Sucuk Ekmek

My experience Sketchers are comfortable but not durable. Currently I wear Asics' gel based shoes. They are okay but not durable as Nike Air Zoom Structure.

I think ChatGPT saves energy by using em dashes — lol. Out of curiosity, I asked it how Thomas Pynchon utilizes them. ''Thomas Pynchon’s use of em dashes is subtle but deliberate — they serve a rhythmic, interruptive, or emphatic function in his otherwise dense and stylistically varied prose. He does not overuse them, but when they appear, they tend to serve very specific roles. Let’s break down his em dash usage in more detail: 🔍 1. Interruptive Function Pynchon often uses em dashes to interrupt a sentence mid-flow with a sudden insertion — usually for emphasis or to signal a kind of mental leap. Example (from The Crying of Lot 49): “It was now like walking among matrices of a great digital computer, the zeroes and ones twinned above—hanging like balanced mobiles—symmetric about some axis or equator...” Here, the em dashes break the flow to insert an image/metaphor, then return to the original clause. The dashes let him float an idea mid-sentence, often with vivid imagery or tone shifts. 🌀 2. Parenthetical/Qualifying Thought Pynchon will sometimes use em dashes instead of parentheses to insert side comments that feel more immediate or urgent. "It was a mailman—blown off course, or perhaps stoned—delivering nothing but confusion." The em dash here gives the sentence a spoken, almost conspiratorial tone, like the narrator’s thought is catching up with itself. This kind of em dash gives his narration an organic, stream-of-consciousness quality. 🎭 3. Character Voice & Inner Monologue Pynchon uses em dashes in dialogue or free indirect speech to mirror the sudden shifts of thought, uncertainty, or layered irony in his characters' minds. “She would have said something—anything—to stop him—but the moment passed.” This use builds tension and reflects the subjective nature of perception — a theme across Pynchon’s works. 🧩 4. Stylistic Modulation Pynchon’s punctuation evolves across his novels. For instance: V. and The Crying of Lot 49 use more traditional punctuation, em dashes included. Gravity’s Rainbow and Against the Day have longer sentences, with punctuation (including em dashes) used more as rhythmic tools. Bleeding Edge and Inherent Vice, being more contemporary and noir-influenced, lean into punchier em-dash usage, reflecting casual dialogue and internal commentary. 🧠 Why He Uses Em Dashes (Thematically) Pynchon writes about: Entropy Conspiracy Uncertainty The collapse of structure The em dash — which opens but does not resolve, interrupts without closing — mirrors these themes. It's a perfect punctuation mark for his vision of the world: fragmented, recursive, always shifting. Summary Thomas Pynchon uses em dashes: Sparingly, but intentionally For interruption, emphasis, or insertion of unstable meaning To shape rhythm and breath, especially in dense prose As a way to reflect mental fragmentation or ontological instability He doesn’t rely on them like some stylists do — but when they show up, they’re doing important work.''

Guitar is happened, looking handsome, I managed preserve the wood while working with metal tools, however for action height I am off by half millimeter, which is okay as I don't have all the luthier tools, half or one mm is not a big deal. Two days ago I met an opera singer. His guitar's strings were floating, I tried to explain him that but he wasn't interested, said they are ok. I'll post finished guitar when sunlight is availble. I hate fluorescent light. Anyways by any chance if you read this blog you should read Shakespeare as well. Here is an introduction for tragedies:

Interesting points. I don't believe in the physical realm, atleast not in the sense of man is the measure of everything . For me our realm just looks very instantaneous but I do think that we should leave ontology to phisicists. I like your analogies — it's like water constantly going through solid and gas phases, then finding itself in a phase it has already been in, which should be impossible. Big or small, nothing in the physical realm would ever align in the same position twice; it would be like stepping into the same river twice, as Heraclitus says.

So I was sanding my guitars pickguard for better and sleeker fit. I have a delta sander, it's the only powertool I have. Suddenly I feel like; hey this machine can handle the wood no problem, how about denser surfaces. Typical male mindset which looking for trouble. I had this big axe rusting in my grandpa's cabinet, I said: Why not, this was a glorious axe, make it great again. I put 60grid on sander, stabilized axe on the counter, I give it a little grind and bam orange color started to turn brown then black and finally with more pressure I could scratch shiny metal underneath the rust. It wasn't easy, I had to push hard. Rust is not coming off easy, especially if there are multiple layers, but I done it ! felt good afterwards. Hear him singing:

I’m not sure whether I encounter things or things encounter me—maybe both. I see objects only in terms of my survival needs, but I would like to know the object itself. Maybe I do know, but perhaps I can’t remember when things encounter me. It’s hard to define the experience happening right now. It’s 5:30 a.m., and there’s a crow cawing outside. But if we look at the object itself, it’s just a meteor that has encountered our world, and now the crow is cawing like there’s no tomorrow. I hope this isn’t another story.

Okay, let's go. Here's what I think: From a survival perspective, experience is a witness to energy, it's a form of self-reflection and thus comes with knowledge or recognition. I don't think any knowledge is separate from the aesthetic aspect, because humans strive for excellence and that excellence is inseparable from what we perceive as beautiful. So, we can't just do whatever we like, because where there is recognition there is an aesthetic aspect, or shall we say, concern about our self-reflection. I have no idea about the fact of experiencing. Fact is something provable, and everything I write here is unprovable or perhaps you mean something different by fact of experiencing.

