You seem to know the best way forward and I remember you also mentioning you have a primarily meat and fat based diet, minimizing if not eliminating sugar, carbs and processed food. Also checking out Dr Ken Berry if you haven't yet. My diet fluctuates but centers mainly around ketovore, but i'm not here to lecture you about what you already likely know.
Just hang in there, don't have much else to say. Take care.
checked out Dr. Ken Berry
While you're at it - Dr. Mark Hymen and chairopractic Dr's Erek Berg & Stein Ekberg. All good content with actionable advice. Really like Ekbergs breakdown videos.
Yeah that seems about right. Sure an inconvenience, but doubtful much more than what you currently feel or what could develop if things stay unmanaged.
They don't have our goals and they are embodied solely within a universe of statistically related characters. With that, I'm quite forgiving with my expectations. Even so, ClaudeAI continues to surprise me.
Maybe a stretch, but here's a wall of an idea:
(1) Let's move from relay pools as the town square, where everyone sharing an intersection of relays shares the same town square and move to relays as islands, closed off rooms etc. Similar to Reddit, but a theme is assigned to the relay, curated by the moderator(s) and community. More closed than what Satelite.earth has.
(2) find better ways to aggregate notes and surface older content - diminishing the recency bias.
Why (1)? With the wide perspectives we see from everyone, groups are not able to maintain a stable set of values. A permissionless wiki or community is not going to bring in specialized groups for fear of vandalism or being lost in the sea of other unrelated notes. Of course you have relay selection, but this is an afterthought in the town square model.
How is a segregated nostr going to help with ingroup behavior? It doesn't explicitly, but it creates an environment at the base level that disincentivizes negative & reactionary behaviors between tribes because now you can choose to not have in your face if you don't care to see it. Set it in your community rules.
Also, the real interesting stuff happens at the boundaries between communities - where relays don't need to be so strict with a specific theme. Where you can share relevant content across communities.
Curation at the level of the user, dictated by what room they choose to be in at any given moment.
(2) Now nostr is more segregated, what about visibility? How can we surface old content?
Searching through tags and labels work, but in a very limited way because you want tags to be specific. If you don't have a defined term ontology for whatever topic it is care about, you're stuck with a resolution problem. You need to balance between trying to find the most relevent tags for a topic and throwing tangentially related tags to increase reach.
Current functionality to share content is boosting, forking articles/notes and quote posting. Quoting, while used to change the context of a conversation or to aggregate multiple posts comes with its own set of problems. Similar to citations in papers, you're stuck temporally. Seeing the top level post means you see the new context, but you're going to have a problem finding where others have taken the conversation if you only see the bottom level. I've also seen quoting as a method for grouping notes together, but argue that its pretty ineffective for the previous reason.
What makes this worse is that many clients are __feed based__. Meaning unless you see it in your feed, you're not going to find it without some text search, which is very limited if you're trying to explore a general topic.
Two problems now, which many if not all clients face: Search resolution in text, tags/labels, and a temporal bias toward recency - incentivizing you to join in on the current conversation.
Here are two specs.
a) Modular articles, aka note collections, note collages, aka renderable lists with context:
Originally developed to help search and segregate focused context within a larger article, modular articles group events together as its core functionality.
Take a set of related events, group them together, and now they're all searchable under a single context.
"Opinions on integrating alt coins for tips"
"Vegetarian recipes"
"Cool notes and events that happened this week on nostr"
https://wikifreedia.xyz/nkbip-01/npub1m4ny6hjqzepn4rxknuq94c2gpqzr29ufkkw7ttcxyak7v43n6vvsajc2jlhttps://highlighter.com/laeserin/1719204947236
b) Embedded content:
Without going into detail about the how, embedding models are a computational approximation of __meaning__ where you can compute distances between concepts. You want to find content that wasn't labeled or grouped and you don't know the exact words being said? Your best chance is through embeddings. Expensive, but effective and ideally used for content to be "caught" later like knowledge content or relevant notes. It makes little sense to embed everything someone shouts out their window.
https://wikifreedia.xyz/nkbip-02/npub1m3xdppkd0njmrqe2ma8a6ys39zvgp5k8u22mev8xsnqp4nh80srqhqa5sf
Relays-as-islands helps users stay in their echo chamber if they'd like: Good for community security, but individuals pick the communities they want to participate in. Broadcasting, boosting and quoting now functions as a cross pollination mechanism, rather than a "hey followers check this out"
Note collections help aggregate and surface old content as prescribed by the user given some context. Embedding models help for search resolution, with the optional capacity to throw in for a recommendation algorithm.
