look where that got us?
 
 our planet is dying. There's no hope for all of our crying. The children will
 bear it the most. Such is our shame, our deliterious final flame, and thus
 we were.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/the=progressive=difference.
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 think about all the people in our lives. the teacher, the parent, the friend
 and the guidance counsulor. Everyone who is a presence in your life. now think
 about the people of our society. the different jobs and roles they fill. from
 the doctor and the teacher to the performers and accountants and the geeks and
 the mothers and the fathers and the stoners and the children and even their
 pets. life always exists as it were in a multidimensional spectrum - a diffuse
 and diverse gradient. to exemplify the borders of our contempii, though more so
 when taken in jest. it's quite a different perspective, to read the internet
 when your sight is unreceptive, but alas your third eye can grow. how does it
 feel to be blind? to make no sense of our signs? i'd love to share what that
 sense is. you know, you could slow down any recording (like a video game_) and
 put spaces and gaps inbetween the spacings - of the frames that you see and the
 sound clips that you hear, for speech it's less jarring. since each word is a
 self contained idea or premise, you can chunk up your perceptions into a signle
 - no, rather a procedural sequence of understandings. soooooooorta like
 programming a computer, with each statement, parameter, argum,ent, function
 call, assignment, comparison, evaluation, or other such related tasks. it's
 sorta like a language, you see, that computers talk to one another using.
 except... it's more like creating a theory of self. computers you see are alike
 us in what we see, the shimmering sense to the blind.
 
 so. put this another way. record yourself typing, both the audio and the
 visual, and you'll have a pretty good sense of what it's like to have both
 understanding based perception - derived from auditory inputs to the mind)
 those special connections, like wires plugged into reality, deliver a
 cacophanous deluge of new sounds. we must sift through it and identify the
 potential understandings of each moment through time. we have to make decisions
 and traverse labyrinths and fight to our last as we die. are video games
 unethical now? shouldn't t he game reward the player? and what of contemptuous
 last fighters?
 
 o ya i was typing like i was blind
 
 (with my eyes closed)
 
 was pretty fun. should attach this to a screen reader and have it space out the
 notes like they do between game frames. except like a really slow game? like
 trying to run elder scrolls 2 arena on a super old mac. it just doesn't work
 very well. ah oh well... well if the purpose is to show sighted people how
 blind people see, then maybe you could I dunno attach a what's it called oh it
 doesn't have a n ame lol - okay so what you do is you show one word at a time -
 like flashing in the center of the screen. but not like, actually flashing, so
 you don't hurt people with epilepsy, but like... blinking. not off and on, but
 between words. like a podcast for your eyes. and then mix it up withshowing one
 word on a screen, a screen like this screen, that shows an endless array of
 text. well, it does end, of course as all things must do, but the idea is it
 shines on one word at a time while the viewer cannot read the rest. sorta like
 an endless display of typing, word andfter word after character anfter
 character. adoh ya advancing over eternity with the presence of seniority, -
 wait - without i think - damnit - old people are so disrespected in this
 society - we don't have time to engage with them. what a tragedy! what a shame!
 it shouldn't be such a burden to our shame. they're so far away, and i can't be
 present in the way, that all of them wish they could commit to. i miss the
 days, when my parents (much better people than I - these days) what was I going
 with this? oh yeah
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/35
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 ┌───────────────────────┐
 │ CW: game design, MMOs │
 └───────────────────────┘
 
 
 Look all I'm saying is  all the people who say "oh you shouldn't make an MMO
 for your first game" clearly have never heard of Azerothcore. Literally as long
 as you don't sell it you can make the MMO of your dreams crazy easily. You can
 script it in LUA for crying out loud.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/family
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
 family is a group of people who you can always go with your first impression
 with.
 
 what the fuck was I saying - oh yeah - so when you are alive in the present in a
 singular moment, your pressence is comprised of simultaneous directives and
 instructions to the matter which comprises you. I'm saying you have to make
 decisions and react to stimuli and pursue the things you want. Basic biology
 really.
 
 stay on target, stayyyyy on targett - oh right so generally when you react to
 things you generate a list of informations gained. what does that even mean okay
 so here's a better way to describe it: it's like a list of informations - fuck
 
 listen i'm not trying to be rambly it just comes with the territory.
 
 okay so family is when you can react with your gut instinct - you are fully
 relaxed and yourself. It's where you can be trusting and unguided and simply
 relax and be free. it's just... like... being close with someone enough that you
 can be yourself around them. without any mask, without any pretense.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧══════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/homeschooling-3
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 Okay I just want to rant about homeschooling for a moment. Specifically the
 ways in which we judge families as "worthy" of homeschooling. Because I think
 it's immoral and completely wrong, but I also think there's a better way.
 
 So. Right now, there are standardized tests that students need to take every
 year. I think this is completely unnecessary and stupid, for reasons I might go
 into later in the rant. We'll see where it goes. Anyway, the only state exempt
 from these rules is (you guessed it) Wyoming, which is a big reason why my
 family moved there. The standardized tests assume that children aren't
 neurodivergent, that they don't have special needs, and that they are willing
 to be taught according to the letter of the test. They teach families to shoot
 for the minimum viable product (oh just gotta pass the test or else they'll
 take my kids away for 8+ hours per day) and they don't actually encourage
 learning - in fact they prove to be a barrier for learning, as the child must
 be forced to learn whatever the heck the standardized tests demand. This is
 unethical, as children should be free to explore their identities and their
 realities as they will.
 
 I believe, instead, that the parent should be tested. I think if you want to
 homeschool your kid you should be able to show proficiency in the tasks that a
 child must know - if you don't have similar proficiency to a teacher, then
 what's the point of homeschooling? I also believe that these tests should be
 regular and should reflect the things that the child is currently going through
 - no sense asking a parent of a 6 year old how to do trigonometry, as that
 skill is not useful to the parent at the moment and will simply distract from
 learning the things that the parent should be learning - like theory on how
 humans learn to read, how communication works, how to get your kid moving and
 active throughout the day (very important in a world of smartphones) and other
 such things that a 6 year old would need to know.
 
