the fisherman of halicarnassus

"the truman show," directed by peter weir and released in 1998, stars jim carrey as truman burbank. the story revolves around truman, an ordinary man living in the seemingly perfect town of seahaven. his life appears normal, but unbeknownst to him, his entire existence is actually a meticulously crafted reality tv show, broadcast live 24/7 to the entire world. everyone in his life, including his friends, family, and even his wife, are actors. the town itself is a massive set enclosed in a dome, with thousands of hidden cameras capturing truman's every move.

as truman goes about his daily life, he begins to notice odd occurrences that make him question his reality. lights fall from the sky, his radio picks up the production crew's communications, and he starts to recognize patterns and inconsistencies in his world. the turning point comes when he meets sylvia, an extra who tries to reveal the truth to him before being whisked away by the show's producers.

truman's curiosity and determination grow, leading him on a journey to discover the truth about his life. the climax sees truman sailing to the edge of the dome, confronting his fears, and ultimately finding an exit door labeled "exit," leading him to the real world. his final moment on the set is poignant, as he delivers his iconic line, "in case i don't see you… good afternoon, good evening, and good night," before stepping out into freedom.

what makes "the truman show" such a compelling movie is its innovative concept. the film presents a thought-provoking premise about reality, media manipulation, and personal freedom. remarkably, it predates the explosion of reality tv and social media, making it eerily prescient about society's voyeuristic tendencies.

jim carrey's performance is another standout aspect of the film. known primarily for his comedic roles, carrey delivers a nuanced and heartfelt portrayal of truman. he balances humor and drama beautifully, making truman's gradual awakening and search for truth both compelling and relatable.

the film also offers sharp social commentary, critiquing media ethics and the intrusion of privacy. it explores themes of authenticity, control, and the human desire for genuine connection in a world dominated by artificial experiences. this satirical edge adds depth to the narrative, making it more than just an entertaining story.

visually, the movie excels thanks to peter weir's direction and the meticulous set design. the use of hidden cameras and unique angles enhances the feeling of surveillance and confinement, drawing viewers into truman's world. the emotional core of the film lies in truman's journey of self-discovery and liberation. as viewers, we root for him to challenge the boundaries of his manufactured reality, making his eventual triumph deeply satisfying.

on a philosophical level, "the truman show" raises profound questions about reality and free will. it echoes plato's allegory of the cave, where truman, like the prisoners in the cave, must break free from his illusory world to see the truth. this philosophical depth invites viewers to reflect on their own lives and the nature of the world around them.

tilting at windmills refers to the act of fighting against imaginary or illusory problems or adversaries, or of engaging in futile or quixotic endeavors. the phrase comes from the novel don quixote, in which the main character, don quixote, is depicted as tilting at windmills, which he believes to be giants, in a series of futile and quixotic attempts to right wrongs and defend the honor of his lady love.

here is an example of tilting at windmills:

imagine that you are trying to solve a problem, but you are approaching it in the wrong way or using the wrong tools. you might be tilting at windmills if you persist in trying to solve the problem despite the fact that your efforts are not making any progress or are unlikely to succeed.

another example of tilting at windmills might be someone who is trying to fight against an imaginary or illusory problem or adversary. for example, someone might be tilting at windmills if they are trying to fight against a problem that does not really exist, or if they are trying to fight against an adversary that is not really a threat.

in order to avoid tilting at windmills, it is important to be aware of the limitations and realities of the problems or challenges that you are facing, and to use appropriate and effective strategies and tools to address them. this can help to ensure that your efforts are focused and productive, rather than being wasted on futile or quixotic endeavors.

the world's biggest forum.
top 3 communities*:
1- r/funny 62m
2- r/askreddit 47m
3- r/gaming 42m

let's dive into muphry's law (yes, that's spelled right). imagine murphy's law (anything that can go wrong, will go wrong) had a nerdy cousin who loved grammar and spelling. muphry's law states that whenever you criticize someone else's writing, you're almost guaranteed to make a mistake yourself. it's like the universe's way of keeping us humble.

here are some funny examples to illustrate:

