In each, "normally I'd ___ but I can't do it so easily now, so ___"
Vormithrax is basically the Lobos of Cataclysm. He plays the game with challenges that'd make it impossible for other people to survive even for a few minutes.
In each, "normally I'd ___ but I can't do it so easily now, so ___"
Then dies and dies and dies, having tons of fun in the process.
Grind slings to level crafting, search bushes to level survival. Make a knife spear. Stop making a knife spear, they nerfed it.
The existence of a meta, an optimal way to minmax munchkin it, removes that narrative generation unless done carefully.
He has to *work* to avoid falling into that meta.
"Oh yeah I'm gonna help you find your father. First wait a sec while I take my sweet time looting everything in here not nailed down"
More from Anosognosiogenesis
An interesting thing about carp is that they can go into anoxic hibernation and switch to an anaerobic metabolism based on converting glycogen to ethanol.
The waste ethanol is diffused out the gills
https://t.co/V3D1umHf04
Carp can switch over to an anaerobic metabolism and quietly exhale booze until the situation gets better.
They basically evolved the same metabolic pathway as yeast, independently.
In theory, if you spent a few thousand years breeding carp for it, you could use them to make booze.
They'd be enormous, almost entirely glycogen deposits with a fish added as an afterthought.
The really interesting thing about anaerobic carp, is that they can go 4-5 months without oxygen by relying on liver glycogen.
You, a human, have only about 100 grams of glycogen in your liver, about 400 more grams in your skeletal muscles. Call it 500 grams total.
In humans, glycogen is also burned for energy. This is where the marathon runner's bonk comes from: you only have about 2,000 calories worth, and running a marathon burns those 2,000 calories.
The waste ethanol is diffused out the gills
https://t.co/V3D1umHf04
Carp can switch over to an anaerobic metabolism and quietly exhale booze until the situation gets better.
They basically evolved the same metabolic pathway as yeast, independently.
In theory, if you spent a few thousand years breeding carp for it, you could use them to make booze.
They'd be enormous, almost entirely glycogen deposits with a fish added as an afterthought.
The really interesting thing about anaerobic carp, is that they can go 4-5 months without oxygen by relying on liver glycogen.
You, a human, have only about 100 grams of glycogen in your liver, about 400 more grams in your skeletal muscles. Call it 500 grams total.
In humans, glycogen is also burned for energy. This is where the marathon runner's bonk comes from: you only have about 2,000 calories worth, and running a marathon burns those 2,000 calories.
Look at some historical examples of mass psychogenic illnesses: dancing plagues, laughing plagues, meowing nuns,
Here's a video on them:
They are interesting, but what is more interesting to me is Culture Bound Syndrome. https://t.co/hMKaApUMZn
Basically: mass psychogenic illness, and presentation of various mental illnesses, do not occur in a vacuum. Cultures shape them.
For instance, Koro.
There have been several mass outbreaks of men completely convinced their penises are shrinking, anchoring them with string at night so they don't get sucked back inside.
Almost all in Southeast
Here's a description of one outbreak in Hainan in 1984:
Here's a video on them:
They are interesting, but what is more interesting to me is Culture Bound Syndrome. https://t.co/hMKaApUMZn
Basically: mass psychogenic illness, and presentation of various mental illnesses, do not occur in a vacuum. Cultures shape them.
For instance, Koro.
There have been several mass outbreaks of men completely convinced their penises are shrinking, anchoring them with string at night so they don't get sucked back inside.
Almost all in Southeast
Here's a description of one outbreak in Hainan in 1984:
More from For later read
The common understanding of propaganda is that it is intended to brainwash the masses. Supposedly, people get exposed to the same message repeatedly and over time come to believe in whatever nonsense authoritarians want them to believe /1
And yet authoritarians often broadcast silly, unpersuasive propaganda.
Political scientist Haifeng Huang writes that the purpose of propaganda is not to brainwash people, but to instill fear in them /2
When people are bombarded with propaganda everywhere they look, they are reminded of the strength of the regime.
