Joseph 'zeruch' Arruda

@zeruch.bsky.social

artist, tech-dude, music nerd, wonk... This is not a single issue account, so buckle up. Art commission/licensing, public speaking, or other requests: joseph.arruda@gmail.com http://josepharruda.com

It's always been fine to say no. For years, the habit of sealioning online in particular, has pretty much meant I often give a single response on my position, and then tell them I'm not going to debate it further because I'm not interested in intellectual attrition by "stupid but relentless".

Deva Woodly@devawo.bsky.social · last wk.

It’s important to be clear that the truth value of a subject does not become debatable just because somebody wants to debate. Ether. Wandering wombs. Devils in red heads, the cursed left handed. Flat earth. Phrenology. Humors. Race science. “Debate me bro!” It’s fine for the answer to be: no.

I'm re-watching "Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters" which I find still entertaining, if also still weirdly stupid in a fun way. It's like a parody of the genre without awareness. It's camp and goofy an pretends to take itself seriously, which online enhances the better budget b-movie LOL of it all.

I have long since gone back to Firefox, but still have to use Chrome with some regularity, almost every time I do, it's regretful. It's constant habit of breaking extensions that actually make it useful, combined with it's total failure to understand "performance is a feature" really has doomed it.

the thing about having actual principles is that when a politician I respect does some stupid shit I can just be like, “that sucks, knock it off” instead of inventing an imaginary world where I’m forced to defend stupid shit for procedural 4d chess reasons