Carl-Richard

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a26cd3e-d82c-83eb-9d2d-85e5e78f0ed3

What is going down in this video, you might be scared to know.

They say that good music keeps you at the edge between familiarity and surprise. Too familiar becomes boring, and too surprising becomes hard to follow. Musical improvisation is the manifestation of this in real time, and you can usually notice when the player is engaging in well-established/familiar patterns ("licks") and when the player is creating something completely original. I'm used to improvising a lot on guitar, and I've noticed that I'm able to imagine impossibly intricate and original lines of improvisation in my head, but I'm in no way technically advanced enough to manifest that through my instrument. When I listen to the most complete virtuostic improvisational players out there, even though they can come very close many times, I always feel a tension between boredom and impenetrability. Of course, this desire I have of hearing the most hyper-creative lines of notes that I can possibly imagine is impossible to fulfill. It's completely relative to my unique conception of music, and I would probably never in a million years get to hear somebody produce even 10 seconds of those exact notes (which would be absolutely transcendentally orgasmic if it happened). Nevertheless, I know two players who come extremely close, and I'll try to weigh to which extent they're too "boring" ("musically conventional" is a better word) or too impenetrable (too melodically or harmonically complex) relative to my impossible standard of imaginative perfection. Guthrie Govan (obviously). It's tricky, because he is so versatile that he often fluctuates between too conventional (like bluesy bendy stuff) and too complex (like jazzy shredding stuff). I'll give an example for each player: Allan Holdsworth is notoriously known for being impossible to imitate by other players. For reference, Guthrie Govan can imitate virtually anyone but him. He often becomes too complex. I sometimes have to listen to his songs 30 times to understand what he is doing (like the run at 1:28 in the video below). (Btw things become more interesting around 0:40).

You're saying a bunch of nonsense aren't ya? Offshoot? Inorganic? We're organic. And this, is a microchip: A.k.a.: https://www.nisenet.org/catalog/media/zoom_microchip_video

Yeah, language. *Rocks go goo-goo ga-ga*: "arTiFiCiAl gEnEraL iNtelLiGenCe"

Speed of light is unironically like the speed limit in your neighborhood. 1. Nobody follows it. 2. Why should it apply everywhere and in any situation? Saying something is impossible based on observation means you don't understand what science is.

Why would anybody leave any place? Airplanes have a cruising speed ~100x faster than the average human. That's mindboggling for a pre-industrial tribesman who has never seen an airplane. Weird. There are already indications that UAPs are breaking the "laws of physics". Think of speed of light as the distance you have to walk to a restaurant to eat. You could order a DoorDash and the food will come to you.

179 cm. I remember looking at a graph of my weight and height development when I was little and I had always been just a teeny-tiny bit shorter than national average (it's now 180.9 cm for adult males) but dead-on average weight. So I've always been slightly more beefy than what my height would dictate 😆

"Smart" is usually associated with being unhappy when it's defined as a psychic imbalance of high IQ (working memory, pattern recognition) and low psychological depth, complexity, introspective ability, refinement, values, awareness, meaning, being, and simply happenstance, precarious situations.

I think it's hilarious how strongly Leo disagreed on you categorizing it as a cult throughout the thread, despite you feeling strongly compelled to call it a cult. Almost makes you think 🤫 I wonder what you think about my "cult" experience. Was it a cult? And then, is it categorically distinguishable from this place?

@Inliytened1 plz anser boss 👆👆👆 ty

"Think for yourself about this thing I'm telling you to think about, but not about what I'm saying". "It's not a cult guys, cult means mind contro- funneling money of course".

We're horse-shoeing into the other semen-related thread.

Lmao. Makes a distinction, refuses to elaborate. I want to think for myself but you're making it hard by not answering my question. In fact, I "think for myself" so much that I won't think about what you're telling me to think about (and "contemplate", the most cliché, overused, groupthink concept on the forum) and instead want to think about what you would've answered me if you had answered.

Whatever you currently want to do. That does not mean blindly cater to impulse and discount all future visions. It means cater to what is the best choice in your current situation.

You're setting up for some dirty revenge playing with pale fluids like that.

I should've said "some vegans".

You said there was a contrast. What was the contrast? Or was it just a feeling?

The smoking quitting industry has known this for a long time. https://tryfum.com

This thread is the biggest wanking session the forum has seen in a while.

What's the contrast? "God is nothing, God is not x" vs "God is x, God is this thing"?

What about breast milk and the mother consents? Some vegans proclaim to be against exploitation of animals. But is a consentual transaction or interaction exploitation? Would that vegan be against a worker contract where the worker consents because it's "exploitation" of (human) animals? Or does consent make it ok and it's not the consumption of animal food/labor that is intrinsically not ok, it's the lack of consent (which non-human animals are generally incapable of expressing)?

It is. Stop 😭

Use paid social media ads to advertise your gofundme. There are people out there willing to donate to you (evidenced by the fact that somebody has already donated to you), so all you need is their attention.

Would extracting biological fluids from a baby animal be vegan? I guess if the mother gives consent? 🤔