Before the zoom meeting:
- definitely not going to volunteer for anything
During the zoom meeting:
- no sorry I don't want to be on the committee
- no sorry I don't have time to organise social meetups
- well yes I suppose I could manage to design the thing you require
After the zoom meeting:
- DAMN IT 🤦♀️
#Volunteering
A07 - Mission To Destiny
AVON: Take a look. [Motions to Dr. Kendall is seen unconscious in a chair] He's the fourth one I've found, all of them unconscious. It's... Sonovapour.
BLAKE: Yes I know. We found a couple. It must be coming from the filters.
https://blake.torpidity.net/m/107/68
From the barrage of "news coverage" of the Putin/Trump meeting and today's meeting for everyone else investing in Ukraine, I have to wonder, did anyone actually expect anything to come from these meetings?
My knee-jerk reaction to this article from @… was a cynical [citation needed] re “artists from all mediums emphatically support the use of AI.”
On further reflection…well, that’s still my response to the eyeball-grabbing lede, yes, but the actual article is what I wish we’d had instead of this inane hype avalanche:
Artists poking at the new thing, playing with it, finding its possibilities, critiquing it, problematizing it, asking us to ask what it is, helping us see it with fresh eyes from many angles. https://infosec.exchange/@adamshostack/114704865574139727
"""
All of which was of the utmost importance for subsequent developments in the medicine of the mind. In its positivist incarnation, this was little more than the combination of the two experiences that classicism had juxtaposed without ever joining them together: a social, normative and dichotomous experience of madness that revolved entirely around the imperative of confinement, formulated in a style as simple as ‘yes or no’, ‘dangerous or harmless’, and ‘good or not good for confinement’, and a finely differentiated, qualitative, juridical experience, well aware of limits and degrees, which looked into all the aspects of the behaviour of the subject for the polymorphous incarnations that insanity might assume. The psychopathology of the nineteenth century (and perhaps our own too, even now) believes that it orients itself and takes its bearings in relation to a homo natura, or a normal man pre-existing all experience of mental illness. Such a man is in fact an invention, and if he is to be situated, it is not in a natural space, but in a system that identifies the socius to the subject of the law. Consequently a madman is not recognised as such because an illness has pushed him to the margins of normality, but because our culture situates him at the meeting point between the social decree of confinement and the juridical knowledge that evaluates the responsibility of individuals before the law. The ‘positive’ science of mental illness and the humanitarian sentiments that brought the mad back into the realm of the human were only possible once that synthesis had been solidly established. They could be said to form the concrete a priori of any psychopathology with scientific pretensions.
"""
(Michel Foucault, History of Madness)
Somebody at Apple had a meeting and came out of it saying, “Yes. Put Freeform in the dock by default. On every Mac.” #imaginethemeeting
A Mixed-Gauge Caratheodory Measure Bridging Lebesgue Volume and Surface Content
Yash Thakur
https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.18011 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2508.180…
* gxam wonders if all these globals are really necessary
<Knghtbrd> most of them at the moment yes
<Knghtbrd> we REALLY need to clean them up at some point
<Knghtbrd> gxam: the globals will have to go away as we migrate towards
modularity and madness (ie, libtool)
When you decide to add more CDs to my Discogs page!
Yes, I prefer physical media over streaming, any day of the year.
#Bandcamp
https://bandcamp.com/pmarg