Good things come from the pursuit of legacy, by calling it a delusion I don't mean to paint it as a fundamentally bad thing.

To establish some context, I'm putting aside supernatural rewards and punishments like valhalla and hell.

Legacy for the purposes of this post is having an impact that outlives you. People remembering your name. A lot of people claim it as a significant motivation and, I suspect, a lot more people are motivated by it without openly admitting it.

The obvious reason being that it's an antidote to mortality or, at the core, impermanence. Chaos. It's a fear that motivates us all more than we probably admit because most people avoid thinking and talking about more often than they don't. It's the unnamed void that's always there at the edges, creeping in and reminding us every once in a while that it could all end any time. That nothing lasts.

Legacy, or the eternal rewards I'm leaving out of the conversation, is a big shiny counterpoint to impermanence. You might even call it a psychological coping mechanism. We all need them sometimes and a key part of their operation is that they're not entirely rational.

And legacy is pretty irrational. No matter what we do we'll die, and then everyone who knew us will die. Not long after, in the scope of time, everyone who remembers us will die. If we're Einstein then maybe people love and remember us for a few extra centuries before we become a rarely visited piece of ancient history. At some point even Einstein will be forgotten.

So legacy isn't actually an antidote to impermanence, it just feels like it if you don't think about it too much. You can't make a mark on history big enough to last forever in any meaningful sense. Which leaves its impact on the lives we're living. Does it make them better? When people wear t-shirts with Einstein and hearts on them does it echo back through time and give the still living Einstein a tingle? Does he get better orgasms, smoother skin, deeper relationships? I don't think he does.

He probably gets a sense of satisfaction and fulfillment from knowing that he's moved the needle. That he's leaving the world better than he found it. That's worth a lot, but it's not really about legacy, it's about impact. Something which is available to everyone all the time.

I bring this up because periodically I see legacy contextualized as almost a virtue. Something noble to strive for. To me it's a false idol, like fame, celebrity or wealth worship. It comes with a partially broken set of values.

Whereas values that arise from prioritizing the lives we're living and the people we're living them with seem to me to be a lot healthier and more fulfilling. And I think, in a bigger sense, more conducive to a healthy society. If more people are investing their identities and energy in values that give them a meaningful return without needing to achieve a particular level of historical impact, they'll suck less. If legacy is the goal, and you need to step on people, or neglect relationships, or put off mental health in order to get there, it's very easy to rationalize doing it. And if we hold the people who do those things up as ideals, we're tacitly telling society that it's something they should be pursuing too.

To put it one way, and digress a little, we'd probably have a lot less self involved billionaires if we didn't put them on pedastals and talk about them all the time. As things stand it's no wonder that so many children grow up believing that achieving wealth or fame is the best way to get attention. It absolutely is. Whether we love or hate it, we can't shut up about it.

Of course talking about wealth and fame brings in a bunch of factors that aren't necessarily about legacy, and I don't want to turn this into an essay about everything that's wrong with culture. But I do think that all of the above are part of a sort of package of self defeating values that we all (mostly unintentionally) play a part in perpetuating.

I don't expect we're going to stop doing that any time soon but I think at some point, between here and a future where we're not constantly flirting with annihilating ourselves, we're going to need to.

The Skibidi Wonderland

Imagine a world with skibidi rizz

Where the rivers run with flowberry fizz

Every tree has a W gyat

Everyone is ruled under Kai Cenat

Everything, even the hills looksmax

Criminals will have to pay a fanum tax

Every December we celebrate Rizzmas

Where we get candy and gifts from St. Grimace

From the screen to the ring to the pen to the king

Every October we celebrate Hawktuahween

Everyone follows the sigma grindset

Everyone thinks with the sigma mindset

The skibidi sky has a rizzy aurora

All citizens have skibidi aura

Can you imagine a world where all is rizzy?

Can you think of a world where all is skibidi?

Can you fathom a world where all cheese is drippy?

'Cause I yearn for a world where I can hit the griddy

The earth, once scarred by shadow’s hand,
Now trembles soft, a waking land.
From soil soaked with roots that bled,
New shoots arise where death had fed.

The storm has passed, its howling stilled,
The air now warm, the silence filled.
With whispers light, the seeds take hold,
Their leaves like sparks of green and gold.

The soil hums with tender grace,
A pulse of life begins its race.
No longer bound by gloom’s demand,
It rises tall, a fearless stand.

Though remnants of the past remain,
They sing of hope, not loss or pain.
The cycle turns, as it must do—
To bury old, and birth the new.

I received an email this morning from the good folks at the WHE entitled: Perplexity AI Partnership to Improve History Education

In it, their CEO Jan van der Crabben, writes:

As the most-visited history encyclopedia globally, World History Encyclopedia is pleased to announce a strategic partnership with Perplexity.ai.

…

As artificial intelligence (AI) tools based on large language models become increasingly accessible to the public, growing concerns have emerged regarding the quality of information provided by these tools. These AI systems are typically developed and trained using publicly available internet information, often without robust verification processes, and frequently generate inaccurate results.

There are also significant concerns about the business models of AI companies, which utilise content developed and meticulously checked by providers like World History Encyclopedia —a non-profit organisation— without obtaining proper consent, without providing compensation, and without offering appropriate attribution.

Perplexity.ai is an AI-powered search and answer engine that combines the capabilities of a search engine with artificial intelligence. Unlike most other AI systems, Perplexity clearly cites its sources, providing users with an easy way to verify the accuracy of its answers.

In alignment with our goal of being a trusted resource of accurate and objective historical information, we are excited about this partnership. It will allow us to develop tools based on the Perplexity API to make the content in World History Encyclopedia easier to find, browse, and access. We aim to develop educational AI tools for history learning in close collaboration with teachers to augment the World History Encyclopedia website for students.

The partnership will also enable World History Encyclopedia to use artificial intelligence to enhance our human review processes more efficiently. This includes improving tasks such as fact-checking and plagiarism detection.

Additionally, Perplexity is the first AI service that allows providers of information like World History Encyclopedia to be compensated fairly for the AI use of that information. We will receive a share of advertising revenue generated on the Perplexity platform whenever Perplexity cites World History Encyclopedia to answer a question.

I have worked with Jan and his staff many times over the last six years and I find them eminently trustworthy and dedicated to education.

What does everyone think of this kind of partnership moving forward? I understand Perplexity might have a slightly different approach that certain folks find promising.

And what kind of content do we think this might be able to generate? I look forward to your comments.

Does anyone have any experience making miniatures? I'm looking to get started and there just seems to be an absolute overload of options for sculpting material: Sculpey, Milliput, Green Stuff, Scultamold... The list seemingly goes on and on. I've seen some great videos by Miscast or Bill Making Stuff, but they can be a little all over the place.

Does anyone have any suggestions or point to any video/written tutorials on getting started?

Thanks!

I do hope one of you thinks of a better title or a more coherent structure for the overall post.

This question was inspired by a comment chain about PFAS in Gore-Tex jackets under a different post here, but it's been a bit of a simmering question for me.

When reading through that thread, my immediate reaction was something along the lines of the following.

Unless you're directing traffic in Seattle or Scotland, wouldn't the amount of time you'd wear the jacket be too little to have meaningful exposure? It's not like you're walking into an oven where the polymers would break down from heat. Further, if it's GoreTex-appropriate weather, you'll near-certainly have additional clothing between your skin and the GoreTex.

I was bored at work today, so I had plenty of time for rumination and introspection. What I found so far is that my instinctive skepticism toward health-conscious rhetoric has these primary sources:

1. I listened to Stronger by Science's six-hour deep dive on aspartame. Their eventual conclusion is that aspartame does cause bladder cancer in rats & mice, but the equivalent doses for humans make fears over its use into a major nothingburger. A human would need to spend a year chugging down five gallons of Diet Coke each day for the elevated cancer risk to be statistically meaningful.
2. When I catch someone trying to be convincing in an area where I lack domain expertise, I judge them by their overall demeanor and (if I can catch on) general rhetorical logic [in that order] long before I consider the truth of their specific claims. The IRL people I've met who are most stridently into wholesome natural living have fervency and lack of appreciation that it's the dose that makes the poison to the degree that it makes RFK discussing vaccine policy sound grounded in reality by comparison. Perhaps if they were born in a different society, they'd make excellent temple priests who ensure no lazy shortcuts or "it's all we have available" excuses are made when it's time to ensure a full harvest. Instead, they're the kinds who play 50 million questions and have genuine concerns that the radio waves that connect my wireless headphones are giving me brain damage or control. [To be fair, there is some large selection effects here. My hobbies have a habit of attracting those who are so open-minded that their brains fell out. Since online interactions strip the majority of demeanor and previous interactions, I judge online strangers with strange opinions way less harshly than IRL contacts unless they've gone out of their way to be obnoxious. IRL, I'm exposed to a lot more generic chemicals bad rhetoric than in my usual online bubbles. ]
3. Based on 1, unless I have preexisting trust with a particular journalist, layman's science journalism—when it's performed by journalists dabbling in science rather than scientists trying their hands at public communication—is far too likely to overblow a headline or misrepresent the research conclusions. "Here are 30 links to news articles" doesn't appeal to me because 25 of them are probably copying each other (that's just how internet journalism works). It's highly unlikely that all 5 of the remaining links misread the original paper, but I'm not reading through all those (perhaps AI summarization could help here—at the very least it could identify commonalities and outliers for manual examination later).
4. Related to 2, two additional SMBC comics that share my attitude: Vitamin Water v. Butter and Pronounceable Ingredients Only

That said, sometimes the health nuts are correct. As it turns out, all the coughing smokers do is a strong sign that smoking is bad for your lungs.

What are some heuristics to sort health tips that get passed around without citation into one of the following buckets?

1. You'll notice the improvement within a week once you've finished withdrawal. Smoking, boozing, eating meat or alliums at dinnertime, and heroin are in this bucket.
2. The effect is real and significant, but you may not notice the impact until at least a year has gone by, if ever. Seatbelts and bike/horse helmets are the two examples that immediately pop to mind.
3. Technically non-zero, but ultimately trivial. The opening aspartame example would fit. In a similar line to doctors who recommend against treating prostate cancer because the treatments would shorten your lifespan by more than letting that cancer run its course and waiting for a heart attack or totally unrelated cancer to do you in, these interventions are meaningless to anyone who uses motor vehicles regularly.
4. Playground rumors or outright disinformation. Vaccines causing autism and yellow 5 as an HRT supplement b/c it shrinks your testicles belong in this wastebin.

Circling back to the impact of PFAS in Gore-Tex that inspired today's thinking, my layman's estimate that the effects on the factory workers who make a career out of working with the stuff is a low 2 when following proper safety procedures. Without them, a definite 1. For wearers of the stuff, a solid 3.

One final reason I may have been so fired up on this topic is that I listened to a highlight reel from a Congressional hearing round table on food & pharmaceutical safety last week. During the testimony, I had a nagging feeling that at least half of what they said was true, but the truth percent is below 75, and I had no idea which was which because all claims were presented with the same urgency.

Today's problem description: https://adventofcode.com/2024/day/5

Please post your solutions in your own top-level comment. Here's a template you can copy-paste into your comment to format it nicely, with the code collapsed by default inside an expandable section with syntax highlighting (you can replace python with any of the "short names" listed in this page of supported languages):

<details>
<summary>Part 1</summary>

```python
Your code here.
```

</details>

Today's problem description: https://adventofcode.com/2024/day/6

Please post your solutions in your own top-level comment. Here's a template you can copy-paste into your comment to format it nicely, with the code collapsed by default inside an expandable section with syntax highlighting (you can replace python with any of the "short names" listed in this page of supported languages):

<details>
<summary>Part 1</summary>

```python
Your code here.
```

</details>

So we can sort the new page by new activity, but I do not see any way to reference when that "new" is. The only reference on the front page I can see to there being new content is in threads I've already accessed - where I get a notification there are new comments in the thread. If I didn't access the thread, but come back later, there is no notification that there has been activity within that thread. The only date listed is when the thread was created, and not when last activity was had. Is there more I'm potentially missing to see when a thread was last active from the front page?

In that same vein, is there a way to mark a thread as "read" besides going into it after new comments have been made?

Asking for what I'm looking for in a different way: Is there a way to filter out comments since last visit? Eg on old forums, there were "activity since your last visit" links - basically exactly like how the notification system works here, but a thread-based system for all comments instead of a comment-based system that are only responses to you (and in both to get the notification gone, either you interact with it or mark it is read). Is there anything like that?

The wiki only seems to have how to find new comments within a thread itself, and not new comments site wide: https://tildes.net/~tildes.official/wiki/instructions/navigating_tildes

What you got:

Top 5 Artists

1. Billie Eillish
2. Lana Del Rey
3. Addison Rae
4. Sabrina Carpenter
5. Dua Lipa

Top 5 Songs:

1. Aquamarine - Addison Rae
2. CHIHIRO - Billie Eillish
3. LUNCH - Billie Eillish
4. Espresso - Sabrina Carpenter
5. National Anthem - Lana Del Rey

Minutes listened: 52,691

Here were my predictions from a month ago

What have you been listening to this week? You don't need to do a 6000 word review if you don't want to, but please write something! If you've just picked up some music, please update on that as well, we'd love to see your hauls :)

Feel free to give recs or discuss anything about each others' listening habits.

You can make a chart if you use last.fm:

http://www.tapmusic.net/lastfm/

Remember that linking directly to your image will update with your future listening, make sure to reupload to somewhere like imgur if you'd like it to remain what you have at the time of posting.