ederal leaders risk falling victim to a modern cyber version of the McNamara Fallacy. Named for Defense Secretary Robert McNamara’s reliance on quantifiable metrics during the Vietnam War, it describes managing by what is easiest to count (e.g., patches applied, tickets closed and average CVSS scores) while overlooking operational reality.

The real-world weighted ratio (1.325x) lands near the top of their range. Individual file types exceed it — CLAUDE.md at 1.445x, technical docs at 1.473x. That's the useful finding: the top of the documented range is where most Claude Code content sits, not the middle.

we may see a growing divergence between the capabilities we can measure and the capabilities we actually care about.

LLMs have no grounded understanding of the physical world. They model the statistical distribution of language about reality, not reality itself.

break that reality checking process.

Are orphans of the earthly love and heavenly:       Let them weep ! let them weep! They look up, with their pale and sunken faces,       And their look is dread to see,                                                                                     150 For they think you see their angels in their places,       With eyes meant for Deity;— “How long,” they say, “how long, O cruel nation,    Will you stand, to move the world, on a child’s heart, —

Strange things happen to your sense of reality as you read.

whereas

Perceptual reality monitoring theory

we have had since since, you know, the time of Pythagoras and before that, we've already had examples of non-physical facts um determining reality in the physical world.

"Forget about computational models -- let's see the physical world itself as a sequence of unchanging states.  Let's think about and work with the physical world as a frozen sequence of states.  Let's decouple time from reality, and be able to freely pan across time and abstract over time in the physical world."

Everyone's probably wrong

I think reality is so incredibly rich and powerful. It's like looking at the sun like we would get blinded.

Patrick Harper's book, Dimmonic Reality, where there's fact and fiction, and then there's imagination

At some point I realize that all my knowledge all possible scientific knowledge is 0% of reality. And do I really want to confine myself only to 0% of reality?

I don't have a brain and you don't have a brain until we actually look inside and render a brain

if we actually understood that all of this that I'm seeing right now I'm making it up on the fly. This cup that I'm seeing, it only exists when I create it.

There is another way that you can appreciate that

there's not only not a theory of everything, the best theory we'll ever come up with is 0% of reality.

What we experience and know is trivial compared to whatever reality is. Absolutely trivial. We know 0% of reality

From an evolutionary point of view, perception is expensive

Darwin's theory says the probability is zero that any sensory system like eyes, ears, smell, touch, taste has ever been shaped to see any aspect of objective reality truly. So the probability is zero that you see any aspect of the truth. Period.

what unification uh allowed us to do with a uh a good theory of electromagnetism is to say that first of all all of these are actually uh examples of the same underlying phenomenon. So we were able to put them on one continuum

“His verbal communication center is still giving trouble. I think he’ll have to go back to the factoryagain.”

reality distortion field

you can't actually measure the kilogramme, and you can't measure the metre because they are the platonic

shi-ne

it's said that you can get there by doing like philosophical analysis, but this is using basically physiological techniques to get to the same place phenomenologically. So that's what "tukdam" is theoretically

if we're gonna really understand the ultimate nature of reality, it means to understand the ultimate nature of the mind

The only way you can become a buddha is to see the nature of ultimate reality with the motivation of relieving the suffering of sentient beings. And in order to do that, you have to cultivate this wisdom.

avidyā in Sanskrit or "ma rig pa" in Tibetan,

The Greeks took that material change and they mythologized it into the soul. And then, of course, Genesis—the creation of the world in Christianity—says, the world is here for humans. It was created for humans to use, to dominate, to exploit, you know, in their trial here to see if they’re righteous or not.

we impute three-dimensionality onto the world as we walk around we use things like Parallax and assumptions about what thing is bigger than what other thing and so on

so because now the mind is not because the the the mind isn't separate from everything else your mind begins to become more and more synchronistic

once you realize that the world isn't what you think it is it's very easy to grab onto something else and grab onto some kind of weird conspiracy well that's the thing you've been describing thus far as well sorry to in just say but like the openness requires structure

This theoretical description of reality should be contrasted with the usual view of reality as being quantum, creating a fallacy of misplaced concreteness.