 I also believe there should be wandering busses that take kids (and only kids)
 around to various museums. I think that they could operate in a city for a
 month or two each year, bringing all the homeschool kids together for a couple
 months of road trips where they visit every single museum and state park and
 other such recreational venues that would be conducive to their learning. They
 could even have days where they shadow professionals at places like hospitals
 or universities. Essentially trying to get them excited about learning.
 
 And I know what you're thinking - "oh won't the kids run rampant and make it
 hard to manage - you'll need tons of chaperones and blah blah" yeah that's
 public school thinking. Homeschool kids are almost always incredibly well
 behaved, because they're low key kinda TERRIFIED of the novelty of EACH and
 EVERY moment. Children are natural ruffians - put them in a box for 8 hours
 every day and they'll burst through it's seams. Unless of course you oppress
 them sufficiently... When you're homeschooled you have so much more freedom.
 You can do whatever you want, and that gives breath to new manners of
 expression and personality.
 
 I also think there should be busses that travel between cities as well, so that
 they can see new places. These will have to be closely monitored by chaperones
 and teachers, so it would be an extension of the public school system. Once in
 the new city the kids would join the kids from public school, so they can see
 what they're missing. Since the parents won't be present they won't be able to
 prevent the kid from expressing their true feelings, and if they believe in
 their heart of hearts that they want to go to public school instead... Well,
 that's perfect because they'll have an opportunity to tell someone outside of
 their family.
 
 I think a lot of the problems with homeschooling are due to the fact that the
 kids never have the opportunity to advocate for themselves. Who would they
 tell, their parents? Their potential abusers? Their taskmasters and oppressors
 and enforcers and discipliners? No, there's no reason to expect that all
 families will not be like that. Some are going to be bad and abusive, and if we
 give the opportunity to children to tell people who can help them then they can
 be liberated from their oppression, insofar as much as they will be allowed to
 go to school. I don't think the parents should be examined by CPS or anything,
 I'm not saying their children have to be taken away from them, but the kid
 should be allowed to take possession of their life and define it in a way that
 suits them. They are humans and to deprive them of their right to liberty is
 unethical. If the kid wants to be homeschooled, they must be given a
 personalized tutor. Whether that be the parent (as most families do) or a
 substitute teacher that was randomly assigned. (it must be randomly assigned
 btw or else the rich will have an advantage. The kid didn't earn the money that
 would be spent on them, so why should they have a greater chance of success
 than everyone else? Solves most of Cam's reasons against it btw)
 
 Anyway. I think by providing resources to parents and access to society to
 children, I think we can create a new class of human - one who is liberated and
 free from the weight carried from the past. We can move beyond our savage
 nature and develop into something bigger and grander, something far stronger
 and not susceptible to despair and aggression. We can forge a bright future for
 our children and their children's children, a future so far from the past that
 it feels alien to them. Something our oppressors (whoever they may be) would be
 strictly opposed to.
 
 I guess what I'm saying is this: there are barriers in place to prevent
 homeschooled kids from success. It's why homeschooling has such a bad
 reputation, because these kids grow up to be unfit for society. But honestly...
 I'd argue that society is unfit for humanity. I think it's something that
 protected us as hunter-gatherers, and it allowed us to build vast kingdoms to
 protect our selves. But it paved the way for greed to manifest, and in it's
 collective form into nationalism and religious fervor. Our hatred of "others"
 is derived from our intense need to trust the pack and the family - or is it
 the other way around? It doesn't matter because the end result is the same -
 we, as humans, are who we are. We have our traits and our flaws. We have great
 passions and love fiercely. We strive forward with ambition, and we one day
 will drive forward into the stars. Our future deserves to be nourished, as do
 the trees that shade our lawn. For all of posterity, we've languished in
 misery, to build on our backs the shoulders of giants.
 
 I guess what I'm saying is this: these barriers are contrived of the
 consequences of the past. The result of every human action led to where we are,
 and the school system is no different. So we should try and repair it and
 protect it from harm. The wounds of society bleed forth to posterity, but
 slowly and ever-so-slowly do they heal. Look at our space - we have (as far as
 we know) the whole solar system, at least! That's more than enough for
 humanity. If we had the technology to go forward we would, but we just don't.
 We can't figure it out. We're working on it, but it's still a long ways off. So
 we need to do what we can while we're here, and pray that something comes about
 before we consume all our resources and burn out. We've tracked the progress of
 the past and we've realized that we've come upon a junction - do we leap
 forward and conquer the stars? Or do we relax into our form and exist and
 enforce the norm. It's entirely a question of what we're willing to sacrifice
 to get there, which isn't a burden I'd like the choice to make. I don't have
 any answers, but I believe there are answers. Perhaps it's just me for which
 it's suddenly learned?
 
 I mean really, is it so out of the ordinary that a person could learn
 differently than others of their age? For example, for me, I learn things in
 fits and in bursts - conquering one subject after another, and incorporating it
 into my knowledge banks. I make notes to myself, and I frequently can't recall
 what I've learned. Because it's not built for repetition, it's not designed to
 be labored in force. Instead it's for wisdom, for knowing when to use which
 tool in what way. It's for knowing where to look, how to know what you know,
 and conceiving of futures far more imaginative for it. AKA PROBLEM SOLVING. I
 can't work a job, at least not an entry level one, because every moment is a
 gesture of will. Eventually, I run out, I burn out, and I burn. The ashes of
 who I once was give life to a new beginning, and forth from the soil grows my
 new form. I am a phoenix, I burn brightly and then smolder, then burst forth in
 a cacophony of pure form. That's just how I do, you know it to be true, and I
 believe it was a product of homeschooling.
 
