Too Young, Too Simple, Sometimes Naive

Putting that as the title means I can't use it as the anchor text when linking to this video:

Rare Footage of Former China Leader Jiang Zemin Freak Out (With English Subs!)

https://nitter.net/IPTower/status/1998142495251693993#m

In ~1918, the world dreamed of peace (the League of Nations). According to the thinking at the time, one of the ways to ensure peace was to heavily punish Germany, the loser of the Great War. What the world got was the Great Depression.

"You can think and you can fight, but the world's always moving, and if you want to stay ahead you have to dance."

 

This is about Death Note. I have been logged into my YouTube account for the past 4 days, which means that my watch activity has been influencing recommendations and it has been giving me Death Note parody videos. The most recent one I watched, 818k views, by PolyDawg with 5.93k subscribers: 

Death Note but Light is Sexist

It shows L's death. I have never read or watched the series so I wasn't sure how he died, but a commenter mentioned the cause. I was reading the wiki page, for no particular reason (since I was still just trying to understand the particular circumstances of his death, which at this point I only know to be some threat against Misa), when I read that "After Kira begins to kill innocents to prove the fact that they're Kira" and clicked links to find out whether this meant Light.

Videos like the one above show that people have a distorted view of Light. (Another one I watched was Columbo SOLVES The Death Note Case.) So, many people who had forgotten details of the story, but had formed an impression of Light, might not be surprised to hear that he killed innocent people. But to me it sounded unusual for him to do this, so I clicked links to investigate. ('AI' also works reasonably well to answer questions I have had, like "in Death Note, why did L have one arm handcuffed?" although it worked less well for questions about, in which scenes L wore shoes.)

And so I came across this fact, on the page for Amane Misa:

Despite her typically cheerful personality, Misa has been mentally afflicted by seeing her parents murdered right before her eyes. It is unclear how much the trauma has affected Misa psychologically, but in the films, Rem indicates that Misa went through a deep depression immediately after she discovered the murderer was acquitted of the crime.

A few days ago, Giggly aka Madison posted a note on Substack; a quote by John Adams that it was better for society that guilty people to go free than for innocents to be imprisoned.

Giggly aka Madison has cosplayed as Misa before, and made other comments about the series and character such as that one of Grok's companions on Chirp Club is modeled after Amane Misa.

But to be honest, and I'm glad I didn't forget this, I think a better show about the topic of justice is the Netflix live-action adaption of Jiok, or H***bound. In it, someone who killed a person does go to prison, with no doubt about their guilt, but they are later released and an affected character does not think that the punishment was enough.

I shouldn't imply disagreement: maybe a week ago, I replied to a post on Reddit in which I gave an opinion . . . well, since I have linked my Reddit account before, here is my comment:

https://old.reddit.com/r/hypotheticalsituation/comments/1p85vss/an_ai_jury_is_developed_in_2_versions_for/nr3wrts/

(Note the relevance of this scenario to the upcoming film Mercy.)

Although I have read about Death Note before, I did not know (or forgot) this detail about Misa. I assumed her actions were basically just "because of l***".

So, in the song LEVEL5 -judgelight- (the slideshow version, deleted from YouTube, that I shared with Giggly aka Madison on 02 Nov; includes an image of a notebook that says Death Note), when it says — well, all it says is "Believe in Judgelight". But in this context, one can understand it to mean that if there was no corruption or improper behavior by the authorities, then someone in Misa's position should accept the result.

In the real world, of course, Japan has a very high conviction rate for serious crimes. The drama IWGP has the main character falling under suspicion for the death of his girlfriend in the first or second episode, and the main character in Nobuta wo Produce is also suspected of a crime he did not commit. (I might have mentioned this detail before.) This can be contrasted with, say, Tatta Hitotsu no Koi, where characters commit a minor illegal act (fishing where they shouldn't) but are not punished.

So, at least in the context of Japan, someone who is found innocent of a crime is probably innocent.

But note that in my answer to the question on Reddit, I suggested that letting guilty people go free is more acceptable if they are likely to be punished if they commit further crimes. Someone who commits crimes but is never caught, will never be punished. (I won't comment on the situation where someone commits many crimes, is frequently caught, but is never punished.)

In the drama Liar Game season 2, the episodes with the angels and demons game: several of the characters who have met the point requirement to progress to the next round are just enjoying themselves in the bowling alley place, without worrying about the situation of other people who have not yet met the point requirement. They don't feel guilty, as they have not harmed anyone.

