The dog found a nest of 'em in the backyard once. She started digging at the hole then stuck her nose in it. Got rewarded with a snoutful of bees for the effort.

Pooch looked like a happy hamster for a few days but recovered ok. She stopped rooting around after that though!

Can you be sentient without first being concious? If not, and I’d argue not, then in speaking of sentience we are also necessarily speaking of conciousness.

Your assertion that sentience is perception of environment is a category error. You’ve mistaken casually identifying sentience in others with sentience itself.

I’ve fetched the definitions for all three terms and quoted them below.

Merriam-Webster

consciousness noun 1 a: the quality or state of being aware especially of something within oneself b: the state or fact of being conscious of an external object, state, or fact c: awareness especially: concern for some social or political cause

The organization aims to raise the political consciousness of teenagers. 2: the state of being characterized by sensation, emotion, volition, and thought : mind 3: the totality of conscious states of an individual 4 : the normal state of conscious life regained consciousness 5 : the upper level of mental life of which the person is aware as contrasted with unconscious processes

sentience noun 1: a sentient quality or state 2: feeling or sensation as distinguished from perception and thought

by extension…

sentient adjective 1: capable of sensing or feeling : conscious of or responsive to the sensations of seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, or smelling 2: aware 3: finely sensitive in perception or feeling

sapient adjective : possessing or expressing great sagacity

Sentience is the capacity of sensing or feeling. That’s an important distinction.

how is sense and reaction an indicator such a system carries within it a theory of mind?

I don’t know and I’m not saying it is.

Then I fail to see the point or intention of your first comment. How are your semantics meant to further the discussion or clarify the reader’s thinking?

we do not know what it is we are talking about.

Do we not? That’s precisely why it’s important to make that difference. Sentience is relatively easy to define and can be assigned with a lot of confidence whereas sapience isn’t and can’t.

If sentience here is taken literally to mean “physical sense ability” in the broadest sense then, yeah, sure. That’s not helpful though. It’s too reductive to be relevant to the topic at hand. Within philosophy of mind sentience is often referring to the ability or capacity for feeling (as in experience (joy, grief, etc)). It’s a complex quality of some thinking minds and may well be a spectrum of ability whose boundaries are difficult to define.

[…] can sentience exist apart from perception of environment? I’d say it must.

Wait, really? Can you give several examples of this, then?

A person suffering from pseudocoma or “locked-in syndrome” is as close a real-world approximation I can think of. With that as a starting point we can arrive at my conclusion via thought experiment and create as many examples as you’d like.

Think of a brain in a vat. Maybe it’s your brain. You’re awake but you have no sensory input and, to your knowledge, no way of asserting your existence to the outside world.

It’s a hellish thought. It demonstrates the importance of recognizing that one self’s connection to the external is not equivelant with the self though.

Now digitize that mind. We now have an artificial intelligence. Disembodied. No sense organs to speak of. A thinking mind alone in a void.

Some variations on the Chinese Room demonstrate how thick a quagmire this discussion can be

For example, the chance for something to become sentient is never increased by a lack of stimuli, right?

Agreed! 😄

My point is not that an organism might find an evolutionary niche which requires no sense organs and yet develop sentience (though the universe is so vast that improbable is not impossible).

My point is that our measures and models cannot be the thing itself. Reponse to stimuli as you describe are mere measures we use to categorize minds based on our current models. Even if we believe our means are valid and useful and provide access to some level of truth: we cannot reasonably claim they allow total surety.

I’ve separated them purposefully because I think there’s an important semantic distinction. The boredom you describe is driven by disinterest due to neurochemical dysfunction.

That’s distinct from boredom as a state of mind which assumes or asserts that curiosity, entertainment, etc, are presented and consumed. There is not necessarily a chemical imbalance imposing this state on the mind.

If you like, you could reword the sentiment as; only boring people are bored (and those with depression are not necessarily boring).

I’ve considered that phrasing previously but found it diminishes the concept.

The reason this is attracting flame is mostly that you’ve included assertions in your question.

There is no “right” way to experience art, people with ADHD are not a monolith, and ADHD is symptomatically diverse.

I believe the heart of your question, if presented in good faith, is “do people who experience movies differently than I do still enjoy movies?” and the only correct answer is: it depends on the person.

It has nothing to do with money. This is something people will struggle with sans agriculture and in a perfect gift economy utopia.

Only boring people are bored (and depression is not boredom).

https://elv.sh/

The tour is quite comprehensive.

I’m the other one!

Not that I have any say in the matter but I think this kind of question is fine for the selfhost community. It’s still in the spirit of “how to do xyz with my own hardware / less dependence on a third party”.

The other suggestions have covered my own. I did want to add that good resources for finding these kinds of tools are often called Awesome lists. Awesome self-hosted. Awesome CLI. Awesome social media. You get it. I’m not sure where the trend started but I stumbled on them after getting fed up with the likes of Slashdot and AlternativeTo.

They’re usually a community-maintained git repo on one of the major platforms. This list has quite a few hits for “YouTube”, for instance: https://github.com/krzemienski/awesome-video

I know this feeling. I’m not a doctor and I can’t offer a thorough explanation. I am prompted to share my experience though in the hope that you find it helpful.

