"Historical patterns have indicated that merchants, war and technology have been associated with different transitions within history. One of the things that has been associated with different historical changes is the military industry where it consists of merchants developing and selling technology to those who are waging war."

"TECHNOLOGY AND HISTORICAL PRECEDENTS" "Industrialisation, smartphones and A.I. and more examples of technologies that have been associated with historical seismic shifts especially in the last century with the acceleration of technology. Some people say, 'Look at the historical patterns of the past.'" "Technologies could be described as being associated with new historical precedents. According to what the kyoto philosophers said, they believed that war is something that defines history. It could be argued that they saw war as something associated with new historical precedents especially with the decline of usage of cavalry. In the case of technology, what are the new historical precedents associated with technology?" "If we look at the manufacturing of cars which was associated with a higher demand of roads, we now see larger connections between the rural and the urban areas. Ruralites were seen as the 'untouchables' by others including those who wanted to invade where they preferred conquering the urban areas. Now the rural people are now viewed as semi-urbanites." "Another case, is the industrialisation which was associated with lots of women being able to earn a salary where she is now able to afford clothing, food and housing. Whilst housing did become more expensive as the labour supply increased, the woman doesn't feel the inclination to get married in comparison to the pre-modern woman who married out of her desire to survive." "Another new historical precedent is the amount luxuary the masses have in comparison to today. In fact not even some of the wealthiest people during the pre-modern era had access to the luxuries of average person of today. Even the rural people have access to electronic fans." "There are much more historical precedents associated with technology that have occurred in the last century."

"The internet is a gallery."

"REALISM AND METAPHYSICS" "Much of the political analysis espoused by a lot of commentators is based upon an international-relations theory known as ‘realism’ which is about nation-states who seek the preservation of their ‘national interest’. You find commentators who whisper to themselves and publicly bloating that they believe that principles don’t really matter and they discuss their denial of metaphysics. They believe that if a nation-state does espouse principles, they conduct themselves where their interests align with their principles." "Whilst you do find nation-states who contradict themselves against the principles they espouse, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the principles that were espoused are false. Whilst the realist probably doesn’t care much about philosophical arguments and he prefers practical arguments (which is quite interesting where the philosophy of pragmatism values practical utility) yet it could be argued that realism contradicts pragmatism if it is argued that realism is actually a version of egoism." "The egoism of realism is implicit in the ‘national interest’ where it is interpreted that the realist seeks to maximise his selfishness of the nation-state. And if you have witnessed egoistic behaviour on the streets where the man feels urge to attack even when it is probable that the police plan to arrest him if he assaulted someone or when some women who engages in gossip against someone more beautiful than her whilst smiling in front of her beautiful competitor. That kind of behaviour is not unheard of in international relations. That kind of behaviour is actually very common in international relations (interestingly the female egoistic behaviour is quite similar to how countries conduct their diplomacy whilst the male egoistic behaviour is similar to how countries conduct their military affairs) where there is a difference between egoism and rationality." "Egoism and rationality isn’t the same thing where there are cases that where nation-states have done things that were not motivated by cold-calculation but a response to personal attacks. Saudi Arabia did cut ties with Canada after bin Salman felt insulted by canada. In the case of America where they sent a navy out of their supposed desire of protecting trade routes in response to the houthi strikes even when the ships still was flowing. It was until the Americans intervened is when majority of the ships diverted from the Suez Canal. In the case of iran, it demonstrates a desire of non-retaliation against zionist strikes out of their desire of survival yet this desire motivated the Zionists towards a more aggressive position towards iran." "There are a lot of cases where the nation-state preferred entertaining the ego over ‘cold pragmatism’, which shows the nation-state is not a cold actor but an actor that seeks to maximise his ego. The realist is no pragmatist. He is an individual who is concerned about his ego. He is someone who believes in the metaphysics of egoism where the statements uttered by nation-states are statements that are in accordance with egoism."

On the topic of ai don’t you think it’s possible that countries use bots into nostr platforms.

"Polytheism is a rejection of hierarchy."

"MASS EDUCATION AND INDUSTRIALISATION" “On the topic of education, there are people who say that, 'We need mass education to industrialise so we can get a few people in technical positions such as engineering etc.' What they don't realize is that they're assuming that theoretical knowledge is usually applied at job positions. In a lot of cases even in professional positions such as accounting and even programming, you usually don't really apply the theoretical knowledge you have that much. In fact many uni students have forgotten the technical knowledge they had before after they've been involved in jobs that haven't reinforced the remembrance of such technical knowledge. In other words, what you've ended up with an excess supply of 'qualified' people who don't have the practical skills and who don't what they did in even high school. Looking at the jobs of today, even people in elementary school are capable of doing the jobs that many adults are doing now. Even in the technical positions, a lot of employers do actually train their employees. Therefore the utility of mass worldly education is in question. Some traditionalists have compared modern schools to what prussia did where they believed modern schools are training camps of state-loyalists. Some others argue that modern schools are training children to become loyal workers. Yet in the case of modern schools this isn't even the case where teachers are attacked by the children and modern schools are actually training children to become researchers or professors rather than someone who works at engineering or some applied field where modern schools focuses a lot on the theoretical knowledge. So the argument that you need mass education to get into highly technical positions isn't entirely accurate. Now this isn't to say that 'theoretical knowledge is useless', you do need know basic arithmetic, literacy etc. Now some are saying, 'What do you suggest?'. There are multiples things that have been suggested by other people which are the following: make sure young children have basic level of education (basic arithmetic, basic literacy and basic general knowledge), privatize schools (Even in south korea, people pay high amount of tuitions fees meaning there are parents willing to pay their child's education), encourage a certificate system of different levels (which could involve exemptions of exams for those who left a specific level of schooling such as high school etc), change the perception towards universities from being associated with STEM jobs towards it being more associated with intellectualism and research, encourage and improve the reputation of trade schools.”

