Exercise of Command [pdf](commons.wikimedia.org) |
Exercise of Command [pdf](commons.wikimedia.org) |
EDIT: note also the naval terms of art 'order' (what) vs 'command' (how) as explained to the rank and file on pp133-134 of https://ia801304.us.archive.org/15/items/bluejacketsmanua00m... (1940).
> An order gives no details of the way a task shall be accomplished, but a command does.
Pay no heed to music :)
b) "dropping"? More like thrown, which unfortunately means we only have a lower bound on the flight altitude (3s ~= 50m)
c) "One must imagine Sisyphus with a heavy lift helo." —not AC
Was Sisyphus' punishment an order or a command? If the former, I suppose an advantage to doing so for eternity is that ever since the industrial revolution S could've set up some sort of cogwheel system to do the boulder raising for him.
Zeus: Hey, Hades, where'd Sisyphus go?
Hades: Off on Krk — he said he was going to try trading vowels for some of their tomatoes; ought to be back by September though!
Hades: In any case, if you want to see his Mark LXII boulder-roller, it's over there on the hill. He's got some crazy arb scheme that rolls the boulder uphill at evening electricity pricing, then lowers it back during the ENTSO-E lunch peak.
a)-b) there was a spate of TikTok fanmade USMC recruitment ads, this was most likely USMC Osprey somewhere over the Pacific, properly labelled yt arb shorts gone now, flagged due to recent fatal accident?
You can check FF comments for recent random farmboy enthusiasms
>Investigators later found the fail message occurred because the detector "had so many chips on it, it couldn't keep up," Conley said.
CH-47 https://tomflaherty.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09...
V-22 https://data3.primeportal.net/hangar/michael_block/mv-22b/im...
[which I guess means the answer to "airplane?" is really »jein«, and "tiltrotor aircraft" would be the pedantic sol'n]
(annoyingly shorts don't seem to use `.` and `,` for frame advance; do they have something else instead?)
> "had so many chips on it, it couldn't keep up,"
"I think mauve has the most RAM" —PHB
My mention of Camus is not a endorsement of his ideas, more in comparison of his character(/effectiveness wrt various psychological archetypes) vs Sartre .
You might also try to formalize (and understand how formalization can fail):
Ein Teil von jener Kraft, die stets das Böse will und stets das Gute schafft
(I posit that Cap is Stan Lee's fave son, rei publicae*)
I have a better, but not yet complete of course grip on my firmware, (more contrapositives to "the road to hell is paved..")
See the jseliger's goodbye, I am fairly certain that HN has too many well-intentioned bullies
* Loki for Revisionistas, this is why my effort to uncover the Finnic-baltic-ugric (?) origins of proto-Prometheus
**Goethe remains to be Repsilonvisioned, eg s/evil/naughtiness/ ala Cantor
* for some values of "fun": I have memories of using an oscope to debug what problem in printf(3) was causing my print debugging to be buggy. That was type II fun.
(if we wish to fully determine yon Kraft we'll need to minimize or maximize)
Okay my bad at innuendoing the context/env/extra quantifiers, but I think you get what I'm driving at (even if I don't, not really?)
But I guess this here is great starting point for collaborative firmware debugging.
There needs to be that epsilon of absurd distrust as well.. as an actual, physical, liminal raum, aka the no-man's land of truth or truce,aka the meatspace of quasi-community.
*You and I (our "real" selves), but a direct sum?
Have to include PG and dang (and the workfromhome who has delete privilegs) amongst the bullies, most unfortunately.. If you are paying I plead for you to listen to your own injunctions to be more thoughtful..
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41167419
*You must understand that Camus is suspected (by me) of having latent schizotypy, therefore please forgive his hamfisted approach to promoting absurdity.
EDIT: also, I think G (JWvG, not "not F not") is using schaffen in the sense of https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_unregelmäßig , but it is amusing to think of it in the ugs. sense of https://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/schaffen#Verb,_regelmäßig , where Woland is constrained by the ergodic incompressible nature of the "good" to schlep his portion of it from place to place*, no matter what he will.
* compare BAWR's "what is work? Work is of two kinds..."
you probably realized that I was using the jseliger goodbye threads to set an example. We can probably try to analyze the efficacy of my actions in the future, or at least improve the tactics..
[Tried to play the sovereign while the cats (mods) were away (or, narcissistically, "deciding on the exception" -- as in Carl Schmitt's cliche)]
...looks like I "succeeded", whatever that means (improve odds for rna cancer vaccines to become Grothendieck's dream? Manifested a study of mischievous tactics? But once we conceive of the good --while engaging in bad faith tactics -- the scheme fails??)
[OTOH I got paid 0 points net, so does that mean I moved neutrinos in the Russell dichotomy]
Granted, "we" need to work on our temporal logic..
But I do see an interesting mod, in
E(K. G(K `will` mischief in the past) ∧ G(K `manage` good in the future)),
Like you (I) maybe intended to mean, how much mischief, in what sign and proportion in relation to ___?
Or should we go with
E(K. G(K `use` bad faith tactics in the past ) ∧ G(K `do` a modicum of good in the future)),
Or quantum voodoo. the wavefunction has support almost only in the bad faith subspace, but somehow collapses only in the "good". This almost works because bad faith -> good might involve "just" a "relativistic" frameshift