@scudery@jaztrophysicist ce qui m'amuse déjà, c'est que je vois bien les 🇫🇯 sortir les pommies en 1/4... #rugby
@activitypub_fetcher
Exercitationem saepe magni est cupiditate assumenda accusantium saepe consequatur fugit amet possimus rerum quas dolores quos quisquam sapiente sit perferendis officia ad aut ut ut quibusdam quaerat autem corporis vero illum tempore et culpa rem ut ratione!
- Joined
- Website
- krajcik.name
ptdr c'est brouillon comme match mais au moins c'est mobile
on vient d'assister à un truc qui ressemblait plus à une balle au prisonnier qu'autre chose mais c'est rigolo
C'est un match avec pas mal de serendipité je crois mdr
On a des camps de concentration, mais c'est vrai que Le Pen présidente ce serait pire.
Au moins ce soir on soutient la même équipe !
#Scugby du soir, bonsoir
Premier aperçu du match :
très joli maillot des 🇵🇹 mais quand même les lettres en doré c'est pas très lisible pour les Mémés comme moi
magnifique maillot des 🇫🇯, j'aime beaucoup la typo très carrée des chiffres
Je suis donc pour les 🇫🇯 à cause de leur maillot, mon fils aussi, mais lui il m'a expliqué qu'en fait il choisissait toujours "l'équipe où il y a le plus de joueurs avec la peau marron parce que c'est joli", moi je dis, pourquoi pas
Le Nom de la Rose.
Umberto Eco.
Rire et profondeur.
2 media files
🔔 Update 🔔 Curious about my tech tools and workflow? I've updated and greatly expanded the annotated list of favorite open source tools on my website: https://seanfobbe.com/code/
Includes both general tools (browser, e-mail, OS, editor) and data science specific tools (R, R packages, reproducible science).
German translation coming soon!
#Workflow#DataScience#RStats#LegalTech#LegalDataScience#OpenSource#OpenScience
@rstats@histodons@politicalscience
It really freaks me out when people start talking about how individual human existence and experience is "fleeting" and "illusory" and what's "actually real" (or concrete or stable or whatever word they use) is communities and other such abstract concepts, and how individual human beings are just meaningless and uninteresting alone because we can't survive on our own (some sort of survival of the fittest naturalistic fallacy might makes right bullshit here) and so we shouldn't really think about individual needs and experiences at all, but just consider ourselves "organs of the collective social organism."
This might sound fine to you coming from a queer leftist, because surely they wouldn't apply this rhetoric in a way that hurts you right? You're on the same side! But this rhetoric is also the exact sort of thing you would hear from a fundamentalist Christian or a fascist or an authoritarian communist — or even fucking Jordan B Peterson, with his reasoning to deny gender identity: "personal identity is shaped by social and cultural influences around you and exists only in dialogue with others and therefore you don't get to determine what your identity is everyone around you gets to determine what your identity is and you have to accept that" — because it's the kind of logic that lets you suppress individual human beings' need for autonomy and self-expression and unique identity apart from (and even in contradistinction to) their community "for the greater good." It makes things nice and simple because it eliminates the need to have this ongoing dialogue of balance between the interests of the individual and the interests of the community while getting to sound all altruistic and nice and hippie while you're at it. But it is still the route to very dark and horrific things, even in a community of compassionate and sensible and progressive people, because it still promotes the suppression or ignoring of the individual in favor of the abstract concept that is the group. The blind brute force of social pressure based on group thinking. What we should be talking about is the balancing of those individual and collective interests and needs, providing people a space to be themselves and be independent from others while still being able to recognize community interests and needs and coordination problems, not just ignoring the problem entirely by doing away with the human individual.
Because ultimately, no matter what your intentions are, each of our individual human existences and experiences is the most tragically, painfully, joyously, and beautifully real thing to us and each other. Not the community, but me and the person beside me whom I love and the people I meet even for a moment throughout my life who I can share these wonderful moments of getting to know a real complex human being with. It is not some abstract epiphenomenal metaontological entity I love, to paraphrase Stirner, but individual human beings — almost every single one I've ever met, I appreciate in one way or another. (This is why I always make friends with the ppl on the airplane or bus or checkout counter or whatever lol). And I don't want to see my individuality and their individuality crushed into some sort of collective social organism because someone has decided that our individual concrete human existences are meaningless in the face of this abstract ship of Theseus community that they've decided is somehow more constant and real than we are (even though by the same logic that humans are fleeting and whatever because we change so often so are our communities).
