※ Kora

※ Kora

@koragendum.bsky.social

stopping by this profile page / you’ve stopped to read a verse / i hope it brings a small delight / despite the fact it’s terse (and should you stay a moment more / in hopes of killing time / i wrote this stanza just for you / and even made it rhyme)

41 followers70 following51 posts

this reminds me of something that comes up in discussions about AI and art: an essential or defining characteristic of art is decision-making; the more decisions there are to be made, the more opportunity there is to create art. the devil is in the details, and art has much more depth when...

※ Kora@koragendum.bsky.social

realization: one reason i don’t like contemporary AI: i’ve seen people describe agents as “like having a junior dev at your beck and call”. but i don’t want a junior dev! i don’t want anyone else to write any part of my program – i want to write all of it myself!

...choices are made at every level: high-level ideas or concept, implementation choices, and intentionality in the subtleties of execution (whether that intentionality is consciously made in the moment or is in past practice). and art is further enhanced when these choices are made in concert.

realization: one reason i don’t like contemporary AI: i’ve seen people describe agents as “like having a junior dev at your beck and call”. but i don’t want a junior dev! i don’t want anyone else to write any part of my program – i want to write all of it myself!

i think there’s a deep divergence between [people who want a thing and are willing to write a program because a computer is a way to do that thing] and [people who enjoy systematizing their ideas/knowledge and writing it out the way they’d like]. i am one of the latter.

this sets aside enjoying puzzles, wanting to understand a thing entirely or exactly, the pleasure of watching a machine work, and the satisfaction of making a system do a thing, which might be correlated but i think are separable.

※ Kora reposted

Replying to @fullmoon.id

My reason for doing this is very similar to why rubber duck debugging works so well: the act of saying something in one's own words (or to type it out with one's own fingers) forces one to make a deeper level of mental contact with it than we normally would and greatly improves accuracy/quality

※ Kora reposted

I have been more or less silent on the dumpster fire formerly known as Twitter, and even though the algorithm will prevent anyone from seeing it, I felt this needed to be said...

Very excited to open day two with @affinelytyped.bsky.social!

RustNL@rustnl.bsky.social

** RustWeek Speakers Announced! ** Check out the selected speakers and talks here: 2026.rustweek.org/blog/2026-02... Thanks to everyone who submitted to our CFP! #rust #rustweek2026

Von Neumann said, per Fermi’s word, that “four params can fit an elephant,” elephant! How absurd, and there he didn’t quit: “with five I’ll make them wiggle their trunk,” which shows to great effect: with skill, an appendage is easy to rouse and even make erect.

※ Kora reposted

Had an intriguing editorial discussion recently: how did people in the past talk about 'minutes' when they didn't have watches or standardised times? How does that affect your thinking? Come down an Elizabethan/Jacobean rabbit hole with me. 1/

Phrases like “biological male who identifies as a woman” drive me up a wall. If by “biological male” you mean “assigned male at birth”, say that instead of pretending to be objective. Biology is not uniaxial, not discrete, and not immutable, and in most or all aspects a transfemme person may be...

View full thread

...delegitimizing. We don’t say things like “they identify as (blood) type AB+”; we simply say “they are type AB+” because it is true, and we accept report of it on good faith. We don’t even say “identifies as” for obviously self-chosen identities (who on earth says “they identify as an...

...accountant”) because... why would we bother? [I realize “identifies as” is used because there is contention whether sex or gender are inherent, immutable, chosen, or self-chosen; my point is that the phrase is unsubtly the expression of an opinion on the ultimate issue.]

Phrases like “biological male who identifies as a woman” drive me up a wall. If by “biological male” you mean “assigned male at birth”, say that instead of pretending to be objective. Biology is not uniaxial, not discrete, and not immutable, and in most or all aspects a transfemme person may be...

...biologically categorized female rather than male by all reasonable standards. (Frankly, this ought to be neither here nor there; there are so few aspects of life where sexually dimorphic biology actually warrants differentiated treatment.) And “identifies as” is overtly patronizing and...

“Perhaps the whole root of our trouble, the human trouble, is that we will sacrifice all the beauty of our lives, will imprison ourselves in totems, taboos, [icons, races, ...], armies, flags, nations, in order to deny the fact of death, which is the only fact we have.”

View full thread

...but exist side by side in spite of each other. We can embrace and cultivate some aspects of our nature while trying to eliminate others, and although there may be some ultimate dilemma – if they come both part and parcel, then the ultimate and only question is existence versus nonexistence, ...

...in which case you can’t have one without the other – but I doubt we’ll ever be confronted with that question (it only exists in the limit, as it were). Put another way, I don’t think wanting contradictory things is contradictory, which for the longest time was my automatic, unconscious judgment.)

“Perhaps the whole root of our trouble, the human trouble, is that we will sacrifice all the beauty of our lives, will imprison ourselves in totems, taboos, [icons, races, ...], armies, flags, nations, in order to deny the fact of death, which is the only fact we have.”

View full thread

(After rereading what I just wrote, I realize I left the linking idea unspoken – what prompted the comment about acceptance and disavowal was the reality of death. Can we both love it and hate it, fear it and embrace it, attempt to overcome it without running from it?)

(And I think this extends pretty naturally to other aspects of the human condition. Can we cherish our humanity, cultivate our humanity, while also wanting to kill our humanity? I somehow think this is possible. Good things and evil things, eudaimonoa and suffering, don’t cancel each other out, ...

“Perhaps the whole root of our trouble, the human trouble, is that we will sacrifice all the beauty of our lives, will imprison ourselves in totems, taboos, [icons, races, ...], armies, flags, nations, in order to deny the fact of death, which is the only fact we have.”

View full thread

You can both adore and defend the quality of being human and acknowledge the circumstances of our existence while also fighting against them, insistent that the universe bend to the consciousness that inhabits it.

“Perhaps the whole root of our trouble, the human trouble, is that we will sacrifice all the beauty of our lives, will imprison ourselves in totems, taboos, [icons, races, ...], armies, flags, nations, in order to deny the fact of death, which is the only fact we have.”

View full thread

About many things in life, I’m beginning to simultaneously feel both acceptance (or at least realize the foundational importance of acceptance) and disavowal, both appreciation and indignation or aspiration, which ought to be contradictory but in fact coëxist complimentarily.

“Perhaps the whole root of our trouble, the human trouble, is that we will sacrifice all the beauty of our lives, will imprison ourselves in totems, taboos, [icons, races, ...], armies, flags, nations, in order to deny the fact of death, which is the only fact we have.”

[1/2] “Part of a teacher’s job—certainly in the humanities, but even in professional fields like business—is to help students break out of their prisons, at least for an hour, so they can see and enhance the beauty of their own minds.

You are up to date.