@12 I'm trying a bootstrap on Linux right now and got exactly the same error.
This discussion reminded me of an interview I heard on NPR a few weeks ago w/ an author of a children's book about a boy w/ one arm. It's aimed at disabled kids, giving them permission to not answer questions about their bodies. It acknowledges the often unspoken belief people tend to have that if you're different, you must want someone to comment on it, to break tension (and how this needs to STOP). I can't remember the name of the book. Anyone know it?
@matthewskelton this made me realize that, as I was thinking of all the research I've read lately, plus books like reinventing organizations, well...
The most successful leadership teaching course of all time might just be convincing executives to go to therapy for 5 years??
@DivineKestrel
This one still hits and I absolutely love it.
I love it!
I love being a girl.
Credit: AyvieArt
@28of47 That's amazing, congrats!
plurality
@joan Yes. System roles are usually pretty flexible.
Common obstacles to getting another host in particular seem to be: host is frontstuck, others lack the endurance to be active long enough, or no one else wants to.
re: plurality
@transfaeries We've been doing alright with consensus decision making. Which is good because it'd suck to have to make big life decisions without a consensus.
iore claiming host was more of a "no one objected so I'm doing it", but as she said it's easily reversible. -Liza
stream announcement
https://twitch.tv/madewokherd Trying this again, after the failure a couple days ago due to tech issues.
plurality
I'm going to try to be the system's host. That doesn't mean I'll be fronting all the time or even most of the time necessarily, but I'll be responsible for moment-to-moment bodily operations when no one else is engaged with it, which should hopefully reduce instances of it being left largely unattended.
It does require someone in the system to remember that when I'm needed, so I'm not sure how effective it'll be, especially at first.
-iore
re: twinning
@12 @28of47 That makes a lot of sense. It's really fun seeing you learn about each other from this conversation.
I think it does require active attention for us to comprehend speech, although we are able to mentally buffer and replay a limited amount of it if we miss it the first time around.
We have noticed that we sometimes "background count" without language processing and without the need to replay audio for that, but we're not sure how accurate it is.
twinning
@12 @28of47 Reflecting on it further, I think the main reason for this is that voice communication requires us to do language processing (both understanding and generation) in real time, when we'd prefer to have control over the pacing. Although we process it as audio either way, when the audio is synthesized by our mind based on written word, we have more control, and less real time attention is needed.
twinning
I don't think we've ever interacted with another system by voice enough to notice. While there are differences in how we use the body's voice, we haven't really tried to track it, as mindvoice is so much easier to distinguish.
It seems easier for us to detect differences in others' "written" voices than listening.