Chapolin Colorado

Todos os meus movimentos são friamente calculados.

Public Key

npub1nal077c3xyyqgp66fxcmf4txa5c943y8cz8h6uqm67gdcqpfkm4qhegerh

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsf7lhl0vgnzzqyqadynvd564nw6vz6cjruprmawqda0yxuqq5md6spz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dss4xwky

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1nal077c3xyyqgp66fxcmf4txa5c943y8cz8h6uqm67gdcqpfkm4qhegerh

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-10-02 20:12:58 UTC

- reply

I very much agree. A “disprove it” approach works wonders, however; if something is true, and one is both dedicated and honest, then truth prevails. Again, the subject is eternal salvation or damnation and I am much more inclined to believe the Creator would not leave such a serious matter—it does not get more serious than eternal consequences, does it?—to guessing and trusting, without any possibility of certainty or even reason; yes, I am inclined to believe that He would ensure the truth could be assailed to no end and stand. The Bible cannot.

2025-10-02 13:18:18 UTC

- reply

I think anyone who begins with presuppositions—for instance, “this book is true and accurate”—will find ways to justify absurdities and contradictions in order to “prove it.” It’s interesting to compare the different contrivances each person comes up in order to do so, however. Anyway, your working theory won’t hold: both authors are describing the same events/timeframe; the women ran and said nothing to anyone out of fear at the same time they ran to share the good news and met the Messiah himself, upon him be peace, on the way. As to my own explanation? Simple, the text was changed, accidentally and deliberately, over time, which makes it quite a rollercoaster source for guidance regarding one’s eternal destination.

2025-09-30 18:12:47 UTC

- reply

Do let me know how you conciliate Mark’s claiming the women, seeing the empty tomb, ran away and said no word to anyone with Matthew’s having them not only run to share the news with the apostles, but encounter the Messiah himself, upon him be peace, on their way.

2025-09-30 13:56:39 UTC

- reply

Fair enough. But what’s the plan?

2025-09-28 19:36:54 UTC

- reply

*Blindsight,* by Watts, next.

2025-09-28 17:43:14 UTC

- reply

Looks like a gray ratsnake.

2025-09-27 16:58:17 UTC

- reply

I would really love to hear what you have to say about Islam.

2025-09-27 16:53:55 UTC

- reply

What does that even mean? Planetary problem?

2025-09-25 19:38:00 UTC

- reply

A sign of core principles and sticking to one’s guns.

2025-09-25 15:04:15 UTC

- reply

Wrong. It may have sounded great and brought warm fuzzing feelings to write that, but, no, that’s not how it goes, not if history is anything to go by. Freedom is a process, and never an unopposed one. I read your ebook analogy and could only think of the time Amazon deleted *1984* (ironically enough) from thousands of devices.

2025-09-25 14:02:20 UTC

- reply

Sounds complicated. May you find guidance today, however.

2025-09-25 10:18:15 UTC

- reply

Oh, yeah? AI is a shortcut for the clueless, is it? Well, let me teach you by the number; indeed, here’s a few: 127.0.0.1—I’m sure you recognize it. How do you like having your IP address exposed on Nostr? Can you guess how long did it take “the shortcut for the clueless” to figure it out? As you frantically call your ISP to request a reassign, be sure to reflect and benefit from the lesson your ordeal is meant to teach you—and not only you: to others reading, before you dare speak against AI, consider how much you want to follow suit and be vibe-pwned. Don’t you think @sama knows better than you?

2025-09-25 00:07:49 UTC

- reply

You did, of course, know, writing that, that writing that would alert those in the know to the fact that you know there is something to be known and—worse, given how much, as by now you surely know, they loathe being known—some in the know of what there is to know?

2025-09-24 23:51:02 UTC

- reply

Suas publicações ficarão deliciosas após ler Peter Levenda.

2025-09-24 13:38:30 UTC

- reply

Would you trust a senior judge who couldn’t bake you a good roll?

2025-09-23 16:42:07 UTC

- reply

#nevent1q…dex5

2025-09-22 17:42:16 UTC

- reply

What? Doesn’t look at all like Quark!

2025-09-22 15:36:24 UTC

- reply

“Por favor” or “faz favor”—or, perhaps, “se me faz o favor.” Maybe it is a Portugal-specific construction, but I have never heard “se faz favor.”
Not nitpicking; showing command of a language can be the difference between being considered for a position or not, though, of course, other factors are usually more important.

2025-09-16 13:02:57 UTC

- reply

Nowadays, you mean? Or Christians not in the sense of, say, “the Lutherans,” but more like “good Christians”?

2025-09-15 19:38:13 UTC

- reply

And the best investment in yourself is that which pays eternal dividends.