For a long time I was focused on forcing the yawn or otherwise putting effort into it as you described. What I realized was that the missing ingredient was the depth of my breath. My body is trying to relax, initiated a semi-autonomous routine to do that, and I’m interrupting it.

When I’m too tense I have trouble yawning. If that’s happening the only sure way I’ve found to satisfy the yawn is to drop my shoulders, breathe from my stomach first, and let the yawn take over. Sometimes the jaw still ends up pushing open quite wide. Sometimes not. The key is that I’m not trying to control it either way.

Now it feels as odd to force my own yawn as it does to overthink my own breathing. The only viable solution seems to be giving up on control over it and letting my body go on autopilot instead.

Why’d you stop?

This assigns too much legitimacy to the position. The working class are not capitalists because we have no capital with which to commit legal theft through property law or pay thugs to enforce those laws with violence.

The working class under capitalism are beholden to systems they often do not understand, cannot exercise agency within, and are actively stymied from prospering under.

Capitalism dehumanizes even those who support it. Those who support it are conditioned to reflexively demonize alternative systems. To rise above this culturally ingrained propaganda and advocate for alternatives requires seeing capitalism for what it is.

Alternative systems are to them what the bogeyman is to children.

BTRFS + Snapper makes automating system snapshots and updates so care-free that it almost feels wrong. 😅

With proper partitioning and backup strategies deployed during setup an admin could inexorably hose the OS and it wouldn’t be a big deal. I can count on one hand the amount of times it’s made sense to nuke a Linux machine. None of those incidents required I redeploy from scratch. Just re-install, log in, and all the data is exactly where it ought to be.

I’ve reguarly had to re-install Windows machines from scratch as if they were some eldritch beast whose rage was only calmed after the ritual sacrifice was complete.

I’m a bit late to the party. I was a network admin in another life and believe I can help out. I’ve skimmed existing conversations but not fully poured over them.

That said: I’d print the routing tables for the switches and firewall and review them. Considering firewall rules is sensible but it seems you’ve already done quite a bit of investigation there. It sounds like there is some vlan configuration missing. Like one of the switches doesn’t have the vlan interface defined or named in its vlan database.

Review the routing tables and confirm who owns each vlan and what those networks are aware of. Also toggle your logging options on so you can review them and test with more info than pass/fail.

It very well may be a OPNsense firewall knowledge thing but I’m not convinced. If you’re still working on this tomorrow I’d be happy to help root-cause the problem and fill in the gaps between RTFM and old YouTube videos. :)

The relaxed position of mammalian eyelids leaves them open. Muscles must contract for the eyes to be shut. Dead creatures cannot contract their muscles so their eyes remain open after they die.

You cannot shut their eyes for them by closing their eyes with your hand. Morticians place contacts in cadaver’s eyes while preparing the body for a wake. Those contacts grip the inside of the eyelids so that they remain closed.

This is why some cultures have funerary traditions in which objects are placed over the eyes.

TL;DR: you and your loved ones won’t close their eyes when they die.

One of the reasons is flow control. You want to be able to move a lot of water slowly until it’s where you want it. Many small inlets distributed along the surface is a simple and effective method. I’m sure achieving the design you’re speculating on is possible but it would be more complex and expensive for that design to reliably achieve similar goals/metrics.

Permeable pavements like pervious concrete and porous asphalt allow some of what you’re interested in without requiring a reinvention of the wheel.

I’ve tried a few extracts. Blending with other flavors they’re pretty good. Solo is hit or miss. Real vanilla bean extract is excellent (if one likes vanilla) but ones found on the same store shelf which use vanillin are… Unpleasant.

I’ve had some success using bitters as well. Angostura makes an orange bitters that mixes well with the oooflavors cream soda flavoring. It’s like a creamsicle’s older brother turned into a fizzy water. That one gets a nice lift from a bit of honey or agave but doesn’t require it.

Check out One On One Flavors. They sell water soluble and oil soluble flavors.

A few years ago I bought a variety of the water soluble flavors for making flavored sparkling water at home. I’ve enjoyed most of my choices and the few I don’t care for are still interesting (and useful for cocktail experiments).

Some of the cola flavorings are fine as-is. Some of them rely on a bit of sweetness to taste like they should.

Am I correct in understand your central question is “what’s the practical impact”?

If so then I think it’s a good theme for conversation. I’ve seen suggestions that “death of the artist” applies here. I’ve also seen “software is apolitical” and similar. While these are valid discussions in their own right: they miss the point.

Using anything created by people whose public speech is actively and consistently attempting to rhetorically enhance their political views implies acceptance or endorsement of those views. It’s a kind of identity politics not dissimilar in concept from brand identity.

What is and is not culturally acceptable is (in part) determined by norms established via association with such identities and the credibility-enhancing displays affirming those associations.

Using Omarchy suggests DHH’s political views are acceptable. It doesn’t matter how much creedance one gives this idea or how much impact it may have. The “Nazi dinner party” principal applies regardless.