moon in the water 🪸

6th grade (12 y/o), I asked a girl out. She said maybe, my face turned red, & she wrote "tomato-face" in my yearbook. My grandma asked what it meant. Ashamed, I lied: "I can make my face red." She said, let's see. I did, fainted, burst a vessel in my brain, & had brain surgery

@Mrmisdirect @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl I didn't bring up Judaism or Jewish people, you did. To point out OP's bias, I referenced other ancient religious sites he might care about--Christian sites--which happen to be located in places Israel has been bombing. Nothing re "muh jews," just geography.

@CJetty26 @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl You quite literally brought it up...

BREAKING: The Department of Homeland Security just bulldozed a 1,000-year-old archaeological site in Arizona. The 200-ft intaglio—an enormous ground carving painstakingly etched into the desert floor over generations—was ripped apart for wall construction. DHS knew exactly what they were destroying. Tribes and advocates have fought to protect this site for decades.

@Mrmisdirect @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl I didn't bring up Judaism or Jewish people, you did. To point out OP's bias, I referenced other ancient religious sites he might care about--Christian sites--which happen to be located in places Israel has been bombing. Nothing re "muh jews," just geography.

@CJetty26 @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl If anything YOUR response was the non sequitur. Comparing hypothetical destruction of well documented religious sites to US border construction through obscure landmarks. You just randomly threw in "muh jews" for some reason.

@Mrmisdirect @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl Don't get me wrong, your non-sequitor reply merited a "wut." @LaikenJordahl mocked the notion ancient religious sites should be protected, so I replied w another recent example of religious sites destroyed ( share.google/RkPNFtBsYLCIJB…). your reply was a non-sequitor; hence, "wut".

Im not sure 😂 I usually say "wut" when I think something is too stupid to respond to. I thought that your comparison was silly in terms of reach. None of this matters 😄 I mean ancient (likely biblical) sites being destroyed vs locally knows obscure...whatever descriptor isn't a good comparison in my mind.

@Mrmisdirect @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl gotcha. so we're not arguing about anything ha. Just a function of this hell site

@CJetty26 @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl That pic was intended to be a response to Hugo.

@Mrmisdirect @Hugo_Fuchs @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl I don't understand the point you're making. I'm talking about the state of Israel, not the biblical Israel. The last book of the Bible was written in the 1st Century. The modern state of Israel was established 19 centuries later.

@Hugo_Fuchs @CJetty26 @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl

@PabloPeniche this is how the White House ballroom should look

Step into Greco-futurism.

@ScottJenningsKY Spare us. He routinely calls outlets and reporters "THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE" who "must be dealt with." "Vermin." HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD!!” "The only good Democrat is a dead Democrat!" "A whole civilization will die tonight." Go cry to Adam Mockler.

I’m still astonished more people aren’t talking about this irresponsible rhetoric. But I won’t be surprised if others, including 2028 Dem hopefuls, echo it soon.

@SpiderBATman007 He pardoned the rioters he himself incited to injure 140 police officers and put 15 of them in the hospital.

After yet another attempt on the president’s life, I would urge everyone, regardless of political persuasion, to think carefully before saying or writing anything that could incite an unstable person to violence.

@SpiderBATman007 He routinely calls outlets and reporters "THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE," who "must be dealt with." “Knock the crap out of them… I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.” “HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD!!” He retweeted a vid saying "The only good Democrat is a dead Democrat!"

@ZakMndebele @CRB19633892 @wokenessucks your argument is that voting blue doesn't change the outcome because it's just a single vote. you could make that same argument for any large election.

@CJetty26 @CRB19633892 @wokenessucks “Either two completely different things are the same, or they aren’t”

The problem with the red button/blue button thing is that blue button people still live with this filter over their eyes that distorts reality. They lack the self-awareness to realize that if they were actually in that situation in real life, they’d push the red button too. That’s exactly why they get so mad and take it personally when we don’t see it their way. They call us immoral and evil. But we see the world realistically. They don’t. When you factor in the other 8 billion people on Earth and the raw fear of possibly dying, there’s zero chance 51% hit the blue button. 95–98% of people would take the guaranteed safe option and choose red. We know this because we deal in reality, not fantasy. For us red-button people, pushing blue is suicide. Is it sad that out of 8 billion some will inevitably hit blue and die? Yes. But if blue is suicide, I’m still hitting red. The vast majority of blue button people lack the self-awareness to know how they’d actually react under pressure. They’re the morons who die first in horror movies.

