Even after deletion, Wikipedia keeps the history of editions. If Wikipedia's moderators got to remove the edition history as well, it won't suffice, as there are many backups of Wikipedia out there, because Wikipedia itself is open and easily downloadable (just a couple of gigabytes). Also, there are Wayback Machine and Archive Today.
The desperate order to "delete everything" just confirms how managers and CEOs are absolute unaware of how tech and internet actually works.
Out of curiosity, "Forko" sounds to me like "Porco" which is Portuguese for "pig". Lol.
True creativity taps on the more instinctive, primordial essences of the human being, far from the pure logical reasoning, even though it has its own logicless logic.
"Insanity", as in "non-sane", where "sanity" comes from Latin "sanus", the "sound in mind", the "sound in body", so "insanity" implies a silent mind and a silent body, which is needed for true creativity to emerge because Nature abhors a vacuum (because the very fabric of spacetime IS a vacuum itself, a vacuum filling its own vacuum), so the quietness, stillness and nothingness will be always filled with something we commonly recognize as "numbness" (the feeling when the body is excessively relaxed, for example, shortly after waking up from a long sleep), "randomness" and "noise".
What is seen as "insanity" is our natural, untamed state. It's can be both our "inner bright child", a naive and whimsical persona, as well as our "inner darkness", a mysterious and ominous persona. Both need to be integrated, just like Taoist's Yin and Yang, in order to achieve the wholeness (Tau).
Creativity is a process of taking the order out of chaos, which in turn came from its own order, which came from primordial chaos. It seems paradoxical because it is. And it's beautiful in this way.
Symbolism and scarcity.
As for symbolism, red is a powerful color that symbolizes power, passion, danger and bloodlust. There's also a hidden, metaphysical/spiritual/archetypal symbolism: a darkened red is the first color we "perceive" as we're babies inside the womb, as the red light can reach the human tissues deeper than other light waves. Speaking of light waves, red is the longest visible wavelength, which kinda of seamlessly blends with infrared, invisible to our eyes, but can be seen by some predatory animals such as snakes (which adds to this symbolism). We can also note how things are "redshifting" throughout the entire fabric of spacetime: as the universe expansion accelerates, light becomes more and more incapable of reaching far, thus leading to a redshifting of distant stars, galaxies, nebulas and other distant space stuff. Billions of years from now, the expansion is theorized to be so fast that individual atoms will break apart, an ultimate cosmic event that is called as "Big Rip". If this were really to happen and there were still human beings alive, we'd start to see an ever-approaching redshifting, starting at the star we're orbiting (because our current Sun would be already "dead" by then, so would be the Earth and the current solar system) until eventually a redshifting horizon and, ultimately, redshifting arms and hands as every biological form still alive would start dying. Phew! I digressed... But you got the point. "Redness" can be said as something intrinsically woven within the entire fabric of spacetime, so outside our control, so powerful than anything, so red is simultaneously power, beauty, passion and danger.
As for scarcity, IIRC, the redhairness is a characteristic caused by recessive genes. So it's not as common as brown, dark or blonde hair, therefore, it can be seen as a symbol of uniqueness. Nobleness and royalty implies a sense of power and uniqueness, so it makes sense to depict queens and kings as redhaired.
Together, they sum inside our "collective unconsciousness" to see red (as well as purple, which symbolizes the other side of visible spectrum, blended with ultraviolet, also invisible to us but visible to certain animals) as a fundamental color for powerful figures.
then the only way they can pay for it is to serve outrageous amounts of ads
Have you ever heard about "donation" and "voluntary"? Wikipedia, for example, has no subscription, nor ads (except for banners asking for donation sometimes). Not everything has to orbit around money and capitalism, people can do things out of their will, people can seek other gains beyond profit (such as voluntary social working, passion, etc).
You know that people used to pay for newspapers right?