Now we understand why there has to be an inner reality which is made of qualia and an outer reality which is made a lot of symbols, shareable symbols, what we call matter.

it has to be taken as a postulate

you've mentioned the word theory a lot of times. How can we test this?

reality lies behind the multiplicity and diversity of appearances and is concealed by them

the ultimate reality of the universe never appears as an object

There is more than one kind of freedom, said Aunt Lydia. Freedom toand freedom from. In the days of anarchy, it was freedom to. Now you arebeing given freedom from. Don't underrate it

self-sufficient, pre-given referent. Both the Freudian andthe Lacanian unconscious, as it were, put external reality outof play.

language and the thing about which itspeaks

Lacan’s terms, these distinctions come to us from the order ofsignifiers, and they must therefore be understood as an activelystructuring principle.

we will never find anything morethan gradual differences. Yet we are not a bit “man” and a bit“woman” (or vice versa), but either “man” or “woman”—we areone or the other. This absolute difference does not exist in (lived)reality, which knows only gradual distinctions.

hat clearly cannot bedirectly derived from the facts of experience.

it is a question of whether there is a signifier inthe symbolic system that articulates this connection.

For Freud, this means that language does notyet function as language in the proper sense here: the uncon-scious does not know language, and nor therefore does it knowthe test of reality.

Consciousness is the perfect instrument to explore the inner reality which is exactly what we have been done all our lives when we think and when we understand the meaning and so on we are actually doing that in that Quantum reality we are not doing that in the brain

in your book one of the quotes was Free Will is the ultimate cause of reality

Anglophonic monoculture which renders certain dimensions of life invisible and therefore impossible to address

Companies that exploit our gameplaying compulsion will have an edge over those who don’t, so every company that wishes to compete must gamify in ever more addictive ways, even though in the long term this harms everyone. As such, gamification is not just a fad; it’s the fate of a digital capitalist society. Anything that can be turned into a game sooner or later will be. And the games won’t just be confined to our phones — “extended reality” eyewear like Meta Quest and Apple Vision, once they become normalized, will make playing even harder to avoid.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution." - Albert Einstein

Seeing things for what it is. That's intelligence.

while concepts help us understand reality, they aren’t reality itself

To boost its search engine rankings, Thai Food Near Me, a New York City restaurant, is named after a search term commonly used by potential customers. It’s a data layer on top of reality. And the problems get worse when the relative importance of the data and reality flip. Is it more important to make a restaurant’s food taste better, or just more Instagrammable? People are already working to exploit the data structures and algorithms that govern our world. Amazon drivers hang smartphones in trees to trick the system. Songwriters put their catchy choruses near the beginning to exploit Spotify’s algorithms. And podcasters deliberately mispronounce words because people comment with corrections and those comments count as “engagement” to the algorithms.These hacks are fundamentally about the breakdown of “the system.” (We’re not suggesting that there’s a single system that governs society but rather a mess of systems that interact and overlap in our lives and are more or less relevant in particular contexts.)

[Steve Jobs]: If you sort of dig beneath the surface,one of the real successes of the Lisa programwas creating an environment where all these crazy people that could reallybe very, very successful.And I guess that's one of the things that Apple's done best.

The wine she drinks is made ofgrapes.

Her eye must be fed, and what delight shall she haveto look on the devil?

bringing to light our inner diversity could be as transformational for society as recognition of our externally visible diversity has been

For example, an HS event closely followed by heavy rainfall caused the deaths of more than 500,000 livestock and over $1.2 billion in economic losses

For when my outward action doth demonstrateThe native act and figure of my heartIn compliment extern, ’tis not long afterBut I will wear my heart upon my sleeveFor daws to peck at. I am not what I am

Whip me such honest knaves. Others there areWho, trimmed in forms and visages of duty,Keep yet their hearts attending on themselvesAnd, throwing but shows of service on their lords,Do well thrive by them. And when they have lined theircoats,Do themselves homage.