If you take experience out, you are not an individual anymore. On the other hand if you depend on your experience you are a fool. Do you see any other way? I would like to be free of aesthetical concerns.

I bet that in Shakespeare's time, men portrayed women on stage better than women themselves might have.

Are you living in 60's?, there is no national interests only cooperate interest.

Experience is your platonic love.

Sun is gone time for a break, most of the job done without a single tool mark on the rosewood. Somehow I can't upload the second photo, it states I can only upload 4mb... for floppy disk sake

I been with this guitar for 9 years. 9 years of active playing, now this girl or boy needs a fret leveling, which I will do it by myself, I am up for a challenge.

I switched to YouTube. Lo and behold, YouTube claimed copyright on my cover. I mean, I’m contributing to the artists, they should give me something for that. Fuck you YouTube. So I improvised the second video. Literally. That actually turned out well, because I could see where I tend to overdo things. I noticed my comfort zone from the first attempt. From now on, I’ll memorize new songs and try to keep things nice and tidy. That’s the only way to improve—within a set of limits. Just playing however I like isn’t going to do it justice. Atleast video is embed now.

It depends on your situation. I gambled on gold—I knew it would go up, so I took out a loan from the bank. I'm six months in, and I've already made a profit. Becoming a professional poker player is not something foreseeable for me. I believe some things have to happen biologically.

Oh old national security threat trick, a.k.a. some corporate interest.

My personal favorite, the Gospel of John, has a different scene—perhaps a Hellenic flavor. 25 Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman, here is your son,” 27 and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home. The Death of Jesus 28 Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” 29 A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. 30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

This observation feels quite true to me, and I believe it can be dangerous, both for ourselves and for others. When we become completely absorbed in something outside ourselves, it’s as if we are being pulled into an external gravitational field. In that state, we lose awareness of our own presence, our own inner landscape. What’s more troubling is that we don’t even notice this shift. Our attention gets hijacked, and we drift away from the world, and also our own inner grounding. In our current era, I believe we are living in a kind of permanent flow state; not the healthy, focused kind described in wikipedia, but rather a state of constant immersion in stimuli, distractions, and external narratives. It mimics flow, but lacks rootedness. It’s a form of disembodied engagement that can numb critical awareness. That’s why I would place self above non-duality. While in a ''positive sense and perhaps in common meaning'' non-duality emphasizes dissolution of boundaries and the merging with the “other,” I believe reclaiming a grounded sense of self is more vital in this time. We need a clear sense of who we are and where we stand before we can afford to dissolve into anything. I think, as long as average person is ''self'' it doesn't matter. Today I didn't ''notice'' any non-duality during my daily routine, in fact for me non duality is a study&practice ground, like actually doing something.

Of course it depends on your situation. If you're not living in a first-world country, for most young workers out there, online is the way to go. I never seen one with such life purporse. It’s not always about the money—real sex offers a chance to build a meaningful network, if you know how to filter out average clients. Older gen. workers often had doctors, lawyers, accountants, and others in their circle. There was a real social aspect to it, even if it was rooted in mutual benefit. I’m talking about a small percentage of workers who actually built their networks— to me, this also seem like a viable way which I suppose more beneficial for the worker. I know I am only good as my presuppositions. Perhaps another time Princess.

Online sexual services are much more desireable from women perspective, it offers the most safety, wide customer base, less mental stress. These type of service providers even refuse to provide real sex despite it's being more profitable, don't ask me how I know it. I blame men, they shape the market and they are lazy af.

He is a smart dude. @14:45 is a good example

I am sure you will recall lots of things from him.

The thing is, it's easier to fool people than to convince them they've been fooled. I mean, only a master vampire can get other vampires to drink animal blood instead of human blood.

Truth is any cast shadow is a rape.

Do we still have symbiotic culture chambers that decides what is is and what is not? In my country, I see people from, let's say, the opposite faction—or rather, the opposite "knowledge field"—because things are starting to move beyond the realm of politics, even if just a little. People are taking matters into their own hands, disrupting the exchange between those who define what is and what is not—those who benefit from others without giving anything back—while exposing them for taking more and more. For example, people are trying to be more conscious about their attention and resources. There's a Muse concert hosted by an organization with close ties to the government. People are angry about this and are even threatening their friends—saying that if they attend the concert, their friendship is over. It looks like Stage Green is forcing its will upon itself to create a more solidified & defined ground. This seems more like an "us versus us" scenario rather than the easy "us versus them." How about your place? When practicing daily life as a collective, larger cultural chamber, do you take your personal worldview into consideration and impose your will on your cultural chamber? What I noticed is constant action from, again, let's say, the opposite knowledge field because participants are not only pro-X or pro-Y. It would be wrong to use the terms "right" or "left." So this constant action I'm talking about caused interesting things to happen—like, who would have thought a bunch of right-wingers would defend a canceled, secular-looking franchise managed by a religious-looking businessman? These right wingers got alienated by other culture chambers in the process.