1. social media fail: you comment on someone's post, "your such a idiot for not knowing the difference between 'your' and 'you're'." congrats, you just became the idiot.
2. email embarrassment: you send an email to your coworker, "please proofread this report. it's full of errors, and we can't have any misstakes." your coworker replies, "sure thing! by the way, you spelled 'mistakes' wrong."
3. editing nightmare: you're editing a friend's blog post and write in the margin, "this sentence is awkwardly phrased. rewright it." oops, guess who needs to rewrite their comment?

everyone's all focused on the hawk tuah thing, but the real bomb she dropped was when she said, "the only way to get over one is to get under another."

crossfit is a popular high-intensity fitness program that combines elements of weightlifting, cardio exercises, and gymnastics. it has gained prominence due to its focus on functional movements, varied workouts, and community atmosphere.

after world war ii, many nazis and collaborators fled europe to escape trial for war crimes. surprisingly, some of them found refuge in the united states. there were a few different ways this happened.

operation paperclip: this was a secret program in which the u.s. government recruited scientists from nazi germany to work on america's behalf during the cold war. these scientists, some of whom were alleged to have ties to nazi war crimes, were invaluable assets due to their advanced knowledge in rocketry, medicine, and other fields. perhaps the most famous of these was wernher von braun, a former member of the nazi party who played a key role in developing the v-2 rocket during wwii and later became an integral part of nasa's moon landing program.

intelligence use: the u.s., like many nations during the cold war, was focused on gathering as much intelligence as possible to gain an edge over the soviet union. some former nazis and collaborators were used as spies or informants, despite their criminal pasts.

immigration: some nazis managed to immigrate to the u.s., often hiding their past affiliations. they lived in the country for decades, typically maintaining a low profile. many were later tracked down and prosecuted or deported, particularly after the formation of the office of special investigations (osi) in 1979, a unit of the department of justice tasked with identifying and expelling former nazis.

it's important to note that the presence of nazis and collaborators in the u.s. after wwii has been a source of controversy. these events have been subject to numerous investigations and have led to changes in u.s. policies regarding war criminals and immigration. as of my knowledge cutoff in september 2021, these efforts to hold former nazis accountable continued, even as the number of surviving wwii-era nazis dwindled.

gerrymandering is the practice of manipulating the boundaries of electoral districts to favor one political party or group over another. this can be done in various ways, such as packing voters of one party into a single district, cracking the supporters of a particular party across multiple districts or shifting the boundaries in a way that benefits a particular candidate or party.

for example, let's say a state has a population of 50% democrats and 50% republicans. if the party in power redraws the district lines in a way that packs all the democrats into a few districts and spreads out the republicans over the remaining districts, they can essentially ensure that their party wins a majority of the seats in that state, even though they don't have a majority of the overall votes.

another example of gerrymandering is racial gerrymandering, which involves redistricting in a way that diminishes the voting power of racial or ethnic minorities. for instance, if a state has a large population of latino voters, and the district boundaries are redrawn in a way that divides them across multiple districts, their voting power is diluted and their ability to elect a representative who truly represents their interests is severely impacted.

gerrymandering can have significant consequences for the political process, including reduced competition, decreased voter turnout, and the disenfranchisement of minority voters. it can also lead to the election of representatives who are not truly representative of the interests of their constituents.

efforts to combat gerrymandering include initiatives like independent redistricting commissions, which aim to take the power of redistricting out of the hands of politicians and ensure that districts are drawn fairly and with the best interests of voters in mind.

in summary, gerrymandering is a practice that involves manipulating the boundaries of electoral districts to benefit a particular political party or group, often at the expense of minority groups or fair representation. efforts to combat gerrymandering aim to promote fair and competitive elections and ensure that districts are drawn in a way that truly reflects the will of the people.

edward bernays developed a number of techniques for manipulating public opinion through propaganda. some of the key techniques he used include:

emotional appeals: bernays believed that people are more likely to be influenced by emotional appeals than by rational arguments. he used techniques such as fear-mongering and creating a sense of urgency to appeal to people's emotions and motivate them to take action.

creating social pressure: bernays believed that people are more likely to conform to the opinions and actions of their peers. he used techniques such as creating "grassroots" movements and using celebrities as spokespeople to create a sense of social pressure and make people feel like they are part of a larger group.

