Ooh, shiny!

Under the cut is a full list of the phrases I have in Proloquo4Text, organized by folder. It includes the folder titles and the colors of the phrases when they're relevant. At the very bottom are some of my tips/processes for organizing P4T, and some of my setting preferences/why.

I haven't seen many P4T setups on Tumblr so I hope this can be helpful. I'm happy to answer any questions about this stuff any time :)

Lost my mind a little and added (if my math is correct) 5,615 beads to Nim Teasdale's Odenwald pattern. Anything worth doing is worth overdoing!

The goal was “soothingly weighted but not uncomfortable to wear, even as someone with chronic pain.” It could have been a little heavier, so maybe I’ll make a shawl with larger beads another time, but I’m very pleased with this one. I used size 6/0 seed beads, applied as I go with a .6mm crochet hook.

Yarn-wise, used 2 cakes of YarnArt Flowers. I knitted the fully purple sections from both, then knitted all the way through the yellow-oranges with a single ball. When I hit the beginning of red-oranges, I used yarn from both cakes, alternating between them. (Not the entirety of both, I played it by ear to make sure I made it through the full rainbow.)

I do have edited charts with bead placements. I will only share them with Nim's permission.

Charles Turner was born in the United States just a few years after the end of the civil war. His brilliance was evident from the start, and after graduating valedictorian of his high school class he quickly went on to earn his Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees in short order. While in school, Turner’s relentless curiosity became his greatest advantage. He was drawn to and fascinated by topics that were largely ignored by modern science at the time, namely the cognitive behaviors of insects and other invertebrates. While many of his colleagues believed insects to be mindless automata acting on instinct alone, Turner felt deeply that the brains of these oft overlooked animals were far more complex than the scientific community suspected. He performed extensive experiments to test his theories and found overwhelming evidence of problem solving and individualism among organisms as small as ants and spiders.

By the time Turner earned his zoology pHD in 1907 he had published dozens of papers in highly esteemed journals and had even co-authored a book. It is likely that Turner was the first African American to earn a pHD from the University of Chicago. With such a sparkling academic reputation and enormous body of research, one would expect this candidate to have no issues obtaining a professorship at a prestigious school. Though by every right Turner should have been head of science department at a top university, the systemic racism that permeated academia meant that doors a white man would have walked through were locked and bolted shut for Charles Henry Turner.

Turner did not allow this prejudice to dim in any way his blindingly bright passion for knowledge. He took a job as a high school teacher, and continued to perform and publish research on his own all while he instilled his students with a love for zoology. He published more than 70 papers in extremely respected journals and he remained passionately curious for the entirety of his life. If I tried to list here all of the incredible discoveries Turner made in his lifetime it would take me days to sufficiently express the impact he had on the field of invertebrate behavior. His experiments were so ahead of their time that entomologists today marvel at his research and wonder how much more we would know if Turner’s work had been given the attention and respect of other scientists working at the time. Turner’s mind was about a century ahead of those entomological contemporaries who had no interest in giving him a seat at the table. His tombstone simply reads “scientist”

ive worked in hospitals for a long time, and years ago i saw a patient very frequently. he came in once every month or so, inpatient. one day he told me what he kept coming in for. he had a knee replacement, but it kept rejecting. so the hospital would take it out, keep him, and then put it back in. he told me that he was fighting to just have it amputated. he said he was in his 70s and he just didnt have enough time anymore to spend it all in the hospital. he said that he felt he could live a better and more fulfilling life for the years he had left if they just took the leg off. he could get a prosthetic and just not have to go to the hospital all the time. he said that the doctors were fighting him on it but that was what he wanted. i said that i understood, and that i hoped he could get that amputation

anyway, some time passed, and i saw him again. i asked whats up, he was beaming and said, "i got it done! they took the leg off!" i was like, "hell yeah man, how are you feeling?" and he said "well it hurts right now but im not gonna have to come here all the time anymore." he left the hospital some time later, and i never saw him again, which is all you can hope for when you work in a hospital

he also had an elective surgery, a "voluntary" surgery. he chose to have an amputation because he was suffering with the limb intact. and thats really what we're doing too. yes, transition surgeries are elective, but that doesnt mean that theyre not necessary to improve the quality of our lives

Rumination is probably the most common type of OCD compulsion, but I rarely see anyone talking about it. I've talked to multiple people diagnosed with OCD who didn't even recognize it as a compulsion.

Basically, if you have OCD you have terrible intrusive thoughts. They can be about anything, but common themes are fear of being a bad person, fear of hurting someone, fear of contamination. etc.

Rumination is when you get stuck in a spiral. Rumination is when you spend hours catastrophizing, overthinking, analyzing, telling yourself it's going to be okay.

I'll say it again:

Rumination is a compulsion.

Rumination is a compulsion, and that means you have to stop doing it.

I did ERP (exposure response prevention) for my OCD with a therapist! For 9 months! And it did help, but the idea didn't really click until I found this website a couple years later.

And Oh My God. It made things make so much more sense, and I was able to pull myself out of an episode even though I wasn't in therapy or on meds at the time.

Genuinely if you have OCD, or even if you suspect you have OCD, I'm begging you to read some of these articles.

Like this was genuinely life changing for me.

Here are some of the ones that were most helpful to me:

Defining Rumination

How to Stop Ruminating

ERP Exercises for Compulsive Rumination

Tumblr en concreto es muy anglocentrista y un gran número de los usuarios no habla más que inglés. Si quieres que tus cosas lleguen a gente con gustos u opiniones similares, escribirlo en inglés asegura que la gente por lo menos lo pueda leer. Suma a esto el hecho de que bastantes series y tal son originalmente de habla inglesa (y a veces ni se traducen a tu lengua madre), lo que crea un fandom principalmente angloparlante.

