2024-12-14 at 11:22 pm
Hypoaesthetic Rotation
The Risk Imposed by Random Angry People
Some people literally lose verbal reasoning capability when they're mad. I ran into a number of those adults when I was a kid ... they would demand that the kid stop talking, and they would only react clearly to yes or no answers. I think I encounter these folks less often as an adult, simply because I don't live with anyone who presumes that I will agree with them all the time.
The most charitable case of course, is sitting down every angry person in the world, and lie to them, so that they will calm down, and then begin to discuss things with higher intelligence. Some days one feels like lying for charity, and some days one does not. After all the P&L impact of throwing so much energy at fixing other people really is predicated upon one already having maintained one's own happiness adequately, and in excess of basic requirements to function as an individual.
I guess you can have a neutral approach to other people in society, but if they bring their anger to your doorstep, and dump it there, you can only do so much to console them. Clearly, it's harder to provide a solution, if you're viewed as the aggressor. But that is the limit of comprehension available from folks in a state of trauma.
This is literally why I presume that no matter where I go in the world, there will be some asshat waiting to pull some random freakshow on me. Haha. So I every day of my life, I begin with the notion that that the base case is that it is the day I will die. And if I don't then, damnit, now I have to think about what to do tomorrow ... or risk further boredom.
I'm conditioned to keep my stakes really low.
On the 'Normal' Frequencies of Suicidal Thought Varieties
From the 'Your Therapist Needs a Therapist' FB group ... OP posts a meme :
... therapist : any suicidal thoughts?
... patient : only the normal amount.
... therapist : the normal amount is zero
... patient : ( monkey face giving a side-eye over their shoulder )
My initial comment ( edited for clarity ) :
... "Thoughts WITH high intent to execute, WITHOUT reason," is associated with a LOW normal frequency.
... "Thoughts WITH high intent to execute, WITH reason," is associated with a HIGHER normal frequency.
... "Thoughts WITHOUT high intent to execute," is associated with an EVEN HIGHER normal frequency.
... All different stats
Another commentor :
do you have any literature on this?
Me :
unfortunately, no. Lay person here, not certified. Could sit down to Google it, but I haven't.
The intuition is simply what I understand that societies consider to be disordered or not.
- 1. Having the capability to simulate a murder (self or others) isn't criminal, and therefore there are few laws limiting the freedom of thought about this.
- 2. Having the incapability to (simulate without subsequently reifying) however is criminal, but we generally don't have brain scanners to read what people think, so we only judge them by what they do.
- 3. Back to therapy ... this is the slow method of brain scanning.
- 4. There are good arguments that sometimes it is ethical to commit murder (self or others). But that's into the realm of ethics, less about mental health.
- 5. After all what is considered health or orderliness is some synthetic norm agreed on by a community, which we codify into arbitrary norms and laws.
2024-12-13 at 1:11 am
USDT and TetherInc are basically a test tube for USD-CBDC
TIL :
- - TetherInc is NOT regulated to prove its claim that all USDT issued is backed 1-1 with traditional USD assets ; it has never been comprehensively audited by a third-party ; is has a history of being fined for false claims
- - TetherInc controls the USDT validator network, and can arbitrarily freeze any USDT wallet ; it has a history of cooperation with US.gov to seize assets
- - the absence of regulatory stringency combined with government cooperation basically indicates that US.gov allows TetherInc to function as a sort of test tube for USD-CBDC
- - the mechanism of seizing USDT assets seems fairly straightforward : TetherInc simply has to freeze a wallet, and transfer the corresponding reserve assets to the seizing party
2024-12-12 at 10:33 pm
2024-12-11 at 12:40 am
Check : am I allowed to say X under the Sedition Act of Malaysia? #1531f
Malaysianisms : Yesterday, I engaged with some comments about the role of language in national identity, and the lenses that different demographics of Malaysia apply to this debate.
A very brief metaphysical overview ( ontological question : what exists, to be discussed? ) of this is :
** Under the Law / Formally **
1. The national Constitution differentiates 'classes of citizen' by certain 'traits', such as the use of a particular language.
2. Each class of citizen is subsequently attached to differentiated sets of rights.
3. There is no legal requirement to obtain knowledge of any language, unless one wishes to gain admittance to certain classes. The use of specific languages is necessary, but insufficient, for admissions to a class, based on the given class definitions.
