Staples

That plays a role. It's definitely possible to make a highly profitable and quality film. It's just not the norm of course. Dune, Mad Max Fury Road, Joker, Pirates Of the Carribean are recent examples. It requires insane levels of leadership, creative taste, and systems thinking. The few moments I've spent working with filmmakers of that level are awe-inspiring. Their talent is to use the capitalist machine against itself to create art. There is a fantastic book written about the making of Fury Road that details how George Miller and team beat the hollywood elites.

Definitely. The problem with many filmmakers is they have not spent a second actually developing their taste. Or an understanding of what works for an audience, outside of what they personally like. The concept of aesthetics is so unvalued in the film industry. It's such a technical craft that few find the time to learn artistic principles. Those rare individuals are doing all the heavy lifting.

Bars. It must be this way, there's no way around it. That's just how consciousness development and emergence works.

Sorry to answer you serious question with a meme, but it illustrates the point well. Delusions (faith) can serve our survival, but they are not truth. Faith is belief in a grand narrative, without evidence or reason. Post-modernism reveals grand narratives are constructed and inherently 'unreal'. A construction is not truth. It's a filter that distorts reality to serve you selfishly in some way. Drop beliefs and narratives and get in touch with real Truth.

@FourCrossedWands

Yeah mate, we've heard of them...Those are by no means small fry directors. They're all original in their own way. I love Yorgos Lanthimos particularly. But Nolan is the only one commanding $100m+ budgets for high concept films. It's a totally different level of responsibility and movie biz politics. It is near-impossible to get hyper-capitalist producers to invest in an unproven idea, yet Nolan is able to do it.

The movie is just its own thing. Only the rough plot is the same as the book. The juicy meaning comes from knowing a bit about who Chuck is as a person. Go watch his Joe Rogan interviews. Try reading it from a gay male perspective. He also is trying to get you to release your own trauma by sharing traumatic stories in vivid detail.

Bernie once again being awesome.

@Jayson G Fight Club is totally recontextualized if you get to know the author Chuck Palahniuk and read his other books. The movie is great, but its a totally different thing compared to what Chuck is trying to say. Chuck is a gay man who is endlessly fascinated with human suffering and the relatable beauty we can find in it. David Fincher is a straight, edgy, crime film director making a mass market production The creative intent is totally different. The red pill stuff is totally a projection from culture, not at all what Chuck was interested in.

Chris Nolan gets way too shade for being pretentious. No one else can or will make good original movies at that level and scope. He's not IP whoring like most modern franchises, who are too afraid to come up with new characters and settings.

Definitely. I made so many mistakes as a kid and teenager. Plenty still in my adulthood. The world around me and my experience would be better if I changed a few key things. But it cannot be helped nor can I blame myself, I was a product of my environment with almost zero autonomy.

Easy there, Tiger. You didn't actually critique anything about the book. Rishabh is putting their own personal spin on the topic. A book doesn't have to be a totally novel concept to be extremely valuable. Readers being exposed to a new perspective is the point.

Congrats 👏 Nice work. If you have a preview chapter somewhere please drop it here, I might buy it.

My stage red avatar is an asshole. Green is way to nice to him. And I have no idea WTF Turquoise is talking about half the time. Orange and yellow are pretty nice. Blue has some heavy baggage though I'd stay away from him.

I am doing okay. But my LP is a pretty standard job. The difficulty is in maximizing income and pushing the artistry as far as I can take it. Most clients in my field have pretty low standards and have an undeveloped creative eye. Leading to sub-par work and client ass-kissing becoming the norm. So that's what I'm trying to fix.

Enjoy, my Lion bro.

This Philosophy professor has a great series of videos on classical critical thinking and formal logic. I found it quite useful as someone not in academia to quickly get up to speed with academic philosophy and learn to structure my own arguments. I'm currently working on developing my own writing and it's been very helpful. Anyone with a serious interest in discussing philosophical or spiritual topics in a formal 'money-on-the-line' setting should get good at this.

Smacked in the face with truth by Leo once again. Great point.

Such a place does not exist. It would not be sustainable without falling into a cult-like pattern. That's 21st-century reality for you. Better to just exhibit those traits within yourself and lead by example.

An attack on the scale of 9/11 is near-impossible nowadays. The precident was set then and security measures have increased immensely. Information warfare and targeted assassinations of key POIs are the real concern now. It should be obvious now that any mass civilian attack in the west only provokes extreme retaliation. Very interesting share @Leo Gura. I never knew the soviets attacked Afghanistan at that scale.

The voice chat is so good. I hope Claude implements it soon.

I've tried the paid versions of both and Claude provided better quality responses for me. Though that as before GPT-4 came out. Open AI's feels a bit watered down and loose in its responses for my liking.

I don't see any reason why materialism and idealism can't both be true at the same time. Idealism grasps that in order to perceive anything it can only occur within consciousness. Materialism suggests things can exist independent of consciousness. The fault is in assuming consciousness arises from matter, or that matter arises from consciousness. Assuming one must be the defining force of the other. But they could just be simultaneous interlinked phenomenon. Matter = consciousness. Therefore, a rock is conscious. Don't know for sure though, just a hunch.

Nice share, thanks @Hojo. I've not come across his work before.

Really great video on complexity and systems thinking from a comp-sci perspective. Irreducible complexity is very akin to an insight I had about how reality has made a justification for everything. Everything has infinite depth and complexity, you can keep zooming in forever and find more nuances and distinctions forever. In my work I need to understand the human visual system and how we interface with light. I am trying to connect the dots from the physics of light, to the display technology we use, to the conscious experience in our brains. It's clear even only half decade into this work that I'll never reach the bottom. Just like the mandelbrot set.