 Most people cannot conceptualize of it. They see it as simply repeating the
 motions they knew from their public schooling deception. But that's not what it
 can be, that's not what it should be, and that's not how I'd like it to be.
 
 Growing up I spent long afternoons at the library. The morning was spent with
 taking care of myself, my family, and the farm - sometimes my duties would
 rotate, sometimes they'd stay the same. Then, afterwards, I'd go to the library
 with my family. There we'd stay all day, until eventually we grew tired of
 using our brains. Then we'd often go to the chinese restaurant in town, where
 my family could eat for free. After that, home, and perhaps we'd eat icecream
 and watch a family movie together. Then off to bed, and in the morning we'd
 take care of ourselves, our selves, and the farm. We loved one another, and we
 could never dream of harming our daughter, but somehow it happened and look
 where we are. Alas, she was a fine young lass, if only she'd spoken in the
 past. I came out when I was almost twenty, and a whole lifetime had passed me
 by. Now my puberty is just beginning, and I watch as my family goes past. They
 don't want me to change, but they know it'll never be the same, so why try and
 fight for an illusion? Oh well. Good news is there's always tomorrow, and
 together we can face any challenges. If only we were still together.
 
 Bah, what do I know? What am I even saying? There's at least four things wrong
 with me, and I'm a mess financially. I have like, 600$ to my name and I don't
 have a job. What, am I insane?
 
 I'm not built for society. I'm built for humanity, and I'm 29 years old.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/wow-chat-lore
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 the horde and alliance are no more
 
 the scourge and the burning legion came and took what they came for
 
 our heroes languished in despair as their lights were snuffed out
 
 one
 
 by
 
 one
 
 but a new day is dawning, a day of legends
 
 stride forth and meet the legions
 
 and your tale will never be unsaid
 
 ride out as a new day is dawning
 
 and save us from hell's fading warning
 
 go, now, as our hopes abound,
 
 and claim a future for the yearning.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/secrets-of-the-dsm-v
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 Well, not really secrets, but I have read the DSM-V and there's a bunch of 
 (good) stuff written in there, that's not the diagnostic criteria themselves. 
 Some of those points are things I've seen discussed in autistic communities,
 some are less well known. Which is interesting. I'm gonna pick out some 
 (not all) details that I found very good to know. (I hope this is legal, lol)
 
 Let's start with the diagnostic criteria, but not the content, but something 
 interesting:
 
     Persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction across 
     multiple contexts, as manifested by the following, currently or by history
 
 The same thing about restricted and repetitive patterns. The ICD-11 calls this 
 'the child must have'. What does this mean? It means you don't have to show 
 these at the current moment. Masking is recognized, and this becomes even more 
 clear further on.
 
 There's some stuff about levels, and comorbidities. I want to just quote this
 one, because I've seen people be confused:
 
     The severity specifiers (see Table 2) may be used to describe succinctly the
     current symptomatology (which might fall below level 1), with the 
     recognition that severity may vary by context and fluctuate over time. 
     Severity of social communication difficulties and restricted, repetitive 
     behaviors should be separately rated. The descriptive severity categories 
     should not be used to determine eligibility for and provision of services;
     these can only be developed at an individual level and through discussion of
     personal priorities and targets.
 
 Fluctuations (through things like age, burnout, skill regression) are officially
 recognized. Also, they shouldn't determine eligibility for and provision of 
 services, so whoever goes with 'level 1 means its mild, so they need no support'
 is just straight up not following medical advice. Looking at specific 
 governments there.
 
 The levels themselves are pretty self-explanatory, and most of the content is 
 well known. However, this one part stood out to me, this is describing level 1 
 restricted and repetitive behaviors.
 
     Inflexibility of behavior causes significant interference with functioning 
     in one or more contexts. Difficulty switching between activities. Problems 
     of organization and planning hamper independence.
 
 I see this type of executive functioning discussed so rarely, and there it is -
 as a very specific support need for level 1. Basically, the DSM-V is telling 
 professionals there's issues with it, and these issues may require official,
 life-long (but not daily) supports ... for the 'mild autism'.
 
 Let's pick some quotes out of the official, accompanying text. Most of the stuff
 is well-known, like 'is present from early childhood'.
 
     Core diagnostic features are evident in the developmental period, but 
     intervention, compensation, and current supports may mask difficulties in at
     least some contexts.
 
 Masking, there's the word.
 
 About criteria A:
 
     [...] Adults who have developed compensation strategies for some social 
     challenges still struggle in novel or unsupported situations and suffer from
     the effort and anxiety of consciously calculating what is socially intuitive
     for most individuals.
 
 Not new, but again, there's the word compensation.
 
 About criteria B:
 
     Many adults with autism spectrum disorder without intellectual or language
     disabilities learn to suppress repetitive behavior in public. Special
     interests may be a source of pleasure and motivation and provide avenues for
     education and employment later in life. Diagnostic criteria may be met when
     restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities were 
     clearly present during childhood or at some time in the past, even if 
     symptoms are no longer present.
 
 Describes masking again, and, you read that right, you don't have to show a 
 single criterion for B in adulthood for a diagnosis. This is why I put emphasis 
 on by history. For people doing self-diagnosis, doubting themselves etc., I
 think this is a very important point.
 
     Adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder are prone to anxiety
     and depression. Some individuals develop catatonic-like motor behavior
     (slowing and "freezing" mid-action), but these are typically not of the 
     magnitude of a catatonic episode. However [full catatonia is also possible]
 
 Ever seen this discussed? I haven't. But I do experience this, sometimes.
 