creating false needs: bernays believed that by creating new needs and desires, people could be induced to buy more goods. he helped to create the idea of "planned obsolescence" in which products are designed to have a limited lifespan so that they would have to be replaced more often.

creating a sense of authority: bernays believed that people are more likely to be influenced by those who appear to be experts or authorities. he used techniques such as citing "scientific studies" and using "expert" testimonials to create a sense of authority and make people more likely to accept his message.

using symbols and slogans: bernays believed that symbols and slogans could be used to create powerful associations in people's minds. he used techniques such as creating powerful slogans and symbols to associate a product or idea with positive emotions and values.

creating a sense of mystery: bernays believed that creating a sense of mystery around a product or idea could make people more curious and interested in it. he used techniques such as creating exclusive events and hiding information to create a sense of mystery and intrigue.

in summary, edward bernays developed a number of techniques for manipulating public opinion through propaganda, including emotional appeals, creating social pressure, creating false needs, creating a sense of authority, using symbols and slogans, and creating a sense of mystery.

the chaos theory is a branch of mathematics that studies the behavior of dynamic systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions, also known as the butterfly effect. this means that small differences in initial conditions can lead to significantly different outcomes over time.

one example of the chaos theory in action is the behavior of a pendulum. if a pendulum is set in motion, it will swing back and forth in a predictable pattern. however, if the initial push is slightly off, the pendulum will start to swing in a slightly different pattern. as time goes on, the differences in the swing become more and more pronounced, eventually leading to completely different behaviors.

another example of the chaos theory is the prediction of weather patterns. small differences in temperature and air pressure can lead to significantly different weather patterns, making it difficult to accurately predict the weather more than a few days in advance.

overall, the chaos theory helps to explain why it is often difficult to predict the long-term behavior of complex systems, even when we have a good understanding of the individual components of the system.

pooh-pooh is a term that refers to the act of dismissing or belittling something as being unworthy of serious consideration or attention. it can also refer to the act of expressing contempt or disdain for something.

for example, someone might pooh-pooh an idea or suggestion by saying "that's a ridiculous idea" or "that's not worth considering." this can be done in a dismissive or contemptuous tone of voice, and it conveys the idea that the person believes the idea or suggestion is not worth considering or discussing.

another example of pooh-pooh might be someone who dismisses a concern or issue as being insignificant or unimportant. for example, someone might pooh-pooh a concern about climate change by saying "it's just a natural cycle" or "it's not a big deal." this can be done in a dismissive or contemptuous tone of voice, and it conveys the idea that the person believes the concern is not worth considering or addressing.

in order to avoid pooh-poohing something, it is important to consider all ideas, concerns, and issues with an open and respectful mindset, rather than dismissing or belittling them without careful consideration. this can help to create a more open and respectful dialogue, and it can encourage people to consider a wide range of perspectives and viewpoints.

a concern troll is a type of online troll (someone who posts inflammatory or provocative content online with the intention of causing disruption or distress) who pretends to be concerned about a particular issue or community, while secretly working to undermine or disrupt it. concern trolls often use fake accounts or anonymous profiles to hide their true identity and motivations, and they may present themselves as allies or supporters of the issue or community they are targeting.

concern trolls often use fake or misleading arguments, or they may present distorted or incomplete information in order to mislead or deceive their audience. they may also engage in inflammatory or disruptive behavior, such as posting inflammatory or offensive content, starting arguments, or engaging in personal attacks.

here is an example of a concern troll:

imagine that you are part of an online community that is discussing issues related to climate change. a concern troll might join the community and pretend to be concerned about climate change, while secretly working to undermine the discussion or sow discord among the members. they might do this by posting false or misleading information about climate change, or by starting arguments or engaging in personal attacks against other members of the community.

another example of a concern troll might be someone who pretends to be a supporter of a particular political party, while secretly working to undermine the party or its candidates. they might do this by posting false or misleading information about the party or its candidates, or by starting arguments or engaging in personal attacks against other members of the party or its supporters.

