domain:arjunpanickssery.substack.com
Vintage dollhouse does one that’s basically no screens and living like it’s 1940. There are a few that did 1990s and 1980s tech. There was a group of reinactors who did a LARP of the 17th century England, and a couple of odd ones (mostly women) doing the regency era which I think is 18th century. But the common denominator of the experience seems to be exactly that they are much more creative and able to get things done once they basically “detox” of Internet, screens and so on.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=f9mZJ9Z-mfM?si=r5aaEso6h8SdXl79
https://youtube.com/watch?v=z_ZGk-tVIUA?si=ayvCEsgMu4rjA0aZ
https://youtube.com/watch?v=J-uRFPbaKEw?si=UkxQBHSy3g2rP5Yd
These two are women living a 1940s lifestyle. The first two are Vintage dollhouse who does a lot of other reenactment work for 1940s stuff.
Yes. I'm very pedantic about my music collection and I insist on having exact dates of release. Often, though, the exact release date isn't easily available, so I have to conduct research to determine an estimated release date. If ChatGTP can imitate my research process I'll take back everything negative I ever said about it:
- For major label albums released circa 1991 or later, an official street date should be available. This gets first priority.
- If a release date is provided by a reputable source such as RateYourMusic, Wikipedia, or 45Cat, use that date, giving 45Cat priority.
- If a reputable source only provides a month of release, use that as a guideline for further research, subject to change if the weight of the evidence suggests that this is incorrect.
- For US releases from 1978 to the present, use the date of publication from the US Copyright Office website if available.
- For US releases from 1972 to 1978, use the date of publication from the US Copyright physical indexes, images of which are available on archive.org, if available.
- For releases prior to 1972 or are otherwise unavailable from the above sources, determine the "usual day of release" of the record label, that being the day of the week that the majority of the issues with known release dates were released. Be aware that this can change over time. If no information is available regarding the usual day of release, default to Monday.
- If ARSA chart data for the release is available, assign the release date to the usual day of release immediately prior to the date of the chart. (ARSA is a website that compiles local charts from individual radio stations).
- If ARSA chart data is unavailable, assign the release date to the usual day of release the week prior to the date when the release was reviewed by Billboard, first appeared in a chart, or was advertised in Billboard.
- If ARSA and Billboard data are both available, use the earlier date (ARSA will almost always be earlier unless there was a substantial delay between release and initial charting).
- If neither ARSA nor Billboard data is available, use a similar system with any other trade publication.
- If no trade publication or chart data is available, determine the order of release based on catalog number. Assume that the items are released sequentially and are evenly spaced. Use known release dates (or release months) to calculate a reasonable date of release based on available information, including year of release (if known), month of release (if known) and usual day of release.
- If none of the above can be determined, make a reasonable estimate based on known information.
The following caveats also apply:
*For non-US releases, domestic releases often trailed their foreign counterparts by several months. Any data derived from US sources must take this into account when determining if the proposed estimate is reasonable.
- If the date of recording is known, any estimated release date must take into consideration a reasonable amount of time between recording and release based on what was typical of the era.
- For independent releases, dates of release from Bandcamp may be used provided they don't conflict with known information (i.e. sometimes Bandcamp release dates will use the date of upload, or the date of a CD reissue).
There's a ton more I could put here if I really wanted to get into the weeds, but I don't think ChatGTP can do what I've asked of it thus far.
I'm not taking sides on you/Dase vs Tequila (I've already registered my opinion) but on the tone of the disagreement.
If you are losing your cool in an argument, back off and cool off. I say that knowing that I am not perfect either and don't always follow that advice, but we both know that's what needs to happen.
I disagreed with the percentiles and that global ranking mattered, not your reasoning for why to engage in activities. I didn't mean to say you are deluded, only that people reasoning about these things often are (like guys at the gym or whatever).
People didn't give a shit about hobbies before the internet either and can't tell a 90th percentile from a 99.9th percentile anyway.
Like artistic drawings or AutoCAD style?
It was surprisingly difficult for multiple reasons: your heart doesn’t differentiate between ‘low stress’ and ‘depressed heart rate because you’re recovering from a massive exertion’, or ‘high stress’ vs ‘happy drinking with friends’.
Does your smart watch track heart rate variability and blood oxygenation? I think my garmin watch is pretty decent at knowing when I'm stressed emotionally vs when I'm stressed metabolically. Of course, the little suggestions it gives me are kind of useless ("take a breath", "go on a walk", buddy if I was the kind of person to do those things I wouldn't need you to tell me to do them.) But I think the problem doesn't lie with either the sensors or suggestions, but with a lack of an effective punishment/reward scheme.