This is why I find people's reaction to finding out that I like Stirner and the other individualist anarchists a pretty good litmus test for determining whether they are even worth talking to — if their reaction is disgust and disdain and the assumption that my philosophy is one of an egotistical maniac based on some memes they saw once or whatever then obviously that's not something worth interacting with, but on a more nuanced level if their reaction is still rejection and concern or horror for the fact that someone might be an anarchist that doesn't place the collective over the individual and want everything dominated by a sort of collective brute majoritarian or "consensus" social force, then that's someone whose morality is based on abstract speculations and whatever feels or sounds good to them, and not a concrete value for human life and experience, someone who values the "human essence" over any individual human, and I know I'll never be able to discuss anything with them because it will always be a game of them trying to gain the holier than thou moral high ground for being more altruistic and self-sacrificing in the honor of these abstract concepts.
Also, the whole idea that our philosophy should be based around caring for the collective and others before ourselves is just fundamentally incoherent to me for so many reasons.
Yes, our lives and interests and experiences and needs are all inextricably bound up in a complex web with everyone else's — and even the world itself — but we still have to start from a place of caring for ourselves and our own lives first to see the worth of everyone else's, that's like a basic insight in psychology, and it just makes sense because we can only experience our own experiences, and we can only direct our own actions, so we have to start from ourselves and then see how that naturally weaves into everything else.
Moreover, relying purely on altruism as the only valid motive instead of realizing that altruism and selfishness are an artificial distinction (just as individualism and true collectivism are) when our needs and desires and interests are all so intertwined leads to problems like the paradox of altruism: if everyone is only allowed to look out for everyone else, then no one can accept anything for themselves, nor maintain themselves and their happiness and well-being enough to take care of anyone else (because taking care of yourself purely for the purpose of being able to take care of others is a very unhealthy and psychologically harmful motive if it's the only one you have). Furthermore going through the emotional process of seeing how much everything around you actually does affect you and matter to you and then letting your care for others and your service and solidarity with them come naturally out of that is far better than doing it out of self denial. Only one of those things is sustainable!
It really freaks me out when people start talking about how individual human existence and experience is "fleeting" and "illusory" and what's "actually real" (or concrete or stable or whatever word they use) is communities and other such abstract concepts, and how individual human beings are just meaningless and uninteresting alone because we can't survive on our own (some sort of survival of the fittest naturalistic fallacy might makes right bullshit here) and so we shouldn't really think about individual needs and experiences at all, but just consider ourselves "organs of the collective social organism."
This might sound fine to you coming from a queer leftist, because surely they wouldn't apply this rhetoric in a way that hurts you right? You're on the same side! But this rhetoric is also the exact sort of thing you would hear from a fundamentalist Christian or a fascist or an authoritarian communist — or even fucking Jordan B Peterson, with his reasoning to deny gender identity: "personal identity is shaped by social and cultural influences around you and exists only in dialogue with others and therefore you don't get to determine what your identity is everyone around you gets to determine what your identity is and you have to accept that" — because it's the kind of logic that lets you suppress individual human beings' need for autonomy and self-expression and unique identity apart from (and even in contradistinction to) their community "for the greater good." It makes things nice and simple because it eliminates the need to have this ongoing dialogue of balance between the interests of the individual and the interests of the community while getting to sound all altruistic and nice and hippie while you're at it. But it is still the route to very dark and horrific things, even in a community of compassionate and sensible and progressive people, because it still promotes the suppression or ignoring of the individual in favor of the abstract concept that is the group. The blind brute force of social pressure based on group thinking. What we should be talking about is the balancing of those individual and collective interests and needs, providing people a space to be themselves and be independent from others while still being able to recognize community interests and needs and coordination problems, not just ignoring the problem entirely by doing away with the human individual.
Because ultimately, no matter what your intentions are, each of our individual human existences and experiences is the most tragically, painfully, joyously, and beautifully real thing to us and each other. Not the community, but me and the person beside me whom I love and the people I meet even for a moment throughout my life who I can share these wonderful moments of getting to know a real complex human being with. It is not some abstract epiphenomenal metaontological entity I love, to paraphrase Stirner, but individual human beings — almost every single one I've ever met, I appreciate in one way or another. (This is why I always make friends with the ppl on the airplane or bus or checkout counter or whatever lol). And I don't want to see my individuality and their individuality crushed into some sort of collective social organism because someone has decided that our individual concrete human existences are meaningless in the face of this abstract ship of Theseus community that they've decided is somehow more constant and real than we are (even though by the same logic that humans are fleeting and whatever because we change so often so are our communities).
