Janus

The exceptional is not always exceptional in a good way The abnormal is not always abnormal in a good way Sometimes the NORMAL is simply the best we have

Or perhaps it’s even worse than the previous source Perhaps it’s an outright fucking FRAUD

When you reject AUTHORITY — you’re left WITHOUT authority (unless you can replace it with some other authority)

@thogge -wake up and remind yourself you won't waste your life looking at a screen -before bed remind yourself you won't waste your life looking at a screen -keep remembering throughout the day that you don't want to waste your life looking at a screen +get better life, as replacement

Twitter friends A serious question: What is the most impactful thing you’ve done to lower your screen time / phone addiction? Need all advice 🙏🏻

@biruckx I thought it likely had to be led by Tesla precisely due to supposed lead in FSD - which bridges the gap between both abstract cognition, mere moving mechanism, and actually moving in space But I agree, once FSD is there, and now that LLMs are here - the hardest part is solved

@JanusFaustus Agreed, but doesn’t have to be led by musk imo

The only thing exciting that remains about Tesla is self-driving. It makes sense for Musk to step down after that.

@biruckx I feel like robots are quite exciting

@JanusFaustus Tesla has accomplished its primary objective imo, self-driving being the last frontier. If spacex can be accelerated, then that would be more exciting; granted it’s already doing a lot.

@DellAnnaLuca Absolutely everything in this world has “luck factor” — because everything in this world (sans theories and math) has a degree of unpredictability. So the word you’re looking for is VARIANCE. Chess has low variance, but it has variance.

In the latest Chess World Championship Finals, out of 18 games played against the other finalist, the winner only won 4 games (and lost 3, the rest were draws). This means that chess has a luck factor, in addition to skill: otherwise, he'd have won 100% of games. True / False ?

You use your current resources well, and you build from there. It’s within your control; that’s why it works. Meanwhile you stay paranoid about your positioning to safeguard (and reap benefit) from that which you can’t control. Other approaches are just noise and chimera.

@jimmpierce Generalizes to all "negative": When something negative betides me I don't feel mad - I'm grateful for learning what not to do / what to avoid / what to do better / what doesn't belong in my life.

When someone breaks my trust I don’t feel mad, I feel grateful to them for showing me they don’t belong in my life.

@biruckx Used to think this way, but the content meriting a therapy is beyond bad memory - it's in muscle memory

Bad memory is how the mind does self-therapy.

did you know that you are not qualified to have meaningful opinions on fixing the world if you are not even able to fix yourself, your relationship, your family and your organization

A person whose predictions are inaccurate is a fool, regardless how clever and logical his chain of reasoning was

@sean_a_mcclure Actually it’s precisely *intellectual engagement* which is the point, and makes all the difference And we can generalise regarding all engagement — there’s nothing so exhilarating so as to satisfy you if ENGAGEMENT is not there

If you predominantly listen and watch stimulating but shallow content you’ll never feel fulfilled. And you’ll never get enough. Your mind needs something deeper. Look for content that is complex, requiring a level of intellectual engagement. Being entertained doesn’t satiate.