2017 Apr 10 ~ 21

Gonna put my drawing stuff here from now on too. Older stuff can be found here or here.

Upload schedule is other week, usually Saturday, occasionally Friday or Sunday.


Digital lines are a pain. Asked around and was told there’s no trick to it, I just have to grind a couple thousand curves through pre-established points. Which sounds about right, since the answer can’t possibly be vectors, but I still don’t like it. Means that the problem here is mostly one of mechanical finesse rather than any sort of mental refinement.

Integrating down to calves and feet, though, is. Using head length as a unit the full body is ~2 units wide and ~8 units tall, or 1:4 aspect ratio. I’ve primarily been working in 1:1 to about 1:2.5; doing something so long just feels weird. There’s also the part where if I want to make it large enough to have the most basic of details in eyes and eyebrows so that 0.5mm doesn’t trip over itself, a 1:4 means I’d need to take up ~2/3 of the page’s height.

That being said, this is also not a problem one’d naturally associate with “learning to draw”. Just as digital lining is a problem between tablet and chair, foot integration is a problem between anatomical understanding and mark-making instrument. Neither are my favorite kind of problem.

Problems, problems, problems.

A 17_04_10-13
Wasn’t too clear what I needed to be doing. Saw that pupils/irises were on my to-do list.


A 17_04_14-16
I always thought of the long eye type as simpler, but somewhere along the way the tables flipped. Not because I got particularly worse at them, but because I got better at the other type, and I started to know what to look for.

Long type is more difficult because of the nose, which has lower tolerances because it’s more realistic.


A 17_04_17
Didn’t end up being all too difficult. Just took a bit of space.


A 17_04_18
Adding the head and eyes really tightens the tolerances.


A 17_04_18-21
Had the thought of enforcing some sort of minimum level of detail; if it’s just a head it should detail hair, eyes, expressions, if it’s just a torso the hands should be there or at least some drapery. There seems to be an infinite number of things to refine and since that’s my “comfort zone” mixing them in a bit before and after bigger ones feels pretty nice.

Let’s see if I can’t make myself put more things together this time.


B 17_04_18-20
Started with looking closer at some silhouettes, then looked at motion instead.


D 17_04_21_2
Took ~10 minutes to go from nothing to final on paper.
Took ~100 minutes to go over only this much in lines digitally. Did some lines, then erased and refined, almost every line had its own layer, the jawline had four… I was originally planning to do hair but no way in hell was I going to touch it with this complete lack of speed.

Definitely missing something.

