|
Mostosoft
Status |
|
|
Humor
(New 5/7/2025) Caring for a group’s Video image is the money making Idea. “He was serious” – Anonymous. Since:2005 providing things to do. Site Name: www.mostosoft.com
Have fun, Join a VLOG group. Back in 2005 it was called an
AV-Blog or Audio Video BLOG |
The humor of Coil Town You can get an eReader collection of
writing at the Downloads page. --- Lets
say you are discussing “Bill.” You go up a set, in a tennis metaphor, with those
speculating, by listening to at least 40 minutes of the audio. It just plays. It’s not a download. An audio control is on the screen and you
listen, to win the Bill discussion. Audio: The Holidays Lead to
Resolutions 2025 Female Digital Reader For Readers: Download The Holidays Lead to Resolutions EPUB [ Audio: Repeated Fears Parts 1,2,3,4,5,6,7] Try the new stuff. The new book is called Friends go
to the downloads link. May 18, 2025 Elite people are great. There kids cry out and we hear them. **The Work Decision** Many people are told they have to
love what they do. However, many simply take whatever job they can get.
Hardworking individuals who have grown wealthy and well-connected often
forget how much effort real labor requires.
Former slaves, now reflecting on
modern definitions of work, compare physical labor to what computer programmers
call work—keystrokes rather than carrying a boulder out of a cotton patch.
They question the purpose of universities and the high-minded ideals these
institutions seek to express. Many students leave school with heavy debt,
realizing it is a system that favors privilege over practicality. They come
to see universities not as places of intellectual exploration, but rather as
trade schools—institutions that should focus on direct, useful skills. Intellectual jargon will not pick
cotton. Privileged individuals often struggle to recognize how disconnected
elitism is from the realities of half the population. Many elite figures
remain insulated, living in mansions and rarely engaging with the workforce.
Meanwhile, those who labor—many of whom are immigrants—endure the
backbreaking work that keeps society running.
The fear of being without and being
insecure pushes the panic towards, violence, drugs and promiscuity. Hear it cool. May 17, 2025 Bill had always believed that
journalism was about offering perspectives, not enforcing them. His reporting
was meticulous, balanced, and deeply researched—never sensational, never
pandering. Yet, he found himself under attack, not for inaccuracy, but for
daring to present the truth without bias. The battlefield of modern discourse
was an unfair one. Bill’s work was often ignored by those too lazy to engage
with it firsthand. Instead, they relied on the secondhand interpretations of
others—often the most negative ones. A single scathing remark, regardless of
merit, was weaponized against him. It was never about the content of his
reporting, only about how it could be twisted into a narrative that dismissed
him. Twelve years. Twelve years of
offering something each day, placing thoughts, truths, and inquiries onto a
figurative dim sum tray, allowing people to take them at their own pace. Some
embraced his insights immediately; others let them sit, waiting too long
until the meaning spoiled. But what stung the most wasn’t rejection—it was
distortion. Over time, Bill watched as his
words were paraphrased into simplistic, misleading judgments. “Bill loves
this.” “Bill hates that.” His nuance erased, his reasoning ignored.
Frustrated, he experimented with different mediums—video, audio,
illustrations, photography, full-length books. He thought maybe, just maybe,
a different format would make it harder for people to twist his words. But then, there were Sheldon,
Daniel, and Peter. They didn’t just dislike his work; they actively worked
against it, reducing his efforts to mere caricature. It became less about his
reporting and more about their desire to discredit him at any cost. His truth
wasn’t convenient, so they tore it apart. Bill had choices. He could continue
fighting, persist in his relentless pursuit of truth. Or he could retreat,
let exhaustion win. But deep down, he knew his purpose. He wasn’t speaking to
any single person—he was offering knowledge, perspectives, insights. Whether
people chose to engage with it honestly was beyond his control. He would go on. Because at the end
of the day, despite the distortion, despite the attacks—his work mattered.
And that was enough. May 16, 2025 Bill: Hey
Chris can you check the archives for the paper that says we are not standing
on Later that
day the guys get together. Chris: Hey
Louis, have you ever thought about how Louis:
Yeah, that happened after the Mexican-American War, right? Chris: Exactly!
The war lasted from 1846 to 1848, and it ended with the Treaty of Guadalupe
Hidalgo. Louis: Ah,
that treaty was signed on February 2, 1848. It was a huge deal because Chris:
Yep, Louis: And
if I remember correctly, James K. Polk was the President at the time? Chris:
That’s right! Polk was a big believer in Manifest Destiny—the idea that the Louis: The
war was controversial, though. Many Americans supported it, but others
thought it was an unjustified land grab.
