There is a limit to behaving 'bold' if your aim is to be properly 'legit'. And I get to it every once in a while. This right now
may be another example, for I don't truely know how to iterate on this statement!
On my mind the most right now is the whole feminist nonsense ... where, having left that bit on a positive note doesn't quite sit
with me all that well. And ... beyond that I feel like there is some ... bollocks about the whole statement where I "took them in",
which was however meant to be a hypothetical environment for once - and I have to emphasize that this 'taking them in' was about
looking only at a part of what they're saying. Taking in those others that would then complain was to say in about as much as taking
a thorough look at the rest of what they say.
Oh yea, details ... sodding details. I'm not very good at details, but I am in deed very good at details. I love details. I love
drawing detailed stuff - but I also love ignoring details here and there. It works for me as within my art style - which is paradox
in a lot of ways I guess.
Hitting the breaks however seems to work. Although there is no physical or virtual pedal to hit per se - there is some effect that
makes the virtual pedal kindof a thing. Its the intention though that didn't seem to have much of an immediate effect, but ultimately
I find myself coming closer and closer to an active consciousness relative to the one that got me started. I mean, post Unification
however.
Its reasonable. Acting up internally against hunting for more and more new stuff - I get to 'fall' into that which has been established
- or burried, sortof, beneath layers and layers of dirt and what not.
And that again doesn't remove what else I have come to learn throughout the years - and I notice that this doesn't quite give me a
way to go per se because actually I know 'the' way to go - which is however locked behind that door; Which to open requires me to take
care of some software first.
Regarding that - there are a few wisdoms that I'm quite confident about sharing already. #1: Sometimes you just got to hack some crap
together in order to make certain experiences. There is no way around the value of that consequence - which is tightly connected to
#2: Don't try to do too much at once! This is maybe more of a complicated issue - all in all - but in all simplicity I would there
compare IT to Architecture - talking of structural integrity and all the stuff connected to that. The idea there is that the things
you have will be things you get to expand on. As there's #3: Don't rely on shitty placeholders. You may want to come back to them at
some point - but unless that's guaranteed you might find yourself at a point where thats an effort too difficult to stem. Its like
trying to replace one of the bottom cards of a card-house. What I'd consider a 'guarantee' is a person dedicated to that sort of work.
Or that its literally just a placeholder asset that can be easily swapped around without any other work to be done. But ... if you so
look through ... in case you stumble upon them ... older pages on this site - you'll find cases that I eventually wanted to revise at
some point; But time has passed and that stuff is now effectively forgotten. And if you try your best from the start - you can at the
very least register that as experience to get it done better once it comes down to it - and the way it is implemented will be right
away more beneficial to you.
Which takes me back to #2. By doing too much at once I mean taking care of parts of the project that aren't yet actually close to what
the program currently supports. So - if you have some functions "3 Layers" off the main loop - you might first want to establish those
2 underlying layers before taking care of the third. Else you'll come to establish those two Layers more on asumptions - and later you
might find them inadequate whence it gets to expanding on them.
But yea - those ... "my wisdom haters" ... with their super perfect all-can-do engines ... with all that tapping on and drilling in;
they're dealing with shit thats way too complicated for me to grasp - and its difficult to compare; Like Scalable Vector Graphics don't
really compare well to Pixel Arts although they're practically the same kind of thing. 2D Graphics. Back in the days of 320x200 pixels
of resolution 'a pixel' was sotospeak much cheapter than it is today. And the effort you'd put into a blot of 20x20 pixels or any
image doesn't really weigh all that much today anymore. But I love me them pixel arts - and I love me that bit-wise coding, that
old-school Tetris IT - but going too deep into the nitty and gritty does at some point also qualify as too much at once.
I meant to mention these things because those insights somehow influence my writing in general. While #1 and #2 do actually contradict
- the golden cut between the two is of course purpose and insight as hindsight. Thinking for too long about what to do and getting to
do nothing in progress does also count for me as doing too much at once. Hence rule #1 comes into play. And so the two basically come
hand in hand - and are in that a nice parable for looking at our history. Not in the direct sense - but so to the point that pretty
much everything we have to day is somehow built on something someone at some point just had to pull out of its arse!
Like the meter for instance. Or the foot. I would today say the only real measurement is the 'Gi' (Hydrogen Line) - but we couldn't have
waited for measuring that before starting to measure any distance whatsoever! And we wouldn't really have a scale for it either.
Ironically.
Most obviously do these rules however appear in my habit of never truely getting down to the stuff that really matters - in a way that
does actually make sense. I did get started - twice as of recent; So speaking of the first insight and the word. But I from thereon
continue however it makes sense to me - which isn't how it "should" be - but I'll learn in progress and will certainly get to those
bits in time - when it makes sense to do so.
What might be off-putting at first is the bold display of my human fallability - or my actual cluelessness, which I maybe at times
exagerate on and sometimes downplay hard - but so is life.
For instance, there is this 'Ken' player that I came accross recently whilst playing Street Fighter V. At first I thought: "Oh well,
yet another shitty Ken!" - and I really didn't want to loose that time and so I upped my game and rekt him good. Then it got to the
rematch and it turned out - he wasn't actually just another shitty Ken player, but he actually knew what he was doing! Better than me
at least!
(The excess footage is there because ... so. I ... haven't recorded the rematch :()
(The main reason why I suck at competitive games I guess is that I'm not used to loosing! Loosing is like a strager concept to me -
as I'm the guy that isn't supposed to loose. In gaming however that chances - as - where's the point in playing if you can't loose?
There is no 'foundation' for getting any better! Sortof.)
And thats on lower Bronze already! ... ...
But yea - to so stay true to the core ... "returning "Home"" ... isn't as much whats up as that of trying to close issues that are
otherwise left open before moving on. A common theme hereby is that things carry over - either way. Which is by the way something
I had to learn in some way - to correct myself rather than not. I mean, on the other hand it would be nice if I wouldn't have to -
but yet ... another thing that stands there is that - well - there isn't really an end in "sight" - at least would it seem like there
is still plenty of time before any of this will truely matter. Which might be wrong. I however feel much better with these things
being told ... rather than there being nothing. But it doesn't matter so much - and that I guess is the more important way to look
at it. I mean - that which doesn't matter is whether or not there is an end in sight, or how soon or late it will come. That is also
something of a red thread throughout the past. Not in the way things mattered, but in some abstract way - as - regarding expectations
for instance, or mainly.
As saying that there are no absolutes is certainly wrong - and although I yet kindof see it sometimes as though I'm writing a testament
(last will) here - the core of the idea is that aside of common sense things are more open than not. ... Once fate finally draws some
absolute lines ... well ... then thats whats up. But if we are the ones drawing them for each other - we're basically pissing one
another off - and - I'm not really a fan of that. Also - there is something of an Anti-Hope, or non-faith-dependent Optimism/Realism,
as based on what is rather than what we see in the future. And when that which 'is' seems depressing - thats not that. Depression
thinks in absolutes too.
And if you're proud and did draw some absolutes for yourself - you might want to stick to them even if it means your downfall. That
so is the 'no-good' about it. I think at least. For as long as you got yourself to work on, you always got something to do! Sotosay.