#not even elon musk would do that

[songmingisthighs]

dear "creators" who depends on ai

how does it feel to be so absolutely lazy and useless as a human being ?? how does it feel to have a functioning brain but can't use it properly ?? how does it feel to be so absolutely incredibly dull and uncreative that you can't muster 200 words to convey your ideas ?? how does it feel to have to face the fact that you suck so damn bad and you have to live with it ??

[viridescenttemple]

I SOMETIMES WONDER IF I SHOULD MAKE A TWITTER MAIN AGAIN TO POST MY ART IN, BUT EVERYTIME I THINK ABOUT IT A NEW UPDATE THAT FUCKS UP THE SITE HAPPENS AND MY DESIRE TO DO GOES BELOW 0 LMAO

[sherlock-is-ace]

.

[jofiah]

Actually, considering the shitshow that is twitter right now, I wonder if musk will even let whoever is left of the team make a pride logo for June

[nerdyfangirlingbooks]

I think one thing that's getting overlooked with the whole Elon Musk Nazi salute is that it doesn't really matter whether or not he genuinely did mean it just as throwing his heart to the crowd or whatever. It's still the Nazi salute. If you draw a bunch of lines because you like drawing right angles and you accidentally draw a swastika it's still a swastika regardless of intentions

Maybe he was throwing his heart to the crowd, realised what he'd done, and then said it to make it clear and give himself plausible deniability. Maybe he chose to do the Nazi salute and then give himself an excuse for plausible deniability to see what he could get away with. Either way, the physical action is recognisably the Nazi salute

[marshmellowtea]

seen a small spike in headlines about zuckerberg which is making me wonder if he realizes that the only reason he generally doesn't draw as much ire as musk is because he isn't constantly in the goddamn media so i can just blissfully forget about his existence most of the time. not sure you want to be doing this bestie

[sapphoslibrary]

i genuinely cannot fathom being the richest person in the world and spending the bulk of my time harassing minorities on the internet. don’t you want to travel the world? solve world hunger? buy a bunch of animal shelters? donate to charities? house the homeless???

[phylomedusa]

free speech absolutist everyone

[horsesource]

Why do you say that subjectivity is becoming increasingly autistic? Also, have you ever read Homo Ludens?

Because people are increasingly socially exhausted. Since capitalism began to ravage communication, creative energy, etc, psychosis is no longer a limit to economic production and instead is itself a force of production (we are no longer compelled to repression, as we were during industrialization, but to hyperexpression)

If psychosis has been appropriated by economic processes, autism presents a new limit to capitalism (also, historically speaking, autism emerged out of psychosis)

This is because autism is neither repression nor hyperexpressivity, autistic subjectivity involves a turning away from the symbolic, or else a use of the symbolic for non-economic/non-communicative means. I have not read the book you mentioned but thanks for mentioning it.

[ineffably-human]

an entire episode that's just Dennis having a mental breakdown?

[lilliryth]

See the problem is that, if Albert Wesker were real, as in the combination of canon and headcanon that lives in my heart, I would love him, dearly. If Albert Wesker were real in the sense of a man grown from our own world but with the same combination of privilege, trauma, and conventional good looks that Wesker has, he would be a complete bastard, just a violent and predatory monster. That’s one highly-anecdotal and specific example, but the same goes for nearly every multi-faceted character I can think of. I remember that one post that was making fun of people for still liking Tony Stark, when we know what billionaires who erect towers named after themselves are actually like.

There’s a certain cognitive dissonance that happens here, I think, but it doesn’t have to be. Really, we’re talking about two different people here. You have the character—the same character, superimposed in our world—and then, you have who the character would likely be if they were to occur naturally. It’s precisely why The Boys is such a compelling show, because it explores all of this through the cultural phenomenon of superheroes. We all love our complicated little Guys. We’d hate them if they were “real”.

[the-corey-lynxx]

There is nothing like learning you are bad at something because you had to do it at school (looking at you, business management)

[the-crumbs-on-my-journal]

okay, sideblog for emo venting for maybe half a degree of anonymity, and like to not flood my main blog with this half coherent rambling.

i feel like i'm not good at being a person. i think immediately in the basic aristotelian terms i'm familiar with. what is a person's function? do i fulfill that function? but i dont mean in a moral sense. i think i am a pretty good person. i have a feeling most people think they are pretty good because they judge themselves by their own standards, and while that does apply to me because i am just another person and because of my awareness of my moral scrupulosity, i also think of how even the people around me emphasize to me the ways they think i am a good person. but i remind myself that i don't mean it in a moral sense. or maybe this is an extension of morality when interpreting aristotelian virtue ethics in this way. i guess i just have a reflex against that because of my established deconstruction against equating ability with morality. this is exactly my argument against my original thesis, for which i haven't even gotten around to explaining my justification, but i think maybe this whole chronologically backwards expository spells out enough of what that would look like, in a forensical way.