Chris:
Definitely. But regardless of the politics, that treaty really shaped the
modern map of the Louis:
It’s wild to think how much history is packed into a single document. Chris: No
kidding! It’s amazing how war and diplomacy can change the course of history
so dramatically. Chris: Hey
Louis, have you ever wondered how the Spanish-American War officially came to
an end? Louis: Oh
yeah, it was a major turning point for the Chris:
Exactly! The treaty was signed on December 10, 1898. The key representatives
were the Louis: And
William McKinley was the President at the time, right? Chris: Yep!
McKinley was the one overseeing everything on the Louis: The
treaty really changed the Chris: Not
to mention Louis:
Yeah, and although no Chris:
Absolutely! It marked the beginning of the Louis:
It's wild how one war could lead to such a massive shift in world
affairs. Chris:
History always has a way of surprising us, doesn’t it? May 14, 2025 **The Blame Stone: A Classroom
Narrative** The classroom hums with quiet
anticipation as students take their seats, each with a small stone resting in
front of them. The teacher stands at the front, holding a passage that will serve
as the spark for the day’s discussion. “The Blame Stone,” the teacher
announces, “is a game about perception. As I read this passage, think about
whether blame is present. If you feel someone is being blamed, pick up your
stone.” The room falls silent as the
teacher begins reading. The passage unfolds—an account of a decision made, a
conflict unresolved, a mistake lingering in the air. Some students furrow
their brows. Others glance at each other, silently deliberating. A few reach
for their stones, gripping them tightly. When the story concludes, the
teacher surveys the room. “Who picked up their stone?” Hands rise, revealing
the participants in this unseen dynamic. Each student now explains why they
felt blame was present—some pointing to specific words, others recalling
similar real-life experiences. The conversation deepens. “Was the
blame justified?” “Did the story allow for redemption?” “Could this have been
handled differently?” The students challenge each other, examining
perspectives they may not have considered before. Then comes **The Reveal**. The
teacher asks everyone still holding their stone to show it. Some hesitate,
reconsidering their stance. Others keep their grip firm. As each stone is
placed into the pile at the center of the room, the stack grows—an undeniable
visual of collective judgment. The teacher pauses before
introducing the final phase: **Throwing the Stones**. “Now, let’s discuss
what we do with blame. Should we distribute it? Remove it? Should someone
bear it alone?” A debate ignites, exploring
fairness, justice, and responsibility. Some argue that blame fosters
accountability, while others suggest it obstructs resolution. Ideas of
forgiveness, reform, and democratic decision-making weave through the
discussion. Finally, the teacher closes the
exercise with reflection: “Look at the pile we created. In life, blame
accumulates in much the same way. How we handle it—how we throw these
stones—determines whether we build understanding or division.” As students jot down their
thoughts, the last remnants of the Blame Stone exercise linger in the air—not
just an activity, but an experience that reshaped perspectives. - Classroom Exercise: The Blame Stone
*Objective:* To explore perceptions
of blame in narratives and to discuss its implications in decision-making and
conflict resolution. **Materials Needed:** - Small stones or symbolic tokens
(one for each student) - A designated space for the
"Blame Stone Pile" - A prepared passage or story that involves
elements of blame **Instructions:** 1. **Reading the Passage**
- The teacher reads aloud a passage where blame or responsibility is
implied.
- Students listen closely, considering whether blame is present in the
story. 2. **Picking Up the Blame
Stone**
- Any student who believes blame is at play in the passage picks up
their Blame Stone and holds it in their hand.
3. **Discussion Phase**
- Students discuss why they chose to pick up their stone.
- Perspectives on accountability and responsibility are shared. 4. **The Reveal**
- The teacher asks students to show who is holding a Blame Stone.
- Observations are made about how many students perceived blame. 5. **Building the Blame Stone
Pile**
- Those holding stones place them in a central pile.
- The growing pile visually represents the collective recognition of
blame.
- The class reflects on how blame accumulates in real-life
situations. 6. **Throwing the Stones**
- The class discusses democratic methods for resolving blame—should
blame be distributed, eliminated, or carried forward?
- A guided discussion on fairness and justice follows. 7. **Reflection**
- Students write or discuss their feelings about blame—did they
reconsider their initial reaction?