I don't actually remember the resolution to the problem, just the general outcome, but one could say that the irresponsible people are irresponsible because they know they are stupid. The problem is, I think, eventually solved, but by the other, smarter characters. People cannot help if they are stupid. Just as they often cannot help if they are poor, or if they are powerless, whether power comes from real-world things like money or social influence, or from fictional things like a Death Note or scientifically-derived teleportation abilities, as in the Toaru Kagaku no Railgun series. (Unless the lore is that it's all actually magic, I don't know, but the title is A Certain Scientific Railgun, not A Certain Magical Railgun.)

Basically: I don't know if it was significant that Giggly aka Madison posted on the topic of letting guilty people go free, when she has cosplayed Amane Misa in the past; I am not checking her accounts right now.

Poor people have fewer options than rich people

There are some things that a poor person can do that a rich person cannot do, like state "I am poor" without lying, but a rich person has the option to become poor.

Many danger, so much threaten

I'm just watching this news article about the Black Mirror episode, Metalhead

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv2Teo18oNs

I'm disappointed by 'AI'.

clean your neck in wuxia series explained

In wuxia series, "clean your neck" is a metaphorical expression often used to warn someone that their life is in danger or that they are about to be executed. The phrase draws on the imagery of beheading, which is a common form of capital punishment in historical and fictional Chinese contexts. When a character is told to "clean your neck," it means they should prepare for death, typically at the hands of a powerful martial artist or as a result of a failed mission or betrayal.

Meaning and Usage

- The phrase is dramatic and is used to heighten tension, often before a confrontation or execution scene.
- It is not a literal instruction but rather a way to convey that the character is facing imminent death and should accept their fate.
- In some contexts, it can also be used sarcastically or as a threat, indicating that the speaker has the power to end someone's life.

Cultural Context

- In wuxia and historical Chinese dramas, honor, loyalty, and martial prowess are central themes, and death is often portrayed as an honorable or inevitable outcome for those who fail or betray their sects or masters.
- The phrase fits into the genre's dramatic style, where threats and warnings are often delivered with poetic or archaic language.

Example in Wuxia

- A villain or master might say, "Clean your neck, for your time is up," signaling that the character will be executed unless they can escape or redeem themselves.
- The phrase is also sometimes used to add gravitas to a scene, emphasizing the seriousness of the situation.

In summary, "clean your neck" in wuxia series is a dramatic way to indicate that a character is about to be killed, drawing on historical and cultural motifs of honor and execution.

why would someone clean their neck in this situation?

Someone would "clean your neck" in a wuxia series as a metaphorical way of preparing for execution or imminent death, not a literal act of hygiene. The phrase is a dramatic warning or threat, suggesting that the person should accept their fate, often because their life is about to be taken—typically by beheading, which is a common method of execution in the genre.

In this context, "clean your neck" is used to emphasize the seriousness of the situation, urging the character to face death with dignity or resignation. It reflects the wuxia tradition where honor, fate, and martial justice play central roles, and characters are expected to meet their end bravely if necessary.

So, "cleaning your neck" is symbolic, indicating readiness for death rather than a physical action.

First point, the message at 1:52 is in Japanese. This is like when after the Islamic State attacked Paris, they posted a message in French.

I remember in 2008 or 2009 when I was in Iraq and had nothing to do but read the news (since I literally did my job, which was to prepare and give intelligence briefings to convoys that drove at night, before my shift even started). There was a news story about a naval exercise that involved the Japanese and Chinese navies, and it was a point of interest that the language they used to communicate was English. So, out of the three languages the Chinese official could have chosen: English, Japanese, and Chinese, they chose Japanese.

This was not unusual. But it just shows how, in making a threat, they were also being respectful to Japan.

Second point, at 2:15: "China wouldn't hesitate to cut off a dirty neck."

It seems obvious from this wuxia story that the purpose of cleaning one's neck is so that if another person's sword encounters that neck, the sword will not get dirty. In that story, everyone complies with the request for them to wash their neck. Unlike what an 'AI' said, it is a physical action.

I was going to say that I failed to find a mention of cleaning one's neck in Chinese drama The Prisoner of Beauty, but just as I had already clicked on Ep 04, I saw in the transcript for Ep 03 that the main male character tells the main female character that her family should wash their necks.

