Uen / is on Nostr

Not an intellectual.
90% deontologist, 10% pragmatist.

Views: Ancap. Hedonistic Transhumanist. Cartographers' Ally. Pro-C. Pro-White.
Attraction: Non-exclusive ephebophile. Straight, homophobic.
Fetishes: Shotadom (Shotaone + Maledom, i.e. Shotas dominating taller/older teenage girls).
Theology: Atheist (if god exists, it is an enemy). Despise Wokeism (as in cult of dysgenics).

Last Notes

2024-09-11 16:17:04

- reply

Thanks, I'm very proud of it.

2024-09-11 16:17:04

- reply

Thanks, I'm very proud of it.

2024-09-11 16:02:24

- reply

I don't like editing cuz it leaves ugly (*) mark, so I use "delete and redraft".
Apparently you sent ur reply within a short window of it resending, and it caused a bug.

2024-09-11 15:58:33

- reply

Keep your subjective delusions to yourself.

2024-09-11 15:58:06

- reply

If a merchant who's trying to sell me a sword claims that it's not a sword, but a functional sculpture of a sword with some magical property of "divine art" which he can not rationally explain, and claims that it therefore costs twice the average price - I would tell that merchant to go f**k himself with his "functional sculpture", and go to other sword merchants, until I find one who calls their product what it objectively is, and doesn't try to bullshit me with mysticism.

2024-09-11 15:58:06

- reply

2024-09-11 14:34:25

- reply

You are talking about magic, not abstract concepts. Abstract concepts can be defined. Claiming opposite is ridiculous. A word is meaningless if no one knows what it means.
Beauty being subjective is irrelevant, because so is a thing being considered "art" - it's subjective, no matter what shamgic it supposedly has according to it's producer.
In the end "artists" are just selling their products like everyone else - for money, attention, praise, status, good emotions, etc.

2024-09-10 21:23:00

- reply

>bad reading comprehension
You claimed that whether a thing is "art" is determined by whether or not it's producer intended it to be art.
That claim is non-sensical, as it does not define what "art" is in the first place. "X is whatever I intend to be X" does not define X.
And besides, it's all subjectve:
Just as you claim that intent defines art/not art status, I can similarly claim that beauty defines art/not art status.

2024-09-10 20:35:51

- reply

An image is meant to be looked at.
A video game is meant to be played.
A toilet is meant to be sit on.
A gun is meant to shoot.
I don't know what fundamental difference you claim to see here, but I very much don't.

2024-09-10 19:31:12

- reply

>hot take: everything is art
Even hotter take: nothing is art.
"Art" is just a word people use to mystify something objective, make it feel special and noble, and inflate it's value.
A drawing is a product.
A photo is a product.
A video is a product.
A video game is a product.
A piece of music is a product.
Some products are just better aesthetically.

2024-08-01 15:48:42

- reply

are these two bots?