Author: Curt Doolittle

  • False. It’s called Baiting into Hazard

    False. It’s called Baiting into Hazard.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 08:28:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913147498748891138

    Reply addressees: @TheJadedOne2021

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1912882674118558047

  • That is false. And your claim is dishonest and harmful nonsense

    That is false. And your claim is dishonest and harmful nonsense.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 08:27:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913147330905145631

    Reply addressees: @VerumVulnero1

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1912915611463582194

  • Done

    Done


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 05:37:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913104595502637188

    Reply addressees: @Mofoman360

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913103709426397187

  • RT @Mofoman360: It’s James Woods birthday today he is a true patriot would you l

    RT @Mofoman360: It’s James Woods birthday today he is a true patriot would you like to wish him a happy birthday @RealJamesWoods https://t.…


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 05:37:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913104551349227987

  • @WerrellBradley Yet this is where you set up shop? (lol -hugs.)

    @WerrellBradley Yet this is where you set up shop? (lol -hugs.) https://twitter.com/p8stie/status/1912568432266211771

  • I spoke with both Flynn and Lynn about this and they both understood it was an a

    I spoke with both Flynn and Lynn about this and they both understood it was an adaptation though noted that the contraction came mostly from the bottom which was explicable by the multiple variables – the only lesson being the obvious.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 05:22:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913100908562661865

    Reply addressees: @timothycbates

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1912942464526418029

  • Difference Between Testimony and Decidability The difference between testimony a

    Difference Between Testimony and Decidability

    The difference between testimony and decidability regarding the satisfaction of the demand for infallibility is operationally clarified as follows:
    1. Testimony:
      Operational Role: Testimony is a promise of having performed sufficient due diligence, minimizing involuntary costs imposed upon oneself or others’ demonstrated interests.
      Functionality: Testimony serves as evidence of warrantied truthfulness or honesty, subject to conditions of knowledge, language, due diligence (effort in eliminating error, bias, deceit), and contextual precision.
      Scope of Infallibility: Testimony doesn’t guarantee absolute infallibility; rather, it promises effort to approach infallibility to the highest achievable standard given limits of human faculties, diligence, and context. In other words, testimony promises a process, not an absolute outcome.
    2. Decidability:
      Operational Role: Decidability indicates that the available information has reduced the possible alternatives to improbable or impossible, allowing a choice or statement to be made with minimal risk of imposing involuntary costs.
      Functionality: Decidability establishes conditions under which a claim can reliably satisfy the demand for infallibility. It’s a measure of how completely uncertainty has been eliminated or mitigated.
      Scope of Infallibility: Decidability doesn’t just promise diligent effort; it asserts that uncertainty is sufficiently reduced such that infallibility (absence of involuntary costs to demonstrated interests) is reliably achieved in the given context. Thus, decidability guarantees an operational outcome (practical infallibility), provided the context is respected.
    Summary of Difference:
    • Testimony is fundamentally a promissory act—an assurance of careful investigation, minimized bias, and diligent effort toward truthfulness.
    • Decidability is fundamentally a state of affairs—an outcome demonstrating that available information and adversarial testing have sufficiently limited uncertainty, rendering infallibility practically achievable.
    In operational terms, testimony provides warranty of method and effort, whereas decidability provides warranty of result or state of completion. Both satisfy the demand for infallibility, but from different perspectives: testimony as promise and method, decidability as proven state of informational sufficiency and reduction of alternatives.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 05:13:12 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1913098465409937715

  • Untitled

    http://x.com/i/article/1913098277006057472


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 05:13:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913098465409937715

  • The difference between testimony and decidability regarding the satisfaction of

    The difference between testimony and decidability regarding the satisfaction of the demand for infallibility is operationally clarified as follows:

    Testimony:
    Operational Role: Testimony is a promise of having performed sufficient due diligence, minimizing involuntary costs imposed upon oneself or others’ demonstrated interests.
    Functionality: Testimony serves as evidence of warrantied truthfulness or honesty, subject to conditions of knowledge, language, due diligence (effort in eliminating error, bias, deceit), and contextual precision.
    Scope of Infallibility: Testimony doesn’t guarantee absolute infallibility; rather, it promises effort to approach infallibility to the highest achievable standard given limits of human faculties, diligence, and context. In other words, testimony promises a process, not an absolute outcome.

    Decidability:
    Operational Role: Decidability indicates that the available information has reduced the possible alternatives to improbable or impossible, allowing a choice or statement to be made with minimal risk of imposing involuntary costs.
    Functionality: Decidability establishes conditions under which a claim can reliably satisfy the demand for infallibility. It’s a measure of how completely uncertainty has been eliminated or mitigated.
    Scope of Infallibility: Decidability doesn’t just promise diligent effort; it asserts that uncertainty is sufficiently reduced such that infallibility (absence of involuntary costs to demonstrated interests) is reliably achieved in the given context. Thus, decidability guarantees an operational outcome (practical infallibility), provided the context is respected.

    Summary of Difference:

    Testimony is fundamentally a promissory act—an assurance of careful investigation, minimized bias, and diligent effort toward truthfulness.

    Decidability is fundamentally a state of affairs—an outcome demonstrating that available information and adversarial testing have sufficiently limited uncertainty, rendering infallibility practically achievable.

    In operational terms, testimony provides warranty of method and effort, whereas decidability provides warranty of result or state of completion. Both satisfy the demand for infallibility, but from different perspectives: testimony as promise and method, decidability as proven state of informational sufficiency and reduction of alternatives.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 05:12:27 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1913098277006057472

  • too many chemicals. I would sleep for thee days and have face melting allergic r

    too many chemicals. I would sleep for thee days and have face melting allergic reactions for three more. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-18 04:29:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913087427847340269

    Reply addressees: @brettbarnes83

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1913081744779051446