IFLS is an intended result of Science

LAX: What is that supposed to mean
REZ: whats what supposed to mean
LAX: “objectivity is a big fucking meme, just like science”
REZ: it’s the same group of people and same mentality
REZ: IFLS is effectively a religion
REZ: or if you’re a bit more highbrow, the Rationality Community e.g. Less Wrong, Slate Star Codex et. all
LAX: Are you saying you’re opposed to science?
LAX: Science and being objective are appropriate in certain situations
REZ: I am opposed to both science and IFLSers, though they’re two slightly different topics
REZ: well, i suppose it could be seen as two slightly different ways of being the same thing
LAX: How can you be opposed to science yet use a computer?
REZ: my using a computer has nothing to do with science
LAX: It’s a byproduct of science
REZ: i will give you 5 more arguments until i stop this line because it’s base as fuck and wastes my time
LAX: I get being opposed to the IFLS shitlords
REZ: it’s a byproduct of a bunch of things which aren’t science too; doesn’t mean anything
REZ: it’s like saying haha aren’t communists funny they complain about capitalism but they still buy things
REZ: communists are idiots but that’s not a legitimate argument to level against them
REZ: they have about as much choice to not buy things as they do to evade taxes or not drive cars or not speak english
REZ: there’s one great thing that everyone touts about science and it’s that it’s self correcting
REZ: which is completely nonunique since every way of thinking has methods of self correcting
REZ: religions have priests who interpret their holy books, science has scientists who interpret their experimental results
REZ: i forget the number but something came out recently showing that something like 1/2 or 2/3 of scientific papers in recent years have experiments which aren’t reproducible
REZ: in english that means “most of recent science is effectively made up shit and not science”
LAX: I know of this
REZ: science isn’t so great that i have to acknowledge tribute to it by using something i have to use in order to live
REZ: science sticks its name in a bunch of things just because it’s only ever so marginally related
REZ: like a college claiming “oh yeah that famous guy? he went here.”
REZ: whereas the vast majority of people who’ve actually been to college can tell you, it really isn’t that special.
REZ: except for the partying.
REZ: when colleges start saying “oh yeah that famous guy? he partied here. and that’s why he’s famous” instead of pretending it’s some great knowledge or insight he gained through hard work and education, i’ll take another look.
REZ: same with science.
REZ: but if they do that, then their credibility goes out the window, so i won’t have to.
LAX: So you’re not actually opposed to the scientific method, just the way people use science to “seem smart”?
LAX: like people using science to publish a paper that’s just total bullshit?
REZ: why would the difference between what something is and how it manifests matter to me?
REZ: we had this conversation like yesterday
REZ: my brother COULD be something that ISNT a complete literal retard
REZ: but unless it’s demonstrated who cares?
REZ: science COULD be the greatest thing ever but if the big people who are so much smarter and so much more productive than me are 1/2~2/3 LYING about their SHIT then why do i care?
REZ: i don’t have any personal investment in the word or ideology of “science”
REZ: i see its leaders being shit, as far as i’m concerned, it’s shit
REZ: if i remember high school science and youtube atheism from pre-2010 correctly this is the scientific response too
REZ: god COULD exist
REZ: but if we can’t detect him then he’s not in this universe, i.e. he doesn’t exist
REZ: that’s the big problem
REZ: the other problem which is somewhat related is science is one of the mainstream religions
REZ: anything which is NOT “proven by science” is “pseudoscience”
REZ: things which have long existed before science are deemed “immoral” or “wrong”, even if they are accurate predictions and have demonstrable effects, up until the moment some “scientist” records it in an experiment and presents his conclusions to a “scientific community”
REZ: at which point it becomes truth, oh look we were wrong this whole time, isn’t it great we have science to correct our ways?
REZ: like literally go fuck yourself
REZ: the point, anywhere in any field of human activity, is to be “correct” or to get a job “done”
REZ: whether it’s “scientific” or not is secondary
REZ: and the more i see and hear about science it’s the modern day equivalent of religion in the sense that they’re the gatekeepers of knowledge
REZ: just like media
REZ: “if we say its true its true, if we say its false its false”
REZ: media has eroded a bit thanks to internet and smartphone video but people just keep lapping up whatever they hear when they also hear the word “science” or whatever