Historically, answers to this question have fallen between two extremes. On the one hand is the skepticism of the 18th-century empiricist David Hume, who held that the ultimate reality given in experience is the moment-by-moment flow of events in the consciousness of each individual. That concept compresses all of reality into a solipsistic specious present—the momentary sense experience of one isolated percipient.

I do want to point out one more really significant implication here which is how it affects our experience of time

sense of self is a construct a psychological and social construct it's something it's not something that 00:06:42 infants are born with it's actually something that develops as we grow up our caregivers look into our eyes give us a name that we learned to identify with and also basically we learn to see 00:06:59 ourselves as they see us we inte

Horror films are always shot in the dark, in the forest, at night, in the depths of the sea, the blackness of space. And the reason is because dying was easy during evolution. If you weren't sure that was a predator, it was too late. Your brain evolved to predict. 00:02:42 And if you couldn't predict, you died. And the way your brain predicts is by encoding the bias and assumptions that were useful in the past. But those assumptions just don't stay inside your brain. You project them out into the world. There is no bird there. You're projecting the meaning onto the screen.

Virtual and Mixed Reality (VMR)

it is a mental construct

repressed intuition "returns to consciousness in distorted form" as the symbolic ways we compulsively try to ground ourselves and make ourselves real in the world: such as power, fame, and of course money.

The Buddhist doctrine of no-self implies that our fundamental repression is not sex (as Freud thought), nor even death (as existential psychologists think), but the intuition that the ego-self does not exist, that our self consciousness is a mental construction.

Although Virgil, MM and others like them certainly possess a rudimentary form of vision, decades of visual deprivation may never be completely redeemable. The human brain has an amazing capacity for plasticity, but there are some things that it cannot do. MM will likely never see the way that we see.

MM's visual capacities continue to improve, but he also remains somewhat uncomfortable with his new sense. As a blind person, MM became extremely proficient at skiing, with the help of a guide to give him oral directions. After his eyesight was restored, skiing frightened him. The trees, snow, slopes, people -- everything whizzed by him, chaotic and uninterpretable. After much practice, he is now a moderate sighted skiier -- but when he really wants to go fast and feel confident, he closes his eyes.

There is a window of opportunity in youth, often called a critical period, during which the brain can best form neural connections that correspond both to retinal images and to practical experience. During the critical period for the visual cortex, normal visual input is required to wire everything correctly. If input is missing during this period, the brain's links will probably not be built correctly. In fact, brain tissue ordinarily used in visual processing might even be taken over by other systems, perhaps tactile or olfactory systems. Some of MM's visual abilities lend further support to the theory that he missed a critical period of visual development. He is quite good at visual tasks that involve motion. Tasks that stumped him at first often became solvable if motion was incorporated into them. He became able to detect the circular patterns in random noise if the patterns were moving. And he began to see the "square with lines" as a cube if the lines moved, and the cube appeared to be rotating. At the end of their evaluations, the researchers saw some patterns emerging in MM's visual abilities and deficiencies. His ability to detect and identify simple form, color, and motion is essentially normal. His ability to detect and identify complex, three-dimensional forms, objects, and faces is severely impaired. The researchers have a tentative explanation for these variations in visual skill. Motion processing develops very early in infancy compared with form processing. By the time MM lost his eyesight in the accident, the motion centers in his brain were probably nearly complete. So when he regained some eyesight in his forties, those connections in the brain were ready to go. The parts of the brain that process complex shapes, however, do not develop until later in childhood, so MM's brain likely missed its chance to establish those particular brain connections. The authors also propose that our brains may retain the ability to modify and refine complex form identifications throughout life, not just throughout childhood. New objects and faces are continually encountered throughout life, and our visual processing centers must be able to adapt and learn to see new shapes and forms. MM's brain never had the chance to learn.

his problems didn't seem to be vision deficiencies so much as visual interpretation deficiencies. And deficiencies of this sort lie not with the retina's ability to perceive light and color, but with the brain's ability to process the retina's signals correctly. We usually do not think of the above problems as involving interpretation, because we have performed these interpretations so many times, and from such a young age. But since MM lost his sight at an early stage of development, since he had no visual input into his brain after age three, the researchers suspect that the visual centers in his brain did not develop normally -- and now, they likely never will.