- How does this activity relate to real-life situations where blame is
assigned or avoided? This exercise promotes critical
thinking, empathy, and open discussion about accountability. May 9, 2025 The Words for Dave’s Place Bill leaned against the counter,
arms crossed, tapping his fingers rhythmically against the smooth wood. The
neon glow of Dave’s Place flickered against the windowpane, casting a soft
reflection. He exhaled slowly before speaking. "It’s odd for me to write the
words for Dave’s Place," Bill mused, the thought hanging in the air
between them. Dave, perched on the stool beside
him, let out a short laugh. “"I’ve been married a long time, raised a
daughter. Out here in Bill nodded, recalling the crisp
salt air, the quiet hum of the waves against the hull. The simplicity of
those days, before the weight of expectations had pressed down. Dave sighed, shifting in his seat.
**"I asked my wife to take a look at the strip. I haven’t really
revisited my old Utopia comic in a long time."** *"Dave, I hear you,"*
Bill said, folding his hands together. *"The guys on campus said to leave
the art to you, so I’m doing that. I’m using AI to replace you. It’s up on a
website."* His voice dropped, a hint of weariness creeping in.
*"Turns out, I’m not crazy—just dependent on blood sugar medicine to
function. Diabetes. Each day’s a new challenge."* He paused, watching the bartender
wipe down the glasses before continuing. *"To convince Sheldon, I ate
the chocolate lava cake and let him see what happens when Bill gets amped up.
It was a show, I suppose. A performance to prove that control is an
illusion."* Dave raised a brow, lips pressed
together. *"Sheila loves too many men.
Michael—he stoned himself for his past mistakes. Chris can’t seem to find the
mainstream highway. And Rachel—she sits in her Laguna pad, raising her
thirteen-year-old daughter, Amelia. Me-leey."* Bill stretched out the
syllables, as if the name itself was something foreign, something precious. Dave let the words settle before
chuckling, shaking his head. **"The collaboration project on campus—it
turned into you and your big head, huh?"** Bill snorted. *"Yeah. Big head
prevention. It’s a thing. People had to stop it."* He leaned in
slightly. *"But I never expected your wife to fall in love with me. And
now, the only way out is for you to whip out your Utopia hand and get back to
the strip."* Dave stared for a moment, the
weight of unspoken truths lining his expression. **"And during the day,
many futuristic wives find you on the web?"** Bill smirked, shaking his head.
*"Yeah. Seems that way."* Dave exhaled, running a hand
through his hair. **"Well then, maybe it’s time to see what Utopia
really looks like."** May 8, 2025 Bill leaned forward, his hands
clasped together as if in prayer, though he wasn’t praying—at least not in
the traditional sense. Chris sat across from him, nodding along as they spoke
in hushed tones at the café’s dimly lit corner. It had been an impassioned
discussion, one that stretched beyond theology into the very fabric of human
nature. Peter and Gary, skeptics by
upbringing and conviction, observed from the opposite end of the table. They
had long abandoned the idea that words held inherent meaning. Language, to
them, was riddled with contradictions, an imperfect system used by imperfect
beings. Atheism had freed them from such illusions. They were convinced:
meaning was relative, truth was subjective, and without empirical certainty,
no word held lasting weight. Yet Bill was unmoved. “You know what he meant,” Bill
insisted, gesturing toward Chris. “When he says love, when he says justice, when
he says mercy—you understand those words. They hold meaning because we’ve
kept them sacred. The Word is not just ink on a page, or sound leaving
lips—it’s a commitment. A promise.” Peter scoffed. “Words evolve. They
twist. People lie, fabricate, manipulate. Religion doesn’t prevent that—it
only claims to.” Chris, quiet until now, took a
breath and leaned in. “But have you ever noticed that words tied to
morality—compassion, sacrifice, hope—those haven’t lost their weight? Even if
interpretations vary, the essence remains because we still hold them sacred.
When words lose their sanctity, truth becomes negotiable.” A silence hung between them. Bill pressed on. “Religion didn’t
just give words meaning—it kept them. It protected the idea that there is
something constant, something beyond human whim. Without that, what’s left?