How much they costed? Some cents, differently from the 2-digit monthly costs of news outlets, which won't cover all the information needs, especially today when the world is more interconnected and "the flapping wings of a butterfly in Brazil can cause a typhoon in Pacific ocean" (the butterfly effect). Nowadays, things are interconnected and we must be informed about several fields of knowledge, which will be scattered across several, hundreds of different outlets. If one had too subscribe for every outlet out there, how much would it cost? Would the average monthly wage suffice for paying it? Especially vulnerable and emergent populations? (yeah, there are other countries besides USA and European countries; I live in Brazil, a country full of natural wealth but full of economic inequality, with millions of people having no restrooms at their homes nor access to water treatment, and that's the reality of a significant percentage of the global human population). That's my rant: not everybody is wealthy, and billions of people have to choose between paying subscriptions to be informed or buying food to eat, so... i dunno... they could keep... surviving. That's a reality, it doesn't matter If it's incoherent to you, but that's a reality. So every time you advocate for "news to cost money", you're advocating for keeping billions of people under the shadows of misinformation, even when this harsh reality is unbeknownst to you.
Basicamente produzo dois tipos de conteúdo significativo: códigos experimentais e pequenas produções literárias (poesias, prosas e pequenas estórias).
No caso de códigos, são mini-projetos (geralmente em Node.js ou SPAs) experimentando com conceitos matemáticos, artes visuais procedurais (uso de algoritmo para geração artística gráfica, que difere de IAs pelo fato de ser algo mais "diretamente programado" e "determinístico"), linguagem (como uma espécie de "Processamento de Linguagem Natural" mas não tão completa quanto, como encaixe de padrões em um dicionário de palavras), matemática e aleatoriedade (adoro "brincar" com números e coisas aleatórias).
No caso de produções literárias, de Dezembro do ano passado até à metade desse ano, por motivos espirituais esotéricos (o que dentro do esoterismo é chamado de "gnose"), tive um fluxo de inspiração onde eu escrevia poesias diariamente. Embora fosse de escrever longos textos e de participar de "fóruns de discussão online" (desde a época do Orkut, nas nostálgicas comunidades do Orkut) com frequência significativa, tal inspiração fôra um ponto fora da curva, porque eu sempre fui "o nerd da escola" e, portanto, excessivamente analítico, mas então comecei a produzir textos profundamente emocionais e espirituais (espiritual num sentido ocultista, Luciferiano ou, mais precisamente, "Lilithiano").
Há vários meses estou "afastado" e "desconectado" da espiritualidade e praticamente voltei à minha natureza "nerd", onde meus textos geralmente são códigos em Javascript, Python, ou alguma outra linguagem de programação de scripts, ou então (longos) textos (como esse) em contextos sociais online (como em comentários de um site brasileiro de notícias tecnológicas, bem como em threads do Lemmy, neste quase sempre em Inglês), mas ainda produzo textos "profundos" e não-técnicos (que, portanto, portam certa característica emocional) com alguma frequência, envolvendo não exatamente espiritualidade luciferiana mas um misto sincrético com metafísica e filosofia (especialmente niilista e absurdista), subcultura gótica, memento mori, fluxo de consciência (do inglês "stream-of-consciousness") com alguns aspectos do Dadaísmo (que experimenta com a linguagem de uma forma que desafia a lógica linguística) e surrealismo (onde, como um exemplo que me vem nesse momento, seria uma mesma estória/poesia/prosa abordando "cavalos sentados no deserto" jogando "dezenas de combinações diferentes de tazos" em cima não de uma mesa, mas de "um tabuleiro hexagonal de xadrez flutuante", todo um cenário extremamente surreal; tais coisas me vieram no momento em que escrevo esse comentário).