Scientists and surgeons are slowly learning how to remove constraints on the eye's ability to see; unleashing the brain's ability to see is another story.

the lack of external input—of content to consume—is terrifying to people, to the extent that singular artifacts of media aren't sufficient. you need multiple inputs at once, to hedge against the possibility that one of them will fail to hold your attention and force you to sit in the quiet of your own mind.

i like them because they're time without my phone, time to properly and intentionally inhabit my body, time to experience time.

what yogachara does through its detailed analysis of the nature of consciousness through its detailed analysis of the three natures that all phenomena enjoy and through its 00:34:28 detailed analysis of the three respects in which things are natureless gives us a nice analysis of how it is that we come to represent what is in fact dependently originated as um as 00:34:42 independent and intrinsically real and how it is that we come to see our mediated access to the world as immediate

this is not to say that our inner life has some kind of a second grade um existence conventional reality is not 00:25:14 second level reality um because as the guardian and chandra kirti also emphasized we must remember that conventional reality dependent 00:25:26 origination is exactly the same as emptiness which is ultimate reality the only kind of reality anything that we ever encounter is going to have is conventional reality so when i'm talking 00:25:38 here about cognitive illusion i'm not arguing that the existence of our interstates um is illusory i'm arguing that the illusion is that we have immediate access to them as they are and 00:25:51 that their mode of existence um is um intrinsic existence so this allows us to understand the majority analysis of the most fundamental cognitive illusion 00:26:04 of all the illusion of the immediacy of our knowledge of our own minds and the givenness of our own interstates and processes our direct knowledge of them as the kinds of things they are independent of 00:26:18 any concepts that's the illusion that wittgenstein quine and sellers each in there worked so hard in the 20th century to diagnose and to cure but we can put this just as easily and maybe more 00:26:31 easily in the terms of second century indian madhyamaka the fundamental cognitive illusion is to take our mental states to exist intrinsically rather than conventionally and to take our knowledge of them to be 00:26:45 immediate independent of conventions this illusion is pervasive it is instinctive and it is profoundly self-alienating because it obscures the deeply conventional character of our own 00:26:57 existence and of our self-knowledge and this illusion is what according to buddhist philosophers lies at the root of our grasping of our attraction and diversion and hence at the root of the 00:27:09 pervasive suffering of existence

it is its weakness and not its strength that appears in a sick chamber: it is selfishness and impatience rather than generosity and fortitude, that one hears of

From my own perspective, the conclusion is important that human structural development issubject to a categorical double bond: On the one hand, a person’s lifeworld is his or her ownsubjective construction. On the other hand, this construction is not arbitrary. In spite of allsubjectivity – because of the human’s structural coupling to its environment, this constructionis influenced and limited by the framework of this very environment (Kraus, 2013, p. 65ff.).

5.5 Logic, reason, and common sense are your best tools for synthesizing reality and understanding what to do about it.

1.4 Look to nature to learn how reality works.

1.2 Truth—or, more precisely, an accurate understanding of reality —is the essential foundation for any good outcome.

1 Embrace Reality and Deal with It

these four philosophers in very different ways but 00:18:14 in ways that intersect in very intriguing ways um emphasized that with knowledge sensory knowledge perceptual knowledge isn't the direct access um to sensory properties or descent or 00:18:28 objects around us but rather is always the result of a complex cognitive and perceptual process mediated by our sense organs our sense faculties and our cognitive processes 00:18:41 and just another way to put that this is a way that paul churchill puts this but also um paul fire robin also sellers is that the objects we experience the 00:18:52 world that we inhabit the world in which we find ourselves embedded is not a world that we simply find it's a world that we construct and whose constituents we construct in our central nervous 00:19:06 systems in response to sensory stimulation transduced by neural impulses that is somehow our bodies interact with other bodies in the world um our and through various kinds of 00:19:19 cognitive processes