The vast amount of resources authoritarians spend to display their message in every corner of the public square is a costly demonstration of their power /3
In fact, the overt silliness of authoritarian propaganda is part of the point. Propaganda is designed to be silly so that people can instantly recognize it when they see it
Propaganda is intended to instill fear in people, not brainwash them.
The message is: You might not believe in pro-regime values or attitudes. But we will make sure you are too frightened to do anything about it.
And yet authoritarians often broadcast silly, unpersuasive propaganda.
Political scientist Haifeng Huang writes that the purpose of propaganda is not to brainwash people, but to instill fear in them /2
"propaganda is often not used for indoctrination, but rather to signal the government\u2019s strength in being able to afford significant resources and impose on its citizens...not meant to 'brainwash', but rather to forewarn the society about how strong it is" https://t.co/mFAurhEHeO pic.twitter.com/WXKKJaPqWQ
— Rob Henderson (@robkhenderson) June 18, 2020
When people are bombarded with propaganda everywhere they look, they are reminded of the strength of the regime.
The vast amount of resources authoritarians spend to display their message in every corner of the public square is a costly demonstration of their power /3
In fact, the overt silliness of authoritarian propaganda is part of the point. Propaganda is designed to be silly so that people can instantly recognize it when they see it
Authoritarians do not use propaganda for brainwashing, "but to demonstrate their strength in social control...propaganda may need to be dull and unpersuasive, to make sure citizens know it is propaganda when they see it and hence get the implicit message" https://t.co/PqRpxjaIPL pic.twitter.com/1y67d2RCjB
— Rob Henderson (@robkhenderson) June 19, 2020
Propaganda is intended to instill fear in people, not brainwash them.
The message is: You might not believe in pro-regime values or attitudes. But we will make sure you are too frightened to do anything about it.
Every single public defender. Every single day.
Bail arguments, motions, oral arguments, hearings. Judges don’t know, follow, or care about the law. Prosecutors are willing to take advantage of it. And mandatory minimums, withheld evidence, & pretrial detention coerces people to plead before trial. When theres a jury. A shot.
But defenders still fight. And still win. Most times wins aren’t “Justice.” It’s power of repetition of argument in front of same judges. Introducing those in power to the people they oppress. Not just a RAP sheet or words on a page. Defenders make it harder to be brutal & cruel.
I worked as a public defender at an office as well resourced as any in the country. Social workers, team of investigators, a reentry team, support staff, specialist attorneys in immigration, housing, education, family. Relatively low caseloads (80-100). And yet still injustice.
Most think that balancing the scales of justice means more funding for defenders. Thats part of it. Enough a attorneys to actually be at bail hearings. Wrap around services to be able to help people trapped in the system end up better off in their communities. Lower caseloads.
Raise your hand if you\u2019ve lost a case despite having the law, facts, quality lawyering, and justice on your side.
— Jon Feinberg (@JonFeinberg) February 13, 2021
Bail arguments, motions, oral arguments, hearings. Judges don’t know, follow, or care about the law. Prosecutors are willing to take advantage of it. And mandatory minimums, withheld evidence, & pretrial detention coerces people to plead before trial. When theres a jury. A shot.
But defenders still fight. And still win. Most times wins aren’t “Justice.” It’s power of repetition of argument in front of same judges. Introducing those in power to the people they oppress. Not just a RAP sheet or words on a page. Defenders make it harder to be brutal & cruel.
I worked as a public defender at an office as well resourced as any in the country. Social workers, team of investigators, a reentry team, support staff, specialist attorneys in immigration, housing, education, family. Relatively low caseloads (80-100). And yet still injustice.
Most think that balancing the scales of justice means more funding for defenders. Thats part of it. Enough a attorneys to actually be at bail hearings. Wrap around services to be able to help people trapped in the system end up better off in their communities. Lower caseloads.
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
