饱饱兔 @SuperSG15 had 30 videos for over a week. Her video count went down to 29 yesterday and 28 today.
This was because 02 Oct, I spent a few minutes watching a live stream of calligraphy. (Most of it was spent with my screen frozen, since I had too many tabs open and it made my system use swap space.)
 |
| Calligraphy, Douyin live 南星 @27127971091 Screenshot from 2026-10-02 00-48-30.png |
 |
| Calligraphy, Douyin live 南星 @27127971091 Screenshot from 2026-10-02 00-48-51.png |
 |
| Calligraphy, Douyin live 南星 @27127971091 Screenshot from 2026-10-02 00-49-32.png |
 |
| Calligraphy, Douyin live 南星 @27127971091 Screenshot from 2026-10-02 00-49-56.png |
 |
| Calligraphy, Douyin live 南星 @27127971091 Screenshot from 2026-10-02 00-50-00.png |
 |
| Calligraphy, Douyin live 南星 @27127971091 Screenshot from 2026-10-02 00-50-06.png |
 |
| New YouTube side ad, no recommended videos, Screenshot from 2026-10-03 14-11-25.png |
I think it's harmful if this continues: after a month, she would have no videos left. So, I am acknowledging that I watched part of a Douyin live stream, even though I said that I would not.
If she wants to avoid a situation where I see that she's streaming, but I don't watch the stream, then she can't stream at all, because I check her account at unpredictable times of the day.
Original post, saved 03 Oct 2026 at 02:26:
'conflicts in ethical orientation, 03 Oct 2026.txt':
"Blondes have more fun."
Would not be an expression if not for dying hair. This possibility turns the statement from an observation, into a recommendation.
Autumn had dyed blonde hair 13 years ago.
A few days ago, watched an early practice video from Black Pink. A highly-rated comment said that a certain member with dyed blonde hair seemed to outshine the other members with her dancing. Was it actually better dancing, or was it the aura from her hair color?
<deleted examples>
Link: sometimes, an observer may not realize that a person's hair color is not its natural color. So it's sort of like lying.
A question I was thinking about recently; it didn't seem useful, but it illustrates the situation. "Suppose that there are two patterns of ethical behavior, A and B. You exhibit B, but all the people you might be interested in exhibit pattern A. Would you be willing to change how you act to be in a relationship with someone?"
In 'Danger of monocultures', there are two obvious patterns of behavior: "do try to fix problems", and "don't try to fix problems".
There are also less obvious patterns: "do good things when there's no reward", and "don't do good things when there's no reward".
Two people could both be trying to fix problems, but one does it for the rewards, while the other disregards the rewards.
And then there are the patterns: "act in the way that appears to be moral", and "don't act in the way that appears to be moral".
These patterns are a bit different because morality includes many hidden things, i.e. lies. Again, Sun Tzu's Art of War points out that "all warfare is based on deception" so commanders don't think, "it would be immoral for me to use deception in war". There are limits to deception in war; the German merchant raider that deceived an Australian warship into getting close with a false identity, before exposing her true identity just before she initiated combat. And the rules about soldiers wearing their official uniforms during any operations, or else they are not protected by the laws of war that forbid executing enemies who surrender.
But many deceptive practices cannot be forbidden for practical reasons. A tactical or strategic feint. A merchant ship transmitting a radio signal that it is being attacked, that complicates rules about a submarine allowing a ship's crew to get to safety in lifeboats before sinking the ship.
If many people in society have pattern A, and many have pattern B, how to know which pattern a particular person believes is the ethical one? How to know whether they are using the pattern they believe to be the most ethical one?
The question about whether it's ever acceptable for a boyfriend to lie to his girlfriend can also be applied to females. The Japanese story about a female who married a male, but he wasn't allowed to ask her about her past or something, and when he did, she had to leave him. In the story, she's a fox or something, but one could imagine that it follows a pattern of a female who believes in the patterns "do try to fix problems" and "do good things when there's no reward", but who also follows the pattern "don't act in the way that appears to be moral".
And so she assumes that it's ok for her to lie and imply that she really follows the pattern "don't try to fix problems", up until the male reveals that he follows the pattern, "act in the way that appears to be moral", which means she can no longer lie about having the pattern, "don't try to fix problems".
The story, East of the Sun and West of the Moon could be seen as similar, just with the genders reversed. During the day the male is a bear: unattractive, just like patterns of behavior that don't involve helping other people are unattractive. But at night, secretly, he is attractive: he does want to help people, he just pretends not to. The female was instructed not to look at the male at night: a rule, and rules are meant to be followed. So her act of looking suggested she was following the pattern, "don't act in the way that appears to be moral". Presumably in conflict with what he was doing.
I think I've mentioned both of these stories before. Maybe in an email.
Why I act like this idea isn't important: there is another reason. You could say that I exhibit the pattern, "don't act in the way that appears to be moral".