“For ppl who want artificial generalized intelligence, they often miss the generalized part. Even with ChatGPT and Deepseek you have to know what to ask. Or look up. Otherwise it won't figure out what you're saying. AI augments the limits of the user's existing capabilities.”

"The internet is an ever-changing gallery."

"You see a lot of rappers wearing chains, necklaces and rings where they want to show their "masculinity". Meanwhile muslim scholars believe that a man wearing jewellery with the exception of the silver ring, is a man who is imitating a woman."

So far the Egyptians (both the military and the civilian population) are resisting his threats. I think people underestimate Egypt a lot. Recently “trump” cut off foreign aid to all countries except to the zionist state and Egypt. The Americans are trying to bribe Egypt where they don’t want them attacking the zionist state. In the case of Jordan, I don’t think Jordan wants the Palestinians to come to Jordan, at the same time, are the Jordanians capable of resisting the Americans?

If you believe that fiat currency isn't valid money, you believe that engaging in interest transactions in fiat currency is not riba.

"THE CONVERGENCE BETWEEN FEMINISM AND WHITE NATIONALISM" "I came across a post claiming that a lot of white nationalists liked 'RFH'. I did wonder why especially when she was a radical feminist. Yet someone told me that a lot of white nationalists liked her critiques on non-white men. They disliked that she extended the critique upon white men. If you haven't noticed there are a lot of similarities between how white nationalists talk about non-white men and how feminists talk about men in general. 'Non-white men are violent'. 'Non-white men are rapists'. 'Non-white man oppress their women'. If you really notice what white nationalists really say, a lot of the racism they espouse is really directed at mainly non-white men. Even with the recent rise of racism against 'indians', majority of it is directed at 'indian' men and not at 'indian' women (I've seen cases of racism against 'indian' women). Even the 'they are taking our jobs' narrative is directed at non-white men who are engaging in cheap labour. In other words, it's not really surprising when you see feminists and white-nationalists collaborating with each other especially when they have similar views of non-white men."

"TECHNOLOGY AND PHENOMENOLOGY" "Have you ever wondered what you felt online isn't the same what you felt offline? I remember quite a while ago that I visited a reddit in dealing with pornographic addiction where there are people who like the experience of watching a specific pornographic fetish whilst in reality it's not something they INSTINCTIVELY even consider. The pornographic industry was one of the industry that went through massive technological changes where it shifted from CDs hidden away to now pornography being widespread where it's now difficult to hide it from children (who were given ipads by the lazy ones). The pornography industry is one of the first 'transhumanist' industry where it seeks to imitate the sexual pleasure of sexual intercourse where it uses algorithms and imagery to 'imitate' reality via technology. The pornographic industry attempts wants to turn the mechanical to become like an 'organism' where it uses the videos of young women having sex with another man. The man sees the woman twerking in a video. He's pleased with it. Yet when he saw it in real life, he was disgusted. Why is there such a gap between the two? One of the differences is that the man undergone two different experiences. One involved watching a video of a thing whilst the other involved watching the actual thing. The transhumanist tries to get the mechanical object to function 'similarly' to an organism yet it cannot become an organism, whilst the organism continues to function as usual. Meaning there is a barrier between the organism and the mechanical. In other words the interaction the mechanical that is 'similar' to the organism is not the same as the interaction with the real organism. Now what does this mean? One of the limits of technology is that it cannot transform the experience you have with technic (that imitates the real thing) as the same as the experience you have with the real thing. Even with the widespread use of pornography it has not impeded the male desire for a real women. What pornographic industries did with technology was that it tried to nudge the consumer to different experiences. 'Bored with one sexual fetish? Have you tried this one?'. In other words technology could be used to nudge human beings into interacting with other things which leads to different experiences."

On a podcast, Riaz Hussain talked about "generative A.I."(chatgtp etc) Riaz Hassan: "...people think it understands language but it really doesn't, it just understands statistics." https://image.nostr.build/77cc20273e4cb764117a5656bd84ba8a380a4dcd5b956bba7834f481c4fdfb47.png."

**Liberalism and Contracts** "One of the misunderstandings some people have of liberalism is that liberals believe in an arbitrary form of freedom similar to how anarchists view freedom. Hegel (who believed freedom was important) he believed that there was a contradiction between an arbitrary form of freedom and the law. Hegel believed that the modern state is the reconciliation between freedom and the law. Liberals adopted the hegelian view of the modern state whilst they pushed "social contract theory" which was promoted by John Locke. Liberals believe there is social contract between the citizens and the modern state where they believe the modern state provides them some forms of freedom in exchange for their affirmation of the modern state's monopoly to commit violence. Liberals understood that the modern state did prevent the freedoms of people to an extent. Quite interestingly that John Locke was no fan of atheists where he believed atheists aren't to be trusted to uphold an agreement. In other words, liberals do strongly believe in some forms of contracts. Now you might be wondering which liberal talks about contracts. Have you heard of a liberal talking about "consent"? If you've realised that the liberal believes in a contract between the citizens and the modern nation-state, you've probably realised that the major difference between the muslim and the liberal is over who is the legislator. The muslim believes god is the sole legislator. The liberal believes the modern state is the legislator."

a

Interesting site. Anyone interested?