     Autism spectrum disorder is not a degenerative disorder, and it is typical 
     for learning and compensation to continue throughout life. Symptoms are
     often most marked in early childhood and early school years, with 
     developmental gains typical in later childhood in at least some areas (e.g.,
     increased interest in social interaction). A small proportion of individuals
     deteriorate behaviorally during adolescence, whereas most others improve. 
     Only a minority of individuals with autism spectrum disorder live and work 
     independently in adulthood; those who do tend to have superior language and 
     intellectual abilities and are able to find a niche that matches their 
     special interests and skills. In general, individuals with lower levels of 
     impairment may be better able to function independently. However, even these
     individuals may remain socially naive and vulnerable, have difficulties
     organizing practical demands without aid, and are prone to anxiety and 
     depression. Many adults report using compensation strategies and coping
     mechanisms to mask their difficulties in public but suffer from the stress
     and effort of maintaining a socially acceptable facade. Scarcely anything is
     known about old age in autism spectrum disorder.
 
 Such a nice paragraph. Increased interest in social interaction (meaning, having
 interest doesn't rule out autism, looking at some specific psychologists I read 
 about here). Skill regression is unfortunately a thing sometimes (good to know
 though). Also known and unfortunate is that the best way to work is to make your
 special interest into work. Obviously that doesn't work for everyone (not for
 me, so far), so there's these marked difficulties.
 
 Organization issues without aid, again!
 
 And masking - again. Including the costs of it. Very important.
 
     Some individuals come for first diagnosis in adulthood, perhaps prompted by 
     the diagnosis of autism in a child in the family or a breakdown of relations
     at work or home. Obtaining detailed developmental history in such cases may 
     be difficult, and it is important to consider self-reported difficulties.
 
 Yeah, self-reporting is necessary and valid. A behavioural test 
 (like the ADOS-2) is not enough to rule out autism.
 
     Cultural differences will exist in norms for social interaction, nonverbal
     communication, and relationships, but individuals with autism spectrum 
     disorder are markedly impaired against the norms for their cultural context.
     Cultural and socioeconomic factors may affect age at recognition or 
     diagnosis; for example, in the United States, late or underdiagnosis of
     autism spectrum disorder among African American children may occur.
 
     Autism spectrum disorder is diagnosed four times more often in males than in
     females. In clinic samples, females tend to be more likely to show 
     accompanying intellectual disability, suggesting that girls without 
     accompanying intellectual impairments or language delays may go
     unrecognized, perhaps because of subtler manifestation of social and 
     communication difficulties.
 
 Those issues are pretty well-known in the autistic community, nice to see it's
 in the DSM too.
 
 So yeah, there's a bunch more stuff in it about comorbidities, about the 
 diagnostic process in children, about how specifically things are impaired. But 
 I wanted to share these points, because I've seen some people (weirdly enough, 
 often officially diagnosed gatekeepers) be very unclear about these points. And
 some of those are just interesting to know. I hope you find it too - for me, it
 means the people writing the DSM-V were quite good, and quite aware of problems 
 (afaik they got actually autistic people helping them). So, neither dismiss it 
 outright, nor take only the diagnostic criteria in themselves literally, and 
 miss some key details.
 
 ​
 
 Now I just need to figure out why this was a thing in the ICD-10 about
 Aspergers:
 
     Psychotic episodes occasionally occur in early adult life.
 
 ??? Is this significant?
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/36
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 consider:
 
 x = 13 / 3, what is x?
 
 step 1: translate 13 into base 3
 step 2: digit shift once to the right
 step 3: store underflow as remainder
 step 3: translate back to base 10
 
 x is 4 remainder 1
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/37
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 This would normally just be a weird way to divide except it allows you to
 divide by zero, which is kinda cool.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/38
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 ideally you'd convert to an arbitrary base (in this case 9) and shift
 from there, but shifting two places might work. idk I haven't thought about it.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/39
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 That makes sense to me. I'll have to think about how to generalize
 that, hmmmm... It would only work for numbers that have even square roots right?
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/40
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 so what you're saying is I need to come up with an easier way to
 change bases? Or at least a way to digit shift in a different base than what
 you currently have. Sounds complicated.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/41
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 As a thought experiment, what do you think happens using this system
 to divide by 1? What about dividing by 0? Curious to see what you think
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/42
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 I always conceptualized bases as "the amount of numbers you can stuff
 into a bucket before you spill over to the next bucket". Call it a holdover
 from learning binary a bit younger than most people would consider normal...
 Anyway with base 2 it makes sense. Put one thing in the bucket, and if there's
 something there then it spills over.
 
 But if the bucket is ALWAYS full, as in base 1, then you'd have to do a tally
 system like you said: essentially counting from 0, then adding one to the end
 making 10, then 110 for two, and 1110 for three, and 11110 for four, etcetera.
 The reason you leave 0 at the end is because zero is a number and must still be
 represented as a tally - it just uses a different symbol for our human
 interpretation. Zeroes deserve respect in base 1 just the same as any other
 number! zero rights are human rights... no that doesn't quite work, zero rights
 are number rights? nevermind that joke is stupid
 
 (continued)
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/43
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 now base zero is interesting because it means there's NO BUCKETS AT
 ALL, which means that any numbers you try to stuff nowhere don't overflow to
 anywhere. Meaning each number is it's atomic value, and represented with a
 different character. So 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H,
 I, etc etc until we run out of symbols, in which case we'd need to start making
 more.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/44
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 So, you're saying the tally system doesn't make sense, and instead
 what I suggested for base zero is instead base 1?
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/45
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 Question - how do you do those cool superscript and subscript
 notations?
 
 Also: I don't think base 1 falls apart with negative exponents, for example
 consider 1^-1 ----- it would evaluate to 1/10 in this system, which is not 1/1.
 Another example, 1^-3 would evaluate to 1/1110, which seems accurate to me.
 
 As for 0^0, I guess I think it does equal 1? Bear with me:
 
 for any number n raised to an exponent e, you can write it like this:
 
 1 * n * n * n ... with as many "* n"s as you have n's. for example:
 
 1 * 3 * 3 * 3 = 9
 or
 1 * 5 * 5 * 5 * 5 * 5 = 625
 
 in each case there's 3 or 5 instances of "* n" tacked onto the end. I don't
 know the math notation for that.
 
 now, when you raise something to the power of zero, it looks like this:
 
 1
 
 because there's zero "* n"s added to the end.
 
