my current stack yearly: 4-strain flu shot weekly: testosterone enanthate 250mg tirzepatide 10mg daily: rosuvastatin 5mg oxandrolone 20mg escitalopram 20mg 10,000 ui d3 1.5mg methylcobalamin 1.5mg methylfolate 15mg p5p 1200mg nac plus iron, iodine and a bunch of other shit that’s not as important supplementation-wise

Derived from first principles. Web search off by the way. Prompt: For a specified SpaceX Starship lunar mission architecture, how many dedicated propellant-tanker launches are required to supply sufficient usable propellant for a Starship spacecraft to travel from Earth orbit to the Moon and perform a powered lunar landing, either through direct orbital refueling or via a propellant depot? Determine the required number under explicit assumptions about the Starship variant, mission payload, initial Earth orbit, mission delta-v requirements, propellant capacity and initial loading, transferable propellant delivered per tanker launch, transfer losses, and operational reserves. Specify whether the mission includes lunar ascent and return, and distinguish refueling launches from launches of the lunar spacecraft, orbital depot, or other mission elements.

banger

new balenciaga potter just dropped i wasn't ready for this youtube.com/watch?v=5QKeYse5…

>be 2001-2004 >GameSpy bloat, CS server browser lies >open All-Seeing Eye, filter ping <100 >AvP2 server: "SURVIVOR - MARINES VS HORDE - 24/7" >join as pulse rifle guy, 2 mins later getting facehugged in a vent >good shit

incredible anyways, accelerate

One of the most midwit traits is reducing someone to a group label and then attacking them on that basis, as though the group were homogeneous. It’s crude categorization masquerading as intellectual engagement. The result is that people feel compelled to preface their arguments with disclaimers like “I’m not an X hater, but…”, preemptively distancing themselves from an imposed label just to have their arguments judged on their own merits. Case in point, most of the replies in this thread.

I bet shit could hit a tranny in the dick from 50 yards

there's a kind of art so good that aesthetic judgment turns into a coordination problem: how do you get this into the heads of the people who would love it? The Gospel of the Flood by Jonas Kyratzes is one of the greatest audio stories ever made. gospelsoftheflood.com/

@ttywisp is drawing from the well-supported idea in creativity research that constraints foster (rather than limit) creative and aesthetic outcomes. This is most directly tied to psychologist Catrinel Tromp’s (Haught-Tromp’s) Green Eggs and Ham Hypothesis and the related Integrated Constraints in Creativity (IConIC) model. Experiments (inspired by Dr. Seuss writing Green Eggs and Ham with only 50 words) show that people produce more original, creative results under externally imposed limits than with total freedom. Constraints shrink the search space, force deeper exploration, reduce reliance on clichés, and encourage novel associations. It also aligns with Patricia D. Stokes’ framework in Creativity from Constraints: The Psychology of Breakthrough, which examines how self-imposed or paired constraints (one that precludes ordinary solutions and another that promotes alternatives) drive breakthroughs in art, design, and other fields (examples include Monet, Mondrian, and others). Design thinkers have popularized a similar practical version with phrases like “creativity loves constraints.” In the specific context of the ASCII Doom-like game, the severe technical constraint of rendering everything in text characters forces inventive solutions for effects like explosions, blood, and muzzle flashes—producing a distinctive, oddly addictive aesthetic that freer graphics might not achieve as uniquely. A more recent philosophical framing even describes beauty itself in terms of “constraint resonance.”

these are rookie numbers

agents in the hotpath. humans depecrated. just backport the patch and build php yourself.

How low has The New Yorker fallen.

That’s funny lol. But if the question is underspecified what’s an intelligent system to do? Answer every conceivable interpretation of it? Pick the most defensible interpretation and address that instead? Or just reject the question altogether because it’s underspecified? OP’s question has two interpretations: - single-probe LIVE detection - NCV detection Both interpretations are as likely to the model, which is why it answers No/Yes half the time. The multimeter doesn’t support the former, but it does the latter. So from the three behaviors I said, which would you prefer? There are tradeoffs to each. The answer can only rest in forcing the user to clarify what they meant.