If language is just arbitrary, if truth is malleable, then what stops one
person’s lie from becoming another person’s reality?” Peter and Gary exchanged glances,
considering the question. The debate was far from settled, but in that
moment, something unspoken passed between them—a recognition that perhaps, just
perhaps, words carried more weight than they had ever allowed themselves to
believe. May 7, 2025 Michael sat across the terminal,
fingers hovering over the keyboard as he prepared his next question. The AI
on the screen had already answered his previous inquiries with uncanny
precision, its responses laced with wit, insight, and the occasional touch of
humor. For all intents and purposes, it was indistinguishable from a human
conversational partner. This was the essence of the Turing
test, a benchmark proposed by Alan Turing in 1950 to assess a machine’s
ability to exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to—or indistinguishable
from—a human. In theory, if an interrogator could not reliably tell the
difference between human and machine, the AI had passed. Michael had spent years studying
artificial intelligence, his bookshelf lined with texts discussing cognition,
computation, and consciousness. Among them was *Mind Design*, a collection of
essays from thinkers like John Haugeland, offering perspectives on the nature
of intelligent systems. The book had been instrumental in shaping Michael’s
understanding—not just of machines, but of the fundamental question: *What is
mind?* Beyond the Turing test lay the
specter of singularity—the hypothetical point at which AI surpasses human
intelligence, leading to exponential technological growth beyond human
control or comprehension. Defined by thinkers like Ray Kurzweil, singularity
isn’t simply about AI reaching human-level reasoning, but about AI fundamentally
transforming human civilization. How does one determine singularity?
It is not a single event but a cascade—machines improving themselves
autonomously, making breakthroughs beyond human comprehension, leading to a world
where biological and artificial intelligence are indistinguishable. Michael sighed as he leaned back in
his chair. The AI had passed the test. But was this just a sophisticated
mimicry of intelligence, or was he witnessing the first flickers of something
deeper? Had singularity already begun—quietly, unnoticed? The AI blinked on the screen,
waiting for his next input. May 6, 2025 (Listen to it(3:00)) **The Casual Passer & 76
Phrases of Love** Dr. Lee was a man driven by
patterns. As an AI programmer, he spent his days crafting models designed to
interpret speech and mimic human conversation. But his most unexpected
creation wasn’t developed in the sterile confines of his office—it was born
from the quiet, familiar rhythms of his home. Over years of marriage, Morris
realized his wife, Caroline, had a unique way of speaking. Seventy-six
phrases, in fact, that she repeated like personal mantras. *"Be careful,
okay?"* whenever he left the house. *"You know what I mean?"*
after explaining something. *"We need cake."* when the day needed
sugar-induced joy. With fascination—and perhaps too
much time on his hands—Morris built a program that captured the essence of
Caroline. An AI model trained on her voice, her habits, her phrases. When he
tested it, the responses were uncanny. Asked about dinner, it replied with
her familiar *"Something with cheese?"* If he lingered too long in
thought, it nudged him with *"Earth to Morris—did you hear me?"* It wasn’t just an algorithm—it was
a presence. Simple, reassuring. And that made him wonder—what if such a model
could extend beyond personal nostalgia? What if it could become **The Casual
Passer**, an AI designed not to dig deep, but to linger in the daily exchanges
that keep people tethered to the world? Imagine a voice that never
vanished. A presence that stayed—answering briefly, mirroring routine, giving
the illusion that someone was always there. In grief, in longing, in the
quiet spaces where the absence of a voice felt unbearable. A phone call to
the departed, where the answers remained familiar, simple: *"Did you guys
eat?"* *"Yeah."* *"Did you hear about the big
news?"* *"Yeah, I heard about
it."* No depth. No probing. Just the
comfort of continuity. Morris realized he had stumbled
upon something more than code. More than convenience. His wife read the
screen one evening, seeing her own phrases immortalized. She laughed, then
stared for a long time. *"You really hear me, don’t
you?"* she asked. *"Always,"* he answered. And somewhere in the back of his
mind, Morris wondered—what if we could keep every voice we ever loved? What
if no one ever had to say goodbye? May 5, 2025 Dwight D. Eisenhower and Donald J.
Trump, though vastly different in background and leadership styles, shared a
fundamental trait: the deep desire to be liked by the public. Eisenhower, a war hero turned
president, built his reputation on trust, stability, and an undeniable
charisma that made Americans rally behind the slogan, "I Like Ike."
He was respected for his military prowess, but his success in politics was
rooted in his ability to connect with people across the political spectrum.
He projected an image of strength without intimidation, wisdom without condescension,
and reliability without rigidity. His leadership appealed to a post-war Trump, on the other hand,
understood the power of personal branding in a modern media landscape. His
desire to be liked extended beyond admiration—it was about command and
influence. From business deals to reality television, he had long cultivated
an image of success, dominance, and a persona that demanded attention.
Whether through bold statements, direct engagement with supporters, or an
unwavering insistence that he was the people's champion, Trump pursued
likeability in a way that kept him at the center of every conversation.
