El Goonish Shive - layers-049
The Experiment. I'm guessing this has something to do with demonstrating the link between Uryom projections, base forms, hair that continues to grow despite being enchanted, and so on.
The Experiment. I'm guessing this has something to do with demonstrating the link between Uryom projections, base forms, hair that continues to grow despite being enchanted, and so on.
Holy crap, positive acknowledgement of the continued existence of Lord Tedd in a recent comic! I think it's been, what, a decade?, since the last time anyone brought up Lord Tedd.
Makes me think of John Titor.
That's a very seventeen year old thing to do: Scour an unsettled area of knowledge utterly convinced you're going to solve it in just a few minutes.
lmao, I LOVE those last three panels. And yeah, illusion stretching well beyond the audiovisual realm is one of those things that can drive someone bonkers.
This is interesting. I'm guessing it was Tedd's success with the project that ended up with him allowed to keep his access. I really doubt that "technically I brought the tech back, the second unit is his" would fly. Either that or the reason we've never seen Conan Sr. (let's see if I can make that stick) before is that Edward's connections proved more potent than this guy expected... and he was never heard from again.
Anybody know who that is spying on Edward and clearly not happy about what he's doing? Is this a new plot point, or am I forgetting something?
https://www.egscomics.com/comic/layers-027Open linkView original on midwest.socialEdward is discovering the limits of secret keeping. Lavender is right: Tedd will find out eventually, and if there are concerns about his learning certain things, better he learn it in a controlled environment from people he trusts, rather than at random out in the wild. Tedd's reputation in the Uryom community, his mother, all that stuff is out there to jump at him from behind a bush (as his mother's situation did when he was playing with the magic mirror, and as it nearly did when Nanase came face-to-face with one of Noriko's old adversaries).
I feel like Crunchyroll used to have it, but I searched for it and couldn't find it. Myanimelist suggested HiDive might have it, but so far as I can tell it doesn't. Does nobody have it any more?
Also, how is Crunchyroll deciding what can be watched with free account and what requires premium? I got an urge to watch some Laid Back Camp, which came out many years ago at this point, and they're requiring premium for that? I went over a year not watching any anime, so I'm kind of out of the loop on the streaming scene.
I generally use "anarchist" to describe my political philosophy. I'm pretty sure I'm using it correctly, but I'm not certain. I haven't had much contact with other "anarchists", just a bit of exposure through history and such.
First off, to me, "anarchism" doesn't mean "no government". Rather it means "no intrinsic authority". What I see among historical anarchists is an opposition to practices that, frankly, aren't all that often practiced any more, in the political realm. I'm referring to rule by bloodline and such, nobility and royalty. I get the impression the early anarchists wanted to do away with royal governance, in favor of a federation of voluntary governments instituted at the local level. Which is to say, they believed in government; they just wanted to do away with imposed external authority.
But I do see our current economic relations as having a great deal of externally imposed authority in it... though going into my beliefs about why, and what could be done about it, would be beyond the scope of this essay.
To me, anarchism means the following:
Favoring no unnecessary relationships of authority.
Where authority is necessary, it should be granted by those over whom the authority is exercised, directly and individually, to the greatest extent practicable. So, for example, if we have an economic system that leaves both employers and employees with the same level of market power (we do not, but if we did), the employer-employee relationship would qualify, since it commences by choice of both parties, and can end by the choice of either party.
Where this is impracticable, the authority in question should always be temporary, with a clearly delineated end. For example, the parent-child relationship is necessarily one of authority, since children lack the faculties to make all the decisions one needs to make. But this relationship should be premised on preparing the child to survive outside this relationship, and have a clear end point (the point of their majority). And I mainly include this but just for the parent-child relationship; I can't think of any others.
All this being said, I know there are those for whom Anarchism means "no government", usually detractors who don't actually understand the philosophy... or so I assume. Do I assume incorrectly? Is my use of the term wildly incorrect? I really don't know.