SunlitZelkova

Living in Hiroshima kinda reminds me of being in a Philip K. Dick novel, because its a city that got nuked and was rebuilt in a modern way. Especially because my school is just north of the pseudo-red light district, going on walks there at night can give real Blade Runner vibes (not that I really connect BR with Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? plotwise, but the vibes are what matters). The wide streets also give off a unique feel compared to the narrow ones more common in other Japanese cities. I've always thought that so long as a nuclear war is limited to the countries that actually have nukes (which I can count on my fingers if Europe is just mashed together as one) humanity will rebuild quickly with help from South America, Africa, and Australia. I don't subscribe to the nuclear winter hypothesis. If humanity was going to go extinct I think it would be caused by the GG emissions from such a rebuilding effort + general consumption, assuming green technology is abandoned as too expensive in a post-war world. But that would take centuries, it wouldn't occur on a small timeline. This is why I like another of Philip K. Dick's novels, Dr. Bloodmoney, so much. It takes place slightly before, during, and then mostly after a nuclear war. But in the after part, there isn't really any of the usual post-apocalyptic tropes. Its just people going about their normal lives for the most part. There's some mutant tomfoolery but none of it drastically affects the characters' lives. The recovery of the world is even mentioned, surgeries are beginning to happen again in New York after eight years without any, likewise it is possible to send a letter from NY to San Francisco as new paths across the Rockies are cleared (apparently key nodes there got nuked during the war), and the Army-run central government in Cheyenne is even building simple rockets to try and reach the Mars mission that launched on the day of the war and got stranded in LEO after mission control was destroyed (Dick wrote the novel in 1963 so all he really would have been familiar with was Vostok and Mercury style near-total (in the case of Vostok total) ground control of spaceflights).

I love local stuff that's 1000+ years old. The best I was able to hope for back in Oregon was imagining there are giant sloth fossils under my feet as I go on walks around the neighborhood, which is right in the northernmost area of their range. There's exposed strata out in the Columbia River Gorge but that's a good hour away.

You'll be okay. *gives hug across cyberspace*

The Swedish did it too actually, but not only with jets but props as well! The SAAB J21 and A21 had a successful career in the Swedish Air Force after the military buildup begun during WWII began to actually come to fruition during the late 1940s. A jet-powered variant was built in small numbers (I didn't realize but apparently besides the Yak-3 to Yak-15 transition it was the only aircraft successfully converted from propeller to jet propulsion) until all of them were replaced by the Tunnan and Vampire.

It's real life nickname was "A$$ender" (not censored obviously).

Either a lot of Russian language websites with cool art have been taken down/expired or they're region blocked in Japan, because I tried to search "СССР 2000 год" and the results were really lame compared to when I did it back in America two years ago.

Maybe their descendants tried again and succeeded in doing so, and then commercialized the Grail's connective powers and sold it as Scotch Tape.

The motto of my university is to be a “22nd century university.” I had immense difficulty holding back laughter as I discovered the school portal looks like it’s from the 1990s despite the school having been founded in 2021. Even my community college’s portal back in the US looked like it was up to late 2010s standards. There’s a lot of novel things here, but I can’t help but believe there is some truth to the adage “Japan has been living in the 2000s since the 1980s.” Joke’s on people who use that as an insult though, I love me some retrofuturism in real life.

Reminds me of that Minuteman flying through (destroying) a Soviet flag that's painted on the blast door of the preserved Minuteman II silo and Missile Alert Facility. I can't remember which state it's in. I actually drew an updated version of it with a Chinese flag, but not only can it be construed as political but the reasons I drew it were political so I'm not gonna post it here.

I had my matriculation ceremony for university today. It’s actually the day after here, but I count late nights and early mornings as one single unit. I’ve realized I suck at Japanese so to temper my expectations about interacting with people I’ve been focusing on reviewing Russian skills*. Just to maintain hand writing and try and pry open opportunities to use it more in daily life, I’ve begun writing as many notes as possible. Even if I don’t have time to look up translations or case uses. Just to practice hand writing. So I reminded myself about today by writing серемони матрикулации on a sticky note lol. *Brilliant plan right? What are the odds I’m gonna run into a Russian speaking person in Hiroshima of all places and be tempted to speak more than I can understand? On that note… I saw a meme several weeks ago about “English in my head, English when I speak” with a finely drawn and poorly drawn horse, respectively, and I kinda wonder if that goes all ways. This school is very cosmopolitan, in just a couple days I’ve spoken with persons from Nigeria, Botswana, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Czech Republic, Argentina, and of course Japan. And I can barely understand what anyone is saying. As I’m trying to write this it’s kinda making sense. Sure, the school required a passing TOEFL score to enter if your native tongue wasn’t English. But how good are speaking tests anyways? When I took end of term exams during Russian courses I pronounced «ый» in adjectives like «ий» so many times, yet the teacher/professor never noticed. Granted it was over Zoom due to her fear of a long COVID recurrence, so it might have been impossible to hear. Another thing is that everyone is speaking so quiet. I thought all the kids these days blasted their headphones. Yet I seem to be the only one saying “huh?” and “what’s that?” while cupping my ear and leaning in. That’s my little slice of life I had to share at the corner bakery cafe that is the KSP forum lounge. Cheers.