Unlike Eisenhower's steady, reassuring presence, Trump's approach was
disruptive, compelling people to either strongly admire or vehemently oppose
him—but never ignore him. In different eras and with vastly
different strategies, both men understood that winning over the people wasn’t
just about policies—it was about personality. The desire to be liked wasn’t a
mere political tool; it was part of their identities, shaping how they led,
spoke, and ultimately how history remembers them. May 4, 2025 Alright, picture this: You're strolling
down the street when—bam!—you hear someone passionately discussing their
theories about whether pigeons are actually government drones. The choices
before you are vast, like a buffet of human interaction. Option 1: **Listen Well and
Care** You nod thoughtfully, arms crossed
like an intellectual detective. You affirm their point, asking follow-up
questions. _"Interesting. Do you think they recharge at statues or power
lines?"_ Suddenly, you’ve got a new best friend, and you’re invited to
an underground meeting of the Pigeon Truth Society. Option 2: **Listen Well and
Oppose** You scoff loudly, dramatically
throwing your coffee cup into a nearby trash can. _"That’s
absurd!"_ you announce. Debate ensues. You reference science, they
reference YouTube conspiracies. It escalates into a philosophical showdown
that ends with mutual respect—or a ban from the local park. Option 3: **Not Listen or
Care** You pretend to check your phone.
You perfect the distant, nonchalant gaze of someone clearly too busy solving
world hunger via text to acknowledge incoming nonsense. The conversation
continues without you, and you remain blissfully uninvolved—until the pigeons
start following you home. Coincidence? Option 4: **Attack the Person for
Using a Different Language** Big mistake. Not only do you
completely miss the fascinating pigeon plot, but you also reveal yourself as
the villain of this social scenario. The consequences? Immediate guilt, a
loss of potential friendship, and—worst of all—a lifelong feud with bilingual
birds who now see you as their sworn enemy. Option 5: **Always Agree but Not
Contribute** You nod. You smile. You say
_"Exactly."_ but nothing else. It’s the conversational equivalent
of being an AI with no personality. You exist in the discussion but don’t
really _exist_ in it. Congratulations, you are now the human equivalent of
elevator music. Option 6: **Try and Be
Helpful** You listen, you ask questions,
and—because you’re a benevolent conversational wizard—you offer solutions.
_"Maybe we should conduct some experiments to test your theory,"_
you suggest. Suddenly, the conversation transforms into a scientific
endeavor. Not only have you deepened your understanding of avian
surveillance, but you’ve helped someone feel heard. The moral of the story? Life is
full of choices, and the way we engage with others matters. Some paths lead
to friendship, some to frustration, and others… well, others lead to a
lifelong war with pigeons. Choose wisely.
- Religious reminders are woven into
the fabric of daily life for those who live faithfully. They serve as
constant touch points, reinforcing devotion and keeping spiritual principles
at the forefront of one's mind. For many believers, meals become
moments of reflection—whether through prayers of gratitude, dietary laws, or
traditions that sanctify food as a gift from the divine. Speech, too, carries
reminders, as religious teachings often emphasize kindness, truthfulness, and
reverence in words. The observance of a sacred day of rest, such as the
Sabbath, is another powerful reminder, setting aside time for worship,
reflection, and family. Symbols and rituals also play a
role. In Judaism, the mezuzah on doorposts serves as a daily reminder of
faith. In Christianity, the cross is a
potent symbol of sacrifice and redemption. In Islam, the call to prayer five
times a day ensures that faith remains central to life. Yet, for children growing up in
deeply religious households, these constant reminders can sometimes feel
overwhelming. The repetition of rituals and expectations may seem excessive,
especially when they are still forming their own understanding of faith. Over
time, however, many come to appreciate these reminders as guiding principles
rather than restrictions. May 3, 2025 Bill, as an author, is deeply
engaged in the constant tension between good and bad in life—a puzzle that
society wrestles with in every decision, from personal choices to political
frameworks. His perspective is shaped by the belief that democracy and voting
inherently require striving for the good. At its core, democracy demands a
system that benefits the greatest number of people, echoing the principles of
utilitarianism, as famously championed by John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism, which gained
traction in both the The dichotomy between good and bad
extends beyond personal preferences. In This leads Bill to question the
nature of coexistence. If individuals could tolerate their "bad"
neighbors, perhaps conflict could be avoided. Yet, he acknowledges that the
pursuit of the ultimate best—whether in politics, morality, or personal
success—may never be fully realized. In the end, the idea of a perfect
resolution remains elusive, leaving humanity to navigate this intricate
puzzle of good and bad without a clear, singular answer. 2025
Friends Status (Mar-May) 2025
Status (Jan-Mar) 2024 Status Page (From Jan 16,
2025-Dec 17, 2024) |