2025-09-15 13:31:01 UTC

- reply

Idiots often prescribe generalities, rarely anything concrete. In order, therefore, to better align your post with your anti-idiocracy stance, would you please delineate the concrete actions it implies? So, you know, no one has to rely on what it does and doesn’t sound like?

2025-09-15 08:16:32 UTC

- reply

Has someone’s psyop budget run out? Far be it from me to doubt the stupidity of the masses, but pigeonholing on to the dog metaphor hardly seems to be effective enough as a redirection tactic against a reference to the Samson Option. Is “shitty Russian propaganda” the new “antisemitic”? It feels like a downgrade.

2025-09-14 20:03:33 UTC

- reply

At the exact same time elsewhere—I’d venture Bluesky—someone likely posted there is no excuse to review code in 2025. “Kills the vibe, don’t you know?”

2025-09-12 00:37:44 UTC

- reply

I honestly conjured [this grieving man](https:/redirect.invidious.io/watch?v=7ryHyDFCCD8) to my mind and had him narrate your diatribe as though it were an extension to his own—inserted right after “mound of diseased hyena filth who’s not fit to lick the dirt from my spats.”

2025-09-12 00:05:44 UTC

- reply

Some humans struggle to go beyond its not being possible to fold a paper even 4x times less than that. Not me, of course. I thoroughly enjoyed the post about exponentiation. Cleverly done!

2025-09-11 23:55:18 UTC

- reply

Some things become quite obvious once one realizes just how deep can the chasm be between what someone claims (and proclaims, and shouts, and so on) and what someone believes.

2025-09-10 00:04:08 UTC

- reply

A quem não o tenha feito, eu recomendaria pesquisar sobre a System1 e sua relação com a Startpage — e usar o DuckDuckGo enquanto isso (pessoalmente, também depois) — além de conferir o projeto SearXNG, que, além da disponibilidade de várias instâncias públicas (com características e países de hospedagem listados em https://searx.space), oferece a opção de hospedar a sua própria.
#busca #duckduckgo #ferramentas #privacidade #searx #searxng #startpage
#nevent1q…095y

2025-09-08 16:47:13 UTC

- reply

It is always worth reflecting about what is and what isn’t reported, not to mention how something is reported. Here we have a Syrian who stabbed a German woman; very clear, very direct. Hind Rajab, on the other hand, and once she could no longer be ignored, became “a woman who died in Gaza”—which is not a particularly clear, direct way of referring to a 6-year old girl being shot by the IDF, along with her family and the paramedics who tried to rescue her. One way or the other, however, you may have heard about her. Oddly enough, I find that rather less likely when it comes to Iryna Zarutska, who was recently stabbed, fatally stabbed, in the USA. Her tragedy and the German tragedy were caused by the same forces, they represent the same phenomena in action. And yet, @nprofile…eztt, @nprofile…n5j9, by writing a few lines about her, you will be doing more than the CNN, the New York Times *et caterva* seem to be inclined to. Why do you think that is? Why are some bells so inconsistent in their always tolling for thee and me?

2025-09-08 16:05:44 UTC

- reply

“Narrated by Abu Bakra: ‘When Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, ‘Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler’.” (Bukhari, 7099)

2025-09-08 15:42:24 UTC

- reply

Not everyone is raised a Muslim, o great rhetorician—and, judging from the pondered maturity of your answer, and from your presumption that inability for critical reasoning and reflection is the only reason someone might not share your worldview, let alone adhere to one you are at odds with, I should think I had been busy being other things for quite a while before you made your great entrance to this world and that it is far, far more likely you’re one who should dare in that regard. Do begin your daring by describing your own philosophy—assuming it doesn’t consist entirely of “don’t abuse children” and “don’t blow yourself up,” two points in regards to which whatever you are and Muslims are in agreement.

2025-09-04 13:31:23 UTC

- reply

Indeed, you, you, o enlightened man, you’re diagnosing two billion, you’re claiming to know better than all of us—and this if, if, you aren’t tracing our supposed “cancer” to our brains, which would mean we aren’t even capable of being nearly as enlightened. But, assuming we are, pray, o noble sage, describe your cure or at least support your statement.

2025-09-03 18:35:20 UTC

- reply

The man who proclaimed the words in your tagline died syphilitic; having advised bringing a whip if we are to engage women, there’s nevertheless a picture of him tied to a horse cart, while the woman riding holds the riding crop. Maybe stand on firmer philosophical ground before diagnosing others? But beyond that, how much of the world is ruled by Islam? Not much, I’d say. And whilst it is true not many Islamic countries are rich right now—which, of course, has nothing to do with their being bombed and invaded whenever someone feels like it—I don’t think the West presents some utopia.

2025-09-03 13:45:30 UTC

- reply

Será que convidaram Timothy Leary para a discussão? Ele dizia a mesma coisa.