When I think using the mindset of that "other" solution I mentioned, what I come up with makes Edward Teller look like Mahatma Gandhi.

@AlamoVampire I'm hearing your news only now as I've been away from the forums for a few days. I extend my deep condolences. I just left my mother and the rest of my family to begin attending university in a different country. Parting with them on a temporary basis was difficult enough, I cannot imagine what you are going through. I don't really pray anymore, despite continuing to hold some degree of religious belief. I'm not sure if this helps. All I can say is, know that this one person feels pain for you. I have not experienced the feeling of wanting to be with another human being and never being able to again, only such a feeling with animals. Idk. The worst thing that's happened to me when suffering loss- specifically the loss of those pets- was being told to move on. As if there is some set of actions you can take, according to a sort of manual, and the pain will go away. I don't believe that's the case. That's not necessarily advice, just some food for thought. So what I really want to say is this one person feels pain for you, and, does not hold expectations. If your pain is still intense months, even years from now, and you are posting about it here, I will not tell you to get over it. I'll continue to listen (read). And my pain for you will continue. I don't think anyone is supposed to get over pain. It's more about learning to live with it. That's where my journey took me. You will go on yours, and find your own answers. I hope that you will find them, at least. Even if I was to make a request to a deity, in the end I'm just hoping for the good outcome I desire to be granted. Note that I mean journey in a much more abstract, philosophical sense. Consciously declaring "I'm going to explore my feelings and see how I can get better" does not really mark the start of a journey, but is part of one that is ongoing, one that cannot be initiated or ended, for it is eternal. It is unconscious, existing outside of our own faculties. Perhaps when saying journey, what I am actually referring to is experience. Not in choosing to have a certain experience, like going to a concert... but rather the very essence of being alive and sensing things, thinking about things. I hope that your journey ends with peace. Ends with feeling better. On a different level, I believe and know that your journey will have such an outcome, but it's based in that "some degree of religious belief" I mentioned earlier. That's my personal opinion. I don't think that it makes it better for you, or that it should make it better for you. But ending a response to such terrible news with "I hope you're gonna be okay" just seems a little lacking somehow. As something I would say, not that when others say the same, they are lacking in compassion or something. I only say hope- and nothing else- with the intent of actually providing something... a form of condolence, I guess... because that's all I can do. I don't think anyone has a magic formula that can be applied to others' pain as a cure or alleviation. We can make formulas for ourselves, but it can only be a sort of study material or advice for others. It can't be applied directly, it just won't have the same effect. Everyone has their own way of thinking and feeling, and with such a deep, painful issue as the loss of a loved one, the only way one can meet that way of thinking and feeling is by their own hand (or mind). So I don't actually know if you'll be okay. If it will get better. But I can hope you'll be okay; hope it will get better. When my pets passed away, I did not have anyone hoping things got better except in a way that suited their expectations. That made it take longer for me to get better. So even if I'm just a wall of text on a screen, I'd like you to know there's someone feeling pain for you and hoping you'll get better, but with no conditions as to exactly how (or when) you do. In the hope that might help a little bit. I don't know you well, but I wanted to try my best to console, and I felt that the best I could do was (is) just trying to be the kind of person I would have wanted to have around- or rather, simply know existed- when I suffered my own loss.

