Stark Raving Sane

A large proportion of frustrating conversations—especially on social media—seem to occur simply because people have differing approaches to using language and, especially, different definitions of words. Besides simple misunderstandings of intent, which are inevitable, I'm constantly surprised by how often these interactions are defined by someone demanding that others to submit to using words—often, seemingly, even outside of the conversation itself, and with others—to mean what they demand, usually to match how they personally would use the same words. I find that to be a complete waste of time, as it doesn't reflect what I understand to be the ideal function of communication. [🧵 1/8]

@skinthent @DecodingFoxNews @atrupar Maybe so. And yet it still leads, by quite a margin, when broken down by type in the typical fashion. So... why would it stupid to acknowledge that? Or to speculate that it may remain so for some time? Is it a mistaking of an "is" to be an "ought"?

@aflickerofdoubt @DecodingFoxNews @atrupar Coal generation capacity has been falling everywhere in the world except for China, India & a few more Asian countries. It has been almost flatlined globally since 2010, while other forms of generation are growing.

This is incredibly stupid.

@Rosie_Gamgee_ Whoa, that is a very black dog. 😲 You are forgiven for missing it.

Do you see the black dog lying in front of my bedroom door? Yeah, neither did I Ow. (Don't worry, the dog didn't even wake up)

@UnmitigatedAss Oh, and, I personally tend to start with a deontological base, as it is the foundation or prerequisite of concepts like consent, and liberty. And I like those things.

But this is yet another example of why I think it's weird that people orient themselves to philosophy and specific philosophers as if they are mutually exclusive. Almost by definition, they are all talking about the same thing in just different ways or from different perspectives.

Here's a fun one: Which alternative do we take: -deontological ethics -Judeo-Christian ethics -Aristotelian ethics -something else ??? Your responses will be judged by my Ass and M'Asses.

@jarvis_best I love pacific salmon so much. Oh my god. 🤤

My dream job—as in, only happening in my dreams, because I'm not trying for it—is Justice of the Supreme Court, since I was very young. That's the most realistic one, anyway, the one that I could plausibly work towards. My truest dream job may be guardian angel. What's yours?

@timruss2 You think it's unreal that in a world of billions of people, and a country of hundreds of millions, sometimes some of them will think differently than you? Huh. Unreal. 😉

Un… fucking real. Why not just go all the way back to the 1950’s?! These folks are the ones who helped nominate your Supreme Court Justices !

@MrHustleMCR Okay just making sure something didn't change when I wasn't paying attention. Because I really don't pay attention. 😅

@aflickerofdoubt Hahahahahaha you’re absolutely correct! One down…loads to go🤣

Another lunatic in a decision-making position… Gaetz obviously subscribes to the conspiracy nonsense that Wilcock spewed. America has a real problem. #ufotwitter

@Rayminded Everyone who needs to hear this, won't. 😭

If a truth revealed makes you uncomfortable you are lying to yourself in some way. The truth isn’t actually the source of your discomfort, the lie trying to protect itself is.

Ok, now hear me out...

@aas_ker Nightmare.

Describe your current life in one word..

It depends on their personality, I suspect. For me the key question in situations like that is whether they are the sort to be more upset by coddling or hesitation. Some people feel cared about when someone hesitates, when someone delivers news gently, they like being thought about or worried about. Other people feel like that's just adding more tension to an already inevitably uncomfortable situation, or even that it's you prioritizing your feelings of discomfort about their situation over their own feelings of discomfort about their situation and how to minimize that. I suppose it's kind of like people who slowly peel the bandage off, and the people who rip it off quickly. If it's the former, be gentle and honest and caring, maybe explain your concern or hesitation in even sharing it. If it's the latter, don't make a fuss either way, just say it matter of factly and let them set the tone. If they're excited, then let loose. (This is broad strokes, of course. Everything can be more nuanced, people are nuanced.)

How do you tell someone who has experienced pregnancy loss, including a still birth, that you’re pregnant again? I know she’ll be happy for me, but I’m afraid no matter how I tell her, it’s going to stir up a lot of emotions.

@UnmitigatedAss Argument about what and acquiesce in what way? There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer.

Hypothetical: You and I have an argument. I acquiesce. Were you right or wrong? Why? If I was just not into the battle, did I make your understanding of the world better? Are you more or less confident in your position? Did the reddit headline remain the same?

@CBHeresy I believe that's called "Okinawa". 🤓

My politics are whatever this is.

Sure, I'm not making an advocacy point, except maybe to advocate for charitable interpretation of what someone says. He said that coal leads. Most of these analyses, including the one you linked, will break it down with coal on the same level as individual renewable technologies like solar, or other fossil fuels like natural gas, or nuclear. So, charitably, I think it's fair to say he's probably working from similarly organized data, and with that in mind, he's right. Among sources of generation categorized thusly, coal still leads. If he had said "fossil fuels" as a class, I think a comparison to "renewables" as a class would make sense, but then he'd still be right if he said "fossil fuels" lead. It seems clear the choice to compare "renewables" to "coal" is careful framing by media to claim a subjective narrative victory beyond the objective gains in solar (which are remarkable, though I do like nuclear too). But it's not charitable to use that framing to call someone "incredibly stupid", IMO.

@aflickerofdoubt @DecodingFoxNews @atrupar Thanks. I was thinking of renewable sources as a class. Also, given careful regulation, we know how to build safe nuclear reactors now. "Clean energy meets entire global demand growth as renewables overtake coal" downtoearth.org.in/energy/clean-e…

@gaiambassador17 They're so cute! I love germinating seeds. 🥰

🥰 moving Virginia Gold Tobacco to soil. After, I covered with cellophane and will put them back in my small cloner tent with 24h light. Then, in a few days, switch them to 18/6.

@hagdaughter In my experience, most artists seem to have a similar attitude, and are often trying out new things, and if a style emerges it's often over the long run. Especially, perhaps, in mediums where they have a lot of exposure to other artists, if commercial viability isn't foremost.

still don’t know how to feel about not having a style. I don’t think I care every piece has a different soul that needs to emerge. I can’t be constrained .. I just need to make this seemingly sentient idea manifest however it wants

If you're lumping "renewables" together, then "fossil fuels" might be the fairer comparison, no? Obviously it's a somewhat arbitrary classification problem, but if you're going to interpret what he said charitably, and he treated coal is its own category, I would think dividing renewables into wind, hydro, solar, etc. would be more typical? At least, most analyses I've seen do that.

@aflickerofdoubt @DecodingFoxNews @atrupar In the first half of 2025, renewables overtook coal's share in the global electricity mix for the first time on record.