/edu/ - Education

I can't speak of Pol Pot's "achievements" and whether he's worth defending or not, but Michael Vickery is legit and anticommunists have certainly inflated the death toll while trying to whitewash the damage they themselves caused in Indochina.

I'm also interested in this

>>6522
Thank you

>>6524
Dead board

bumping on /edu/, maybe it will get more responses here

>>6488
Do this. Block all those damn sites and seriously consider deleting them. You can stay in touch with your friends by texting, so they fullfil no real use case

Literally, OP, stop using them. Start making effort posts, reading, and even blogging. I have a gemini capsule and it allows me to write posts thousands and thousands of characters long and it helps me to focus and hone my skills as far as logic and my attention span goes.

>>6485
Stop using social media, even youtube is a attention span killer. Also, reading and WRITING are good trainers for you attention spam, not to sound too new age but meditation also works. If you can learn to spend a few minutes doing nothing, you can learn to spend a few minutes doing something full focus.

Here are some things I have done to help train my attention span:

I deleted my facebook once and for all.
I kept my instagram to share memes and cat pics.
And I started writing in a journal 20 minutes (minimum) daily.
Limit my time here, focusing on /edu/

Writing has helped me get into the process of reminiscing more, so maybe that's a sign that I'm being more attentive?

It's just the little things.

>>6578
Also, if you must use youtube to get a source of news, copy down your usual channels, and watch sparingly while NOT logged into google. Do NOT let the algorithm suck you in.

There really is no easy TL;DR, he wrote about a lot of very different things. You could start with the SEP article, especially the part about his collaboration with Guattari.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/deleuze/

>I am too brainlet to actually read them
Just do it, anon. Deleuze himself said that you should jump right into Anti-Oedipus even if you have no background in philosophy.

>The history of philosophy has always been the agent of power in philosophy, and even in thought. It has played the repressors role: how can you think without having read Plato, Descartes, Kant and Heidegger, and so-and-so’s book about them? A formidable school of intimidation which manufactures specialists in thought – but which also makes those who stay outside conform all the more to this specialism which they despise. An image of thought called philosophy has been formed historically and it effectively stops people from thinking.

>>6473
> Deleuze himself said that you should jump right into Anti-Oedipus even if you have no background in philosophy.

How can one man be so based? Truly the nu-Marx who wanted to arm the common man with reason against capitalist production. I need to finish AO after Vol 3.accelerationAcceleration

>>6472
Read Jon Roffe's The Works of Gilles Deleuze I: 1953-1969. v02 is set to come out whenever. Avoid Brian Massumi and any secondary lit derived from him as much as you can.

>>6501
>Jon Roffe
Free pdf here: https://re-press.org/books/the-works-of-gilles-deleuze-i-1953-1969/ (no bookmarks though)

>>6472
Schizos are outside rationality and therefore are the site of revolution against the logic of capital.

>>6478
Oh you have interacted with the two?

>>6479
yes anon, people in academia talk to each other

>>6499
How the fuck should I know that you are in academia?

>>6504
telepathy

>>6478
There's tacit knowledge that A) is tacit because it just hasn't been formalized and stored in documents and it it's trivial to do that; there's tacit knowledge B) that could be easily formalized like that in theory, but the people who could do it have vested interest in not doing it (keeping their skill set scarce), and then there's tacit knowledge C) where it seems hard to impossible to actually do that, even with people who are both unusually bright and unusually generous about sharing information (for example, I may remember very well how somebody looks like, but communicating that information is tedious). I don't think shouting "tacit knowledge" is really a great argument for capitalism as it actually exists, the rhetoric seems to be focused on a sort of rare Renaissance Man, a fabulous small-business guy who is both engineer and manager. Most managers are not like that. And a capitalist can be somebody who isn't just a bit ignorant about what's going on on the shop floor, a capitalist can be an entirely passive investor. If anything, tacit knowledge should be the buzzword of the syndicalists and not those shilling for the existence of stock markets (which is what they do, even if they rarely bring up the stock market while they make the claim with tacit knowledge, because deep down they know that wouldn't convince anybody).

We have already talked about the issue in the various cybernetic socialism threads. The following problems and ideas for minimizing them are all from older threads:

1. A jury rates products or performances or whatever by average rating. A small dishonest minority can get disproportional influence by using tactically exaggerated ratings. Solution: We use an aggregation method that is less influenced by outliers, the most extreme option here is using the median.

2. Some resource is available in limited quantities and allocated without use of budgets. When the sum of requests exceed the available amount, each request is scaled down proportionally. People can anticipate the down-scaling and make exaggerated requests, which leads to anticipation of more extreme down-scaling and bigger exaggerations and so on. Solution: We either use budgets or another method of reducing amounts which is not sensitive to this exaggeration: allocating one additional unit per agent per round. However, if this method iPost too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>6456
Not that anon but this could help.
https://minihabits.com/mini-habit-ideas/
>>6457
This is legit too

>>6464
>This is legit too
what if there's no 'the most important thing' but rather a long, consistently intense task?

>>6465
Can you maybe give an example?

>>6465
You are supposed to break it down into smaller sub-tasks. But if it is related to studying, I would recommend the Pomodoro thing instead.

>>6274
You serious bro?

>>6274
Guy praised Stalin's Collectivization too

Post some more Bataille PDFs bleaseeristocracyΈριστοκρατία

>>6482
Here you go

>>6490
thanks anon, if you have any more surrealist pdfs please link. i love that shit.eristocracyΈριστοκρατία

>>6236
>pi = e
i don't get it, it that a clever joke ?