REZ: it’s all related
REZ: IFLS is not a mistake, it’s an intended consequence of how science is portrayed and how their people work in our system
LAX: Okay I’m with you now
REZ: good
REZ: laxeris was not an idiot today
LAX: I don’t know about not an idiot.
LAX: But I wasn’t totally retarded
LAX: :3
REZ: yes, which is why i said “today”.
LAX: Sometimes I forget the way you view things and it makes it really hard to comprehend how you come to conclusions
LAX: Like how you put science and science people in the same category. Which makes sense, but not the way I do it.
REZ: people like to recite that one line from v for vendetta, ‘you can’t kill an idea’
REZ: but you can kill people, and you can censor books, and if there are no people to espouse an idea and no one to hear the tree fall in the forest, it doesn’t make a sound
LAX: I dislike that line, it’s pretty stupid
REZ: in obverse: an idea is only as much as its people
REZ: i could take the conventional stance, “those guys weren’t real scientists, how horrible they abused our system!”
REZ: but why would i do that?
REZ: people generally don’t reach that question because they just accept that science is correct
REZ: which it might or might not be
REZ: if we’re to believe the great message of science, that we’re always learning and 90% of what we knew 100 years is wrong today and 90% of what we know today will be wrong 100 years from now
REZ: it’s pretty plausible what we think of as “the scientific method” today will look fucking stupid in 100 years
REZ: in which case the only thing retained is the name
REZ: the brand
REZ: the marketing.
REZ: the religion.
REZ: and i don’t care about marketing that brand for free.
REZ: i’m gonna need to get paid.
LAX: I think it’s fair to assume that science is correct a decent amount of the time. But to place one’s entire faith into the results of science and accept it as fact, I completely disagree with too
REZ: i’m not going to assume science is correct even a decent amount of the time
LAX: I think the baseline of what science would change into (should) still remain the same
LAX: To compare them to computers, in 100 years our computers will be slow and basically useless
REZ: first of all stuff we actually operate on day to day doesnt rely on science
REZ: science today is string theory or other nonsense
LAX: But at their cores they’d still be the same fundamental idea
REZ: yes… a same fundamental brand.
REZ: an idea in your head and not related to anything that’s actually done.
LAX: The methods used to “extract data” would still remain fairly the same
REZ: you say this without any knowledge of how university researchers do things today or how university researchers did thing in the enlightenment.
LAX: I don’t need to know the tiny details of how they find things, like what equation they use, or what material etc
LAX: Those things will obviously change
LAX: The core of having an idea, then testing the idea, then retesting the idea should remain the same
LAX: Which is the core of what science is built on
LAX: If that were to change, and it still remained “science” that would be a problem
LAX: But if the catalyst in which science is preformed is changed that doesn’t really affect anything.
REZ: clearly it doesn’t exist anymore then, because 300 years ago a majority of experiments were actually done to retest other people’s ideas, these days everyone’s trying to do their own because that’s what gets published
REZ: which is why you hear about all these studies being done on some really specific super obscure shit that doesn’t matter
REZ: it’s “still science”
REZ: just like how people living in california can “still own a gun”
REZ: have fun marketing pointless research no one’s interested in for grant money and not being able to buy a rifle with a detachable magazine in the current year
LAX: Plenty of people still test old ideas with new variables to see if it still holds ups
LAX: Obiviously not a lot of people though
REZ: undergrads in chem 02a and that’s it.
REZ: you’re right though
REZ: chem 02a is mandatory, so “plenty of people” is an accurate statement.
LAX: Until someone finds a new variable to test the old things with, what would be the point of testing them with the same variables?
LAX: Thus people look for new variables and have to go through the bullshit procedure of getting funding
REZ: “what would be the point of testing them with the same variables”
REZ: well lets see
REZ: lets see if i cant find some textbook-like description of the pillars of science
REZ: actually i dont have to
REZ: you already conceded that the 1/2~2/3 story was true
LAX: Mhm
REZ: the only reason why that story matters is because reproducibility matters
REZ: if i do an experiment and you can’t reproduce it, that means, in science world, that something is wrong
REZ: whether you can’t won’t or don’t is irrelevant
REZ: that it isn’t means science either is dying or isn’t happening