Más allá de eso, también hay que tener en cuenta las diferencias culturales que surgen entre fandoms de distintos idiomas. Por ejemplo, durante mucho tiempo el fandom de Vocaloid angloparlante y el hispanohablante han chocado con respecto a temas como la piratería. En ocasiones es complicado manejar estas expectativas, y si sabes varios idiomas, peor incluso.

A mí me gustaría subir cositas en español y encontrar a gente que comparta mis gustos, pero en Tumblr en concreto es casi imposible. Tumblr ya es de por sí mucho más «nicho» en espacios hispanohablantes que otras RRSS como TikTok o Instagram, y si tus intereses no son muy populares, despídete.

La lingüística de los espacios de fans también está hipercentrada en el inglés. No es una pareja, es un ship; no es un universo alternativo, es un AU; no es destripar, es hacer spoiler, etc. Incluso las siglas: en español es LGTB, pero lo que sueles ver es LGBT. Parece una tontería, pero esta disonancia cognitiva hace que resulte muchísimo más complicado hablar en tu propio idioma en un fandom. Por no hablar de las innumerables referencias a posts o a memes... en inglés todo, por supuesto. Como te atrevas a hacer cualquier referencia cultural no inglesa, no te entiende nadie. Pierde la gracia.

None of those things change using AI assistants.

You try to get the AI to do it, but it all fucks up. Alright, you know how to code. First you try to get your new functions into the codeflow at the obvious place, but you discover that it's not always being called, and it's not totally clear why, or what *is* calling the seasonal tax routine. Eventually it turns out to be a curried function, which is a little odd, but makes a sort of sense. You start hooking the bits about food travelling down traderoutes, and interkingdom trade of food between over-developed provinces and agriculturally-producing provinces, but then you discover this function is non-mutative, and this similarly-named function isn't, so now you have to duplicate the latter one but in non-mutating form to get the data you need, or re-write it and all references to it. You choose to do the latter, but then it isn't entirely clear to you where it's *supposed* to be mutating or not, which rings an alarm bell because it was producing the expected answer, so why was it doing that? And then you discover the corrective function that has been un-mutating things to account for all the extra times that function was called & mutated when it shouldn't, and you can clean that all up and get rid of an entire function that didn't need to exist and your own code makes sense. And you get the expected results. But the debug log is now totally disconnected from the results of tax season. Which is really hurting your attempts to try and figure out why food being produced in one kingdom is being sold to another, (apparently? Maybe?), even while the first kingdom doesn't have enough food to feed itself. Now, it turns out in the end that it was actually a third kingdom feeding the second one, but in the meantime your agricultural holdings are producing the wrong amount of food and you've mis-identified the problem. So you fix the debug logs, getting rid of a lot of variables that only existed to be printed in the debug log and didn't even need to be there. But you fix them wrong at first because of the mis-identification, and then you spend a lot of time debugging the food trade code, but it's not the problem. Eventually, you realize every farm is producing as-if one level lower, and that turns out to be because communal infrastructure holdings built in other kingdoms count as 1 level higher for the purpose of espionage, (so that a level 0 holding still gives espionage bonuses), but more specifically because the AI code stores all holdings as one level higher than actuality, assigned contested holdings to be level 0, and subtracts one from everything's level during tax season, and you didn't know to account for that.

Hi, I pay my rent by fixing people's AI code for them so that they can continue to develop their software, usually video games. The code-fixing process above is fictional, I didn't want to out any clients, I did actually write code for tax season for kingdoms/provinces/holdings, but that was for my own TTRPG software aid and I don't use AI in my own code. If you've debugged AI code, you can probably already tell I have a lot of experienced cleaning up AI code and know exactly what it likes to do, (the above is based on cleaning up after a specific model, even, which some people might recognize). I've read bad code written by people. I've read truly bad code by people who thought they were being very clever. I've read hyper-optimized code where I had to do deep research into the compiler to understand what was happening. AI code . . . is insidious. I can get used to reading someone's assembly code programming, recognize and trust their patterns and recognize their bugs. AI code, it doesn't actually have patterns. I know what it likes to do, but I can never trust that those patterns are buggy, or that those patterns are reliable. I can tell when I see human patterns that, oh, I need to look out for off-by-one errors in this guy's code, I need to look for pointers grabbing the wrong offsets in this part of the codebase, I can get into a rhythm of predicting and finding many of their bugs before even figuring out what's happening. With AI code, there's not even necessarily any line or function that's "bugged", so much as there was never any logic to how anything was constructed in the first place. I often to need to understand the whole system to fix what would, for a human codebase, probably be fairly trivial to find and sort out. If a human could code like AI, they would be exceptional: they would have to be able to hold the entirety of the codebase and the program state in their head, and almost certainly as a result when actually writing code would produce very well-designed and well-executed code. No human would code like AI because there's no sense in switching logical approaches every function, and if they did, they'd be the type of person who would never be able to produce something that appears to work correctly at the end. (And the good ones up for a challenge would probably run out of creativity thinking up new ways each function could take a needlessly different logical approach). And for this reason also, no collection of humans would ever produce AI-like code either. Whoever goes in last and cleans up the code would, well, clean up the code. You might, and often do, end up with several layers of design sticking around because no one ever cleans up fully, (and because of skew, they might not be able to), but there's lines of logic you can follow, and very often you start being able to recognize which programmer wrote which parts of a codebase because you can follow their logic. If you had an infinite sequence describing the number of programmers working on a program with an amount of version skew that prevents redesigning and fixes memory locations and memory structures, then the limit of that function would resemble AI code.