Now, for any person with a shred of moral dignity, there's some time during US history where you would have to admit that an insurrection or rebellion was necessary. Only complete scum bag fascists would try to argue that a slave revolt wasn't an absolute good, and that it was a bad thing when those revolts were crushed. Anyone with a shred of moral decency has to admit that there is at least one point in US history where the nation was doing something so incredibly evil, that it would have been good if people would have rose up and stopped it.
Today we're talking about the displacement and genocide of people in Gaza. We can look at any number of genocide on US soil carried out by the US government. Who, with any moral clarity, wouldn't point to those and want to believe that they would have resisted, violently if necessary, against those slaughters. Who, that today condemns slavery, could look at John Brown and not wish to have the moral integrity to fight and die along side of him?
Every liberal who actually believes in justice, who isn't just virtue signaling out of guilt, should be able to point to a time in history where they would absolutely agree with the most militant resistance. For those folks, I always wonder, when did that evil end? Where is your line? Have you thought about that?
Diffusion-DFL: Decision-focused Diffusion Models for Stochastic Optimization
Zihao Zhao, Christopher Yeh, Lingkai Kong, Kai Wang
https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.11590 https://…
Two Florida pastors were arrested while praying on top of a
‘Black History Matters’ mural
to stop crews from removing it
The church leaders in St. Petersburg prayed over the ‘Black History Matters’ mural as state transportation workers showed up to paint over it
https://www.
I really really really hate how much people in my field and industry have normalized generative #AI use.
I see posts / hear comments literally EVERY DAY to the tune of “can people stop complaining about AI, nobody cares. You’re not morally better” followed up by something about “you’re making work harder than it needs to be” and often “nobody values human-made work more they only care about the final output no matter how it was created”
I usually ignore these conversations but sometimes it really gets to me. It’s so hard to feel sane surrounded by that consensus every day, everywhere I go with people in my profession.
I’ve rarely felt so judged by the majority point of view on anything in my work before.
Aurora: Architecting Argonne's First Exascale Supercomputer for Accelerated Scientific Discovery
Benjamin S. Allen, James Anchell, Victor Anisimov, Thomas Applencourt, Abhishek Bagusetty, Ramesh Balakrishnan, Riccardo Balin, Solomon Bekele, Colleen Bertoni, Cyrus Blackworth, Renzo Bustamante, Kevin Canada, John Carrier, Christopher Chan-nui, Lance C. Cheney, Taylor Childers, Paul Coffman, Susan Coghlan, Michael D'Mello, Murali Emani, Kyle G. Felker, Sam Foreman, Olivier Franza,…
Supercritical fluids as a distinct state of matter characterized by sub-short-range structural order
Sha Jin, Xinyang Li, Xue Fan, Matteo Baggioli, Yuliang Jin
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.07385
Estrogen? Hot drinks will suffice!
"""
Naturally, cold water cooled. For that reason it was used in mania and frenzy, sicknesses of heat where the spirits were in ebullition, solids tightened and liquids were heated to the point of evaporation, leaving the brain of the patient ‘dry and brittle’, as anatomists regularly demonstrated. Reasonably enough Boissieu includes cold water among his list of refreshing cures: baths were the foremost ‘antiphlogistic’, purifying the body of any excessive igneous particles to be found there. Taken as a drink, it was a ‘dilutive procastinant’ that diminished the resistance of fluids to the action of solids, thereby indirectly lowering the general heat of the body.
But it was also said that cold water brought heat and that hot water cooled. Such at least was the thesis defended by Darut. Cold baths chased the blood from the periphery of the body and pushed it ‘with increased vigour towards the heart’. As the heart was the seat of natural heat, the blood was warmed there, all the more so as “the heart, which struggles alone against all the other parts, makes renewed efforts to expel the blood and overcome capillary resistance. What results is a greater intensity of circulation, the division of the blood, the fluidity of the humours, the destruction of congestions, an increase in the strength of the natural heat, of the appetite of the digestive forces, and the activity of the body and the mind.” A symmetrical paradox operated regarding hot baths: blood was attracted to the extremities of the body, as were the humours, sweat, and all forms of liquid, both beneficial and harmful. The vital centres were therefore deserted, the heart slowed and the organism thus began to cool down. This fact was confirmed by the ‘fainting, lipothymia… weakness, nonchalance, lassitude, and lack of vigour’ that generally accompanied excessive bathing with hot water.
But there was more. So great was the polyvalence of water, so great was its aptitude to submit itself to the qualities that it carried, that it sometimes lost its efficacy as a liquid and acted as a desiccant instead. Water could Prevent dampness. In part, this was the old principle of similia similibus, but in another sense, and by the intermediary of a visible mechanism. For some, it was cold water that brought dryness, as heat kept water humid. Heat dilated the pores of the organism, distended its membranes, and allowed humidity to impregnate them as a secondary effect. Liquids made their way through heat. For that reason, the hot drinks so widely used in the seventeenth century risked becoming a danger, and those who took too many risked relaxation, general dampness and a weakness of the whole organism. As these were traits commonly associated with the feminine body, as opposed to the dry, virile solidity of the male, the abuse of hot drinks could lead to a general feminisation of the human race: “Not without reason, the reproach is made to the majority of men that they have softened and degenerated, taking on the habits and inclinations of women – the only thing lacking is a physical resemblance. The abuse of humectants could accelerate the metamorphosis, and render the two sexes almost identical both physically and morally. Woe betide the human race if this prejudice ever spreads to the masses: there will be no more labourers, artisans or soldiers, as they will have lost the strength and vigour necessary for their profession.” [Pressavin]
"""
(Michel Foucault, History of Madness)
Don’t push the horses.: https://benborges.xyz/2025/07/26/dont-push-the-horses.html
On circular external difference families
A. Burgess, F. Merola, T. Traetta
https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.02731 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.02731