Basman

Yes, but it depends on your values and its a little harder without the social pressure that SD Stage Blue tends to provide or the survival pressures back when we where more directly dependent on each other. It is easier to think "I can do better" nowadays which can hurt longevity. You can love multiple people but its takes more responsibility and puts more pressure on communication and maturity than monogamy.

You are basically just seeing a pattern and then ascribing special meaning to it. The problem with synchronicity is that it is wrought with confirmation bias and self-reference. It is literally just fantasy at the end of the day. Its bullshit. I used to subscribe to it and have all these spiritual fantasies about random things all the time. Never resulted in anything except feel good fantasies of the significance of my life. All positive changes in my life came from me taking action on something. Not from weird numbers randomly appearing somewhere. "42" is just a joke from a movie. Kind of telling lol.

Humans are naturally inclined to think negatively because it beneficial to survival. It helps assess potential problems. Negative assumptions specifically can be problematic because it contracts the mind and makes you less likely to see opportunities and the good things you have going for you. Depression is basically just thinking of yourself in the worst light all the time. Negative thinking also just tends to make you feel worse. I find that people who value acing life tend to be positive thinkers. It is necessary if you want to feel good about your life. So, why not?

If you want to philosophize, just do it. You'll know by feeling when you need to explore or research a specific avenue, like book or a course. Let curiosity guide you, not institutions. If an institution can help you achieve your goals and the costs are worth it, then why not? Academia is not a good route if you wish to make a contribution to the world however. If your life work ends up being an academic textbook it'll most likely just end up collecting dust somewhere in a library. You'll reach way more people just by making Youtube videos for example.

A lot of video games nowadays survive of rich whales like this, especially free to play titles. Like Star Citizen that has DLC that cost up to 48000 USD and people lap it up. The profit margins must be nuts.

A lot of very rich people tend to dress minimally, wearing just plain clothes so you can't tell they are rich by a glance and so they spend less time thinking about what to wear. Steve Jobs always dressed the same. He had multiple sets of the exact same clothes. That is as minimalist as it gets I guess. In order to dress well, the most fundamental factor is just that your clothes fit well. With a minimalist approach, that just means you keep a handful of "sets" that cover your essentials. In addition to clothes that fit well, look for clothes that match your wardrobe and ideally that also made of at least decent quality fabric. Avoid H&M and that ilk of clothing stores for most things. You are better off spending that little more for something decent if you are only going to keep "the essentials".

Using artists data without their consent is obviously problematic. And to be exact, it is the lack of consent or compensation that is the problem. The future is AI but that doesn't make unfair exploitation OK. It makes it impossible for small business to be able to compete. Currently, AI is enabling the worst tendencies of SD Stage Orange and the technology is largely being used to further dehumanize society. Many tech companies bank on the political system being slow to adept, so they "move fast and break things" to establish market dominance before new laws and regulations are put in. The gig economy is perfect example of this as it uses tech to effectively compete in preexisting industries while circumventing regulations and workers rights for maximum profit. It is only recently that just talk of regulation of the gig economy has started. I'm worried though that because AI is so seemingly complicated it will be very hard to make laws for it. I'm afraid we'll probably get a situation where it is kind of "too late" for new rules to be most effective.

Hinduism seems so mythological and abstract to me. I know very little of it, so do I know very little of Islam but I at least get the gist of Islam (there's one god, etc.). It is much more focused and straightforward in essence.

@soos_mite_ah Yeah, it sucks. Its one of the downsides our current model of survival. Socialization is just not a top priority, especially friends as family is generally considered more important. I think in the future politically we should start advocating for less work hours. With technology and AI getting increasingly better, there's really no need for us to work as much as we do and there are a lot of important value generated for society when people have more time to nurture their relationships. It'll help reverse the declining birth rate for one and curb some of the excesses of mental health problems, like mass shootings or drug addictions. I think less work hours is a good compromise considering.

Could simply be your cultural background. You said you where raised in a Hindu household so I assume your Indian. There are many Muslims in that region of the world and Muslim values could have peculated into common culture, so when you desire to explore a religion, Islam comes most naturally to you. Many of our values in the west are christian in origins. I've have myself thought about exploring Christianity as a religion most likely just because it is adjacent to my current culture as a religion.