we cannot have a discussion about reality unless it's it's it's it's a discussion there's courses involved 01:35:20 but all the discussions i didn't know about reality um as far as i know happened um through sounds or writing in which atoms were 01:35:32 moving so we cannot have a discussion without atoms right um and so on i could i could so then atoms are fundamental no uh 01:35:44 the fact that something is it's it's part of our discussion about this doesn't mean that uh it's primary with respect to the rest i think we have to take this that's my that's my own personal um 01:35:56 view of that so of course we talk about uh from today from within our consciousness of course and of course we have information about reality from within our senses and of course we talk in 01:36:08 english we talk in tibetan we talk in pali but that's not because english tibetan empire consciousness or atoms are a necessary starting point for understanding the rest i think it's uh 01:36:20 that's exactly the uh the the uh what i read in a gardener's uh uh uh chapter about the self um 01:36:33 it's uh we recognize his dependence uh of of i i would i would say levels of the pieces of the story one respect to the other one 01:36:45 and uh uh but also at a clear at a clear logical analysis this is what nagajuna does none of this stands up as primary with 01:36:57 respect to the other that's my reading uh professor halcyas georgios my dear friend and colleague um i agree with you when we talk about reality we are we are talking not about 01:37:13 reality uh we're talking about reality it's not reality and that is not the reality of the uh of nagarjuna nevertheless it's very useful because 01:37:35 without this conventional reality of words and concepts that are correct in understanding nagarjuna without that it's very difficult for us to have that experience that non-conceptual experience of reality so you know 01:37:49 there's a kind of a metaphor that's used is you you know you take a boat and you cross the river and then uh you leave the boat or the other analogy is you you're out in the forest and it gets cold and you 01:38:02 take two sticks and you rub them together and with a friction you get fire and the fire then burns the sticks so the sticks are conceptuality as was the boat that got you across the 01:38:14 river not any conceptuality but very clear understanding of nagarjuna and of course the buddha his discussion on on the buddhist wisdom

i think we must bear in mind that any any sort of verbalization about reality um is dependent on consciousness it's not possible to have a discussion about what is real 01:33:02 and not have consciousness in the discussion uh especially when we are to verbalize it i mean of course any reality that is independent of consciousness is not dependent on consciousness 01:33:15 is beyond verbalization and i think the buddhist position is very clear on that and i think arjuna if i read him correctly it's very clear that the when it comes to the ultimate reality to um 01:33:28 it's something that actually we cannot talk about and basically all discussion all this course is very much uh within the level of conventional the conventional real 01:33:42 uh so this is a very interesting i think um a point that i wanted to make that i think i can also raise it as a point for the two of you to respond uh from your respective uh 01:33:54 perspectives um because if consciousness from my understanding is primary to this discussion of what is real uh and if consciousness does not inherently exist 01:34:07 right well at least i mean barry also talked about the different kinds of minds um then how does all this discussion about 01:34:20 what is real what kind of claims can we ultimately make about what is reality now i think i have a feeling that carlos comes from a different perspective 01:34:31 then barry in answering that question so i'd like to really point to this question about can we make any claims about reality and if so based on what 01:34:44 from your respective disciplines so that's my um my question and comments