[Review] Nier

6/8

xkeob2c

At certain points reaches 8, but an unfortunately large amount is 2, so this will look more like a negative review than a positive one.

I played NieR because Automata[1] was amazing, and I wanted to see what else its original writer had made. It’s said that the game got a cult following, and at least one of the reasons why a sequel was made was because one of the bigwigs at Square Enix threatened to quit unless it happened. Automata was truly an experience not recreatable just by watching a video, and I had a PS3, so I saw no excuse not to get the original. I generally don’t mind things like graphics too much, so as long as the story was good I thought everything would turn out just dandy. I played the international version with Papa Nier.

But by the end of my time with it I couldn’t ignore its issues. I played through ending A and ending B, but I decided to watch C and D on YouTube. The distance between A and B was about an hour plus, and the other endings were probably equally as far away given my progress, but what faced me was so bad I decided to save two hours of gameplay to deliver story in favor of just watching the changed cutscenes in the form of a video. The story really carries that game, and I think it might’ve been a 7 or 8 if I hadn’t played Automata first.

But it only just carries it; at every other moment it was clear it wasn’t an easy carry.

My recommendation is to play Nier at least through ending B, as there’s a fair enough amount of things added that have enough importance they can’t just be watched in a video. C and D aren’t too hard, but I think the combat actively detracts enough from the experience that it’s harder to connect with the cutscenes as a player than as a video watcher. As for side quests, do them until you get the feeling they’re a bother, they don’t change too terribly many things. If it seems like you need to spend money to do them, do it, you’re not about to need money for anything else. Above all else don’t use spears. Do NOT use spears, they will break the game so much you actually are better off just watching a video. A couple of other weapons are too strong too, so the best thing is to not use any weapons except the starter one- and two-handed swords and whatever upgrades you happen to be able to afford – gathering for upgrades is grinding and grinding the obscure things necessary will detract from enjoyment.

Continue reading

Dreaming too is a skill

In school I chased ever higher grades. In piano I chased ever fast complicated chords. In writing it was ever longer essays. In projects, tighter schedules; in managing, tighter rules.

Or in short in all fields throughout life what I sought was technical competence.

Drawing is the only thing so far where I’ve attempted to teach myself. It’s also the only thing where I’ve had a fairly clear idea from the beginning of what I like and why I like it, and for reasons other than technical competence: line drawings of women in sexual manners because muh dick. Simple, but conscious. While I liked songs I played on the piano I didn’t know why, and never fathomed to begin thinking about why they were appealing. It never occurred to me to think about drawing either, but by chance or other means the reason did exist.

It’s been a little over two years since I took drawing as a serious endeavor, and I’m now reaching basic technical competence in a majority of the things I originally wanted: I can draw all basic body parts of a woman, and know which proportions and camera angles to adjust to emphasize sexuality. There’s still some work to be done on reliably and accurately drawing certain positions and camera angles, but the problem’s approach is known, and estimates on how long it’ll take to solve are fairly accurate. All of this is a far cry from not knowing what to draw, how to draw, or even being able to copy anything at all. I know what I can and can’t do, and what I can do I can do well.

What I can’t do is anything worth doing.

Drawing female bodies is the only thing I’ve ever actually learned on my own, I’m certain I have competencies in it even if several areas need improvement, and yet I’m also completely unsatisfied with it. At some point in the past though I was satisfied with revisiting the same things over and over again, getting better day by day. Technical competence in a number of component skills is always required to open more doors in its superset skill: Not knowing clothing or hair or how to digitally color skin believably weren’t concerning to me because I knew I’d get to it eventually, and get better at it just the same as torso forms with pencil lines. It’s somewhat daunting to have to step into new territory soon; it’s even more to have to relearn how to take steps altogether.

l9wnqyoI can tell you there are some problems in this image. Some things are too large, some things are too small, a few things should be lighted differently, and some forms interfere if thought out a bit more. It’s fully within my abilities to redraw and fix those problems.

But I wouldn’t be able to create bottom up something that gives its feeling. I can draw female figures from this angle, but I wouldn’t know to use this one in particular. I can draw the stairs, but I wouldn’t know where to stop. I wouldn’t know to have the characters only take up that amount of space in the frame. I’d know how to make the females attractive. I wouldn’t know how to arrange everything so that the final product felt both sad yet comforting. At some point in the past I wouldn’t consider to make something sad yet comforting.

But now I do consider it. I think conveying feelings is what’s worth doing.

And I don’t know how to get there because my only meanings in life have been chasing technical competence and whetting my genitals . I’ve written a number of words in my life, but since I’ve never tried to do anything with it other than record my thoughts as-is with only myself in mind as the audience, that’s the limits of my writing. If I wrote a story, my strongest characters would be those singlemindedly improving on one skill and those running around satisfying carnal desires. There’d be other characters too, they’d just all be flat and unreadable. There wouldn’t be a story. They wouldn’t be characters. They’d be words.

The moment I stop thinking pornographically, my drawings become pencil lines. I can’t see characters. I can’t see motivations. If I see anything at all other than lines and shapes, it’s just a pretty face and a pretty body.

