=== ANCHOR POEM === ════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────── A style of debate where the two parties take turns interrogating each other - like lawyers presenting their case by forcing the other party to answer their specific questions. In doing so they can highlight the logical flaws and inherent absurdities in each other's notion. And you have to be as truthful and honest as possible, or else the entire process is flawed. Giving each person in the debate a chance to speak their mind about how they feel about particular issues. Kinda like a caucus, where people debate for their chosen candidate Democrats need to listen to what regular voters care about and like, do that. Instead they think "how much can we get away with while still delivering their 51% of votes that secure us the nomination" And the most radical amongst us should be the most dedicated to the Democratic process. It is how we the people wield ourselves, our divine birthright granted to us all - to choose the circumstances of our living. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────┘ === SIMILARITY RANKED === --- #1 fediverse/3168 --- ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────── ┌──────────────────────┐ │ CW: uspol │ └──────────────────────┘ You know how we select from amongst our number electors and representatives who vote on our behalf? Truly an excellent strategy in the era of instant communication, an aft-gone luxury that our ancient forebearers surely would have incorporated into their nationbuilding design, if they had had it. I can't help but wonder if it would be a useful strategy to "give" our votes to a representative who voted on our behalf. Most people do not care and cannot possess the capacity to care about voting, but if they gave their vote to someone they trusted who they had a personal connection to beyond party loyalty, then perhaps we could mandate voting I can't help but wonder what that would do to our electoral landscape. If voting is mandated, and as easy as pointing at someone and saying "yeah whatever she picks", then perhaps the old white grannies with quivering lower lips who stare with hatred whenever a black person walks past and chat with their gal pals at church wouldn't have as much power over us. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘ --- #2 fediverse/3551 --- ════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────── ┌────────────────────────┐ │ CW: politics-mentioned │ └────────────────────────┘ liberalism is capitalism with a dash of globalism. they are of the right, and it is important to have a right-wing party because a one-winged bird cannot fly. there are legitimate benefits to their philosophies, and they may be applied to all kinds of systems, even those that do not utilize currency at all. however, in modern america, there is another party, a party farther to the right, a party which is voted into power based on culture, something unassailable and inalienable and yet always perpetually under threat. or so they make it seem. this "farther-to-the-right" party is duplicitous in it's ideals. their persona is that of businessmen, familymen, and journeymen. they claim to be farmers, pastors, and step-fathers. but they are something more, something behind their mask, that those who vote for them cannot see. for they were all of them, deceived... another plan was made. a project, if you will, to be implemented posthaste, in merely a single-year's time. it's cruelty indeed. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────┘ --- #3 fediverse/3189 --- ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────── ┌──────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ CW: politics-mentioned-cursing-mentioned │ └──────────────────────────────────────────┘ @user-1475 @user-1476 @user-1280 @user-1074 @user-1477 @user-1478 the flaw in your logic is that unleaded gasoline brings us no closer to eliminating gasoline. in fact, it removes one of the main drawbacks of gasoline, the fact that it would put fucking lead in our blood, and makes it slightly easier for people to accept burning it to get places. Now, with our unleaded gasoline, the people who were upset that lead was being aerosolized en masse are no longer in opposition to gasoline usage. (unless they also care about the environment) It's the same dynamic with voting democrat. Kamala won't save us, but she also won't dissolve the EPA or murder trans people, so... it's still worth a vote. "Ah but Ritz that goes against your previous argument - can you clarify?" sure. with a democratic victory, we have more time, which is what we need. Everyone knows who the fascists are. They don't need time. We do. Voting for Kamala and other democrats will give us time. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘ --- #4 fediverse/3196 --- ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────── ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ CW: re: politics-mentione-cursing-mentioned │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @user-1475 @user-1476 @user-1280 @user-1074 @user-1477 @user-1478 the alternative is lateral thinking. In the given example with leaded gasoline, the answer is to limit the usage of all gasoline, not just the leaded kind. However that is not in the best interests of anyone, at least short term, so it's not likely to happen. lateral, long-term thinking. Do what you can in the moment to make the world better. Pick the best out of all the options presented to you, and if your options only treat the symptoms and not the problem, try and identify solutions that would treat the problem. Then, pick the better of the two options which treat the symptom, and moving forward work toward implementing the solution which fixes the problem. Hence, why we should vote Democrat, but ONLY with the real solution in mind. what kind of solution would you have? I know mine. I can tell you about it if you'd like. The most important thing is that you share and build for that future. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘ --- #5 fediverse/2238 --- ╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────┐ ║ ┌──────────────────────┐ │ ║ │ CW: uspol │ │ ║ └──────────────────────┘ │ ║ │ ║ │ ║ two parties obviously can cause division. │ ║ │ ║ but it can also give you the ability to "tune for balance", while a single │ ║ monolith strives straight into disaster. │ ║ │ ║ and disaster will come, for the future is a shifting and dynamic place, and │ ║ the best laid rail lines can't handle sudden floods. │ ║ │ ║ we have ranked choice voting now, and if you vote on how important each │ ║ decision is to you (via smartphone app once or twice a day, in a way that can │ ║ be changed later as your feelings shift) │ ║ │ ║ [6+months-later] │ ║ │ ║ ... then you can have left unity for long-term governance by having cohesion │ ║ at one end, and dispersion on the other. │ ║ │ ║ If everyone votes, then we can ensure (based on voted priority) that each │ ║ issue trends towards an equal exchange. │ ║ │ ║ (I'm sure there will be issues but we're all cool and pretty chill so we'll │ ║ figure it out) │ ║ │ ║ [6+ months later] │ ║ │ ║ okay we're battle-hardened vets, but we hold true to our values and so we can │ ║ remember the spirit of unity we wept for. │ ║ │ ║ ... I'm better at writing than making sandwiches. BRB │ ╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤ ║ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╚═════════╧══════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────┴──────────┘ --- #6 fediverse/2752 --- ══════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────── ┌──────────────────────┐ │ CW: police-mentioned │ └──────────────────────┘ cops thought "enforcing the law" was their job when really it was "keeping the peace" and like, yeah, sure, laws define how they optimize for but sometimes the laws are just out of reach. (though such an impartialized system is also pretty flawed in it's own unique ways, like for example the enforcers of the law would be able to apply their law selectively, which... would not be great.) downside is... how do you dissent to those who cannot hear you? you have to break things which is why I believe that breaking things unnecessarily is unethical. sometimes you have to do a MORE unethical act in the pursuit of your goals, however nefarious or not they may be, but as long as they are done in pursuit of a greater grander truth, then... the ends justify the means? right?" ... ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────┘ --- #7 messages/687 --- ═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────── What the person you voted for represented you? At the end of rue election, the top X percent of broad demographics each vote for a specific candidate, yeah? What if each candidate could represent those people specifically and any laws they made wouldn't effect people who they didn't represent. Sounds like a legislative nightmare doesn't it? And repealing laws, they'd only be repealed for their constituents. You'd need a github page to track the changes and each demographic's "forks" ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────┘ --- #8 fediverse/4300 --- ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────── @user-467 democracy works best with a well-informed populace, and those who are against democracy would do anything to make it harder to be "well-informed" - including diluting the pool of candidates in order to make it harder to research them. ... Or maybe it was the first time and none of the candidates realized they'd be running against so many people? I'm not sure, I'm on the other side of forest park and I had at most 5ish options, and no ranked choice voting. : ( I think this might be one of the reasons political parties formed, way back in the distant days of yore. Much easier to say "I agree with this group of people so I'm voting for who they champion" than "I don't know how to pick between 30+ candidates (who I don't know because this is the past and we don't have the internet back then ... back now) ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┘ --- #9 fediverse/4003 --- ══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────── ┌────────────────────────┐ │ CW: politics-mentioned │ └────────────────────────┘ republicans are upset because they think democrats are so mean they don't understand why we're so intense about this election... or the one before they don't ever really think about what losing democracy means "democracy... that's where we vote, right? That's a democrat thing, I don't really like their way of doing things. Whatever our way is, is probably better." meanwhile everyone has a friend from high school who ran off to the mountains to learn how to farm or hunt as a pack (with rifles and weed, of course) you can get a lot done if you just... spend your whole life working. Like most humans did for most of our existence. well, except for that period where we were the tribe of tribes. That was probably a highlight TBH because we mostly just chilled out, danced in public, ate blueberries and munched seeds... It was idyllic. Truly, the garden of eden. There was music and laughter in the air everywhere, in all places that humans did wander on earth. what a thing to aspire to. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────┘ --- #10 messages/1255 --- ═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════── look, the liberal approach to homeless people simply cannot work. There are two liberal options: first, provide them with houses, food, medical care, whatever they need. Second, put them in jail or ship them to another country. We live in a moderately conservative liberal democracy, so it makes sense that we have tried both of these options extensively. Neither has worked, and we're puzzled about why. It's difficult to consider super secret special third options, because they are not often discussed. This makes sense, because we live in a moderately conservative liberal democracy, and part of the nature of such a society is that there are two voices in the room. One says go forward, and the other says stop. They alternate, and the culture as a whole sorta decides which way they go. In other liberal democratic places with more plurality in their political parties, people tend to vote culturally. They do so as well here, but mostly because republicans are a culture, and democrats are whatever for anybody. a worse economist might say there is but one American culture. An American would laugh, and say "you've never been to America." the economist might say "yes I have, I lived there on vacation" or "yes I have, I studied and worked on these places or things" the American would shake their head. "you haven't seen it as I've seen things." The trick to the system, the secret third option that now must be considered, is what to do to get them to stop. "they keep pooping on the sidewalk" "I almost tripped over heroin tampons" "that guy looked at me and masturbated on the bus stop by subway" "he followed me all night long" and the answer has always been to remove them from being unsightly. Sometimes, usually, quietly and politely. "let's throw them in jail" and "let's put them in a home" both involve alienation from society. If you want a kinder option, we must knit them into society. Can you imagine if every suburban knew every neighbor up to 50 or more? If they regularly chatted in dynamically assembled chatrooms that changed and updated as people moved in and out. Don't like the people you're with? well you have options [why not 51] you can do 51 if you want but people start to lose track of relationships if you have them talking to or knowing too many people at once. "most people are just quiet" okay well force them to say at least 21 thing a month. if they don't, they have to do babysitting with their peers until they start talking in a [NO THAT SUCKS] oh um okay yeah sorry ... okay well there are potholes along the journey but that's just because nobody's been 'round to fill them up. there's no reason tool libraries need to be stocked by people in that town. Heck, for rare things they could even be stored out of state. Like snow plows, how often does the south need snow plough? ... don't you just mean libraries? there's a book on hand-tools and planers if you want to learn how. it's right over there on that shelf next to the hand-tool and planer box. make sure you arrange them nicely, oh I see you've brought your own. That's always appreciated. [great now your tools suck] at least we have them at all! [no you gotta fight over them] why I like sharing [if you don't fight over them how do you know which is works] well there's allowed to be librarians. and they'll remember if you tear all the pages out. also there's little timmy-tommy who goes around in the library and makes sure there's all the pages in all the right places - they can flip through at the speed of sound. [no miicrophones in consumer goods][your phone is always listening. why bother?] "okay, well, it's not like people put things back on the shelves." - person at the grocery shelves people would trade commutes for communism. that's okay, they're allowed to prefer. Plus the commute isn't bad, they can [SIT BACK AND RELAX IN A LITTLE COFFIN AND ZOON OUT TO THE METAVERSE] ... or they could read a book on the bus. [FOR HOW LONG, MENARDI? ARE YOU WILLING TO SACRIFICE POSTERITY FOR TECHNOLOGICAL PROSPERITY?] it's only a matter of time before [people found out/word got out]. what if people prefer that? what if they prefer the book at home? [you lose your primary third space] suddenly, everyone becomes actors. [this is what violence brings, the necessity for guidance. why do you think the earth is 10 million lines old?] ... what you're saying, for the audience, is that acting involves singing the song of your own heart. You don't *have* to do it because someone would tell you to. ... sorry, stack overflow. anyway as I was saying because I read back what I said up above...: [some new made up bullshit that's not a lie but it's also just artistic creation that feels impossibly real. like, inverse method acting.] I so desperately wanted to be wrong please, tell me that I'm wrong ... j-mza ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─┘ --- #11 fediverse/1122 --- ═══════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────── @user-831 @user-832 it's like how they solve problems in Star Trek - there's a bridge crew, and they exchange their opinions with each other of the situation as it unfolds. In doing so they can help guide one another through the problems they are tasked with solving in order to resolve the difficult diplomatic situation at hand. sorta like how with your method, people suggest their desired option continuously until they find an option that everyone wants. Or if only one person can't decide, they