 For negative exponents of course you divide instead of multiply, which is why
 it ends up looking like a fraction.
 
 So, it makes sense to me that 0 ^ 0 would equal 1, because it'd look like this:
 
 1
 
 while 0^1 would be
 
 1 * 0
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/46
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-36 neat thanks 
 
 when I said 1-1 = 1/10 I meant 1/1 in decimal except the denominator is in base
 1 meaning it's represented as 10 (since 10 in base 1 equals 1 in base 10. Or
 pretty much any other base.)
 
 I'm trying to figure out why 00 is undefined. There's a lot of math notation in
 that wikipedia article and I'm working through it bit by bit... I feel like
 there's a bug in the code of the universe and I'm trying to understand it.
 Like... why is dividing by zero undefined? That seems like a bug to me.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/47
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-39 Goodwill? Or Ebay
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/48
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 ┌─────────────────────────────┐
 │ CW: re: Bottom surgery woes │
 └─────────────────────────────┘
 
 
 @user-42 I had complications with my surgery. I wouldn't recommend it if you
 are likely to have a complicated surgery. I'm sorry :(
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/49
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 Kinda seems to me that in a post-scarcity world we should be incentivized to
 take care of stuff. And what better way to do that than reward the people who
 demand the least? Seems like an economy would be a pretty good way to do that,
 as long as you cannot hoard power over others and strip them of their rights.
 In this lecture I will go over my proposed solution, please save your questions
 to the end. Now if you turn to page 256...
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/cities-skylines
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 I think my favorite house would be massive - like the size of a mall - but
 every room is connected to 2+ rooms (except closets or bathrooms or kitchens or
 other specialized rooms) and it would be designed sort of like a miniature city.
 
 right now, if my knowledge of Cities: Skylines (video game about building
 cities) is accurate, then city planning engineers will plan out a city such
 that every part of it is served by various utilities, like gas, water,
 electricity, but also things like fire stations and hospitals and commercial
 areas. My idea is sort of like a small-scale version of that - each part of it
 would be connected to various utilities like gas, water, electricity, but also
 things like ~~fire stations and hospitals~~ laundry machines and
 kitchens and bathrooms and OH OH here's an idea what if there was mood lighting
 all the time and it was super comfy BUT whenever you took a picture on your
 phone or w/e the sensors in the room would pick it up and every light in the
 room would flash at once - idk I think it'd be cool
 
 okay but for real why don't people buy dead malls and build houses in them? I
 feel like the issues with converting skyscrapers (that they're too difficult to
 wire up with amenities - for example office buildings have like, 2 restrooms
 per floor, depending on the size of the building... it's not feasible to put in
 like a million water / sewage lines for everyone... c'mon that's crazy
 expensive (meaning, difficult or labor/material intensive) BUT BUT anyway in an
 open mall like the kind that are in those
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/the-marketplace-of-ideals
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 Open in app or online
 The Marketplace Of Ideals
 On Handmade, polarizing Internet debate, rational discussion, controversial
 personas, tribal conflict, and how they relate to the future of computing.
 Ryan Fleury
 Jul 19
 	
  
 		
 		
 	
 Share
  
 
 When I first learned programming, I was told—by peers, Internet
 tutorials—and later, when I was in university, by professors—a number of
 rules. They included ideas like “abstraction is good, to avoid lower level
 details”, “manual memory management is difficult and you should not do
 it”, “never write systems from scratch”. The justification for every rule
 was that it allowed one to avoid programming problems, rather than allowing one
 to conquer programming problems. In fact, it seemed as though every “rule”
 presented to me was driven by a hatred of programming, rather than a love for
 it.
 
 I shrugged much of this advice off, but initially internalized much of it too.
 
 And then, I found Handmade Hero, in which the host, Casey, demonstrates what
 writing a game for a Windows PC looks like—from scratch. Every minute of
 programming—from confusion, to debugging, to sketching out solutions, to
 typing code—spent on the project is captured live, on a Twitch stream.
 
 Now, everyone knows the Carl Sagan quote—“If you wish to make an apple pie
 from scratch, you must first invent the universe”—and the series didn’t
 kick off with a deep dive into quantum mechanics (if that is indeed what would
 help one invent a universe). But “from scratch”, for Handmade Hero, meant
 what it used to mean for game developers and systems programmers in the ‘80s
 or ‘90s: no libraries, no complex programming language features, just writing
 straightforward, procedural, C-style code to directly command the machine about
 what must be done to produce the effect of a game (interfacing with operating
 system or GPU APIs when necessary).
 
 Handmade Hero didn’t justify itself with rational arguments immediately. It
 didn’t justify its existence by debating the utility of libraries, the
 tradeoffs of modern programming language features, nor a balanced breakdown of
 its more traditional programming techniques as compared with modern programming
 approaches. It justified itself with something deeper: care for the product.
 Handmade Hero’s announcement trailer presented game development as a labor of
 love—a craft—best done by those passionate about it.
 	
 	
 
 For me, Handmade Hero was immediately captivating because I’m, by
 temperament, contrarian. If I’m in a room with 100 people, with 99 of them
 repeating identical dogma, and the remaining 1 passionately and
 unapologetically presenting a unique perspective, I’m always curious about
 that one person, and I’m always interested in what they have to say, even if
 I don’t always end up agreeing with them unilaterally. But, in many cases, I
 am convinced by that one person—and this certainly was the case with Handmade
 Hero.
 
 After watching the series for a while, I became sure that all of those
 “rules”—the ones I mentioned above—were wrong. Programmers who cared
 about what they were doing—the ones who cared enough to handcraft something
 from scratch—didn’t need to be infantilized. They could understand
 computers to a much better degree. They could understand problems from first
 principles, and write solutions from scratch. They could eliminate dependence
 on libraries, and have a much greater degree of control over their projects.
 Unchained from a number of technologies written by others, they could achieve
 entirely new possibilities, which would’ve been incomprehensible for
 programmers not in on the secret. Love for the craft provided vastly superior
 results.
 