2025-09-03 13:38:16 UTC

- reply

The best part is how you went from “I have a right to be retarded if I want to and I will fight to the death to protect that right for future retards like me” to this. I really look forward to find out what messages will precede your trying, and maybe not completely hating, other languages—APL, Erlang, Haskell... Good old Scheme, too.

2025-09-02 11:20:12 UTC

- reply

> O que aconteceu para mudarem de opinião tão drasticamente?
Por que rameiras têm relações tão efêmeras?
#nevent1q…n9vc

2025-08-31 22:12:00 UTC

- reply

Por quê...?

2025-08-31 22:10:52 UTC

- reply

Esse foi um comentário satírico ou o senhor genuinamente precisa de ajuda para distinguir prostituição de matrimônio?

2025-08-31 22:03:53 UTC

- reply

Crackers! Crackers! Antagonistas, sejam antagônicos à imprecisão na linguagem que assola a classe jornalística. Crackers presos! Crackers!

2025-08-31 12:17:16 UTC

- reply

Not to mention the fact of Israel routinely doing worse to the other side for decades.

2025-08-30 21:48:44 UTC

- reply

Why do you think you should, out of curiosity?

2025-08-30 21:46:41 UTC

- reply

It slouches toward Bethlehem.

2025-08-30 00:57:51 UTC

- reply

Nevertheless, there is more Unix-nature in one line of shell script than there is in ten thousand lines of C. It seems at least two distinct conversations are happening here, despite the parties treating them as one. Would you describe a need to literally fight another man for food as indicative of civilization? I think not. Your interlocutors, are they proposing socialism as an alternative? Not here, they aren’t. Throwing punches has its place, but I advance the possibility that you gentlemen will come to realize you are in fact approaching the same problem from different angles, rather than from different armies.

2025-08-29 18:26:34 UTC

- reply

“Nature never accepts a cash payment in full for anything — this would be an injustice to the poor and to the weak. ... It is only the progressive installment plan Nature recognizes. No man can make a habit in a moment or break it in a moment. It is a matter of development, of growth. But at any moment man may *begin* to make or begin to break any habit. This view of the growth of character should be a mighty stimulus to the man who sincerely desires and determines to live nearer to the limit of his possibilities.” — William George Jordan, [The Kingship of Self-Control](https://www.artofmanliness.com/character/manly-lessons/manvotional-the-kingship-of-self-control/), in *Self-Control, Its Kingship and Majesty*, 1905.

2025-08-29 17:46:37 UTC

- reply

> For most consumer apps, however, it"s rarely a good idea.
For whom?

2025-08-29 16:47:55 UTC

- reply

De certa forma, eu segui o caminho inverso, começando pela solidão e pelos livros, então acabei lendo bastante. De todos que li, esse foi um dos livros mais úteis — e sendo leitura interessante, envolvente, lê-lo é unir o útil ao agradável. Boa leitura!

2025-08-29 16:23:43 UTC

- reply

Go ahead.

2025-08-29 15:23:13 UTC

- reply

Sugestão de leitura: "Deep Work", por Cal Newport. Há tradução em português.

2025-08-29 14:54:40 UTC

- reply

Having read your jeremiad, I’m glad you did not point to some alternatives, but I wonder if you lean toward one or if all left in the box is hope.

2025-08-28 20:16:55 UTC

- reply

Al Capone que o diga.

2025-08-28 18:15:57 UTC

- reply

Proscribe the very concept of objectivity as tyranny; give finagling a cute nickname like #jeitinhobrasileiro and, when not praising it, laugh it over; in fact, laugh everything over — _castigat ridendo mores,_ huehuehue! — and mock those who are serious about anything — specially if they are serious about learning, those eggheads — and if this is not enough, even coupled with the nearly-universal adoption of a parenting strategy consisting of letting screens raise candy-brained, Ritalin junkies, then structure your bureaucracy around humiliating, even punishing, those who strive to walk the straight path while being lenient, if not rewarding, toward those who don’t. If a country does all this, and worse, and more for long enough, can the result be any different?

2025-08-28 13:13:48 UTC

- reply

One day at a time.

2025-08-28 11:48:22 UTC

- reply

Deep.

2025-08-27 23:09:06 UTC

- reply

If you are to wear rhetorics as an emblem, should you not endeavor to maintain a greater distance between your words and mere sophistry?
Here is a better stick: Generally speaking, women need permission from their husband to even leave the house. Unlike yours, it is factual.
For while it is true women must travel accompanied, going to the mosque, visiting relatives and so on does not usually count as traveling.
As to their having to cover themselves, would it not be a better rhetorical device for you to dazzle us with the efficacy of the inverse approach?
How is it working for the West?