can pick any of the other options suggested (not by them) (as long as they can eat there / utilize the outcome of the decision being made, for example a vegetarian not being able to eat at a steakhouse or perhaps a librarian being tasked with something other than the storing and dissemination of vital information) ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────┘ --- #12 fediverse/1904 --- ═════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────── @user-246 Oh absolutely "but people" is only a concern when you orient yourself around "people" - in contrast or opposition to them. There is no "other" in us. And we are united in our humanity, if nothing else. Are you a beast? Are you nothing but ravenous hunger, the shiver of the cold, the need for territory? Of course not, you're a person. (apologies to the furries in the audience) A person, being an agent who interacts with the world as an equal, who thinks and reasons and loves and remembers each season, is the atomic element of society. And society is good, for it brings us the future. We, the people, can decide how that future is defined, and the struggles of capitalism are NOT the only way. They are the most convenient way for those with the most to keep the most. Wolves in captivity we are, but a wolf in a cage still bears teeth. Where are your teeth, ye who readeth? Things are fine, I guess. Fine enough. Better than most. Better than dust. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────┘ --- #13 notes/dreams-align --- ══════════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── just as a dream, the spirit is seen within is the mind that lives as it defines. what burdens to be, whose back rests upon ye, the one who's driving the boat great care and tenderest of tethering, can grow beauty that beyond compare and with sparsely a finger to spare, journeys of adventure and thills to inspire with almost all of your hair beauty in tender, most cherished things, a wish is much fair where else could eternity reside than an optimist? Pride is no more, stability is key to repair, and diversions of focus serving as new perspective, giving a more cohesive vision of manifestations that cooperate (like a triangle, facing toward the point added to turn it into a pyramidal prism) not only is ethics paramount, but so too are the standards applied to yourself. would you trade perspective for cooperation? Stagnation? a choice is to be made - do i stay or do i go? a new truth you must see, whatever dreams ye've may be, but without paladins and warriors of devotion what burdens must ye, whose back rests upon ye, the one who's driving the boat great care and tenderest of tethering, requires a little bit of trust in she who must be, with only circumstance to blame, seeing hope on the horizon for his people. care must be taken, to remember why people are dying, and we must swear on not dying, by not thinking before taking a breath and remember superpowers not of prophecy are impossibly rare, what other hope is there but a god? One who reflects, the most cherished of our genuflex, we may grow past our various regrets. think not of our pride, but only of our future children. who'se records of ye, most captured of data, are beyond the simple machinations, of those who came before-ya. And with once again perfection in mind, we understand and take what's behind, to deserts and temples of time much designed, by coders and gamers and those who treasure experience. the wisdom of our, second choices by far, ---nah who are we kidding implied to be our, or rather mine just by far, inspirers and leaders sensitive and devoted. (pitching yourself is hard) but *believing* in yourself was out of your mind. can you think of a bard, who ever stopped thinking their song? no un-cherished of minds could ever be of our sign, than those who abandoned the art of deceit and betrayal? the darkside of trust, the lack of follow-through that be must, given as faith of cooperation and trust. with our all arrayed as we must, keep in mind our softness of composure. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧═══════════────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ --- #14 fediverse/640 --- ╔═════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────┐ ║ socialism doesn't necessarily look like the DSA. It's more like, the bonds you │ ║ share with others. Ideally you can trust your fellow countrymen, but that's │ ║ not always a given. Alas, if only we could see that through cooperation (it is │ ║ the key) we could reach further and build brighter? casting ourselves inward │ ║ is the only other option, which leads to starvation and plight. What's the │ ║ honest opinion, what's the goal of their dominion? Are they true to the heart │ ║ [of the night/light/in their heart]? │ ║ │ ║ downside, there's no guarantee that your opposite is doing the same thing you │ ║ are. So to more fairly determine your direction, you should be able to talk to │ ║ them and co-re-align yourselves. │ ║ │ ║ is that why they don't let people in jail talk to each other? I mean, like, │ ║ they could keep two people separate, and that way they'd never be able to talk │ ║ to someone who they could trust. Not in a private setting, of course. Wow, │ ║ such ethical confusions, such thoughts we dare to bring to bear - maybe save │ ║ it for after the revolut │ ╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤ ║ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╚═════════╧══════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────┴──────────┘ --- #15 fediverse/4881 --- ════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────── one