...okay, I'll admit it. I just want a robot mommy that pats my head when I'm a good boy and spanks my ass when I'm a REALLY good boy.
More effort than just a laundry list of strawmen, please. This isn't an argument or an answer, it's just "My outgroup is always evil and lying about everything."
I'm going to chime in here in favor of Dase, with my own mod-hat off.
TequilaMockingbird hasn't been operating in good faith. It doesn't exhaust my sense of charity to believe that he started this essay in good faith, but all of his behavior since strikes me as being to the contrary. I'm guilty of losing my cool, because my own tolerance for such behavior only goes so far.
At the risk of being inflammatory, I think accusations of Jane being an "ignorant slut" are at least partially excusable if Jane is, in fact, being ignorant, and a slut. (Accounting for subjective variance in definitions and accusations of ignorance or sluttiness)
Is truth an absolute defense on the Motte? Probably not. I'm sure there are more polite ways to couch that claim. I've personally warned Dase before for being too touchy and acerbic, and yet I find myself pleading for leniency here. Feel free to discount this on the basis of a clear conflict of interest, but I'm saying it nonetheless.
If you need to gamify something to enjoy it, then you don't actually enjoy it.
Counterpoint: Actual games.
Perhaps what we are discussing is more "the feeling of progress." Newb gainz are fun. Novelty is fun. Plateaus are not.
Every once in a while, I stop lifting say squats for a while. When I start back up, it's fun to rapidly increase. Then I plateau. Rinse, wash, repeat. (This is fine because I'm focusing on running for the time being. Where ... I'm making progress.)
Having bucket lists for hikers/explorers is a fun way to force oneself outside of one's comfort zone. I like hiking. Having a goal makes it channeled towards something concrete.
There's more than one way to enjoy various hobbies, in other words. Camping can be luxurious or hardcore. Cheap or expensive. Hiking, running, lifting, shooting, offroading, drones, car stuff, music, etc. all have multiple levels one can find a sweet spot.
Also most people like some kind of diversity, so switching and taking breaks is pretty normal.
but the guy seemed so concerned about bagging an extra peak that he was willing to risk pissing of a friend who gave him free passes to a band he really liked.
Sounds like a rational agent trying to maximize utility between two competing goals and willing to take risks.
What’s stopping the development of drones with video recording that feeds into AI and surveils for incoming enemy drones? Ai should be able to determine if something is a drone from visual signature + movement.
Because surveillance drones are small and practically invisible in a wide angle view from distance. Realtime (or near realtime) computer vision operates at surprisingly low resolutions and only ”zooms in” once it has identified the area that has the target object.
I did a quick test with a camera and assuming a 20 MP sensor (possibly slightly optimistic) and typical DJI drone lens, a drone size target at 100 meters away would fill roughly an area around 20x20 pixels size - and that’s when fully digitally zoomed in!
You know how the stereotypical bird photographer carries a huge ass lens that resembles a bazooka in size? There’s a reason for that and it’s called ”small target far away” (except no bird photographer would imagine getting a good shot from 100 meters away even with a massive lens)
One thing I’ve found absolutely fascinating about these sorts of “live like it’s X year” experiments is just how surprising and even interesting the “analog” real world is once your brain adjusts to it.
Any links to examples? How far back are some of these people successfully resetting their clocks, as it were?
Have you heard of the types of fun? If not, See: https://essentialwilderness.com/type-1-2-and-3-fun/
As a descriptive generalization, all complex activities are composed of all three types of fun. The exact ratio of each type of fun changes activity by activity and person by person. Typically speaking, everyone wants to maximize type 1 fun and minimize type 3 fun. In the meantime, they will tolerate type 2 fun in proportion to they ability to delay gratification as an investment to produce more type 1 fun in the future.
Now, gamification, in this context, is best understood as a means to transmute type 3 fun into type 2 fun. The mechanism by which this happens is through providing consistent feedback and rewards so that the gamer later associated a particular misery with a positive outcome. In games, for example, killing the first 3 orcs in a questline might be type one fun, but killing the next 197 would be type 3 fun if it weren't for the xp and gold you get at the end. Similarly, in martial arts you might enjoy the first minute of getting punched in the stomach while being in horse stance, but you're not going to enjoy the next five unless you come to associate it with improving your capabilities and social status.
Gamification isn't always-- or even usually-- helpful. If an activity has a super high proportion of type 1 fun, you just do it to do it. And generally people don't have many issues doing activities they feel are predominantly type 2 fun, though they might have to get motivated first. I'll procrastinate doing my laundry, but I don't need to gamify it before I do it-- I know exactly how much I like clean clothes. Meanwhile, people should and do avoid activities that are mostly type 3 fun. I think I'd briefly enjoy falling out of a building, but I would definitely hate hitting the ground.
