I’d love to see men cite one women they’re inspired by that they’re not personally related to or dating/fucking. Do that challenge

— ¯\_(👁)_/¯ (@jonnoxrevanche) March 9, 2019

So easy:

Margaret Atwood
Kate Miller-Heidke
Nancy Cartwright
Limor Fried
Ayah Bdeir
Gwynne Shotwell
Karyn Kusama
Sarah Polley
Emily Lakdawalla
Grace VanDerWaal
Tiera Guinn
Sara Seager
Emma González
Maya Lin
Susan Solomon
Valentina Tereshkova
Naomi Wu
Lisa Randall

Ok, I tried to limit myself by only listing currently-living women but this is getting out of hand. I could add a few dozen more. But why is that challenge hard for most men? That I do not know.

Boeing 737 MAX-8 Makes History With Ethiopian Airlines And Lion Air Crashes.

That’s because this aircraft has a “crash into the ground” feature. This is an inadvisable feature to have in a jet.

It’s a system called MCAS that with but one (!) sensor failure, the horizontal stabilizer is automatically adjusted to pitch the nose down repeatedly with a fairly-complicated procedure being required to halt this behavior. I am not aware of any other feature in any other modern commercial airliner where only one (again: !!) sensor failure can cause low-altitude flight into terrain.

I am not a pilot, but I have read a whole lot about airliners, including their flight manuals, and if there is such a consequential and dangerous non-redundant and unverified (by other sensors) feature I’ve never heard of it nor read about it. I don’t believe it exists except in this new aircraft.

I’d advise anyone not to fly in this jet until the issue is resolved.

Did 10×300 on the deadlift earlier. That’s the first time I’ve ever been able to do that many reps at that weight. It wasn’t even that hard, which means I am doing well. Next time, maybe try to break my personal record on that lift.

I feel so much better than I did six months ago. Not surprised about how much stronger I am getting. I knew that would happen, given the work. What I am a bit startled by is how much it has improved my cognitive abilities. That was unexpected but very welcome.

Ever notice how the definition of being yourself (including all of those analogues promoted by conservatism, liberalism, and feminism) promote the ends of capitalism utterly? Consume, get massively fatter, pursue a dream job, buy a house, buy a car…buy, buy, buy, consume more and yet more. Funny that, isn’t it?

Being myself has nothing to do with capitalism or any of its goals. My ambition is to get away from all of that psychologically and physically. This is not wholly possible as neolib capitalism has subsumed all of society and civilization on the way to destroying it, but it’s still a worthy target.

A demonstration that greater than human intelligence is possible is that there are now computer-generated mathematical proofs that are true that no human can understand. No, the computer does not “understand” it either in the sense that we mean here, but it’s not clear what sense we mean, exactly.

I had a friend who could work out mathematical equations expertly, but didn’t understand really any of what they meant, while I could understand their implications but could not work them out. Who here comprehended those equations better? That’s a question I cannot honestly answer perhaps because the answer is extremely contingent or because that it is the wrong question altogether.

Love it when a vendor sends me a VPN sheet with an invalid subnet on it.

192.168.3.18/30

This is not a thing that can exist due to the way binary works! It just can’t!

What it should be is: 192.168.3.16/30. That leaves two free IPs in the range as a /30 is really tiny.

The reason is that in binary for a /30, the first 30 bits are masked out, like so:

nnnnnnnn.nnnnnnnn.nnnnnnnn.nnnnnnhh

Leaving the last two bits as valid for hosts on that subnet. Two bits in binary: four possible combos (two to the second power, the first IP in the range is the subnet ID and the last is the broadcast address). Tada!

(Note that this is only a partial, non-exhaustive explanation, and omits very many necessary details required for a full understanding.)

I heard a sob from my boyfriend so I went over to ask what was wrong and he replied, “today is awful” and handed me this pic.twitter.com/FTYcaQtGJk

— ✨ ✨ @ PINNED (@STRAWBUNNlES) March 5, 2019

I agree. Finding a Pop Tart in your hand is an awful, traumatizing experience. A Pop Tart is the paragon of pseudo-food, the epitome of simulation triumphing over the real. It’s a non-food, an excreted horror of nauseating synthesized non-sustenance fit not for consuming for nutrients but for illusory satiety in a culture beset with obesogenic exultance in the primacy of artificial food — and thought.

If you eat Pop Tarts, you have left the path of wisdom and are approaching the self-destruction of the average heroin addict. Not necessarily because of their lack of nutrition, but because the cognitive devaluation of the self that occurs when one commits such acts of consuming extruded non-food that resembles nothing found anywhere in a true culture that values itself. Every example even lacks a particular flavor. It is a referent to nothing — it points to no food which it truly resembles. The flavor of Pop Tart no matter what is on the box is: Pop Tart.

We cheapen and debauch ourselves when we consent to consuming such debased fodder, and in doing so we assent also to manipulations in other arenas of the cognoscible and the subsequent reduction thereof. Pop Tarts are the nullification of the real, an abolition of the interconnection of humanity to its physical and mental sustenance, the annihilation of association to and with the idea of food as anything more than a generic chip-like module one inserts first into a toaster then into a mouth with no thought as to how one is not consuming a good but rather an ideology.