Which is what I wanted. So I guess it’s what I got.

j5honeb

If you want to see something, and over time you’ve only ever trained yourself to see that particular something, you’re not about to see anything else. If I want to see and draw “pretty faces”, I’m not about to see why she’s making that face, or what pose her body is in, in what kind of scene or including what other characters and their overall story. I still want pretty faces, to be sure. But it’s not the only thing I want anymore.

I want to tell stories now. I’ve no idea where to begin.

But technical competence in a number of component skills guarantees more open doors in its superset skill, and at some point component skills are effortlessly interchangeable.

When I started drawing it was difficult to keep returning to it. I sucked, I wasn’t making progress, nothing looked good, I didn’t know what to do or where to go. I only stuck with it because after a lifetime of believing in school I failed to get any job, and was hammering into my head that I needed to have something to show for in my life. Even then I only returned to it for a few hours a month. But it grew to a few hours every few weeks. Then a few hours a week, and now, I can’t imagine not doing it. The competency of the final result improving was only the cherry on top; what was important was learning how to approach the idea being encoded and becoming familiar with the kinds of mental landscapes that help cultivate these actions. Like water and food in an endless desert, when I just started drawing it was important for me to be able to produce good drawings at a certain rate. Now the land is bountiful, or at the very least there’s a decent sized patch of it which isn’t desert. I know how to get back to that patch, I know how to expand it, I even have a decent idea how to recreate that patch somewhere else entirely if for whatever reason that need arises. Good drawings hold a different meaning now, a man used to having his belly full at the end of every day isn’t going to find the same things acceptable as a man perpetually starving.

Among all the other things, dreaming holds a different meaning too.

This time it’s not like two plus years ago when all I had to reference was the pedagogy of the public school system and an online sea of low quality amateur artists who only pick up their craft twice a year and spend the rest of the time talking about personal style, imagination, passion, big names, and other undefined unactionable buzzwords. This time I have some experience learning, some idea of where to look and how to inspect things for the purposes of reverse engineering. In drawing the workflow is familiar enough to me that I can document it. But even elsewhere I have an idea how it works, what to do to expand my foothold, and the confidence that certain actions will produce the things needed to in turn produce and improve results: the first step is to believe the problem is solvable, the second step is to try out different imitations of examples until the structure of the whole can be identified. The other steps are depend more on the subject matter and are more complex, but are relatively trivial in importance. The first step is the most important one of all. And it’s one I can now take reliably.

Learning how to tell stories in drawings shouldn’t be too hard.

Learning how to tell stories in writing should be doable too, if only a few years further away.


[0] The original intended title for this post was “The End”. The second title was “Desire too is a skill”. It was changed to the final title due to connotations of the replaced words.

Marketing, ideas, and sorting

I wonder how much can actually be paraded due to a combination of lack of expertise and trust in authority on the side of the audience and social shaming tactics on the side of the deliverer.

Seeing through solar roadways needs some understanding of engineering. Seeing through hyper-realistic portraits needs some understanding of drawing. Seeing through No Man’s Sky needed some understanding of programming or video game design.

Mass Effect Andromeda claims to not be able to make white characters because of the “textures” they used. The new Scorpio console says it’ll be better than the best PCs at the cost of one top-of-the-line PC component. Trump’s Syria attack is defended on the grounds that the president has more “intel”.

No one can be an expert on everything, but neither can one not trust in anything nor not care about others’ opinions. “Fuck haters” and “Question everything” are worse-than-nothing statements because the questions should be directed towards critical points.

I think analyzing people’s backgrounds, connections, and objectives bypasses these problems to a reasonable extent. These should be the baseline, with the “facts and evidence” on the “actual” issues as secondary, because the “actual facts” are more easily fabricated by quite a few orders of magnitude. There are people that lie about their work history, but at some point they leave a trail, and people even in the age of their internet for one reason or another generally don’t change names. Generally speaking peoples’ history of actions are hidden or missing rather than fabricated – the opposite of “actual facts”.