i'm not friendly-looking or inviting, i'm not even that comforting. i find it hard to say words of comfort to the people i care about. either i'm not sure i feel them strongly enough to mean anything to other people, or i can't find a way to say them without either miscommunication or making myself vulnerable to psychic attack. i am impatient, and i get snappy when i'm angry. i can see the light at the end of the tunnel now. i make a lot of mistakes even at work, and while i know it's their job to call me out, i feel so overwhelmed with shame after being recognized for my wrongdoings. i'm thinking i haven't fully deconstructed myself from catholicism.

that might be why i followed my thesis statement with evidence that disproves it--i actually believe the opposite, even if i forget that for a moment. my "being a good person" is not a trait that can be measured against criteria. because, which criteria? and why those, how do we know it is those, and not other criteria? and what does it even mean to reach or not reach those criteria? what happens to those people, or what do those people actually accomplish?

and if it is not something that can even be measured, then i don't think it is anything. i don't really buy into this idea of good people and bad people. i have the reflex that some liberal will say "what about hitler?" because in my experience that is the average american's kneejerk version of a litmus test for a moral imperative. but anyway, maybe in a way that actually reinforces this phenomenon rather than challenging or subverting it at all, i check for if i feel like my good faith response to that question would be "yes, this applies to hitler".

as is my nature my mind drags me back to a dreadful conversation in the elective debate club zoom call back in twenty-twenty-covid-nineteen, during which a classmate suggested her argument: hitler was a good leader. i and other classmates immediately tore into her use of "good" and its meaning. anyway, now i'm also thinking: if we all, as good liberal americans in the 21st century, can agree that hitler was a bad person (and i may really be taking this for granted), but apparently we're arguing whether or not he was a good leader, well that seems to mean that the qualities of the ideal leader are in conflict with the qualities of the ideal person. like in sims CAS, certain traits are definitionally opposite each other, so a sim cannot have both traits at the same time. the actual word is mutually exclusive, or a true dichotomy. if ideal leadership is exclusive to ideal personhood, then we must make a judgement as to which ideal to strive for, since, assuming we even are obligated to reaching ideals, and then i remember i actually pride myself on my aspiration toward mediocrity and contentment as opposed to flourishing, although now i'm not sure why exactly, we cannot reach two ideals which are mutually exclusive to each other at the same time, so we could never flourish. and then i'm realizing, i am the problem i need to solve. i need to change myself in order to be rid of my problem, which is things about myself which i can change.

i am in conflict with myself. do i have an obligation to resolve it? well, the conflict is that in one instance i seem to be in support of flourishing--of making a judgement about either pursuing ideal personhood or ideal leadership. in another instance, i seem to be in support of mediocrity--of failing to be convinced that judgements have any meaning or ought to have any impact on actions, when previously i argued vehemently against judging someone as a leader instead of as a person. i think that's it. wait, did i say that i don't think judgements mean anything? that doesn't seem like me, but i think this whole thing started because i don't even know me.

okay, i might be avoiding the question by ruminating in this way, but i don't know for sure because i don't want to spend another second on it. was i ever really ruminating?

it just matters that i want to be here. i can't deny someone else the right to be here if they do or don't measure up to some criteria. criteria i cannot spend enough time deliberating on. criteria that, even if i were passionate about them, wouldn't really mean anything because i alone can't enforce them on others, not that i have an interest in enforcing things upon other people anyway. so i think the whole idea of criteria falls completely apart here. i can't figure them out, and at no cost do i wanna figure them out. so why have them if you spend more time figuring them out than abiding by them? it just matters that i want to be here, so i'm gonna do what it takes to be here even if it gets hard. that's one way to argue myself out of misguided nihilism.

[medicinemane]

I once was talking with my pharmacy manager about... democracy, about how while there's plenty of stupid people in the world we'd all probably prefer didn't vote, that it was very very hard to actually make a line that makes sure only wise people vote while keeping all the idiots out

And I basically said to him "think of all the doctors and pharmacists you know who are smart, well educated people, who you 100% don't think make good choices"

From the look and his face, I'd say that spoke to him (it's incredible how many smart idiots there are in the world, isn't it?)

Anyway, I make that point because it much more addresses the whole concept of... lets call it democracy of the fit

Like it sounds great till you actually take even one second to think about it. It's almost like trying to draw any line in the sand for who it's ok to disenfranchise is not only dumb and ineffective, but also super dangerous. Ah man, I'm sorry, you scored too low on this test which happens behind closed doors and is graded by my political ally... it's not like you disagreeing with me had anything to do with that

(I'd hope we don't even need to touch on why the idea that testosterone levels are a really stupid useless way to decide who gets to vote, cause if that's true then we don't even have to disenfranchise anyone, we can just give out steroids and have the best country in the world... or is it only naturally produced T that makes you a free thinker?)

oh hey just in case anyone who left twitter is wondering how things are going over there

last night elon tweeted a 4chan screenshot (with bonus antisemitic text in the OP image) advocating for only “high status males” in government and the implied repeal of women’s suffrage. Cool cool cool

[medicinemane]

Elon Musk is (unintentionally) a very very funny man

Probably shouldn't be in charge of massive companies though

[floorpancakes]

say what you want about various things but clamp were kinda cooking when they were like 'if ur not around your gay love interest for like three hours you may just simply eat shit and fall out of a window and die' 😭