It’s a lady from Mulholland Drive who scares a guy to death with here appearance. David Lynch films are weird.

Not quite. I am pretty sure that’s the woman who kills a guy with her appearance in a david lynch film.

It is, here’s the scene from Mulholland Drive. She shows up at the end.

Edit: After looking into the film more, the lady is still also Bonnie Aarons, just not in The Nun.

Very cool setup. My one gripe is that the carry handle is not captive in the body, so those two screws on the handle’s rear are the only spots it’s fastened to the body. I personally would not trust that.

What was the bullet drop myth?

Young Adult novels I think.

Is this mostly line work or stippling?

The whole concept is more akin to whether or not you are working directly with the material fruits of your labor, or if you’re some secondary or tertiary job to the actual work being done.

Basically, their view is that if you are not directly making the product or apart of the physical logistics for that product, then you’re in a bullshit job. I would not say I agree with the philosophy myself, but i kind of get it. ‘I farm Corn’, ‘I Truck frozen food’, and ‘I catch fish’, do exist in a very different realm from ‘I manage a team of QA specialists’, ‘I am an Advertisement Consultant’, and ‘I contribute to my company’s server backend codebase’.

Also, yeah, the 3-word rule of thumb sucks.

Meritocracies are still terrible and not the thing to strive for.

Welp, cryptographic software Nintendo 64 port wasn’t on my bingo card, but I respect using retro-hardware emulation as the compatibility layer.

You’re carrying out a similar fallacy by claiming use of the term in its original field is illigitimate in this argument. On top of that, right on the wikipedia page for Eusociality, it states that biologists such as E.O. Wilson have previously argued that humans are weakly eusocial, weakening your whole argument in the first place.

The concept of humans as super-organisms is explored in both sociology and biology, and i’d argue that that means humans fit the bill. Whatever no-true-Scotsman version you’ve been gate keeping with doesn’t even fully agree with the field you’re supposedly arguing on the behalf of.

I see you’re point, I was a bit hasty when saying there’s no good reason to make an exception.

I still do not agree with the argument that ‘Ants are a superorganism, so it’s not really a genocide’. For humans it’s a genocide, because we’re trying to describe a social crime within humanity. For everything else, extermination is communicating the same thing, but generically.

The term was literally coined in an analysis of human social interaction by Herbert Spencer in his book “Principles of Sociology”. The term was created to describe humanity.

So are humans. We still call mass killings of humans a genocide. There’s no really good reason to make an exception for ants.

It’s one of my favorites to argue on.

Maybe you do, and your existence only lasts a day, and you’re just oblivious that you’ll disappear when you lay down tonight. Or maybe we can acknowledge that you never fully lose all brain activity when asleep and that that matters.

You are a current instance of you only, held together by temperal and spacial coherence. If either of those then you cease to exist. Ergo, teleportation and time travel both kill you.

I’ve been trying to be faith-agnostic about it, as in the signals in your brain, some weird angel possession a meat mech, whatever. There is a clear phenomena where ‘you’ come into existance and get to look through your eyes. ‘You’ get to experience the world through these signals, and the full explanation of how that becomes a first person perspective observing the world is still not cleanly explained. That’s the anima, the soul, ‘you’.

Teleportation both, destroys your body completely and so when the copy gets made on the other side it’s not going to be the same you even if you use all the same atoms, and only interacts with the physical world so no spiritual soul would be brought along with it.

Basically, you will go into the teleporter, they’ll fire it up, and then you’ll stop being able to see, think, feel, or do anything relating to existence because you stopped existing. A new anima will be created when the copy of your physiology is constructed on the other end. ‘You’ never come back.

You don’t seem to get my point. We’re talking about the instance of you reading this comment right now. As in ‘you’. That’s the anima.

If that anima is destroyed you cease to exist, because you are that anima. The reassembled you will not be ‘you’, because ‘you’ were destroyed when you were vaporized. You’re not just gonna come back from that. So whether that anima is obliterated or not should matter to you.

Your ability to observe the world is based on the current instance of your whole self in its current configuration, and if that configuration is completely obliterated, you’re gone. It doesn’t matter if they make a copy of you after - even with the same atoms.

The issue is with the conscience and the soul. Essentially the question is: “If your whole body is taken apart atom by atom, does the soul get taken along with it?”

In this case, the soul can just mean ‘you’. The ‘you’ that is seeing through your eyes right now, and is giving you the current experience you are now experiencing. To give an easier example, let’s say you are copied exactly four feet to your right. Your copy will look exactly like you, have all your memories, yadda yadda yadda. It seems pretty obvious that ‘you’ won’t all of a sudden be seeing through your copy’s eyes, no? If you get vaporised, then, your conscience is not going to just teleport into your clone, right? At least there’s nothing to suggest that would happen.

Teleportation is just a fancy version of this in a different order. You are vaporised first, then your atoms are moved real fast to the new location, then your copy uses those atoms. There’s zero reason to think that the ‘you’ which was vaporised is ever coming back. Once it’s gone, it’s gone, or at least that’s the idea.

Whether you believe in the spiritual concept of a soul, or that your experience of the world is just a specific instance of electrical charges in some fancy meat, both seem to suggest that once the anima departs, it will never return. A new anima must instead be made.

You are at the bottom of the diagram right now.

It is all four arms, both of MLK Jr’s and both of Corretta Scott King’s.

one side.

the other side.