Thank you. My first read is it does not seem likely to refer to skills one can acquire (neither through formal western school e.g. medical school nor apprenticeship e.g. acupuncture or informal medical training). It does seem like either route would (could) pre dispose one to recognize or be open to the grace. But it reads like a grace bestowed selectively (from a human view point perhaps would look “randomly”) to select individuals for the good of the community. Just thinking about it past the first layer and it would take tremendous wisdom and prudence for someone to have such a grace and use it for the good it is - but not allow its use to lead one into pride or frustration or lend ones actions to be used to put God to the test. There are some graces I think I am glad I do not seem to possess.

Great question. What reference are you using? I have not. But I am interested now

These are great questions. Hopefully someone with actual expertise will answer. I am under the impression that the vesicles from ER and golgi are not usually different molecules but rather are parts of the ER or golgi that are “pinched off” with the protein at the final step; and that there are coat proteins that do tell the vesicle where to fuse or not. The vesicles can be as simple as a micro environment to keep the protein from getting degraded or “read” and acted upon in transit. Especially if they are designed to leave the cell without being read or intercepted?

Can you elaborate?

Thank you. What are your thoughts on Maple versus other AI? Also if you don’t mind me asking, are there any text to speech programs or apps that you trust to be private? Things that would allow you to submit a pdf and have it read ?

I would be interested in what you think of Antinet. The author was opinionated on 1) analog only and 2) fidelity to Luhmen. Specifically he took issue with / deviated from much of what was in “how to take great notes”. However I did find “great notes” to have an interesting premise- that writing and thinking and learning are intertwined / reinforcing and orientation to writing ensures thinking and learning. For me this *may* be the real key to analog versus digital- digital is so easy to collect there is no refinement into my own thoughts and words for much of it hence the collector (hoarder) takes over. Handwriting may have neurological benefits - but even just fatigue makes distillation mandatory.

I sort of understand that the original was maintained with extensive interlinking but I think that can only work when you have intimate familiarity with the system, and even then proponents seem to gravitate towards index cards for just that more freedom over bounded journals in terms of establishing the links and working through them. But it would have to be something you worked with daily in order to keep up and maintain the extensive linking. I think, digital linking and cross linking is a lot easier, but I think that sometimes for me, perhaps, always, leads to overlining and note “ collecting” rather than effective utility.
It would be much harder to have to open up three or four journals, even if entries were linked through some sort of marginal notes, then it is to pull out 10 or 15 index cards and sort them on a desk and rearrange them. But what you are describing is more of a hybrid were you trying to get the best of both worlds.

Did you find obsodian superior to analog or never tried analog ? There is a book “antinet” that is adamant about analog systems. I think there is appeal to analog but never committed to a true one as it becomes unwieldy.

No you are not. If you put ‘effeminate cringe’ in telepod 1 and ‘absurd horror’ in telepod 2 what do you call what comes out of telepod 3? Because this is what it might look like.

Well for what it’s worth - you (among many) that helped me get from sub-zero to say Mazlow level 2.
Not competent in any way to help your struggle.
But thank you for the education.

Agreed. “To be fair” is good advice, it seems easy to read into this tweet different things than he actually wrote. That is a bit of injustice, no?

If Saylor or any company or any person can introduce counter party risk into the bitcoin “protocol”, just by buying bitcoin, then would that not render bitcoin by definition futile?

(He did not suggest buy MSTR; he did not suggest “buy bitcoin and custody it the way MSTR does if you think the world order is breaking down”, and he did not affirm, at least here, that he himself believes the world order is breaking down. I have no idea if he really thinks it is outside of this.)