Where gamification helps most is at the margins, when an activity is favorably disposed toward types 1 and 2 intellectually, but at any given moment can feel emotionally tilted toward type 3. Think of this as the cold lake effect (you know you'll have fun if you just take the plunge, but you can't help but tiptoe in miserably). So if you're looking for it in mountan biking, don't expect to find it everywhere. As a hobby, mountain biking is probably dominated by the kind of people who find it type 1 fun. But if you find someone that's always a little reluctant to get on the trails. And seems mostly motivated by buying new gear, obsessively tracking their health statistics, and posting images of themselves completing on difficult trails... That's what gamification looks like for mountain biking.
The AI does allow for an automated police state at scale.
Works for the internet police mods too.
Legibility comes with trade offs, and limiting freedom is usually one of them.
I believe there's going to be a whole slew of court cases and societal fights over this kind of thing. In the US, at least. Places like the UK seem to be ok with police state mods.
Protip: If you ever find yourself out of medication and the pharmacy says they are out of stock of your prescription, tell them that you are about to call your insurance company to inform them that their in-network pharmacy is unable to provide nessesary medical care to patients. Suddenly, "it's 3-4 days out," and, "this is just our procedure," becomes, "I'll check the stockroom," and "we'll have that ready for you sir," in about 2 minutes. Dangerous professional voice is a superpower. Obviously you must only use this power for good.
If I'm really disregulated, I can just keep refreshing this and DSL over and over (operator error, I know).
Being a warlord has a certain skin in the game that you are staking your life and fortune on your own martial prowess, while a poet can write crappy poems for the rest of their lives and only be slightly risking their lives against the outrage of the literati.
Yes, I'm making this precise point.
If becoming decent at a given skill set or activity won't win you many status points, what's the motivation to keep doing it aside from autistic fixation?
One thing that is handy about having the weekly threads so self-contained, at least you can reach the actual end of it, there's no infinite algorithm.
Go ahead and finish episode 3; it has a real bite to it.
The three episode rule was largely established in response to Madoka.
For tattoos in particular: it entirely depends on context. On a ski trip back during Covid, we had a mixed gender group, and all the girls had tattoos of various sorts, and none of the men did. That led to some teasing: all the men are squares etc. But the idea that they indicate some latent violent criminality in the women is laughable: all of us were well-educated and had highly paid corporate jobs, and I would be surprised if any of us had gotten into a violent altercation in our lives. It functions more as a piece of jewelry or clothing to show off how cool and stylish you are, which women care about and men don't.
It's a silly fad (and I'm sure some will regret getting one when the fad dies), but whatever tattoos might have once indicated about a person (besides wanting to be perceived as cool) is gone since they've been normalized. At least for most tattoos: face tattoos still provide a useful signal.
Yeah.
I often start off a post intending to just make a quick, lowish-effort reply, then find myself drafting a mini-essay just so I can fully justify the point I'm making.
Effort feels like it is rewarded because people will usually respond with similar effort rather than just troll or dismiss you with a joke.
I'm a bit surprised by how visceral the anti-tattoo sentiment is in the comments. I wonder if it's a product of the average age being higher than I thought (maybe early to mid 40s?) and less interaction with the working class, specifically people younger than them.
I agree that in the past tattoos could be a valid barometer for anti-social traits, but nowadays they're so ubiquitous among young people that I don't think there's a strong correlation at all. The nature of tattoos is different as well. My impression is that they tend to be smaller than they were in the past and thus people, especially women, are more likely to have more than one. Interestingly, I've noticed that a lot of younger police officers have tattoos, usually in the forearm area. I tend to view police officers fairly positively, and so I don't have nearly as negative of an association.
Your contributions on AI are always interesting and worth reading (not that I agree with them, but I enjoy reading them). But as much as moderation here has been accused of running on the principle "Anything is okay as long as you use enough words," it did not escape me that you used a lot of words to basically say Jane you ignorant slut!. No, burying the insults (repeated) under a lot of words does not make it okay to be this belligerent. And on a topic that should not require this much emotional investment. Your lack of chill is a you problem, but your lack of civility is a Motte problem. You do not win the argument by plastering as much condescension and disdain as you can between links.
ENTJ
I just did the Meyers-Briggs a few months ago at the suggestion of some people I work with. Unknown to me at the time, the office consensus had settled on ENT already and was only undecided on J or P.
Once I got my results, J seemed pretty obvious to me, but I guess I hide it well or come off differently to people in real life.
Pretty sure you meant to write ”does not constitute”.
More options
Context Copy link