in order to identify and protect against concern trolls, it is important to be aware of their tactics and to be cautious of anyone who seems to be trying to disrupt or undermine a particular issue or community. it is also important to verify the accuracy and reliability of information before sharing it, and to be respectful and civil in online discussions and debates.

cherry picking is a logical fallacy that occurs when an argument relies on the selective use of evidence or examples in order to support a particular conclusion, while ignoring or dismissing evidence or examples that contradict or weaken the argument. this can create a misleading or distorted view of the subject being discussed, as it presents a biased or incomplete picture of the available evidence.

here is an example of an argument that relies on cherry picking:

premise: all democrats are socialists.
example: bernie sanders is a socialist and a democrat.
conclusion: all democrats are socialists.

in this argument, the premise is supported by the example of bernie sanders, who is both a socialist and a democrat. however, this example ignores the fact that there are many other democrats who are not socialists, and therefore does not provide a complete or accurate picture of the relationship between democrats and socialism. as a result, the conclusion of the argument is based on a biased or incomplete view of the evidence.

another example of cherry picking might be:

premise: vaccines are dangerous.
example: some people who have received vaccines have experienced serious side effects.
conclusion: vaccines are dangerous.

in this argument, the premise is supported by the example of some people who have experienced serious side effects after receiving vaccines. however, this example ignores the vast majority of people who have received vaccines without experiencing any serious side effects, and therefore does not provide a complete or accurate picture of the risks and benefits of vaccines. as a result, the conclusion of the argument is based on a biased or incomplete view of the evidence.

in order to avoid cherry picking, it is important to consider all of the available evidence and examples, rather than selectively choosing only those that support a particular conclusion. this can help to ensure that the argument is based on a balanced and accurate view of the evidence, rather than relying on a biased or incomplete picture of the subject being discussed.

steelmanning is a critical thinking technique that involves trying to understand and present the strongest possible version of an argument or position, even if it is one that you disagree with or find flawed. the goal of steelmanning is not to defend or advocate for the argument, but rather to understand it more deeply and to better understand why someone might hold that position. this can be useful in a variety of contexts, such as when you are trying to have a productive conversation or debate with someone who holds a different perspective, when you are trying to anticipate objections to your own argument, or when you are trying to identify the underlying assumptions or values that inform someone's argument.

here are a few examples of how steelmanning might be applied in different contexts:

imagine that you are trying to have a conversation with a friend about the value of wearing masks to prevent the spread of covid-19. your friend argues that masks are unnecessary because they don't provide complete protection and can make it harder to breathe. to steelman their argument, you might try to understand why they might hold this view, even if you disagree with it. you might ask questions like: "what do you think are the main reasons that people might believe masks are unnecessary?" "what kinds of experiences or evidence might lead someone to conclude that masks don't provide enough protection?" by asking these questions, you are trying to understand the strongest version of your friend's argument, rather than simply dismissing it as misguided or wrong.
suppose that you are writing an essay in which you argue that the government should invest more in renewable energy sources. one of the objections to your argument might be that renewable energy is too expensive and that it is not feasible to rely on it as our primary source of energy. to steelman this objection, you might try to understand the underlying assumptions and values that inform it. for example, you might ask yourself: "what do people who believe that renewable energy is too expensive think are the main costs associated with it?" "what do they see as the main benefits of non-renewable energy sources, and how do they weigh those benefits against the costs?" by answering these questions, you can better understand the perspective of those who disagree with you and anticipate their objections more effectively.

imagine that you are trying to have a productive conversation with someone who holds a very different political perspective from your own. one way to approach this conversation might be to try to steelman the other person's arguments. for example, if they argue that the government should not provide social services because it is not the government's role to take care of people, you might try to understand why they might hold this view, even if you disagree with it. you might ask questions like: "what do you think are the main reasons that people might believe that the government should not provide social services?" "what kinds of experiences or evidence might lead someone to conclude that it is not the government's role to take care of people?" by asking these questions, you are trying to understand the strongest version of the other person's argument and to identify any common ground you might have, rather than simply dismissing their perspective as misguided or wrong.

this is an argument that introduces a new topic in order to distract from the original issue being discussed. for example, "yes, i know i'm late for work again, but have you seen how bad the traffic is this morning?"