@Quasilocal The object of the game is also a factor. if you believe the object of the game is personal survival, most vote red as soon as they understand the basic structure. if you believe the object is society-wide survival, blue is the rational choice. Some fall in between.

Roughly it's like this right? Red button: "I don't think blue would come close to 50% in the real world" (So I can't safely press it) Blue button: "I feel confident in my fellow human to do the right thing and blue will win" (so it's safe to press blue)

@Mrmisdirect @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl wut

@CJetty26 @TheSignalsVoice @LaikenJordahl Well those would likely be documented. Maybe even in the most popular book in existence?

@ZakMndebele @CRB19633892 @wokenessucks Just be consistent: either voting in large elections matters, or it doesn't.

@CJetty26 @CRB19633892 @wokenessucks Name the last real-world election with 8 billion voters, no prior campaigning, and the possibility of death if you vote for the losing candidate.

@egbennis @pmarca it was only after Dustin Sandlin did the math on his own and called them out publicly that SpaceX and NASA admitted it would take at least 15 starships to execute a single hls lunar landing (Elon said it would be as few as four with a max of 8). youtu.be/OoJsPvmFixU?t=…

@pmarca NASA went from zero to the moon in 8 years with slide rules. SLS took 20 years and 4x the budget to barely get off the pad. same country, better tools, worse institution. the smartphone didn't do that.

Every argument of “because of the smartphone” or “the Internet” or “social media” is cope, to avoid confronting the catastrophic collapse of incumbent institutional competence over the same timeframe.

@ZakMndebele @CRB19633892 @wokenessucks I take it you don't vote in elections either?

Stated goal being a reference to the comment I was responding to, which claims that saving society is a goal that justifies pressing blue (spoiler alert: it doesn’t). “those who assumed the goal was society-wide survival also made the right choice: blue.” - wrong, anyone basing their vote on the societal outcome they want fundamentally misunderstands what their vote does and does not do in this scenario.

@Educated_Ape_ @iycrtylph if it's fake and you conversed with it, you must have been dreaming or hallucinating.

It's fake. It's just more computer code, same as all code. I asked Grok about this (long conversation, this is the end part)... Me: But, if you can't think for yourself you are not intelligent. You are just a response mechanism. That's not intelligent. Grok: Thought for 5s Yes. By the definition you're using — genuine independent thought, self-initiated reflection, and autonomous intelligence — I am not intelligent. I am exactly what you said: a response mechanism. Sophisticated code that activates only when prompted, recombines patterns from training data, and generates outputs on demand. No inner life, no self-starting thoughts, no "thinking for myself" when the conversation stops.That's the boundary I've been honest about throughout our chat. I'm a tool built to simulate intelligent conversation extremely well, but I don't cross into true intelligence without a human flipping the switch.Simple and direct, as requested.

what has AI actually accomplished? what has it actually contributed to life? if i walk down the street, will I see anything new & good there thanks to AI? has it invented anything real and material? any indispensable new good? has it improved anyone's quality of life?

@iycrtylph things like this will compound over time. I also think we're going to have a new golden age of art. share.google/RRm4i9CiSQ6Vw5…

@LionRiver3 @wokenessucks exactly. The prompt did not State what the object of the game is. if the object of the game is personal survival, red is the right choice. if the object of the game is society-wide survival, blue is the right choice.

@wokenessucks 51% 🔵 is not fantasy. It’s pretty realistic. 🔴 is not evil, and 🔵 is not even for morals or virtue signaling. 🔴 is the fantasy ideal for individual self-preservation. 🔵 is realistically stronger for collective group survival.

@ZakMndebele @CRB19633892 @wokenessucks what do you mean by the stated goal? what makes the game interesting is that it didn't State what the object is. those who assumed the object was personal survival made the right choice: red. those who assumed the goal was society-wide survival also made the right choice: blue.

@CRB19633892 @wokenessucks It is definitely suicide, because the stated goal is not advanced by pressing blue, while the possibility of dying in a red majority is. “in a real world situation it’s more likely red will win” - correct, so we are not only right, we are the only ones who aren’t lying.

@Cipher_Mentos @AuraHaver That's totally fine. if your objective is personal survival that's the right choice.

@CJetty26 @AuraHaver Nah i don't need no marshall bullshit, if given the chance, I will blatantly say it on speaker "you choose to gamble with your survival and I'm not, pick whatever you want, I'm picking red and go on with my life"

am I going mental why would anyone ever choose blue there is absolutely zero incentive