** Under the Law / Less Formally **
4. Under the Constitution, but subsequently nuanced under subsidiary legislation, and at the whim of by executive policy, both drawn up over the years, there have existed ( and expired ) a number of policies with varying degrees of controversy. Some policies embedded specific structures into the the economic history of the nation, and in hindsight may or may not have been the best way to do things. These continue to be be an interesting class of contemporary debates.
** Above the Law / Informally **
5. There is a great discourse about national identity, and whether a certain language is necessary for informal assignment of national identity. ( Basically some believe that if you don't know language X, it makes you less Y. )
6. There remains room for (5.) to feedback to (4.), and even in the distant future maybe to (1-3.)
** Meta-philosophical Concern : Act 15, The Sedition Act 1948 ( Amended 2015 ) **
7. Most recently, the 2015 amendment to this law was "approved by the King on May 28, 2015 and published in the Gazette on June 4, 2015," thus forming the most recent official copy of the law.
8. As recently as 2023-SEP-08, officials such as the Inspector General of Police have called into question the citability of the correct law, as recent amendments may or may not have been included by recent publishers. ( https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2023/09/08/books-on-sedition-law-should-include-2015-amendment-to-prevent-public-confusion-on-3r-offences-says-ex-igp-musa-hassan/89637 ) An updated PDF could not be found under site:agc.gov.my via Google as of 2024-DEC-10. A Malay version updated to 2006 may be found here ( https://mediamalaysia.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Akta-15-Akta-Hasutan-1948.pdf ).
9. The legality of discussions ** about ** items (1-6.) should be given due consideration in light of (7, 8.).
10. Paraphrased, the Sedition Act, forbids causing :
- 10.1. ... { dissatisfaction, hated, contempt, disaffection/disloyalty } to any { ruler, government, administration of justice } ;
- 10.2. ... incitement of attempts to do anything illegal ;
- 10.3. ... incitement of ill-will or hostility between any groups ;
- 10.4. ... the calling into question ( Malay : "mempersoalkan", defined extrinsically by the Dewan Bahasa & Pustaka as "raising as a question, turning into a question, analysing, discussing, debating" ), matters discussed in Articles 152, 153 or 181 of the Constitution. ( Act 15, Section 3, Subsection 1,f ... which I shall find amusing to hashtag : #1531f ) ;
- 10.5. ... the (creation or distribution) of any (content with a tendency to be seditious), regardless of any intention or absence of intention ( 'actus reus', without 'mens rea' ) ... thus making it possible to be guilty by accident.
11. Therefore, in the BROADEST interpretation the stated topics are strictly taboo, not even to be discussed, which cannot possibly be the correct interpretation. However a NARROWER interpretation of "calling into question" may allow for statements to be made, as long as they comply with the rest of the Sedition Act.
12. So, in the discussion of (1-6.) it may be then be inferred, you DO NOT want to :
- 12.1. ... phrase any (sensitive matter) as a question ;
- 12.2. ... say that any (sensitive matter) should not be the case ; that it is the case in law should be taken as a given, if the law is clear ; however since the purpose of any law is to be read, interpreted, and enforced, it appears that interpreting the law must be allowed to allow the law to fulfill its own purpose ; this will probably have to go to court if you challenge it, and there may not be bail while you wait ;
- 12.3. ... incite any attempts to illegally modify (sensitive matter) ;
13. Finally, what does that leave us with allowances to DO in the discussion of (1-6.) ? Perhaps :
- 13.1. ... stating ( without question ) that something that is stated in law, any subsidiary legislation, and related executive policies, are facts ;
- 13.2. .... stating ( without question ) the observation that any items of (13.1) have had specific consequences, physical or mental, with evidences provided ; phrased in an arbitrarily non-seditious fashion.
That is probably hard!
14. The main concern I had across (1-13.) was, am I allowed by law to say some of the things I have said? For example, that the Constitution and its subsidiary executive policies over the years have caused division among Malaysians, that this is a fact, and that it is a grievous fact, of national proportions?
15. I have just said it anyway. But I grew up in this country assuming that I would be powerless to stop myself from being locked-up at anytime, so generally I am prepared for that.
Good evening!