Specs for aggregating and finding content to help bring knowledge content and collaboration to nostr - Nostr Knowledge Base Improvement Possibilities. The specs are on Wikifreedia.
Free will vs determinism argument makes sense if you've first assumed that you are separate from your environment, which seems true from a very local perspective. What happens if you consider the opposite?
Sure, science must encapsulate phenomena in some way to imply consequences, but an encapsulated and formalized nature is not nature.
Theories have limits, and the theory is not the phenomena.
How are you going to define free will or determinism? You need to find a scope for a definition which implies that the definition will fail outside of the scope. As such, and any mechanistic model of a Complex System can at most be a tangent plane approximation of the system's behavior.
And then you have to factor in the assumption that the system cannot be influenced by its observers. In the case of free will vs determinism you are essentially focusing the camera on the display, which is self referential - a feature that formal systems don't play nicely with.
you're good i don't even know if i got through it
the caricature got from it
" you're doing crazy stuff, have you thought of {idea}?"
"yeeaahh 😅 idont know if itl work cuz ALGORITHUM & INGUhGMent"
nostr:nprofile1qqsyawyrzrttfmv4cmtx5w2m85702kdct7hv3amfrkhagpdf9cz46mgprpmhxue69uhkv6tvw3jhytnwdaehgu3wwa5kuef0qy3hwumn8ghj7enfd36x2u3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99ulkwmr0vfskc0tpd3kqzythwden5te0dehhxarj9emkjmn99ue3v4az your gm post surfaced this song for me 🫂
Might be a good first dive -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_male_speech
also anectodally noted from some conversations that some gay men will consciously work towards developing these speech patterms and might even work with a professional
Think I'm understanding. From that perspective, I'd rather not use the term "real" because it implies a universal shared concreteness.
"Meaning" however, or the process of generating meaning - semiosis is what i like to use because even though whatever is most meaningful is different for everyone and changes all the time, the process is the same. Shared across all living beings, semiotaxis - movement towards meaning is what we all engage in.
When framed in terms of meaning, whatever is "real" doesn't matter. In fact, nothing that has no meaning to you matters.
From that, my response is:
"Find that which is most meaningful to you, and pursue it."
Small footnote: if you want to read more into semiotics, semiosis and semiotaxis, stay away from the linguistic interpretation because that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the framing from biosemiotics - or the study of how living beings generate meaning.
If you're struggling to find meaning, i'd argue you're missing the forest for the trees.
You don't need to tell me, but I want you to introspect for a bit and try and figure out what you /really/ want vs what you are doing. The purpose of anything you do should be in service of that which is most meaningful to you.
There's "means-to-an-end" goals and there are end goals. You get there by saying "im doing this so that I can ..." and you keep going until you can't anymore - "i'm doing this because that's what I want". When you find that, you can try to remove all the bullshit means-to-an-end goals that are bogging you down.
Do you know what you need to be doing to get there?
Personally, i'd look for whatever that "eternal pursuit" is. The end goal is not as important so much as you are pursuing and that the pursuit is enjoyable.
Regardless, Alan Watts really helped me a lot with his "Cosmic Drama" lecture, among others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48ONvZlRXjE
from the "Out of Your Mind" series which is shorter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUTgioWnwik
They're blocking access, removing features and then increasing their addictiveness with recommending their bottom brainstem videos, and this doesn't even touch upon the precariousness that their content creators feel trying to dodge the censors. Getting shittier moment by moment.
i like this mentality.
nostr:nevent1qqsyn6vzlsgev38vtr4jyayjgpykwmuwlwkjdu3suavpfxpnr2llmqgpr4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezucnfw33k76twv4ezuum0vd5kzmp0qgsdhcrqt2w8x9et446j8ge8kgmd2h4ykc6wsrnc4yqnmdu3lr74ktqrqsqqqqqpunuxtw
Oddbean new post about login | logout
Notes by liminal | export
you're good i don't even know if i got through it the caricature got from it " you're doing crazy stuff, have you thought of {idea}?" "yeeaahh 😅 idont know if itl work cuz ALGORITHUM & INGUhGMent"