I've suggested before that I follow the pattern, "do try to fix problems", and that Mei might not. I mentioned how I only posted on general forums in World of Warcraft, in 2005 to 2006, and she probably only posted on realm forums. General forums included the suggestions forum; I posted frequently there (copies of the same posts I made elsewhere), while I would guess that Mei never did.
But she might just not have had any good suggestions about how to improve World of Warcraft. Even if she was in college and I was not, she was still only 15 years old. She had compared herself to Ayanami Rei, a character from Neon Genesis Evangelion who appears to have an important role in saving the world. Rei can be compared to a male character of about the same age, who doesn't want to help with saving the world. It would probably be fair to say he exhibits the attitude, "don't try to fix problems". While Rei exhibits "do try to fix problems", as well as "do good things when there's no reward" (as seen, for example, in the state of her apartment).
It was my estimation, ~22 years ago, that Elyse could be said to exhibit the pattern, "don't try to fix problems". For example, after she sent me a letter that contained a few crossed-out mistakes and a $5 See's candy gift certificate (that I never used, but was lost at some point), I mailed her one or two books from Terry Pratchett. (I also mailed one or two to Hanna; I'm not sure whom I sent two books.) Pratchett's books are basically about the mistakes that people make, and it's important to understand people's mistakes to be able to fix problems. The book Jingoism was about war; is war something that people want to happen, or something they would prefer didn't happen? Elyse never said anything about the books I sent her.
There's also the question I asked her about the meaning of the word "emergency".
The point is, if Elyse exhibited the attitude, "don't try to fix problems", and Mei exhibited the attitude, "do try to fix problems", then I could make myself compatible with Mei and incompatible with Elyse if I had the attitude, "do try to fix problems".
But Mei never replied to any of the mass emails I sent about this idea. Is that really the behavior of someone who is trying to fix problems?
I would say that Elyse exhibits the pattern, "act in the way that appears to be moral".
So, at the end of this long explanation, if I exhibit "don't act in the way that appears to be moral", then it implies I am incompatible with Elyse. In other words, she didn't harm me by marrying someone else, because she never could have married me.
I had said to Elyse in 2005 that we could only ever be friends in the future. But sometimes smart people make mistakes.
What if the pattern of behavior that I exhibit, "don't act in the way that appears to be moral", is only an act? What if I really believe in "act in the way that appears to be moral"? Then it cannot justify an incompatibility between me and Elyse.
Two major types of incompatibility: moral incompatibility, and large differences in attractiveness.
It would be much easier for me if there was someone who was interested in me who exhibited "do try to fix problems". Then there could be an explanation for why I preferred to be in a relationship with them, instead of Elyse. But if there is anyone who might be interested in me, they are exhibiting "don't try to fix problems".
I wrote this for two reasons: over 100k people die every day.
And Ariana made a post on Instagram. This is one those things I say to myself: "if a certain person does X, I will do Y." The reason not to do Y is basically that Ariana is from the United States. The MI: Fallout movie, for those who missed it, was basically about how Ethan could be making the world worse with his actions. Scenes like the map navigation scene, that I linked a month or two ago, supported the plausibility of this: if someone can't use a navigation tool, how likely are they to be able to know which choices will lead to the best results for the world? Is this post the same, making the world worse than if I did nothing?
@9玥、 and @饱饱兔 are maybe giving their opinions. But I'm afraid of misinterpreting what they do. Language communicates a lot of information. Most of the sentences in this post are unique, never before having been written by anyone.
But, consider: @9玥、 did not post any videos for a day, on 30 Sep. Then on 01 Oct, she posted one video on both of her accounts. (Dates are approximate; using my local timezone.) I had been hesitant to check her account multiple times per day or at an unpredictable time, but on 01 Oct I checked her accounts, as well as @饱饱兔, Yara's, and Ariana's, multiple times. If @9玥、 was not posting any videos, then I would not be obtaining extra information about the exact time she posted videos by checking her account multiple times. But towards the end of 01 Oct, around 22:00, @9玥、 had posted a video on each account and @饱饱兔's video count went down by one.
Did this happen I checked their accounts multiple times? Or did it happen because Ariana had created a pattern of fashion-related posts on 30 Sep and then had no activity on 01 Oct?
If @9玥、 wanted me to do the aforementioned Action Y, would she communicate this by posting a video, or by not posting a video?
The best way for me to know would be to wait for more information. But over 100k people died today, and 100k will die tomorrow, and one of them could be someone I know, or know of and care about. (If I'm not sure if someone knows I exist because they have never tried to unambiguously communicate with me, it's hard to say that I know them.)
I checked Ariana's account at midight and saw that she had posted. (She preserved the pattern of fashion-related posts, by rearranging her photos.) I had thought that I would check other people's accounts at 02:00, then I saw that my phone's alarm was already set for 12:00 and decided I could delay until then. It is now past 02:00. What should I do?
Should I post this?