- ... Printing Presses and Publications Act ( Act 301 )
- ... Communications and Multimedia Act ( Act 555 )
- ... Official Secrets Act ( Act 88 )
2024-12-10 at 12:00 am
Komen atas : ketidakgunaan bahasa malaysia oleh sekelompok orang malaysia
Teks1 : Penulisan asal dari tangan :
Bangsa Malaysia selalu mengidolakan bahasa sehingga termaktub dalam perlembagaan bahawa kelas/golongon berhak adalah terpisah mengikuti ciri seperti pengunaan bahasa.Ini bukan ciri setiap bangsa. Kita saja yang mewarisi keidolaaan ini.Lebih lagi, kelas warganegara yang sudah dibuang hak keutamaannya, dia rasa tak perlulah mengejar ciri-ciri ini ... asalkan matlamat dan keutaman hidupnya tidak merangkumi kemasukan ke dalam kelas bumiputera, dalam fikirannya, ciri-ciri bumiputera hanya gangguan kepada jihadnya yang utama, iaitu kekayaan, sejenis gaya hidup, dan penjagaan hati dirinya dan ahli keluarganya.Begitula masyarakat Malaysia, mungkin akan terpisah secara berpelembagaan, selama-lamanya.Inilah antara kepiluan yang diputuskan bangsa kita.
Komen ini ditertetawakan pembaca ; saya teruja :
- "Saya tak faham tulisan saudara. Orang putih kata "verbose"."
- "Inilah kepiluan yang diputuskan bangsa kita. Really??? Did you just google translate this?? Hahaha."
- "google translate ke bro?"
The Malaysian people have always idolized language to the point that it is enshrined in the constitution that classes/groups are entitled to be separated according to characteristics such as language use.
This is not a characteristic of every nation. We are the only ones who have inherited this idolization.
Moreover, the citizen class that has been stripped of its preferential rights, feels no need to pursue these characteristics... as long as its goals and priorities in life do not include entering the Bumiputera class, in its mind, Bumiputera characteristics are only a distraction from its main jihad, which is wealth, a certain lifestyle, and taking care of itself and its family members.
Thus, Malaysian society may be separated constitutionally, forever.
This is one of the sorrows that our nation has decided.
Teks3A : Teks2A, diterjemahbalik ke BM, oleh GOOG :
Rakyat Malaysia sentiasa mengidolakan bahasa sehingga termaktub dalam perlembagaan bahawa kelas/kelompok berhak diasingkan mengikut ciri-ciri seperti penggunaan bahasa.
Ini bukan ciri setiap bangsa. Kita sahaja yang mewarisi pemujaan ini.
Lebih-lebih lagi golongan warganegara yang telah dilucutkan hak keutamaannya, berasa tidak perlu meneruskan ciri-ciri tersebut... selagi matlamat dan keutamaan dalam hidup tidak termasuk memasuki kelas Bumiputera, pada fikirannya, ciri-ciri Bumiputera hanyalah sebuah gangguan daripada jihad utamanya, iaitu kekayaan, gaya hidup tertentu, dan menjaga diri dan ahli keluarganya.
Justeru, masyarakat Malaysia boleh dipisahkan secara perlembagaan, selama-lamanya.
Ini adalah salah satu kesedihan yang telah diputuskan oleh negara kita.
Teks0 : Pemikiran saya, sebelum tulis (teks1) :
Malaysians tend to idolise language, to the point where citizens are classified according to their use of language in the Constitution.
This isn't true of all nations, but it is true of Malaysia.
Citizen classes whose rights are deprioritised by law, have no incentive to learn Bahasa Malaysia, unless they aspire to ascend to the bumiputera class. Therefore this trait of bumiputeras is viewed as a distraction to one's primary pursuits of wealth, a particular lifestyle, and care of oneself and one's family.
So Malaysian society may be divided forever, constitutionally.
So it is one of our nation's decided tragedies.
Teks2B : Teks0, diterjemahkan ke dalam Bahasa Malaysia, oleh GOOG :
Rakyat Malaysia cenderung mengidolakan bahasa, sehingga warganegara dikelaskan mengikut penggunaan bahasa mereka dalam Perlembagaan.
Ini tidak berlaku untuk semua negara, tetapi ia benar untuk Malaysia.
Golongan warganegara yang haknya diketepikan oleh undang-undang, tidak mempunyai insentif untuk mempelajari Bahasa Malaysia, melainkan mereka bercita-cita untuk naik ke kelas bumiputera. Oleh itu sifat bumiputera ini dilihat sebagai gangguan kepada pencarian utama kekayaan, gaya hidup tertentu, dan penjagaan diri dan keluarga.
Jadi masyarakat Malaysia mungkin berpecah selama-lamanya, mengikut perlembagaan.
Jadi ia adalah salah satu tragedi yang telah ditentukan oleh negara kita.