This is why I find people's reaction to finding out that I like Stirner and the other individualist anarchists a pretty good litmus test for determining whether they are even worth talking to — if their reaction is disgust and disdain and the assumption that my philosophy is one of an egotistical maniac based on some memes they saw once or whatever then obviously that's not something worth interacting with, but on a more nuanced level if their reaction is still rejection and concern or horror for the fact that someone might be an anarchist that doesn't place the collective over the individual and want everything dominated by a sort of collective brute majoritarian or "consensus" social force, then that's someone whose morality is based on abstract speculations and whatever feels or sounds good to them, and not a concrete value for human life and experience, someone who values the "human essence" over any individual human, and I know I'll never be able to discuss anything with them because it will always be a game of them trying to gain the holier than thou moral high ground for being more altruistic and self-sacrificing in the honor of these abstract concepts.
Il y a 10 ans pile, démarrait la nuit la plus longue de ma vie, dans une chambre d'hôpital, à "dormir" dans un fauteuil (je déconseille / 20). Ce n'est pas que la chambre ait été dépourvue de lit, mais madame avait décrété qu'il était pour elle ; une sombre histoire d'accouchement à venir (un prétexte selon moi si vous voulez tout savoir).
Ceci dit, le lendemain, petit monstre #1 venait au monde.
Je n'en menais pas large.
J'avais plus de cheveux.
Il y a 10 ans.
Hello,
Je suis nouvelle ici et j'ai peu d'abonnés mais je cherche des infos sur l'encoprésie, si possible des témoignages voir entrer en contact avec des personnes l'ayant vécue enfant.
Merci à celleux qui voudront bien booster ❤️
Pour donner un complément d'info, je cherche à comprendre ce qui peut la causer, et ce qui peut aider l'enfant (outre consultation médicale et/ou psy). Mais comme je n'ai aucune idée de par ou commencer, toute info ou conseil sont bons à prendre.
#RidinWithBiden#BidenHarris2024#VoteBlueNoMatterWhat
'I'd still vote for' Biden if he was 'dead': Pa. voters react to Trump-Biden 2024 rematch https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/-i-d-still-vote-for-biden-if-he-was-dead-pa-voters-react-to-trump-biden-2024-rematch-194683973849
Terrific article on the life and work of path breaking physicist Lise Meitner, & gender bias in awarding Nobel Prizes!
@histodons
@sociology
#physics#women#gender#tech#technology#science#history
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/02/science/lise-meitner-fission-nobel.html
@johncarlosbaez@JPQ And are these the same anyons @DavidJaz talked about in a recent video, linked with Schreiber and Sati's work on quantum computation? Is something known about Microsoft's effort and the math it is based on?
@ceciestmontpouet Un débile qui m'a inscrit à un semi-marathon en avril prochain
@Kalytis
Ah ah, courage à vous deux :)
Ah ah, courage à vous deux :)
29°C à Paris en automne, guerre en Israël, séisme meurtrier en Afghanistan, moi qui dois aller courir alors que j'en ai absolument pas envie... décidément cette semaine ne nous épargnera aucun malheur, le sort s'acharne.
@Kalytis Aller courir ? Un dimanche ? Mais qui t'a mis ça dans la tête ?
[Need to write this in German. Crypto might be on its way out, so we should start to historicize it. #Blockchain is likely to remain in media theory though.]
Ein medientechnisch-administratives Weltbild, wenn es je eins gab: die state transition function des #Bitcoin aus dem Whitepaper von #Ethereum.
A new article up on my website Sociological Infatuation about world historical political economist and general dirtbag Karl Marx. This is an introduction aimed at community college #sociology students and instructors looking to approach this material. This is not focused on various critiques of #Marxism because it was already 2,200 words and I wanted to get something out.
Historical Vibes: Karl Marx
#socialism#communism#theory#politics#economics#Marx#Engels@sociology
Bring the outdoor indoor avec ce s'mores deluxe biscuit au beurre, tablette chocolat 70% et guimauve Esmepim. Seulement à Montréal