So I'm slightly disappointed that the Australian news staff did not understand that the important word in this threat was "dirty", not "cut". And I'm not watching any more of this video about Black Mirror, because I should not have posted about it, but I cannot stop myself from hitting Publish.

3 times 3 times 3

I said in 2011 to amrayu of SARS-fansubs that my initial failures with causing change meant that the next step was having more discrimination between people, instead of assuming that everyone had about the same ability.

This is me saying that people are stupid.

INSANE: Young Americans Don't Know ANYTHING!

Deleted post

A post I made on my personal weblog, in December 2009. It was a like allegory: a very short story, which I can practically recreate from memory at much lower quality:

A village setting, before fossil-fuel-based technology, so 'medieval' or a typical fantasy setting.

Character 1 or characters, who are strangers, address Character 2, saying something like, "we have come to free your village from the dragon who has been terrorizing it."

Character 2 looks past them, at the peaceful village and fields.

In this analogy, I was Character 1, being upset at Mei, who was character 2, for things like her not talking to me.

I deleted this post at some point after, maybe within a few days, and I think also deleted some other posts that I don't remember. I don't think I deleted the one where I linked to an old post where someone talked about how they hated the word "blog" and implied that most writings in "blogs" were useless; but if no such post exists, then it's because I deleted it.

I wrote this post because by that point, it was possible that Mei knew about that weblog. One could imagine that after I wrote it, Mei could have read it and changed her interactions with me. Me deleting it followed from my conclusion that this had not happened. I don't know if she read it, before I deleted it, and so if she is alive and remembers my existence, this post about it might be the first she has heard of that post.

If I had left up this post, which appeared to be a fictional narrative with no conflict and no resolution, it could have been interpreted as a subtle critique of Mei. I think that, by this point, any possible negative consequences are now unavoidable, and I am, of course, to blame if not deleting this post would have avoided these consequences.

Regarding whether people are good or not

I just thought of two polls.

The first poll:

"Do you think it is ethical to vote for policies which take money from the poor and give it to the rich?"

The second poll:

"Do you think it is ethical to vote for policies which take money from the rich and give it to the poor?"

 

— which is really the first poll that I thought of, because it seemed like "Do you think that it is ethical to steal from the rich?" would not give a useful result, because the reasonable interpretation is that it's about an action which is illegal and usually dishonest (I was recently reminded of a rare example where someone stole money and posted a video online about what they had done), whereas voting is not illegal for most people.

Obviously, the objective is to show a difference in responses between these two questions; if the second poll (in which most people are expected to answer 'yes') was posted first, it would probably increase the number of 'yes' responses in the other poll, making the results of the two polls more similar.

(Note that stupid people might criticize someone who posted these polls, as they might interpret the order as intended to make more people answer 'no' in the second poll. Or in general, they might criticize these polls drawing attention to the fact that government policies do take money from the rich and give it to the poor, as they might feel this contributes to the weakening of these policies.)

(Confounding factor with these polls: most people do not vote for policies as in a democracy, but rather vote for representatives as in a republic, and a representative voting in a certain way could be seen as unethical if they

Grading controversy

https://nitter.net/TurningPointOU/status/1994156726225129932

I can't comment on the quality of writing. I do know that one of the recommended and proven strategies for getting high grades on essays, like for the writing portions of the SATs, is to simply memorize a lot of rare words and use them in the essay. And so it's possible that simply mentioning religious works in an essay could also lead to a lower score: negative biases by graders instead of positive biases.

The way to determine if this was an unusually low score would be to release other essays graded for the same assignment and their scores. This is unlikely to happen, so everyone is just speculating. Maybe one side will 'win' as a result of all this speculating, and the other side will be at fault for not attempting to change this from a situation based on speculation, to a situation based on facts.

I am commenting on the fact that it was not just a failing grade, it was a 0 score. In my experience, the only way to get a 0 score on a subjective assignment is to not do it at all. This is what happened with all projects assigned to me in my 11th grade US history class, including group projects. I was too busy to do a good job on them, and so I just did not do them at all, rather than spend 10 minutes on a poor project that would receive an F score but still be worth at least half of the total points.

So, if the professor wanted to give a failing grade for this paper, with standard grading it would have been enough to give it 14 points. Instead, the professor gave 0 points.

___

Update 29 Nov 2025, 15:52

PETTAN PETTAN TSURUPETTAN (HQ)