Joshua Rothman considers lookism—discrimination against people who are unattractive—and whether we should see it like other forms of discrimination, such as racism.

As his thoughts turned from vanity to mortality, the author found that a gleaming new smile helped him vanquish his deadliest habit. Wrapping up a year-long overhaul, he gets his locks freshly sculpted by Frédéric Fekkai, then tackles the final frontier: exercise.

Millenarianism or millenarism (from Latin millenarius ‘containing a thousand’ and -ism) is the belief held by a religious, social, or political group or movement in a coming fundamental transformation of society, after which “all things will be changed”. Millenarianism exists in various cultures and religions worldwide, with various interpretations of what constitutes a transformation.

via: https://www.marginalia.nu/log/a_138_systemdocker/

Like, there’s definitely a disapproving tone in some parts of this article, but I can’t help but nod and agree.

This analysis applies neatly to the daily lives of secular monks. A feeling of “mundanity” and “diurnality” pervades their existence: The practical conduct of everyday life defines the scope of human existence, with daily affairs, tasks, and projects all shaped by habits. There is no world but this one, no day but today, no self but the one knitted together in this perishable mind-body composite.

Each Calvinist is ascetic inasmuch as he exerts rational, “constant self-control” over himself, so that by means of active supervision, “constant thought,” he can direct his will. His object is the calling, a “mundane occupation” through which he can exercise his will for the sake of God’s glory. He produces fruits, and those fruits might be a sign of God’s favor.

via: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/02/american-loneliness-personality-politics/681091/

Americans are now spending more time alone than ever. It’s changing our personalities, our politics, and even our relationship to reality.

I’m picking up what bro is putting down, but I can physically feel him hiding behind his facts and hedges. The fundamental problem is that he’s at a crossroads with his politics: he has a libertarian bent yet believes individuals and society as a whole are making a fundamentally poor decision. The question is if he’ll defect from the former to truly advocate for changing the latter.

Groups that were self-reliant in their work (that is, more volunteer-based, not reliant on outside funding) created more explicitly political work. Groups that were more embedded in institutions in one way or another had more muted outputs, e.g. creating dashboards showing trends but not connecting these trends to harmful actors or causes. We termed this process “strategic neutrality.” These “strategically neutral” groups see themselves as impartial researchers and their work as unbiased, relying on policy makers and activists to politicize whatever trends are surfaced through their “neutral” work.

see: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07352166.2025.2554754

When you’re proficient with your editor of choice—whatever it is—it disappears into the background. But the moment it cannot handle something easily, it stops being invisible. What baffles me is that so many people treat that friction—the effort of working around a tool’s limitations—as the “fun” part, and then advertise it as evidence that the tool is great.

Part of why these debates turn religious is that a tool choice becomes a flag you plant—it says something about who you are. The “hacker vibe” isn’t a mere aesthetic; it’s tribal signaling, and that’s the real trap. Once your identity is invested in a tool, admitting its flaws starts to feel like admitting something about yourself.

Designing an ergonomic tool is fundamentally about having good defaults, while still allowing escape hatches where they’re possible/needed.

Much in common with Borretti’s “You Can Choose Tools That Make You Happy.”

see: https://borretti.me/article/you-can-choose-tools-that-make-you-happy

I would have kept my identity separate from my projects. Requests is a library. I am a person. The conflation of the two was the root cause of most of the damage. When the project is you, every issue is personal, every critique is existential, and every success is addictive in exactly the wrong way. I’d build the thing, release the thing, and then go home and be a person who also built a thing. Not a person who IS the thing.

As an avid user of Requests for over six years, I had no idea that the author was basically running on empty for a decade due to bipolar disorder. I wish the system—both open source and education—hadn’t chewed him up and spar him out like it did. Watch yourself.

When you’re proficient with your editor of choice—whatever it is—it disappears into the background. But the moment it cannot handle something easily, it stops being invisible. What baffles me is that so many people treat that friction—the effort of working around a tool’s limitations—as the “fun” part, and then advertise it as evidence that the tool is great.

Part of why these debates turn religious is that a tool choice becomes a flag you plant—it says something about who you are. The “hacker vibe” isn’t a mere aesthetic; it’s tribal signaling, and that’s the real trap. Once your identity is invested in a tool, admitting its flaws starts to feel like admitting something about yourself.

Designing an ergonomic tool is fundamentally about having good defaults, while still allowing escape hatches where they’re possible/needed.

Much in common with Borretti’s “You Can Choose Tools That Make You Happy.”

see: https://borretti.me/article/you-can-choose-tools-that-make-you-happy

In which I discuss the greater female need for commitment, the absurdity of anti-freedom “solutions” to it (coming from reactionary feminists)

Life sucks, I guess. Yet more evidence I’m glad I’m aromantic.

A hypervigilant fear of being cancelled is prevalent among OCD sufferers, and typical reactions to this fear make things worse.

What’s more is that these hate mob campaigns were almost always intra-party. Having more or less the “correct” politics did not save you. Notably, Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh have never been “canceled.” These types of things only ever happened to leftists and liberals who pissed off extremely unhinged people, who probably still agreed with them on 90% of things.

On “indexicality” (the inherent fact of basically all statements that they exist within context). Leads into how science is an attempt to generate non-indexical (i.e. universal) knowledge, and how the social sciences in particular have been known for generalising indexical knowledge improperly.

A metascience post of sorts that argues we should take human capital more seriously

via: https://www.experimental-history.com/p/the-most-wonderful-thing-that-happened

I’ve worked very hard to learn social cues, but some rules still make no sense to me. I’m putting them up to a vote.

Engaging in hand-wringing over social norms is silly: that’s the conclusion I’ve come to after reading the comics.

Inam heads back to the dungeon for a thoughtful look and autobiographical dive into the roles she’s there to play.

Top or Bottom, Rigger or Bunny, Inam learns to be present in the moment, inhabit the role and most importantly: enjoy herself.

What do America’s earliest restaurant menus teach us about America?

Hooking up: sexual liberation or unethical exploitation? With the rise of dating apps, sexual gratification seems like a few taps (or swipes) away at any given moment. What implications does this have for sexual ethics around consent, fantasy, and using other people merely for pleasure? In this episode, Ellie and David dive into the history, theory, and criticisms of hookup culture. Is there a way to hook up ethically? Some argue that the power imbalances fundamental to hooking up prevent it from ever being on equal grounds, yet others claim that the shift to hooking up generates potential for queer exploration and for sexual discretion in ways that were previously unavailable. Let’s find out!

NetEase went whole hog with Cap’s new Marvel Rivals swimsuit skin.

EQUALITY!!!

So when I see people buying exotic peptides from uncredentialed sources, I don’t see daredevils or lunatics abandoning a system that works. I see people with problems the system isn’t solving refusing to give up on themselves. And when people condemn this, I hear, “You don’t deserve a cure.”

The medical establishment does indeed suck sometimes.

Onomatopee