i was particularly struck by the fact that barry didn't say the mind is this this and that okay barry said well the mind is many things 01:19:18 uh look there's this and this this and this and there's a sort of layers also in some sense in which we can talk about it or or have some understanding partial media 01:19:30 understanding about it some wisdom about it and this layering i find it it's uh absolutely brilliant from my perspective 01:19:43 uh because it it dissolves the wrong question which is what is the mind period what is the thing which is the mind here is the thing which is mine uh let's just 01:19:55 define it characterize it and understand what it is that's a wrong that's a wrong way of thinking about it it's when we say when we think about our mind of course we think something you you unite somehow 01:20:09 it's the set of processes that happen into me and it's about my thinking my emotions but it's not one thing it's a complicated layer there's many layers of discussion possible about 01:20:21 that i don't want to enter into the specific but i found this fascinating and let me go to time immediately because uh it's it's deeply related i got the book of time which is a um 01:20:34 the audio of time in which i carlo this carlo is very timely because we're also kind of running low on time absolutely absolutely 01:20:46 and and and in the book i sort of uh try to collect everything we have learned about time from science from special activity from generative statistical mechanics from other pieces and and what we 01:21:00 tentatively uh learn about time with quantum gravity which is my uh specific field once again you have to sort of uh put your hands on the notion of time and the main message of the book 01:21:12 in fact the single message of the book is that the question of what is time is a wrong question because when we think about time we think about the single thing okay we think we have a totally clear idea about time time is a single thing 01:21:25 that flows from the past to the future and the past influence the president the president of the future in the present this is how things are the reality of the present entire universe is a real state in that and we learn from science that this way 01:21:37 of viewing times is wrong it's factually wrong okay it's not true that uh we all proceed in in in together from 01:21:48 moment a to moment b and the amount lapse amount of time lapses between a and b is the same for everybody and so on and forth because we learned from from experiences especially activity generativity statistical mechanics and 01:22:01 other things so the way to think about time is that it's a very layered thing but with this thing we call time is made by layers um conceptually and when we look at larger 01:22:14 domain the one of our usual experience some layers are lost so uh some aspects some some properties of what we call time are only good 01:22:25 uh are only appropriate for describing the temporal experience we have if we don't move too fast it doesn't look too uh to to to too far away if you don't look at the atoms too in detail as a single 01:22:38 degrees of freedom and so on so forth so the notion of time opens up in a in a in a set of layers which are become increasingly 01:22:53 uh general only if you go down to the bottom level um some aspect of time like the universality of time uh uh only makes sense if if we don't go too 01:23:06 fast velocities for instance um so this is a similarity and that's why the the opening up of what the mind is into layers seems to be uh 01:23:19 the right direction to go right when if if i ask uh does a cat has a mind or does a fly has a mind it seems to me that the only answer is uh to get out of the idea that the 01:23:31 answer is either yes or no i mean i i suppose that certainly a cat has a certain you know a sleepy feeling in the morning and the moment of 01:23:43 joy when he sees his fellow cats but i suppose a cat doesn't go through a complicated intellectual game of trying to understanding what is reality and debating about that so there is some aspect in common uh either not break up 01:23:56 this this notion in in pieces once again uh i mean the the topic is what is real uh 01:24:08 if we start by saying time is real it's a beautiful chapter why you cannot say that time is an intrinsic existence uh we just get it wrong if we think well then atoms are real or the mind is real 01:24:21 all these answers we got it wrong we can say that things are real in a uh in a conventional sense within a context within a within a um 01:24:37 and and then we when we try to realize what you mean by uh something is real this is certainly real in a conventional sense but we realize that um reality the reality of this object 01:24:49 itself it gets sort of broken up into interdependence between this object and else and its different layers 01:25:02 and and that's the reality that as a scientist i can deal with not the ultimate reality the the conventional reality of course conventional reality is real as uh perry 01:25:15 was saying this is not a negation of reality uh it's a it's a it it's a freedom from the idea of the ultimate reality uh 01:25:27 the ultimate uh sort of intrinsic inherent reality being there on which in terms of which building progress