The people most worth looking into demonstrate this principle. Executives are the most powerful and their backgrounds generally aren’t in any “field” – Sooner will an executive of groceries become an executive of pharmaceuticals than a pharmacist, even though their degree might’ve been in partying sociology, or maybe never had a degree at all. Arguing a pharmaceutical executive’s, whether a CEO’s or a politician’s, decisions primarily on basis of biology or chemistry or medicine – or worse, morals – is the discussion level of peons.

“Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”

Any person can expound about ideas. Even when talking about celebrity gossip and keeping up with the Joneses they’re basically talking about ideas. We even have a grammatically correct form of the word for personification: idols.

Expounding on people though is different. Beyond saying she likes cake or he goes weightlifting, can just any person accurately and effortlessly predict what some other person is going to do or say? They can’t. They can’t even fathom where to begin. Of course not, they can’t even understand the people they’ve spent years with!

“I thought you were going to do X.”
“Why in the hell would I do X? That never even occurred to me.”
“I dunno. Maybe you might’ve.”

But he sure does know what’s moral and what’s not or what’s the right thing to do in a certain situation of a field he only heard about two days ago! Just look at all these links and quotes from reputable sources he found on Google.

If only Google could predict what his friends were going to do too, then he could be just as confident and correct with people as he was with ideas. Such a lookup exists, it’s just not available at http://www.google.com, and is only available to advertisers, politicians running for head of state, and other big dollarydoo clients.

But it’s okay, because only small minds discuss people anyways.

“Checking” Facebook

Not using facebook is pretty great. It’s like getting a good night’s sleep; everything’s magically grown more detail.

Probably because as many friends as I can get and as many news “stories” there are, it’s all basically about the same voices saying about the same thoughts and about the same things. It’s not like it’s a calendar of deadlines; the vast majority of items are unactionable, so they all blend into each other like so many fetch quests.

Or perhaps more simply, fb “stories” average ten to a hundred words, and outside I find and read “stories” from two thousand words to tens of hours.

They too are generally unactionable, but unlike stuff I see on fb, which pretends the actions are liking, sharing, and commenting, there’s no pretense, so I’m left with thinking about what to do with what I’ve learned instead. Write a couple thousand words to review the morals and materials? Read up other things the author has done?

Or maybe close the tab/game/video and get back to work?

Hit Detection

I stopped drawing to masturbate. I opened up Honey Select cause that’s what I wanted.

I proceeded to spend the next half a day in HS… not masturbating.

The “half day” part isn’t particularly important, even if I had paid closer attention to the time I probably still would’ve spent 30~60 minutes in HS before realizing I wasn’t doing what I stopped drawing for. Or to put it another way, I could’ve continued drawing for 30~60 more minutes, stopped, go instead to my porn folder, masturbated, then have the rest of the day to do whatever and it would’ve been more productive. I did learn some things in HS, but it’s not how I intended to spend my day[1].

What’s important is that I intended to do one thing and did something else instead. Today it was HS and masturbation. Past couple of months it’s been WOT and having fun. Past two decades it’s been school and happiness in life. In several memorable instances, it’s been humiliating acts and social acceptance.

If the effects of something couldn’t have been predicted it’s one thing, but I think this applies quite frequently to stuff that could have been known too.

I wanted to see what a certain gym was like once, and they did this hour-long spiel-plus-tour and revealed the rates and the existence of both a safety and an advance deposit almost after-the-fact, buried in a sea of text. And I signed it! Even if I couldn’t predict what sales tactics they’d use, I’d been to a different gym before which, within 10 seconds of me walking in the door and asking the front desk what the rates were, was shown a laminated single sheet with big numbers how much it’d cost if paid per 1mo, 3mo, 6mo, 1yr. No fancy ~lifestyle~ names about what this plan is called or that plan’s benefits are; this is the table of costs for a membership, if you want yoga classes it’s a separate charge. Unfortunately that gym is also basically bankrupt, even though it’s cheaper and in a better location. I don’t doubt the addition of predatory sales tactics and red-orange-green marketing strategies would up their numbers; in any case this sample size of 2 tells me that the majority of people go to a gym for reasons other than actually getting fit[2].

How can these occurrences be countered?