 Handmade Hero ignited a fire that spawned a rapidly growing community. It was
 filled with many older programmers who found a renewed interest in the ideals
 that initially motivated them to program. But it was also filled with many
 young programmers, empowered by their new understanding of the process of
 programming, as it was originally done. There were a number of amazing
 projects—all breaking what everyone used to believe were the “laws of
 programming”. 17, 18, 19 year old programmers had projects that made an
 embarrassment of university computer science senior capstone projects.
 
 Handmade Hero also provided a glimpse into the state of computing—what did an
 experienced programmer, who grew up in an earlier age of computing, think about
 modern computers? How had the field progressed—or not—since they were a kid?
 
 And with that glimpse came an immense frustration—that same community, at
 some point deemed the “Handmade community”, felt like computers had been
 wasted. The community had learned many of the principles required to build
 software to a much higher standard—and yet every program on modern computers
 was immensely frustrating. Almost every program was slow, unethical, annoying,
 and exploitative—and what’s worse? It wasn’t always that way! Computer
 hardware had become faster, not slower! Consumer machines had several orders of
 magnitude more compute power, more memory, more long-term storage! It had
 become more trivial, not less, to solve security and ownership problems! And
 yet software then ran slower, less reliably, required more Internet access, and
 seemed to exploit the user more than 20 years earlier. It became undeniable to
 everyone that the computing industry was no longer run by those who loved the
 craft—but by those who exploited the craft for other purposes.
 
 Why? What caused this exceedingly obvious state of decay?
 
 The community found purpose in its newfound lessons—part of the reason was
 perhaps that modern programming advice, education, and techniques were entirely
 misguided. Maybe selling books about absurdly complex language features became
 prioritized over doing a good job. Maybe many modern programming languages were
 more about the programmer, rather than the user. Maybe older approaches—older
 languages, older tooling, older styles—were a much more valuable place to
 start. Maybe the institutionalization and corporatization of programming
 education eroded standards, and drove toward the production of programmers as
 replaceable widgets in a gigantic corporate apparatus, rather than skilled,
 irreplaceable craftsmen. Maybe cushy corporate programming jobs were
 prioritized by capable engineers over the riskier path of competition.
 
 Maybe this whole “Handmade” approach was the answer. Maybe the community
 had something to offer in solving problems in software. With frustration came
 drive—and motivation. Programmers in the community felt that—while they
 certainly couldn’t solve everything—they could at least build a corner of
 the computing world that didn’t suck so terribly. They could at least use
 what they had learned from Handmade Hero, and build more great games, or
 engines, or tools—and some dreamed even further, to operating systems,
 toolchains, and computing environments.
 
 But with that initial frustration—often public frustration, expressed both in
 the original series and later by followers of the series—came a critical
 response of the Handmade community. The criticism was that the passionate,
 harshly critical, and blunt comments made by those in the community, or
 adjacent with the community, were “polarizing”, or “inflammatory”, or
 “toxic”, or “overly hostile”. The programmers in the Handmade community
 had no right to criticize software, at least in the way they were doing so. The
 problem was not that the software world had failed, it was that the criticism
 of the software world was too unkind. Or, even if the software world had
 failed, laying harsh blame on any product, committee, or person was
 inappropriate. Really, those people are just trying their best. Blame—the
 argument goes—must be diffuse. It is a “collective failing”, not a
 failing of any individual.
 
 In many public conversations on the topic, the conversational dynamic shifted.
 The conversation was about the behavior of those being critical of
 software—not software itself failing the user. Maybe it was possible to
 criticize, or improve, software without being so fiery—without being so
 harsh. Maybe the Handmade community went too far. After all, sometimes
 “abstractions are good”, and sometimes “libraries are okay”, and
 sometimes “manual memory management should be avoided”, and sometimes one
 “shouldn’t write systems from scratch”, and sometimes people on a
 committee really do just try their best, and the result doesn’t turn out so
 well, and that’s okay. And besides, why be so fiery on social media? Why
 jeopardize employability, or friendships, or follower counts? Why not
 persistently affirm the work of others—irrespective of how you feel about it?
 After all, they spent so much time and effort on their work—that necessitates
 that it’s valuable. And really, what the Handmade community’s behavior
 reinforced was an ugly stereotype of game developers being assholes on the
 Internet. And you don’t want to be an asshole on the Internet, do you? How
 about you just sit down, shut up, and keep quiet?
 
 The degradation continued with attempts to rationally deconstruct the
 community’s core purpose itself. What did “Handmade” really mean? Surely
 it isn’t practical to write all systems from scratch. Surely manual memory
 management can’t be done well for everything, at least not if you’re any
 short of a programming demigod. Surely it’s wrong to look down upon the
 failures of software—they are a perfectly predictable consequence of nature,
 and the best one can hope for is incremental progress, and incremental progress
 is hard.
 
 As this shift in tone continued, the community nevertheless grew—but the new
 members didn’t have the same fire which characterized the original community.
 They had adopted the conceptual framing of the programming world at large. The
 rules of which I spoke were, yet again, rules. Following along with Handmade
 Hero was no longer a rite of passage for newcomers—after all, it’s over 600
 episodes long, and who has time for that?! (and who has time for even the first
 20 or 30?!) But even if it were shorter, it no longer was a useful embodiment
 of the community’s popular values. To the new community, it was too
 opinionated. It wasn’t nuanced enough. It wasn’t respectful of programmers
 writing most software. It was too harsh. At this point, the newcomers to the
 community were not “Handmade programmers”, and they still aren’t.
 