>>6389
This >>6393 pretty much. Not only do you lose years of salary potential even if you are funded, you will be heavily exploited and worked down into a nub. Also, the payoff won't be good, especially for a physics PhD. I have an anecdotal example: at the law firm I work at, there is an older Asian man with a physics PhD and an impressive CV filled with cutting-edge research at one of the top universities in my state. He has the same job title as me, a lowly fresh graduate with a Bachelor's.international_brigadeInternational Brigade

>>6394
there is this dumb trope that engineers are overly simplistic with their mathematics and approximate to much.

pi = 3.1415… approximates to pi = 3
e = 2.7182… approximates to e = 3
thus pi = e

>>6401
>>6393
So you're telling me I could get the same amount of money immediately working as a fresh Bachelors graduate than a fresh PhD after studying 8 years? That's depressing.

Anyone have any good engineering/technology podcasts which arent Musk-fanatics?

>>6756
>unamused.jpg
<this is /edu/
Imagine posting an actual meme image, and ignoring the image with cited sources while calling the other out for "memes".
>your pro-porn and are a slave to it
<Just control the addiction, heroin isn't so bad if you got control!
Inb4 "false analogy" the effects of pornography are comparable to heroin and other hard drugs, not some basic bitch shit like alcohol and weed.
>which I'm sure you haven't read
I did, you didn't given that your "argument" is
just screeching "M-moral-fag!!!" when literally none of my post is about morality or ethics whatsoever. COPE HARDER FAGGOT.
>show that people get aroused easily
Except that's a oversimplified and intentionally misleading claim
>This is not new, and never has been
Actually it is, faggot. Pornography wasn't as graphic, easily-accessible and wide-spread even back in the 90s, people jacked to Hustler and Play Boy, which was just nude girls, not sex scenes and were free and couldn't be sold to minors legally. Anyone can open Pornhub and find tens of thousands of videos, pictures and more today.
In the past, before the 1960s porn was limited to very esoteric circles of photographs which were neither widespread, nor widely sought. Erotic imagery from actual art is not the same as pornography either, so don't bring up some ancient depiction of a sex scene as some evidence of porn being old.
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>6760 fucking autocorrect
>and were free
and weren't free

>>6760
>Inb4 "false analogy" the effects of pornography are comparable to heroin and other hard drugs, not some basic bitch shit like alcohol and weed.
This is very clearly just sexuality being a strong presence in the human experience. Your treating it as if its an opiate that should be rejected at every turn.
>>show that people get aroused easily
>Except that's a oversimplified and intentionally misleading claim
Elaborate.
>Actually it is, faggot. Pornography wasn't as graphic, easily-accessible and wide-spread even back in the 90s, people jacked to Hustler and Play Boy, which was just nude girls, not sex scenes and were free and couldn't be sold to minors legally. Anyone can open Pornhub and find tens of thousands of videos, pictures and more today.
>In the past, before the 1960s porn was limited to very esoteric circles of photographs which were neither widespread, nor widely sought. Erotic imagery from actual art is not the same as pornography either, so don't bring up some ancient depiction of a sex scene as some evidence of porn being old.
Deliberate misinterpretation of what I said but I'll bite. Your acting as if before pornhub people had more "tame" sexuality. Go out and look through the ancient drawings of sex and you will see its just as raunchy as it is today.
>Again, PORN IS FREE, only in a trap will you find free cheese - YOU are the product, retard.
No shit.
This is simply rebranded evangelical talking points of the 80s moral panics, but we're stuck in a time loop between the 80s and now. Clearly your under 25 and a virgin who is afraid of they're own dick. Go outside, have sex and pay attention in school.

I don't know why people go out their way to defend such garbage. Modern p*rn is distinct from what we've seen in the past in terms of accessibility and the ability to escalate. There's probably not much from a leftist perspective unless you want to dip into radfem stuff.directxDirect X

>>6770
>very clearly just sexuality being a strong presence
So basically you're just repeating yourself without actually arguing, concession accepted
>eating it as if its an opiate that should be rejected
If you can't see the difference between literal brainwashing of dopamine receptors and normal libido, you need help.
>Elaborate
The fuck is there to elaborate, yes humans are horny beings but porn is an unnatural product, that doesn't fulfill basic needs and actively affects our minds in similar ways to narcotics; that being addictive and damaging to the brain. Porn is not a part of normal sexuality and people shouldn't be aroused this easily because that's called hypersexuality, which is a disorder.
>our acting as if before pornhub people had more "tame" sexuality
Yes, yes they did. Outside of the upper class and other lazy bastards with money, most people had sex to have children and did not diverge too far from just that sex. Moreover even casual sex is still less shitty than pornography because its actually real.
>see its just as raunchy as it is today
Come back to me when you find the dozens of futa furry porn and shemale domination and all sorts of fucked shit. Come back to me when you show me that murals, paintings, drawings, wood-cuttings, frescos, carvings, sculptures and more depicted sex constantly, graphically and in public. And no showing genitals or having a mildly erotic scene is not porn.
>This is simply rebranded evangelical talking points
1) Wrong
2) I think I'll side with the Evangelicals on this one given that porn and pro-porn liberals have tended to be the worst kind of glowfaggot scum anyhow
>Clearly your under 25 and a virgin who is afraid of they're own dick
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.