how can lines be real if lies aren’t real?

afterall, lies are 80% of lines. the math checks out…

i wonder if i should give up on the idea that people vary in talent, character, and capacity- to see people as all inter-replaceable clones. i wonder if i, myself being no better or worse, should begin emulating the ‘problematic’ behaviors of those around me.

maybe i’d be even more human.

i feel left behind due to the lexicon continuing to shift while i’m not a teen. i am unsure if i prefer meaning or personal expression. i may be a hippocrite as i think i may be changing my bias there.

i’m thinking about dropping my identity, for the cliche identity in culture. but i’m also having dark thoughts due to it. i don’t believe i’ll be awarded humanity for what i am, i’m just a tool. i don’t remember if hollow rewards were better.

why try if there is no reward? why reward if there is no try?

why value a ‘gift’ if it was just reciprocation? why value a gesture if you expect it to be hollow and symbolic and deceptive? if you are valued by your capacity, and you value someone for being, is it really mutual? i guess i need to improve enough that i don’t see my changes as ingenuine.

i’m kinda wondering if i’m a loser.

i’m not interested in experiencing instances of the normal social dynamic. and what i want doesn’t seem out there. i don’t think the caricature of a ‘girl’ i want exists. and one who indulges in normal social behaviors is repulsive and disgusting.

i wonder if i have a crossed wire since what most people consider repulsive and what i find repulsive are inverse. i find religious humanism gross (in both meanings), and i find ‘try-hard’ a compliment. i find identity in how i am different, though i treasure how i am the same. and they find identity in the pack, and treasure their unique utility/capacity.

i don’t think i will get to experience a fraction of what they allege to take as granted. maybe i am broken and i’ve screwed myself over. and because of this maybe i am a loser.

radio gets revenge

there should be a ‘pop culture’ killer. someone who just has pop music blaring loud before they do unspeakable acts, a new one for each song to be playing on the radio. would make a great dual personality mystery where half the book is written as the murderer and the other half as the detective.

 

TV killed the radio star, but now radio gets revenge

multi personal generalities, which is more fundamental?

the relationship of others to you, called perception. or the inversion of their perception of you, the second person perception.

their truth will be more normal, but your truth will be more precise and developed, so which is truer? which is more fundamental?

 

i wonder if there is a way to compile out second person truths beyond stereotype of the modal identity, so you know how the person would reason.

 

is there a way to create an realistic character within a narrative, and realistic second person characters relating with the main character? or does the hero bias/spin the ancillary characters with so much personality/bullshit that they lose their agency?

if so, is there a fix/patch? how?

i wonder why bad thoughts happen

i get that cursing is cathartic. but why torment yourself with bad thoughts about your circumstance…

 

‘what is worth fighting for?’

every act worth enacting is worth doing on it’s own merits.

fighting is worth fighting for. if it wasnt no mitigating circumstance would validate the behavior, it would still be contradiction.

more consequentially, fighting with ideals leads to tyranny and dominion and eventually retribution. subjugate not, and your enemies will have far more struggle in playing the victim card. so unless they believe in the hydra democracy, you will be able to expect to be treated as an adult.

 

only allow fighting to be worth fighting for.  for it is that earnest consonance in the pursuit of perfection in any thing, which one can attain. no end goal has value, only the methodology to reach it.

just bitching

i have blistering on my foot that is so bad i haven’t been able to go for a walk in a week. and i’m having dark thoughts.

 

maybe i’m better wearing a mask.

wastes

youth is wasted on the young like learning and wisdom are wasted on the senile.

 

naivety reduces the legitimacy of young opinions, and lack of sex appeal does similar to those of the old.

 

so which is more of a waste? to know little but be able to do allot, or to know allot but be able to do little?

idk why a lack of logic upsets me anymore.

“Your technological model is based solely on circumventing legal prohibitions that you don’t want to comply with.”

i thought the judge would have been reasonable and pointed that at companies which both would provide content over the air, and on cable. it makes no sense in the reverse.

the biggest problem with what i read in that is that it the concept of copies is flawed and rejectable.

the broadcasters who send the signal over the air have waved/forfiet copyright, to allow the reproduction of the content on numberless devices. and they waved it due to profit from advertising. creating more avenues with identical properties dilating the market reach and diversity of that one signal they intentionally sent out, isn’t a semantic game.

one group forfeit copyright due to advertising, and another picked up on the forfeit copyright and made it so that advertising and content would go to more customers. and that happens after the signal is sent out to an uncontrollable number viewers- the public. and the biggest issue with the viewing public in this context is that it isn’t even limited to one nation and so it is loses even more protection from copywrite infringement. for the providing party isn’t trying to maintain exclusivity and novelty of the work.

it is a company suing someone for making copies of an advertisement. imagine if geico sued tv station 6 for providing unsponsored ads to the public. so geico bought and payed for one ad, but the station showed the ad twice, and then geico sued the station for the redistribution of copywriten material. it is the same thing, the content surrounding the ads are a carrier for the ads. and the advertisers are paying a fraction of what is asked by the company to kill their cash cow; at that fidelity level. cause once the signal is sent out to deliver it to an indefinite number of people, the only thing left of the content is nosolgia. it is the same reason they don’t do it until it is out of theaters.

there only might be wrong doing, if the ads are removed by the repurposing agent. which would mean there would eb a semantic method of getting around