euphronius posted:

some of his observations are pure gold !!

Andy Pandy posted:

Has anyone else been visited by the night hag?

mdemone posted:

it's neurology thank you

euphronius posted:

lol throw it in the bin

Ben Nerevarine posted:

euphronius please stop strongly interpreting the Dr. Bronner's label

011724_7 posted:

why would the other be executing old programs?

mediaphage posted:

Turpitude posted:

Octopuses have 9 brains, which is why they are pwning Lockheed Martin with their wild psychokinetic tech.

Pooky posted:

Just going to recommend this book again since the topic was brought up.

Tighclops posted:

It's "cool" how we've only ever heard for years that the experiments were just "inconclusive" and no we can't send them on any of our newer rovers or landers to confirm the results because *muffled screaming*

mdemone posted:

random example: gesture & speech

quote:

WASHINGTON — Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks has signed off on a new classification policy for space programs that discourages the use of Special Access Program status (SAPs) that dramatically limits clearances to handful of US officials — in hopes of opening still-secret programs to more stakeholders, including US allies and industry partners, according to a senior official.

“What the classification memo does, generally, is it overwrites — it really completely rewrites — a legacy document that had its roots 20 years ago, and it’s just no longer applicable to the current environment that involves national security space,” DoD Assistant Secretary for Space Policy John Plumb told reporters today.

While the specifics of the policy, signed off by Hicks “at the end of 2023,” are themselves classified, Plumb explained that a key issue has been the overuse of SAPs that not only have limited the ability to share with allies and industry, but even among different organizations within the Defense Department.

“So, anything we can bring from a SAP level to a Top Secret level for example, brings massive value to the warfighter, massive value to the department, and frankly, my hope is over time [it] will also allow us to share more information with allies and partners that they might not currently be able to share.”

Plumb explained that from now on DoD will be “assigning minimum classifications to a various number of things, which will then allow the services to examine their own programs and determine ‘should this really be SAP-ed any more?’ And the general point that I have made clear is policy is not a reason, it’s not the only reason, to hide something in a SAP program. There have to be technical aspects to it.”

National security space leaders within the Pentagon and outside experts for years have been pushing to lower the sky-high classification levels traditionally applied to all things military space. This has included a call for declassifying information about DoD’s plans for conducting warfighting in space — but this new policy document does not do that, Plumb said.

“Inside the beltway, people always ask me about how can I make things unclassified? And that is not actually a thing I’m all that concerned about. I’m concerned about reducing the classification of things where they are over-classified to the point that it hampers our ability to get work done or hamper the ability of the warfighter to do their mission,” he said.

Plumb acknowledged that it will take time for the new approach to work its way down through the bureaucracy and be accepted, but said at the same time there are “many folks looking forward to getting started on it.”

He further noted that he will be “briefing some close allies and partners on these changes” in future.

The new classification policy is in essence a first step in an overarching effort by Plumb’s office to craft a new “DoD International Space Cooperation Strategy,” designed to support the ability of the US, allies and partners to more seamlessly undertake collective military space operations.

Plumb noted that already the Pentagon expanded the “Combined Space Operations Initiative (CSpO)” from seven members — Australia, Canada, France, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States — to 10. At the CSpO’s last meeting in early December, DoD announced that Italy, Japan and Norway had now been admitted.

The Demilich posted:

Why do you keep buying accounts?

SniperWoreConverse posted:

this is disclothesure

The Demilich posted:

Why do you keep buying accounts?

LITERALLY A BIRD posted:

thank you

it's actually incredibly important that humans have empathy for non-humans. You're not wrong in trying to set attainable goals but I probably can't emphasize enough how much it matters that we care about and for things and people that aren't us

quote:

A mycelial network is a map of a fungus's recent history and is a helpful reminder that all life-forms are in fact processes not things. The "you" of five years ago was made from different stuff than the "you" of today. Nature is an event that never stops. As William Bateson, who coined the term genetics, observed, "We commonly think of animals and plants as matter, but they are really systems through which matter is continually passing." When we see an organism, from a fungus to a pine tree, we catch a single moment in its continual development.

quote:

In the case of Ophiocordyceps, an infected ant's behavior can be thought of as fungal behavior. The death grip, summit disease -- these are extended characteristics of the fungus, part of its extended phenotype. Can the alterations in human consciousness and behavior brought about by psilocybin mushrooms be thought of as an extended phenotype of the fungus? The extended behavior of Ophiocordyceps leaves an imprint on the world in the form of fossilized scars on the undersides of leaves. Can the extended behavior of psilocybin mushrooms be thought of as leaving an imprint in the world in the form of ceremonies, rituals, chants, and the other cultural and technological outgrowths of our altered states? Do psilocybin fungi wear our minds, as Ophiocordyceps and Massospora wear insect bodies?

quote:

Horses and humans remains separate organisms, as do plants and mycorrhizal fungi, but both are echoes of an ancient tendency for organisms to associate. The anthropologists Natasha Myers and Carla Hustak argue that the word evolution, which literally means "rolling outward", doesn't capture the readiness of organisms to involve themselves in one another's lives. Myers and Hustak suggest that the word involution--from the word involve--better describes this tendency: a "rolling, curling, turning inward." In their view, the concept of involution better captures the entangled pushing and pulling of "organisms constantly inventing new ways to live with and alongside one another." It was their tendency to involve themselves in the lives of others that enabled plants to borrow a root system for fifty million years while they evolved their own. Today, even with their own root systems, almost all plants still depend on mycorrhizal fungi to manage their underground lives. Their involuntary tendencies enabled fungi to borrow a photosynthesizing alga to handle their atmospheric affairs. They still do. Mycorrhizal fungi are not built into plant seeds. Plants and fungi must constantly form and reform their relationships. Involution is ongoing and extravagant: By associating with one another, all participants wander outside and beyond their prior limits.

mdemone posted:

random example: gesture & speech

Klingon w Bowl Cut posted:

I appreciate the thread's book recommendations about the Right Hemisphere and A Thousand Brains, although I admit to sharing the skepticism about a seeming over-emphasis of the brain's relevance and control over our experiences. It's a powerful part of our bodies... but I believe it's exactly that, a part of our bodies, a piece of the whole. Not separate or standing above like a ruler.

Klingon w Bowl Cut posted:

quote:

A mycelial network is a map of a fungus's recent history and is a helpful reminder that all life-forms are in fact processes not things. The "you" of five years ago was made from different stuff than the "you" of today. Nature is an event that never stops. As William Bateson, who coined the term genetics, observed, "We commonly think of animals and plants as matter, but they are really systems through which matter is continually passing." When we see an organism, from a fungus to a pine tree, we catch a single moment in its continual development.

"Process Theism," Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy posted:

As we have seen, in process theism, the Divine is responsible for the laws of nature and these laws determine the limits of non-divine creativity. Whitehead and Hartshorne deny, however, that God could create actual entities devoid of creative activity. Moreover, developmental and evolutionary categories are central to their thinking. It is contrary to process philosophy to imagine God with the ability to create a fully grown man or woman who did not grow to adulthood from having been a child. One’s being actual is inseparable from one’s having become actual (Hartshorne 1941, 233–234).

Ben Nerevarine posted:

euphronius please stop strongly interpreting the Dr. Bronner's label

Riot Bimbo posted:

I have a job interview today where i'll get to advocate for people in need and it pays well and i'm so excited y'all.

a job where i help make the world better and get to work in a group that does stuff i care about would be amazing, and this crazy trans girl needs a job BAD; the fact nobody hires in december has really dicked me over financially and I need a break!! energy and prayers and all that poo poo please!!