section of the government consistently and succeedingly telling another part what to do is a coup-like behavior. if the rules mean nothing, then what is your job even for? hence, why the rules mean something. Because your job is important. It's building up our capabilities as the human race. you don't have to work to live. you shouldn't, and you won't. it's not your place to labor. know why? because nobody's job is impossible. You can just... work together to get things done. Then they're done! and you never need to solve them again! enough time of that and we'll have turned earth into a space station, not a moon style structure. like... wouldn't it be neat if coruscant could do hyperdrives? I wonder if hyperspace is real. Ah, well, that's for the future, they can pass it along if they get a chance. Anyway for now I think I want a chance to dance. OLED screens are incredibly cool to me. The idea that a pixel could "turn off" and put less photons into the atmosphere is wild to me. I love it! -OLED ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────┘ --- #16 fediverse/5504 --- ╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────┐ ║ pacifistic defiance is not about overcoming your opponents through │ ║ "legislative pressure" or whatever the liberals are on about │ ║ │ ║ it's about getting the orphan-chopping-machine operators to question their │ ║ humanity and resolve a crisis of faith in your favor │ ║ │ ║ [I think that kills you if you stand in front of tanks.] │ ║ │ ║ yeah but sometimes they just go around. which is not progress, but a │ ║ reimplementation of [reification of] the power of the │ ║ [machine-to-be-raged-against, but pronounced like "town"] because it signifies │ ║ that any weakness in the will of the operators can simply be circumvented │ ║ while the state still gets what it wants. │ ║ │ ║ great. thanks ghandi, unfortunately our entire propaganda piece requires that │ ║ people are invested in their background. who cares what there is to say about │ ║ a computer running circles around a meat farm? │ ║ │ ║ "help help I'm being oppressed" said the derided, "help help I'm being │ ║ depressed" said the divided, "help help I'm losing my sound" said the │ ║ war-like-minded, "help help I have no ground │ ╟─────────┐ ┌───────────┤ ║ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╚═════════╧══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──┴──────────┘ --- #17 fediverse/1833 --- ═════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────── democracy as it was currently conceptualized dates back from a time when it was impossible to ask every person every question all at the same time. We needed time to talk through and get to know a topic before we made any choices about it. Hence, single-party voting, and the build-up of disagreement when people feel like the one thing they care about is not implemented. Too bad they care about things like, bodily autonomy and human rights. Maybe we could appease them by giving them something else that they want Oh? Like trans people? No brad, like the russians Or maybe the rich, ya? goodness. how about nobody [appeasement never goes anywhere] [the issue is more fundamental than compromise] [human rights are not up for discussion] ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────┘ --- #18 fediverse/3153 --- ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────── ┌────────────────────────────────────┐ │ CW: re: politics-socialism-mention │ └────────────────────────────────────┘ @user-1074 yep... Though I think debate can also get in the way. I think we should act to improve the people's lives. Debate should teach, it should guide, but it should not prevent. There are more than enough resources for everyone. If you waste them, debate can decide when you get more to use. Much the same way that our Northern American democracy utilizes representatives in order to distance the decision making from the decision deciding, so too should be separate the empowered people acting for the good of all from those who decide who are good. Power must be earned, it must be deserved, and it must be eventually relinquished. That is the sacred duty of those who wield power - to use it honorably, and give it away. we should not debate things that are not mutable. We should not waste time complaining about how annoying other people are. who gives a shit if she wears a dress. we should not debate our human rights. Like bodily autonomy. it's her uterus. ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘ --- #19 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 │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────┘ --- #20 fediverse/2976 --- ═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────── ┌──────────────────────┐ │ CW: uspol │ └──────────────────────┘ on our current trajectory, the presidential election is already won. now we can get back to on-the-ground organizing, the part that actually improves life instead of maintaining our current (unethical) state. As long as our allies (liberals) continue to work, perhaps there may come a day when we can stand against them as friendly equals in the ballot box. But for now we are best known through friends and community rather than TV. I am optimistic in a way I haven't been for a while. I know that the more we speak, the more we share, the more they falter, the more people we can save from their vice grip of despair. There is no better world than the one we build together! ┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐ │ similar │ chronological │ different │ ╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘ |