@SomethingMusic's banner p

SomethingMusic


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 21:49:53 UTC

				

User ID: 181

SomethingMusic


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 21:49:53 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 181

I'm not too versed with Guatemala and it's issues, what's the likelihood he gets assassinated by some cartel or whatever criminal equivalent they have there if he reaches too far?

Other than that, I am somewhat hopeful that his is legitimately successful in cleaning house as an example that it may be possible in the US as well.

Brian Ansell

Apparently he just died December 30th. https://www.polygon.com/24023687/bryan-ansell-warhammer-co-creator-obituary

I certainly think it had limited use case is somewhat limited if you don't choose to tinker with it. It definitely leans towards the 'portable' end of the current offerings of handheld computers in that it emphasizes battery life over performance which is why it's my preferred device. If you don't game a lot or have an extensive steam library it's probably not worth the money imo. I have both and tend to travel and split time between multiple places so having a to-go device like the steam deck is beneficial for my lifestyle.

I definitely hear you on the neck bending! Avoiding the dreaded back hump is something I've always fought against due to how phones and laptops tend to leave you in bad posture positions.

The steam deck can have a (less refined) switch output where you can hook it up to a monitor or TV with a dock, so I frequently use it as a more open source switch which can run all my emulators easily. It has pretty stellar bluetooth as well so you can connect any controller you'd like to it.

I'm surprised that throughout the past few weeks I've seen no discussion on handheld computing a la the Steam deck, so here it is.

I've fairly recently gotten my hands on a Steam deck OLED, and it's everything that I've wanted a modded PSP to be (maybe a touch too large). A higher quality brighter screen is a significant improvement from the old LCD I had from yesteryear. Having Arch OS behind the scenes comes at a significant benefit as well, as full software support means you can literally run common applications, Emulators, etc. with actual software support! Oh, and it can run steam games too, I guess.

Anyways, I think it goes to say I enjoyed messing around with it a lot and have actually started tackling a non-0 amount of my steam backlog. My hope is that the success of these handheld compute units will create incentives for Microsoft to actually take a look at a lightweight version of their OS for ease of use without the endless need for internet connection to send telemetry and personal information and maybe implement some battery-optimizing techniques. I'm not holding my breath but one can hope!

I understand your hatred of defeat - I hate losing as much as you and I've lost an awful lot! This has lead me to a few mental frameworks which can make losing less painful:

  1. Losing is a huge motivator for me not to lose - it forces me to critique what I'm doing, seek help, and actively make adjustments to 'lose less'. Losing is a motivator!

  2. Losing means I'm learning - assuming you can repeat losing, if each time you 'lose less' it means you're winning more - 'winning' and 'losing' are not binary but rather ranges and distributions.

  3. Losing is risk on behavior - seek to increase risk outside of your comfort zone. I've been on this forum enough know that you work in finance to some degree which is an institution where risk-seeking is dangerous. Too much risk causes all sorts of problems so so much of what you do is mitigating risk while maximizing growth. Your hatred of losing can also be a dislike of risk - as other people mentioned in responses this is largely female encoded. In many ways losing is a sort of risk tolerance - are you willing to lose more as an accumulation of risk?

  4. Identify where you hate losing. Some activity you might lose in won't hurt you emotionally as much as others. For example, losing professionally could carry a huge risk. What about learning something new? Trying something new? Cooking something you never tried that's outside your wheelhouse? There might be many things you're less worried about

  5. Change the framework - focus on trying to win instead of trying not to lose - rather than worry about, risk focus on trying to beat out other people. This is largely antisocial behavior but it can come at success - by being better at someone in a thing that's moderately important than you, you're worrying less about 'I hate losing' and more about improving yourself to be able to get ahead.

  6. Ask forgiveness not permission - Once again it requires in engaging in more antisocial behavior, but just going ahead and doing things without first asking for permission or coordinating with others can be a useful competitive mindset - of course it isn't always useful in certain areas, but this sort of choice can allow you to more opportunities and to be more competitive without the 'I want to get ahead' mentality. Sometimes it's 'I want to get things done quickly'

I think part of your problem is your terminology. No music has more than one 'melody' happening at the same time. There are 'countermelodies' which often support or contrast a melody (example, Bach fugues) but very few pieces truly have two melodies at the same time. in this clip Chales Ives has two groups of the orchestra play 'America' in two keys in two different rhythms, literally two melodies.

@KMC I think fills in your other question.

Or, to invert the question, is there a word for music you can arrange for the piano and can't arrange for the flute? Even if that flute was so long it could play any note?

Not really, as in as far as I'm aware there isn't a specific term. There are limitations to every instrument, and it's up to the arranger to arrange things in a way that makes sense for the instrument(s) the person is arranging from the original material.

I agree that illegal population probably hasn't increased compared to the number of illiit border crossings, but Even the low end estimate of 2.4 million is significant enough to change the English lexicon, with the high end being about 3.8 million, larger than the population of most states.

In the past four years (which is outside your dataset) there have been 10 million illegal border crossings. Even if the multilingual population is getting better at spoken and written English, they probably lack the formal education that is required to not bastardize a countries native language.

I don't think it's necessarily an intelligence issue as much as an ESL issue. Currently America is being overwhelmed with non-English speaking aliens ranging from South America to Africa to Somali to Eastern European. None of these people speak English at a high level or are particularly knowledgeable about proper English grammar. A large part of it is being out of practice as well; I know my own knowledge of grammar isn't particularly strong either especially when it comes to sentence structure. This leads to people passively learning 'well enough' communication where there's a general understanding of direction but no nuance.

Maybe this is the lesson of the tower of Babel. When a civilization has the means and resources to build a massive tower, economic opportunists who do not understand and have limited ability to communicate start crating stagnation through gridlock - no one can understand each other well enough to organize logistics.

I have no clue how governments and 'healthcare' agencies can expand these programs. I know it's a boomer Republican talking point, but the more self-mutilation and suicide medical programs I see getting pushed into the public consciousness the more I feel like the medical zeitgeist of a death cult has taken control of our society and its terrifying. Eugenics never went away, they just call it humanitarianism and focus it on the most productive culture the world has ever seen.

The left motte and baily would be at the moment looking for a ceasefire but in reality wanting Palestinians to destroy Israel for some reason. I believe I agree your notion that the 'far left' and the 'establishment' are so intermingled it's hard to separate the real ideas of the two as they often align for whatever political motivation they push the Overton window.

I probably poll more libertarian at the moment because I don't highly respect authority (probably because authority seems to keep getting it wrong in the worst ways possible). I've taken a few political compass map polls and I tend to lean conservative in those, though less so than I would expected for myself.

Grilling is definitely a hobby I'm interest. And breadmaking. A personal goal is to smoke a brisket but I'll probably never have the time/disposable income/space to do it.

Care 31% Loyalty 31% Fairness 50% Authority 22% Purity 56% Liberty 83% Your strongest moral foundation is Liberty.

Your morality is closest to that of a Libertarian.

I definitely have libertarian sympathies, but I would still consider myself more conservative than libertarian, especially among popular social issues. What I find surprising is that I personally find loyalty very important in friendships and relationships, so that loyalty is so low is something surprising to me.

I find it ironic you consider the idea of a women 'selling her body' as loaded language in recent vernacular when and then proceed to issue the statement "After all, I would argue that a woman who marries a man for his money (to a first approximation, most women who have ever existed) is 'selling her body' to a much greater degree than a prostitute, who is merely renting it. And yet the wife is held in much higher esteem than the jezebel." which is a much more modern interpretation of marriage popularized in the last decade.

It's clear we won't come to agreement. I think the modern materialist/rationalist/objectivist notion that marriage is generally a pragmatic institution based off of materialism and risk aversion is generally false in a historical sense beyond well documented edge cases. This simplification is what largely damaged marriage as an institution and changes the game theory to make marriage seem risky with no real benefit. When marriage was considered a permanent union, people prioritized very different things in a partner than simply material wealth. The modern consumptive and transactional nature of sex and marriage has created significant costs in population growth and stability, family stability, and child rearing.

The overlying question surrounding Hlynka's hypothesis is "does the reasoning matter if the end result is the same?" and can be applied to many horseshoe arguments made - be it segregation, racism, economics theory, etc.

There probably needs to be continuing questioning along the lines of "if you could press a button and both sides would immediately ceasefire, would you?". For example, I think an alt right person probably would choose continuing conflict to instead of any sort of peace or cease fire, while a far left person would probably support any sort of ceasefire, even if they perceive the opponent as 'evil'.

Besides, the ancients didn't bother differentiating between actresses and pornographic actresses, but one still married justinian.

Lumping all countries and cultures and all of human history into one singular example needs a big citation needed. Also, are your examples the average result or the exception?

Please stop arguing semantics. I hate when discussions devolve into word games as a way of avoiding the actual validity of an argument, and if this is the line of reasoning you're going to choose I'm not going to entertain this discussion further.

If word choice is your problem, is 'renting' better than 'buying'?

Either way, the negative externalities of turning sex into a consumptive act to be exchanged as a market is something that should be discouraged, regardless of age.

Given the context of the discussion, what kind of actresses do you think we were talking about?

If they sold their body for ten million dollars, they would not end up as 2nd class people.

But they do, and the evidence of this is clear: how many prostitutes and former actresses have ended up in successful happy functional relationships? The evidence is clear that reputation destruction (and whatever psychological damage that happens during the repeated engagement of promiscuity) that women receive when they engage in these acts is fairly permanent and follows them throughout their lives, even if their acts cause financial success.

At the cost of turning sex into a consumer transaction? You might argue this already exists and has always existed in some for of human history, (which you would be partially correct), but I think the consequences of widespread acceptance of this practice are largely damaging to cross gender relationships, especially the perception of women, as well as damaging to formation of families. Even historical practices of marrying women to richer/more wealthy men focuses on marrying and producing heirs, not simply for carnal desires. Women who sell their bodies for money have rarely been treated more than 2nd, or 3rd class people and do it at the cost of having a successful long term relationship.

Or people who vote 'no' value their morality and beliefs over capital and short-term self-interest. I rather value that most people are unwilling to compromise, at least hypothetically, for something that increases short term capital wealth. Selfish individualism is why I can't get behind objectivism, so the fact that twitter males largely deny the right gives me hope for the respondents of the poll.

That's why I started doing it. I wouldn't say I don't think it's necessarily be super consistent, but it's helping me reflect on the day and take the time to organize and recognize thoughts.

My work is very boring and I'm quite dissatisfied with it as it's pretty intellectually uninteresting to me and it's become pretty apparent it's a dead-end job whose only upside is doing some managerial nonsense of overlooking other people who are doing the same boring task. I've been looking for exits but haven't ran into one yet that I found that works.

However, this week I started journaling to have something creatively constructive and stimulating going on at work. I've always wanted to journal but I always felt like I've never had the time. One of the reasons why I started posting here again is because it feels like stream that's been undammed. There's been a lot I've kept bottled up the past few years and finally letting it out onto a page has been surprisingly therapeutic. I wrote a blog while in college and find it's pretty similar, but I can write a bit more personally as well or not be as focused on a topic and drift about. The pen and paper aspect of it is also nice as it gives me a break from looking at a screen.

Just because no Jews can trace their personal history to caanan doesn't mean that they don't consider it the cradle of their culture and their birthright. This is why understanding religious idealism is so important that everyone here is conveniently ignoring which is why I wrote this post, it's not about "I was here first" or "I can trace my family here for 1000 generations". It's about those many generations of Jews having a shared religion and belief structures that through the literal millenia as a nation without a home, that they are united through the Talmud and religious texts that they have a birthright destined by God. 60% of Israels population is Jewish in some degree, do you think that they don't know the history of their people and that it doesn't necessarily require a direct physical lineage?