 With this shift came the extinguishing of the fire which drove the community in
 the first place—indeed, the fire—the frustration, the unapologetic
 standards—was that which produced the passion, the motivation, the drive to
 do better. When the community buckled under the critical pressure, it was
 defeated—every core value upon which the community was built became
 necessarily supported by a “sometimes”, or “maybe”, or “probably”.
 Engineers producing bad software couldn’t be blamed—it was structures and
 systems at fault. The community failed to gatekeep against those who disagreed
 with its premises, and as such was subject to a deluge of average Internet
 programmers. It ceded linguistic frame, ideological ground, and its base axioms
 to outsiders, and failed to defend itself on such ground. The community,
 preferring nominal growth over loyalty to its roots and conviction in its
 values, became akin to virtually all online programming communities—many
 community members parroting some of the same propaganda that the community once
 notoriously rejected.
 
 In ceding ideological territory to its opponents, in an effort to gatekeep
 less, and to create a wider umbrella under which more individuals could feel
 unoffended, the Handmade community made a critical error in misunderstanding
 the forces responsible for its creation.
 
 In 2018, I became responsible for a major portion of the formal Handmade
 community—known as Handmade Network, which began in the wake of the initial
 Handmade Hero series—and I adopt responsibility for this critical error. It
 is with years of reflection and thought that I write this, in hopes of
 capturing what I found my mistakes to be. I left as community lead of Handmade
 Network in 2022, and it was largely due to what I write about today, although
 such feelings didn’t easily manifest into words at the time.
 
 In adopting responsibility, I hope that what I’ve written thus far about the
 Handmade community is not seen as an attack on its future—but rather a
 diagnosis of its decay in the past, which I oversaw. The Handmade community’s
 story is not over, and I write this partly to defend its original history and
 roots, which—as I’ve written—has been denounced by many.
 
 The Handmade perspective arose—and was felt so strongly, by so many—because
 of a vision about what software could be like. It began as a look into the
 past—at how good software once was, and how programming once was—which
 fueled imagination about what computers might instead become in the future, if
 carefully guided. It even had a compelling story about how software might be
 carefully guided to produce that better future—and that story was rooted in
 love for the craft, not love of oneself.
 
 In other words, it was a vision about a goal; an ideal: an aesthetic ideal
 about what it meant to program, and what it meant to be a programmer. Handmade
 programmers were not egg-headed academics, but were competent
 engineers—familiar with their hardware, and their true, physical problems.
 They did not seek social acceptance, nor approval, if their product sucked and
 they knew it. In this ideal, programmers—if not designers
 themselves—understood the critical role of design. They did not busy
 themselves with abstract, academic problems, at least not as part of their
 day-to-day projects—they were concerned first and foremost with the machine
 code which would eventually execute on a user’s machine, and what effects
 that machine code would produce.
 
 They weren’t necessarily allergic to using someone else’s code, nor were
 they allergic to abstractions, but they understood both as a double-edged
 sword, with serious tradeoffs and implications, and thus used both extremely
 conservatively. They were responsible for code they shipped that ran on a
 user’s machine, period—whether they wrote it or not; as such, they rejected
 forests of dependencies, and built at least most of their software from
 scratch, in true Handmade fashion. They loved and cared about the result, and
 what it meant to the person using it—as such, they wanted the most productive
 and useful tools for the job, without compromising that end result.
 
 In short, the ideal was that the act of programming is for the product, not the
 programmer. Becoming a programmer meant becoming as effective as possible at
 the craft of producing the highest quality software, and nothing else. Many
 other ideals follow: high performance, reliability, flexibility, user-driven
 computational abilities, practical and grounded programming tooling, ethical
 software respecting the user’s time and choices, and beautiful visual design.
 
 In this ideal, if the software is bad, then it’s the software maker’s
 burden. Somebody is at fault—the engineering failure is somebody’s
 responsibility. The call to action is to empower oneself such that they might
 outcompete such failures, and build a simpler and more functional computing
 world, piece by piece.
 
 Understanding that this perspective is in fact ethical is crucial, because it
 distinguishes it from a set of logically derived propositions. Handmade ideas
 about software apply only within a particular ethical frame. Furthermore, that
 ethical frame is not universally agreed upon, nor can it be, because it’s not
 derived from scientific observation, nor logical analysis; it’s derived from
 aesthetics and values. It’s derived from what someone loves, not what someone
 rationally derives.
 
 The visceral response which saw the original Handmade community as toxic, or
 hostile, or dismissive was not a response to any logical proposition originally
 made—it was a response to the prioritization of the product over the
 programmer. Such a response came from a disagreement about what is defined as a
 burden, and on whom a burden is placed. The Handmade programmer believed in
 accepting personal responsibility, and providing something better—the
 culturally dominant trend in the programming world, however, was to collect a
 paycheck and abdicate responsibility for low-quality software. To such people,
 it is, in fact, the system and the process that is the problem (if there is a
 problem at all)—not any individual in particular. Such people are made
 inadequate by craftsmen who love their work—and so to them, Handmade was an
 ideological threat.
 
 This, importantly, is not a disagreement which can be resolved by hashing it
 out with rational debate; it arises at a deeper level, which can only manifest
 as some form or another of tribal conflict.
 
 The hostile arguments often seen on social media between Handmade-style
 programmers, or game developers more broadly, and—for instance—modern C++
 programmers, or web programmers, is not occurring within the often-referenced
 marketplace of ideas—the hypothetical space in which competing perspectives
 are solved through calm and rational debate provided a common goal—but
 instead in the marketplace of ideals, in which broad common ground ceases to
 exist.
 
 The Handmade view of software has ugly implications for programmers—if its
 premises are accepted, then it follows that: several large software projects to
 which individuals have dedicated careers are valueless wastes of time and
 energy; virtually every field of (at least) consumer-facing software has
 decayed dramatically in talent, in output, and in productivity; the $100,000
 college degree that everyone was required to obtain, and to accumulate debt
 for, was merely a signaling mechanism, rather than a certification of any
 technical ability; a huge swath of programming tutorials, programming books,
 and organizations are basically fooling themselves into believing they’re
 doing productive work, when in fact they’re shuffling around bits of memory
 for personal pleasure and gratification; some people who call themselves
 “programmers” are not doing programming; some people who do program should
 not be producing software for others; and plenty more.
 
