#posting

opening up this book and the first actual real scene is multiple characters telling nico he needs to get help and deal with his ptsd Okayyyyy

my hopes for reading these books: it being written for middle schoolers doesn’t make it impossible for me to read nico is not reduced to the Grump Emo Boy to contrast wills Happy Sunshine Boy his character is actually developed to exist outside of the context of any of the men its been established he has had a crush on it would be nice if they could get me to actually like will

maybe I’ve always been going through shit…

“krill” is a perfect word for a thing with a lot of little wiggly legs

the power differential between hot drinks and cold drinks seems unfair. hot drinks can burn you but cold drinks are just kind of weak and helpless. i should be able to drink an iced latte so cold it physically harms me

im being a nuisance in a bad way at pub quiz and it’s ok my friends can hate me

the reason straight men are so bad at fashion is that - when they care about it at all - they’re often not so much interested in expressing themselves or saying something with their personal style as they are in reenacting the American Psycho business card scene with sneakers.

Thinking about Newcomb’s problem. If the predictor is really *perfect* by stipulation, I think even causal decision theorists one box. Like, if we understand causality to be about counterfactuals (i.e., if I hadn’t done X, then Y wouldn’t have happened, therefore X caused Y, which I think is the only clean way of describing causality without getting extremely metaphysical), one boxing causes you to get more money. Say you pick two boxes and get the lower total reward, as necessarily happens by stipulation. If you had, counterfactually, picked one box, the one-box world necessarily would have had a higher reward. So picking two boxes *caused* you to get a lower reward, so you should have one boxed. The normal way of considering the counterfactual is: you one box as the predictor expected you to, leaving money on the table. But counterfactually, if you had two boxed, then you would have gotten more money. The problem is, by stipulation of a perfect predictor, that is an incoherent world! It’s not a valid counterfactual to consider! Now, if the predictor is even slightly imperfect and the two-box-for-max-profit world isn’t logically or metaphysically incoherent, this doesn’t work (I think?). So basically people just need to start saying almost-perfect predictor instead of perfect predictor for it to be an interesting hypothetical. Maybe they’re doing this already, who’s to say.

I dont think anyone on the planet is as horny as me rn

i love the idea of hand-painted walls in a future home

1 page in and im already crying #yup

im out of cigarettes so all i have are my special cigarettes which are for special occasions and moments with friends i have one vanilla one from georgia and one cantaloupe one from japan i think . but… what if i had one now … 🤷🏽‍♀️

rox is my number 1 opponent

ALT

maybe i will get my frustrations out in basketball and at least i get to gaze at this beautiful kind man the entire next hour and then ill be so zen

dreamt I had to deliver the killing blow upon Mohg, Lord of Blood, and I woke up crying ?

doing funny numbers on Tumblr dot com

Mina Harker x Lucy Westenra doomed yuri is this anything

huh, I’m gonna be an uncle. Well then. (Day 17)

Just realized i do Not Like cucumbers