he's built a little toy he's built a treadmill for a snail isn't that wonderful he's a genuine scientist he's doing lots and lots of experiments with 00:11:27 animals they're very creative experiments in this case he's built a treadmill for a snail so the snail is held by a vice on a rotating ball and the snail is then um approached by 00:11:40 the investigator who chucks it under the chin like this and if you chuck the snail under the chin like this the snail will recoil not surprising i 00:11:52 would recall it as well but as you speed up the frequency of these chucks under the chin at about five hertz once you pass a frequency of about five chucks per second 00:12:05 the snail's behavior changes remarkably instead of being perturbed and trying to withdraw it tries to crawl onto onto something the qualitative nature of what's happening 00:12:18 to the snail has changed for the snail and its response or it's it's um sense making is altered and it's tried it perceives seems to perceive now a constant surface onto which it might 00:12:32 crawl now that might seem strange to you but i'll remind you that if we flash a light for you five times a second you'll see a light flashing and if we speed up the interval 00:12:44 then we shorten the interval between flashes to make them faster there comes a critical point at about 20 site flashes per second where you no longer perceive individual flashes but you 00:12:54 perceive a continuous light something like this underlies the magic that happens with moving pictures as well where you know that the action you see in the cinema is a bunch of projected still pictures 00:13:09 but they um have this character of continuous movement for you likewise in sound if we play that for you you hear a bunch of disconnected claps but if we shorten the 00:13:22 interval between the claps and speed it up there comes a point at which it changes into a continuous low pitch and that happens again about 20 hertz at about 20 cycles per second now for this snail 00:13:35 that border is at a different place it's at about five cycles per second what this shows is quite profound remember kant's synthetic a prioris 00:13:46 time for this snail is different than time for you the time that arises as a function of the body of the snail has this border at about five hertz where you have one at about 20 hertz 00:14:01 his basic insight is that worlds arise for snails that are not commensurable with worlds that arise for humans with which are not commensurable with worlds that arise for earthworms 00:14:15 the notion of an umvelt we get to determine a minute is used to describe this bodily specific arising of a world together with time and space 00:14:28 now i said it's rather weird to think of time being fundamentally different for an animal of a different constitution but i'll remind you that we can use our cinematic tricks to make ourselves aware of our own 00:14:41 limitations on the left there through high-speed photography we managed to make perceptible an event which we cannot otherwise see the event that you see there with the splash is 00:14:53 perfectly real but we can only make it manifest through high-speed photography similarly whoops there are processes going on around us 00:15:05 that we do not perceive and we can use time-lapse photography to make those to speed them up so that they become perceptible to us something like the blooming of a flower or the battles intricate battles fought 00:15:16 between brambles and hedges these make us aware that we perceive time as unfolding at a rate dictated by our own metabolism and bodily processes so this idea that time and space 00:15:32 are considered very different from count but very much tied now to the body this is quite radical

You ask me who you are; To tell a story you can live your life by; A tail that has some point; That you can see; So that you no longer; Have to feel so pointless; Because what you see is what you get; If you don’t get the meaning of my silence; Because you ain’t seen nothing yet

Humanity’s COG is assessed as its deep frames, prevalent and dominant worldviews that influence governance decisions across the public and private sectors (figure 3). Simply put, CEC presents a new type of threat—a Frankenstein-like killing and destruction phenomenon—that humanity struggles to conceive or perceive.

It is notinsignificant either that among the illustrations of the Roland Barthes par RolandBarthes there are a series of facsimile reproductions of the author’s handwriting,analogic reproductions of linguistic graphemes, pieces of writing silenced,abstracted from the universe of discourse by their photographic reproduction. Inparticular, as we have seen, the three index cards are reproduced not for the sakeof their content, not for their signified, but for a reality-effect value for which ourexpanding taste, says Barthes, encompasses the fashion of diaries, of testimonials,of historical documents, and, most of all, the massive development of photogra-

The idea that Russia has a particular responsibility for the Russian communities outside Russia became a core part of the identity of Moscow’s foreign policy elite in the early 1990s and has been a key driver in the evolution of Russia’s approach to its neighbourhood.

Coming from a functional programming background, I feel there is a profound distinction between function and method. Mainly methods have side effects, and that functions should be pure thus giving a rather nice property of referential transparency

I agree it might be nice if "function" and "method" meant what you wanted them to, but your definitions do not reflect some very common uses of those terms.

Together, post-its essentially become a notes layer that augments the real world.

Some people have found success with a crowd-funded Patreon-kind of funding model. Even though ostensibly making is showbusiness now,

The ARIA Network to offer augmented reality (AR) advertising inventory

When the Western world accepted Christianity, Caesar conquered; and the received text of Western theology was edited by his lawyers.… The brief Galilean vision of humility flickered throughout the ages, uncertainly.