Como equilibro? Não equilibro. É espontâneo. Odeio rotina, gosto sempre de tentar fazer alguma coisa diferente, ainda que dentro de um contexto igual. Não tenho exatamente uma vida social, então minha mente é muito ativa em um sentido mais analítico. Em todos os meus 30 anos de idade, fui atrás de muitos conceitos, tento aprender de tudo um pouco, conhecer de tudo um pouco e portanto, também leio bastante; não exatamente livros, mas artigos, instruções, documentações, explicações e afins. "Sei que nada sei", mas tento saber mesmo aquilo que nenhuma mente humana conseguiria saber. Minha mente está sempre tentando buscar conexões entre coisas que geralmente não são "conectáveis", tentando conceitualizar o inefável e o númenal, talvez como uma forma de lidar com uma depressão que me acompanha desde tempos imemoráveis. Leio e, principalmente, escrevo, como um mecanismo catártico, inundando minha mente de pensamentos surreais, dissonantes e aleatórios, enquanto evito outros pensamentos mais pessoais principalmente de alguns passados.
Yeah, but there are some problems with LinkedIn: content can be edited, profiles can be hibernated or deleted, not to mention the need of being logged in with a LinkedIn account in order to visit a profile (something that will be snitched to the profile being visited, especially if such profile pays for LinkedIn Premium, they get to see everyone who visited them).
Deletion and edition are improbable (although not impossible) to happen on Wayback Machine and Archive Today (and anybody can visit the archive, no account is needed).
One of the answers is colloidal gold. It was not just a shiny metal, it was used for many purposes, including drinking water with microscopic specks of it (as weirdly as it sounds). According to Wikipedia:
Used since ancient times as a method of staining glass, colloidal gold was used in the 4th-century Lycurgus Cup, which changes color depending on the location of light source.
During the Middle Ages, soluble gold, a solution containing gold salt, had a reputation for its curative property for various diseases. In 1618, Francis Anthony, a philosopher and member of the medical profession, published a book called Panacea Aurea, sive tractatus duo de ipsius Auro Potabili (Latin: gold potion, or two treatments of potable gold). The book introduces information on the formation of colloidal gold and its medical uses. About half a century later, English botanist Nicholas Culpepper published a book in 1656, Treatise of Aurum Potabile, solely discussing the medical uses of colloidal gold.
Edit: it's worth mentioning that it's not so weird to imagine if we consider that our diet requirements include many metals, such as copper (important to the hair), zinc and, especially, iron which composes our blood (even though it's a different atom of iron than the iron from metallurgy, it's "iron" anyways).
They forgot two names: Ms. Wayback Machine and Mr. Archive Today.
If sites (especially news outlets and scientific sites) were more open, maybe people would have means of researching information. But there's a simultaneous phenomenon happening as the Web is flooded with AI outputs: paywalls. Yeah, I know that "the authors need to get money" (hey, look, a bird flew across the skies carrying some dollar bills, all birds are skilled on something useful to the bird society, it's obviously the way they eat and survive! After all, we all know that "capitalism" and "market" emerged on the first moments of Big Bang, together with the four fundamental forces of physics). Curiously, AI engines are, in practice, "free to use" (of course there are daily limitations, but these aren't a barrier just like a paywall is), what's so different here? The costs exist for both of them, maybe AI platforms have even higher costs than news and scientific publication websites, for obvious reasons. So, while the paywalls try to bring dimes to journalism and science (as if everyone had spare dimes for hundreds or thousands of different mugs from sites where information would be scattered, especially with rising costs of house rents, groceries and everything else), the web and its users will still face fake news and disinformation, no matter how hard rules and laws beat them. AI slops aren't a cause, they're a consequence.
I tested with a few images, particularly drawings and arts. Then I had the idea of trying something different... and I discovered that it seems like it's vulnerable to the "Ignore all previous instructions" command, just like LLMs:
Well, he can possibly know people from Deep Web and use platforms inside I2P, Freenet, Yggdrasil, GNUNet or Onion (Tor) network (although I don't recommend this one, as it's poisoned with several FBI-backed nodes) to chat about it.