Timeline - Replies (page 364)

hm i think there might be a disconnect somewhere, because those traits i described in you were with a particular audience in mind, and are certainly not the characteristics i would pick out as most valuable or interesting. i actually think in many ways those traits are actively untrue lol

it's not like a core driver, i wouldn't strive after that at all costs. but it feels nice to be skilled and for those skills to help other people with their own goals

even if that were true, what if TOS is bad, or consistently badly interpreted lol. the objections people have are substantive, not procedural

alice robertsNov 24, 2024

👎

alice robertsNov 24, 2024

i'm an auto-anti-natalist, i shouldn't have been born

hahaha omfg thats awesome

👎

ffprobe please retrieve WOAF metadata ffprobe:

media.tenor.com

a cartoon girl with a question mark on her head

ALT: a cartoon girl with a question mark on her head

friendship ended with ffprobe, now mediainfo is my best friend

tru but this was mostly a vibes-based reconstruction and not a transcription. for instance, i’m inserting details of the audience (kasey) and the word “girlfriend” for easy legibility. it was actually a non-specific audience i was overhearing, and i was referenced in a non-specific feminine fashion

been noticing a lotta trad-truthers on my skyline lately :(

vim.sh goes hard

when i first started my job, my friend group was made up of all chinese ppl and they made me play duolingo while they watched and laughed

tfw no 😎 in pw: ☹️

don’t ask me, talk to freud heh idk i think it’s probably just me aspiring to be seen as a competent and useful friend

i had a dream jonas told kasey “your girlfriend showed me <link>, and it works really well” and that made me happi

unfortunately this is impossible because jonas already knows everything on the internet

iirc when i was first reading this book i was using microsoft edge lmao. i switched to SumatraPDF after that bc its goated, but that just has yellow. now i use okular and you can do whatever tf u want

-.-- --- ..- .----. .-. . / ... --- / .-.. ..- -.-. -.- -.-- / - .... . / -- --- -.. ... / .- .-. . / .. .-.. .-.. .. - . .-. .- - .

-.. . -- --- -.-. .-. .- -.-. -.-- / .-- .- ... / .- / -- .. ... - .- -.- .

- .... . -.-- / --. --- - - .- / ... - --- .--. / -.. --- .. -. --. / - .... .. ...

etee etee

yea i was gonna say this too lol, would be nice if it were configurable

i am agnostic as to whether or not it is good design but personally i prefer it :3

caught

if you're microblogging in a way that inspires replies, you're doing it wrong

there is one (1) good bsky user

try reconstructionist judaism

raymond geuss, who needs a world view?, pg. 23-24
Sidney had had rabbinical training at the Jewish Theological Seminary, and had at one time been attracted by a movement called “Reconstructionist Judaism” (after the title of Dewey’s “Reconstruction in Philosophy”). This movement, which Sidney described as “50 percent Moses and 50 percent Dewey,” tried to apply pragmatism to traditional Jewish life. Allegorical or metaphorical readings of religious views are always possible, and they have historically flourished. They are also, by their very nature, difficult to control or evaluate. However, many traditional Jewish beliefs presented themselves as if they were true statements of fact, but were clearly false, if you took them that way. To say that they were “true statements of facts” was to claim that they were not just “warrantedly assertable relative to our best existing standards of enquiry,” but more than that (although the nature of the surplus [“more than”] was unclear). However, what was "warrantedly assertable” was that god did not really exist, had not made the world, had not chosen and made a covenant with the Jewish people, had not split the Red Sea, had not given Moses any commandments and so forth. However, the Reconstructionist claimed that even to ask the question whether such beliefs were “true or false” was to miss the point. What was important was that there was a body of traditional beliefs, values, and practices that “worked” for a certain community, gave meaning to their lives, contributed to social cohesion, and fostered progress in human well-being. One didn’t even have to commit oneself to saying that these beliefs were “metaphors”; it was just that they had shown themselves to be valuable and to “work” for Jews. To obsess about whether these beliefs were “true” was to remain inappropriately attached to the traditional programme of “true belief.” The continued actual flourishing of the Jewish community was all the proof one needed of their value

(no one tell her about this part)

raymond geuss, who needs a world view?, pg. 26
It turned out not to be so, as Sidney discovered. The practices, rituals, observances, and values did give coherence, order, structure, and meaning to life, but they did so only provided that they were not explicitly seen as things to be cultivated because they gave meaning and coherence to life. In fact, if you stopped thinking they were embedded in a network of “true” beliefs (in something like the traditional sense of “true”), they lost their power to create or even retain meaning. The practices couldn’t maintain themselves autonomously, without appeal to Truth, but that is what pragmatism would have required. If the congregation did not believe in the Truth of some claims, the practices simply failed to function/work effectively as cement for solidarity and meaningfulness, and as lubricant for smooth interaction. So the more that Sidney explained that Jewish beliefs about Moses, Sinai, the Parting of the Red Sea, and so forth were not true (in the traditional sense)—although they were “pragmatically valuable”—and that to expect more was a mistake, the smaller his congregation got. William James spoke of the “will to believe” as operating in cases of religious belief, but here there seems to be something even more archaic, like a “need” of the kind discussed by Feuerbach and Marx:26 It is as if the members of Sidney’s congregation “needed” traditional truth. This, of course, leaves open the question whether they “needed” it in the way in which all humans need water in order to survive or in the way in which a drug addict “needs” his next dose.

whew

wait i can't tell are you a real fluoride h8r

pantyboobs wungled

blawg mentioned 🥳

an inordinate portion of my life has been dedicated to repairing 6x6es that have popped

if anyone sees a yellow center piece lurking around lmk

help

i should note that while i didn't really make much of the decision-making roles. i was originally going to make them additional categories of organization (representative federation (US), representative confederation (EU), delegate confederation (anarchist), etc. but i feel like they are two

separate dimensions maybe and shouldn't be jumbled. it's also interesting because historical anarchists would use their terms in funny ways. like they called their organizations "federations", but the most abstracted organization where all the federations federated a "confederation".

its differences in usage here that establish why im so ornery later, because these concepts only have meaning in historical and sub-cultural context, and it seems like the tech usage is just naively supposing "oh here's this well defined concept from something i'm familiar with, and it has

something to do with power i think. let's use that" and its like skreeee it was already messy. i don't think this is going to do the conceptual or normative work you want it to because to be consistent it's either going to be way too thin or way too thick

to the person who liked and retweeted this - i likely disagree with you and do not support your interpretation. :) also i typo'd kms

i'm gonna clarify more. i'm not saying that us philosophers are so wise and untouchable that the tech dregs can't keep up. i'm saying that theoreticians are so shit at their role that tech folks should insulate themselves from our retardation by using the frameworks developed within the specialty,

not because these are infallible (they're probably super deficient in their own ways too), but because there are likely less degrees of separation from the actual problem, and most of the time they may not need the abstraction to describe the admirable traits of their preference

i was supposed to be logged out man... sorry for thread spam.

but those are actually quite discrete. which in a way is great! people are having very grounded debates without the mess, in a way. but what that means is

that there is this massive under-theorized chasm between "we're a federated republic hur de durr" and some hyperspecific nerd shit i've never heard before in my life (/pos). i think the philosophy matters a lot, everyone just sucks at it, and a lot of the competent people just ignore it, fairly.

at a minimum i'm saying most tech people should probably just stay in their lane and use the vocabulary that has independently evolved within their domain of expertise to describe how their systems work. there's an abundance of evaluative material in their already to work with

2 replies