The core issue is that we no longer fundamentally depend on direct relationships for survival like we did in the past. If you wanted to, you can completely isolate yourself, work remotely, etc. and be completely fine whereas that wasn't an option when we where farmers. You'd literally die. In the past you had to work with others to survive and your "colleagues" where simultaneously your friends, neighbors and family. Social circle and survival used to be intertwined, especially as hunter-gatherers. Whole families used to live and work at the same factory. As we developed as a society, we've effectively min-maxed dependency on others out to get shit done as much as we could and we separated our social life from our survival like separating conjoined twins. As a consequence of the separation of work and community, a rich social life is simply a lower priority than work whereas in the past social and work where intertwined and didn't have to be prioritized to the same degree if at all. People don't have the time and energy to do both when they are separated. Its a downside of our (highly effective) capitalist system. There's also the fact that people just move around a lot. Personally, I have close family members living separately in multiple different countries. We are very atomized as a society today.

Half his videos are about tanks and guns but his videos on current affairs are top notch.

I think my first dose was around 7,5g and I don't think I could've handled much more. Either way, you can't blindly listen to a sales clerk advice.

Look up some general sex ed videos/articles on Youtube for an overview, then start listing all the things that you are curious about and then read the wiki page on each item.

If I owned a psychedelic shop, I'd hang up a sign or something with a disclaimer, saying that any and all consumption are at your own risk, psychedelics are dangerous, you are responsible for doing your own research, etc. etc.

I went to a psychedelic store in Amsterdam with a couple of friends before to buy truffles. My friends where complete virgins and the woman recommended a 15g dose each. 15g?! For a newbie?! 🤨 You can't trust these folks to know what they are selling. You must take complete responsibility for your research.

People on the internet put a lot of emphasis on masturbation despite other factors being much more fundamental to one's wellbeing, like sleep, diet and exercise. I don't think masturbation is nowhere near as big of a deal as certain people make it out to be. Thinking that whether or not you masturbate will change your life is complete nonsense unless you have some sort of major addiction, in which case you need professional help. If you think it is taking away too much time then sure, cut down on it but its not going to have some major effect on your life most likely. I find masturbation really helpful with falling asleep at night personally but I've done it less recently in general due to wanting to spend the time elsewhere.

Tate has a clear motive to pressure his audience into buying his products that promise to make you rich. It is quiet a loaded statement to say that you "only have 10 years to get rich".

Sounds like black pillers latch unto this kind of geneticism because they think it affirms their beliefs. Two things can be true at the same time. Your genes are fundamental to much if not most of your ability to interact with life but great effort is also needed actualize on your potential. It doesn't mean to stop trying.

Traditional style arrangements are definitely viable. They worked for hundreds of years to great effect because they very clearly divide responsibilities for daily survival in a way that generally complements the genetics of men and women. The main reason traditional marriages went away culturally was the loss of religion which drove the culture of traditional marriages in the past and the economy needing more workers post WW2. I think the biggest hurdle is simply making enough money to support a family on one income in today's economy. Realistically, the wife needs to at least work part-time unless you make a lot of money. It sounds like people romanticize traditional marriages because they are deprived of meaningful relationships.

I can totally see a technology emerging in the future of digitizing one's own consciousness. Like mapping one's brain or something into a database. Then you can argue if that is true immortality or not.

And to be honest, if your take away on a discussion on the limits of genetics is "what is the point in trying then?", then that kind off betrays a lack of nuance in your thinking.

There is no argument being made that you can't improve your condition with hard work and willpower but you'll never outrun a cheetah. A cheetah's "genetic floor" is so beyond you that it is impossible to compete in terms of running speed. If you where born retarded and needed 24/7 care then you wouldn't even be able to make this post. The fact you can think about this stuff and are presumably healthy means you have relatively good genes. It is really just the observation that genetics determine what you could call your "genetic floor" and "genetic ceiling". The average person is far away from their "genetic ceiling". It is about appreciating when things are out of your control. It is not binary, you can self-improve in most cases but you'll never out-lift a gorilla.