YIDIRYIDIR

@shenanigans That's quite romantic actually, writing a whole Novel about me...dm me if you wanna hit lol (don't)

Holly fucking christ lol

More like a Mosquito repellent system. idk how would that work, but it would repel mosquitos from a zone by using smell or light or whatever idk.

ow, sorry i thought the comment was addressed to me.

Ok now that's an answer.

Looking forward to knowing where you live so i can rob you of all your material stuff, because I'm stronger than you. and i gotta survive.

A common myth about meaning is that it has to be dramatic. A why. A mission you'd die for. A story with stakes "this is my whole life." "this is what i live for" That version of meaning is really just ego doing what it does best: building narrative, because narrative is how the ego survives across time. But meaning isn't a story. It's not something you have, it's something that happens, in the present moment, in the act itself. You can do something for years, love it completely, and then circumstances shift and you simply stop, no grief, no crisis, because nothing was ever lost. The doing was the meaning. When it ends, you find the next present-moment engagement. The suffering from losing that only shows up when identity gets involved, when the ego has fused "this activity" with "who I am," so that stopping feels like a small death. Then you fight to resurrect something that's already run its course. Or that thing might stop being meaningful because you grew or changed, and you read that as a verdict on existence itself, nihilism, depression, when really it's just: the ego lost its story, and it's mistaking that for losing meaning. Meaning was never in the story. It was in the moment you were actually in it.

Don't catch it then. approach it systematically. see the source of the mosquitos, see if you can remove that source.

Same thing is literally happening in my city, dogs are a problem so the government started killing them. the people didn't like that, because it's just a lazy inconsiderate solution. they pressured them, and a uwar later, there's a law that punishes who kills dogs and the government is looking for better solutions. the government didn't say "invent a better solution and we'll finance you"

black and white. it isn't just either kill them or live with them like a beast.

my idea isn't "don't kill them", just find the least harmful intervention. if there isn't any, then kill them. If you find a wasp nest in front of your door, you don't just burn all that shit. you find a way to transport the nest away. your last solution should be killing them.

i didn't say live with them. just find a better solution of getting rid of them. not attracting them in the first place is one example.

it's actually a serious question lol. if you could've found a better solution like altering the environment to not attract more of them mosquitos, then my question is valid. but if the only solution is trapping them and they might transfer desease or smth, then it's okay. mosquitos, despite not having a very rich consciousness like dogs for example, deserve to live as well. (don't ask me where to draw the line lol)

https://www.actualized.org/insights/bug-problems Isn't it more conscious to put some effort to finding a better solution for those mosquitos that doesn't involve trapping and killing them?

Leo, when you're tackling a new topic, or writing in an essay like manner, do you follow a deliberate process, or is it more intuitive and spontaneous? I'm curious whether it's something structured, like jotting raw ideas first, then developing those into longer and fuller thoughts, then finally writing it out in a linear, disciplined pass, or whether your actual process looks nothing like that. What does your workflow look like, from first spark to finished piece?