The more I revisit this the more things seem to come down to awareness and reactivity.

“Reactivity” is a word I made up which happens to exist; what I mean is to have decided on things beforehand and not budging from it after the decision. There is never a time where there is something to be gained from pondering new material in the moment – there’s no shame in losing, but if it happens, you are “at a loss”, and you should strive to avoid it in the future. An expectation should be set concretely, and results checked within a matter of minutes or seconds. If things have deviated from expectations, react strongly and reject any “alternatives”. Your expectation should have included them if they were reasonable, and if you were wrong, then better you learn later than be taken advantage of in the moment.

I walked into that gym thinking “it’d be nice” if they had a simple sheet like the other gym. I did ask what the prices were, but they asked me to sit down until they could have some [associate?] “walk me through” “the process”. Different companies have different naming conventions and slightly different ways of doing things… which is fine, so long as that “different” is still within the range of “stuff I’m okay with”, which should’ve stopped when the first thing the [associate?] gave me wasn’t a price table. At that point I should’ve interrupted him, stood up, literally why should I give a fuck about what they think of me it’s not like they’ll call my mother, they fail for one reason or another to present me the thing I want so the relationship is over. But no, because “I didn’t want to be a dick”[3], so I let him go on his spiel… wasting an hour of my life.

Opened HS thinking I’d get my dick wet then get back to work; didn’t have a day left when I was done. In this instance no one was there to exploit the weak point, so it probably could’ve gone a whole lot worse[4], but it still could’ve gone a whole lot better.

“Awareness”, other than the usual meaning, can primarily be augmented with some amount of other priorities. If you only have one thing to do and you’re actively trying to do something else that’s “temporary”, something not a major task and therefore lacks an “importance” value to it, “temporary” can become dangerously long. It’s clearer how important one thing is when there’s a handful (but not an overwhelming amount) of other things to serve as contrast. More rigidly, this means a schedule. Nothing is truly “scheduled” if there’s only one thing to do, but if multiple things have to be done within a certain timeframe then any “break” from one of them affects all of them.

In terms of training these two things videogames are probably terrible. Videogames will always automatically and without fail tell you whether something has or hasn’t happened. If you fire a bullet at an enemy you know if you did damage within a fraction of a second; if you fire a resume at an application you won’t know when you’ll know if it’s ever seen by human eyeballs again. Physics has instant hit detection but with people and ideas it exists sporadically. People even actively attempt to make it disappear by training themselves with ritual magic they call “politeness” and “professionalism”. Their actions generally reveal their intentions, but it can be difficult to see them if their words are marching the other way. In the end you have to decide where the cutoffs are, then follow your own instructions “blindly” until the event has passed. “Can’t bluff someone who isn’t paying attention”.

Upon browsing my old posts, it looks like I’ve written about this before on multiple occasions. At least the “decide for yourself beforehand” part. As for the other part, I have an ancient draft with a bunch of different ideas titled “What’s In A Name?”. Recently and unrelatedly, I’ve also collected in a txt a bunch of ideas under “what’s in a word”.

 

The mechanics of verbal deception is evidently my enduring topic.

 


[4] This “weak point” is probably how a lot of Free To Play games make their money.

[3] Read a bunch of ‘horror stories’ about commissioning amateur artists recently; this phrase was surprisingly common on a lot of them. One of them had an expected turnaround of about three months and let the thing go on for five years. This wasn’t some ten-dollar throwaway sketch either, it was a deposit of two grand USD.

I ended up getting my shit refunded from the gym the next morning. The internet has thankfully trained me to be pretty nitpicky stringent, but there are some really simple tricks I’ve noticed which completely undo my tendencies. Things which can be trained against but probably will always retain some power. Having to interact with people face-to-face is one. Lots of paperwork is another…

[2] I don’t have the numbers, but assuming what’s said about gyms right after New Year’s is true, I think it’s safe to say most people don’t actually get fitter after starting to go to the gym. Which is what you’d expect from people who aren’t going to the gym to get fit.

[1] For the curious, HS is a game which allows you to pose characters into sex positions.