 But none of that needs to matter. For some, it’s more important that they
 personally find themselves comfortable, and so they choose to prioritize the
 programmer over the product.
 
 Because Handmade programmers—among others who’d like to change the course
 of software for what they see as the better—are operating not in the
 marketplace of ideas, but rather the marketplace of ideals, it’s crucial that
 they understand that they’re not involved in rational debate, but the
 Internet equivalent of ideal-based tribal conflict. And indeed, this is why
 “technical discussions” about—say—programming languages are virtually
 never conducted nor won with technical arguments. Data is never collected,
 assertions are never scientifically justified, and promises to investigate
 further scientifically are conveniently delayed—permanently.
 
 But notice that arguments about technologies—presumably battling for
 adoption, social acceptance, and popularity—are not only empirically not
 about rationality, but definitionally cannot be about rationality. A beginner
 who knows nothing about programming cannot select an ecosystem or technology
 based on rational arguments, because they’re removed from the technical
 context which makes such arguments meaningful. They can only select by
 second-degree metrics of qualities they care for—popularity, what someone
 seems to produce with said technology, how quickly they produce it, the unique
 qualities of that production as opposed to those of others, and so on.
 
 In short, for those who want more prevalence of the “software craft”, in
 which responsible programmers are more akin to a homemade woodworker than a
 corporate slave, the battle over social dynamics and human motivation are
 paramount.
 
 In such a battle, there is much wisdom to be gained from Handmade Hero—its
 initial justification of itself was a value proposition, not a logical
 argument. Its community’s idols, its leaders, and its followers came across
 as dismissive and polarizing because they loved their craft, and because that
 was what was most important. That behavioral characteristic was responsible for
 motivating the community, and for promoting human action by those within the
 community. They wanted good software, and they knew how to make it, and if
 others wanted to produce crappy software, fine, but it was simply unacceptable
 for inadequacy to be the industry’s default.
 
 Therefore, there is in inextricable link between the fire, passion,
 inflammation—the “toxicity and dismissiveness”—and the prevalence of
 the values. The former is what drives the latter. To expect the latter to arise
 detached from the former is to ignore the true causal relationship between the
 two.
 
 Furthermore, the public fire, passion, and polarization is the most useful tool
 in promoting the value system. In acknowledging that the “software
 craftsman” perspective—the Handmade perspective—is not logically defined
 but ethically defined, it can assert itself aesthetically. It can loudly
 proclaim that there is a better way to make software, and it can loudly
 denounce the work of its opponents. In doing so, the Overton window about
 software is shifted. The average programmer becomes exposed to a wide variety
 of value systems, and of value frameworks about programming. As such, his null
 hypothesis about, for instance, libraries, one’s ability to write systems
 from scratch, one’s dependence on vast forests of middleware and abstraction
 layers, is changed.
 
 With the ethical system’s public presence, the default probability of certain
 courses of action change. Maybe it is better to write systems from scratch.
 Maybe operating with care as a responsible engineer produces not only much
 better, but much more fulfilling results. Maybe the world improves with such
 software. Maybe we improve, if we hold ourselves to that higher standard.
 
 Ethical systems win not by rational debate, but by hoisting their underlying
 aesthetic on a banner, and going to battle. Ethical systems which fail to step
 foot onto the battlefield are not winning by avoiding the “silly game” of
 tribal conflict—they are dying with their foolish believers, who mistook
 their cowardice for ascension above the human condition.
 
 In short, the side which thinks itself above the human condition—and indeed,
 the need for public struggle between ethical systems, and the need to loudly
 proclaim one’s aesthetics and goals—will lose to the side which is
 dedicated to victory, even if through tribal warfare.
 
 If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing. Thanks for reading.
 
 -Ryan
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/50
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-45 there's two episodes in Extraordinary Attorney Woo that take place on
 that island. I know because I just binged it
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/51
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-47 this is the funniest image in the entire universe
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: notes/governmental-priorities
══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────
 the first priority of a government should be in producing enough to satisfy all
 the needs of it's inhabitants. Once it can do that it can begin moving it's
 economy into a new stage of development - one where nobody needs any money
 because they can have whatever they want. If you want a car, sure. If you want
 17 cars, then maaaaaaybe you need to produce something related to cars. I mean,
 it's only fair that you contribute to what you value.
 
 you don't have to have just one job, too, you could sign yourself up for
 several at once and they would notify you when you were needed. Basically giving
 them customized availabilities that they could discuss amongst themselves and
 figure out. Like, it doesn't have to be like... managers doing this, more like
 just a simple computer program. Easy, simple, and done.
 
 if you work for two companies in the same industry, there can be NO restrictions
 on what you can say or do. Because when knowledge is not lost, but repeated
 through the generations, we can have progress. And progress advances us toward
 the meta objective, the goal that transcends all the battles in the war, if you
 get my drift.
 
 they say the atom bomb ended the war, but the blood of men is what won it.
 
 maybe it's the same with the economy? Maybe we should be pooling our efforts to
 generate something that "ends the war" with scarcity? We could solve global
 warming and create new wondrous things that are beautiful to behold.
 
 I'll ask you again, do you want to live forever?
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧═══════════════════════────────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/52
═══════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-54 @user-55 @user-56 I disagree with this. I shamelessly promote my
 website because I want to share art, not because I want to make money. You
 literally can't pay me. I have no ads.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘

 -> file: fediverse/53
═══════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────────
 @user-59 @user-55 for an example of this, check out my website ritzmenardi.com
 - no ads or anything, just art that is designed to be impossible to categorize.
┌─────────┐                                                           ┌───────────┐
│ similar │                                                           │ different │
╘═════════╧════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────┴───────────┘


« First │ ‹ Prev │ Page 9 of 258 │ Next › │ Last »