Can one truly love without loving everything? That is, is true love love if there is hate at the same time? As I was dealing with my nuclear anxiety in Tokyo, I was overcome by the intense feeling I could not hate anyone or anything, period, if I was to truly have compassion for anyone at all. The thought that entered my head was this: loving one thing alone is an excuse to hate another. Thus it isn't true love. Note that this notion applies to my very philosophical and... how to put it... spiritual? mind. Of course, by applying this rule, I love those who love one thing while hating another. As someone who values personal autonomy to the highest degree, I do not translate love for all into being love for all on the condition that they are eventually "transformed" into a different, very specific state that suits my personal liking. By love I mean love in the sense of agape. Some context though: I consider much of what I see to be an illusion. A cruel illusion that can hurt, of course, but nonetheless an illusion. I hope this next part isn't too political. What drove me to this was the nonsensicality of existing nuclear disarmament arguments. It just makes zero sense to eliminate one class of weapons without not only eliminating other weapons, but violence as a whole. There's no argument there that anyone will ever be able to agree on. Side A and Side B will never convince each other to try and prevent the mass violence of a nuclear war if *some* violence is okay. Because which form of violence is okay is totally opinionated. You can't form logic around it. Justifying violence requires saying, "I have the right to end this person's life... because I said so." You can do mental gymnastics, of course, but realistically if you have the right to take someone's life, so do they have the right to take yours. Because what you're really saying is "It's okay for me to kill because I have a good reason. If I didn't, it wouldn't be okay." And thus all they have to have is a "good reason" and it's okay for them to kill you, and anyone else. But what a good reason is is entirely up to the person deciding. Because there is no objective "good reason." And what we're left with is it being quite natural that violence and war seems to never end, because the people trying to create peace aren't creating peace for all, they're creating peace for themselves. In the way they want. But I can't hate these people, those who accept violence in some instances. Because to hate and dislike... dislike unless a certain condition is met, i.e. them becoming more like how I think they should... would be to become one of them. Or rather, to join this endless cycle of suffering. Inflicting suffering and having it inflicted back on me. Infinitely. Or until "There's two of us standing and only one of them." Thus I am led to believe one cannot find peace or have compassion without eliminating the concept of us and them, and instead only seeing all. This involves an immense degree of compassion and trust. It involves seeing those who potentially threaten your own life as sentient, feeling beings, rather than part of a machine-like "Them." Hoping... because that's really all that can be done, it's impossible to know... that they will make a reciprocal decision about how to interact with yourself. And then even if they harm you, still loving them anyways. Loving them despite what they do. Not what they do, of course. But loving the person. Not the action. And (bear with me) not loving them believing they "truly" are or can be different, but simply loving them. Loving everyone and everything. I have no idea how to explain this in a way that makes more sense. Human society, as well as human behavior, is, at least from some scientists' POV, specifically structured around an "Us" and "Them" system. That's who we are. Talk of inner humanity and such, is, IMO, just mental gymnastics to convince ourselves "Us" are better than "Them." At the end of the day even the most peaceful person is, if left with no other option, gonna take the life of another in order to defend something they love. The problem is, from the point of view of "Them," we are "Them." Thus there's no way out of this sort of "game." But we... especially I... was left with the question of why this keeps happening. Why do people hurt each other? Which brings me to the other solution to this question. Which is to realize our "morals" are just fantasies we cook up to convince ourselves we are better than "Them," as evidenced by how what we do does not differ from what they do except who it's targeted towards, and that the reality is that these moral distinctions are silly. What matters is that we are alive and they are not (in other words, unable to harm us). There is no point in handicapping responses to threats beyond making yourself feel good that you are. Feeling good is an intangible thought. Fake, in other words. But the threat is real. The possibility is real. So why wait? Why not hit the threat now before it hits us? There's nothing holding us back except ourselves. The same is the only thing holding them back. But can we trust them to hold themselves back? We don't even trust them now. It's the whole point of classifying them as a threat (note that this may sound like I'm describing geopolitics but it can mean anything. Household against robber, business against business, person against murderer, and so on). やれる前にやれ. A yakuza saying to kill before being killed. And my own little phrase I've come up with to describe this thought process. Hit hard, hit fast, hit now. Anything less is inviting an attack on you and what you care about. And this brings me back to that notion of mine. You either love all or you don't truly love at all. Because the end result of allowing some violence to be okay and not others is just a pure free-for-all murder fest. Group against group. Individual against individual. History does not occur according to formulas or patterns. It shifts without rhyme or reason. If one doesn't recognize that and make the choice to take a position and defend it no matter what, they will find themselves suddenly looking a lot like the people they think they are different from one day. Because if pushed... if the external situation was in a certain way... we'd do exactly what they are doing to us. Because if there's a "good" enough reason to do something... But if we stick to one idea and never violate it... not "because of the extraordinary situation," or "because of the demands of the environment around me," etc... I think we will find ourselves suddenly in a much more peaceful and friendly world. Even if we are indeed different in many ways. Because I vow not to take your life, and you vow not to take mine. No matter what. We can talk about how to resolve issues like getting enough food and water, securing shelter, etc., for as long as we want. Because we're alive, and will be for a long time. The specter of many rather choosing to kill me... and millions of others... and take all the food and water for themself haunts me everyday. Killing, killing, killing. Not only "until there is no one left." Because anyone dying in the first place is a tragedy. Mass death doesn't suddenly become more tragic when there's no one left to kill. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk Some notes: These references to killing apply to humans vs. humans. I don't see any sense in militant vegetarianism, we are omnivores and the idea that animal life should not be taken but plant life can devalues plant life, who have just as much a right to life as do animals. I.e. I don't think capacity to feel pain or sentience defines the value of life. Anything living should live. But living things need to eat other living things in order to live. Thus eating animals is simply part of the way reality is. On the other hand, I do object to making these animals suffer for extended periods of time in the process of raising them (in other words I don't like factory farms), but that's my opinion... any how I digress. Some of the stuff about war may sound political. If you choose to respond, please try to talk about war as a concept rather than listing real life examples. I'm not trying to point fingers at specific individuals, because one man is just as culpable for justifying and carrying out violence as any other. All violence is bad, IMO, not just specific instances.

Just wait until Super Heavy is equipped with AI, and Anon decided to hack it and replace its robotic, simplistic mind with that of a cat. It will slip out of the launch tower's hands by any means possible. However, SpaceX will just need to develop a method to wrap it in a towel, and it will be easy to pick up and move to the backroom where it can be tested for viruses. Source: personal experience at the vet.

Kind of half negative thought half interesting thing. I’m in Tokyo right now and I’m overcome by immense nuclear anxiety. All I see is a sea of fire and the faces of dead people. I’ve decided to watch The Sacrifice tonight. I don’t know what for. It’ll be interesting to see how it impacts my fears. All I’m going into it with is the blurb at the top of the Wikipedia article.