Thanks. Multiple people have asked for prompts behind our recent posts. I'll just mention something general in that regard. First, imagine what you want -- that is based on your knowledge of the intended composition. Describe it in words to the engine. The key to note is that
this implementation of DALL-E 3 in MS image generator is not like MidJourney. It does not perform mutations on an earlier generated image. So there is randomness: 1. Some of the prompts fail but slight tweaks to the statement while maintaining semantics gives better results.
2. just repeating the same prompt a 2nd time sometimes works better. 3. There are lots of "heartbreaks" -- a near-perfect image ruined by a single irredeemable flaw -- if only we could engineer or mutate these we could get even better productions. I keep those that come near to
the intended mental images even if slightly imperfect. Imperfections are unavoidable in the current AI-- the defect with limbs, facial symmetry persists from earlier versions. However, I think DALL-E 3 has greatly improved. Maybe MidJ is better now but I have not been able to use
after the early days -- it inexplicably kicks me out. The true potential is probably superior to the version we can use -- the duShTa-s mention crippling it in the name of "safety" and prudery. Also, I fully don't understand the "boost" system. You are supposed to get 100 boosts
i.e., apid GPU access, a day. I initially got 100 a day but now it is now renewing. You get more by using bing instead of mahAduShTa-guggulu. So try your own experiments.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@JoraShankara @Sapratha 2. Harappan being Dravidian is a rather unfounded claim; hence, I think Steve Bonta is correct in dispelling rather strongly the idea that it was Dravidian -- he is a dravidianist himself 3. I think he has made a real contribution to understanding the Harappan script in defining
@JoraShankara @Sapratha the fields P,M,C, T and their sub-structure. 4. I also think he may have found something meaningful in his analysis of the so-called "M" field.
I find his readings more "believable" than another recent IA interpretation which was posted by a person called yaj~nadeva. However,
@JoraShankara @Sapratha that doesn't mean I believe them or am convinced by them. Could there be something to his findings? 1. If the Southern Arc theory of the Harvard lab has something to it & Harappans are related to the Southern Arc then there could be a remote similarity between the S.arc languages
It is v.clear that the neocons, a limb of the deep state with tangled connections that underlie "neo-Occidental civilization", have decided to prop her up. The MSM has been a domain of the neocons since the rise of guchchaka & mahAduShTa-vakrAs. That's what we are seeing here.
They (at least a subset) originally put their lot with anugAmin. However, anugAmin has a bit of a mind of his own & also the instinct to gauge what his base might want. Hence, he did not go their way. Also the base he is trying to tap into knows that nAri~Nga is a better choice,
so why go for some1 secondhand. So anugAmin started declining. OTH viveka is clearly best of the also-rans by a large margin. However, he has several disadvantages: 1. He looks alien to the modal mahAmlechCa. 2. Despite his many genuflections & assimilation of Judaeo-Christianity
A “Kafiristani” incantation recorded via Morgenstierne: *imro*! delect machi mrhor o! o *bagiShT* o!
imro of the gods (delect ~ devaloka or godly realm) and of mortals the lord o! (c.f. devAnAm uta yo martyAnAM yajiShThaH); o the god baghiShT o!
The o in the incantation is
likely a denasalized OM cognate. The deity imro is the cognate of yamo rajan; The deity baghiShT seems to be a superlative formation from the same root as the I-Ir deity bhaga, who once enjoyed a popular Iranic cult. Comes in names like bhagadatta; baghdAd on both sides of the
divide. The position of the god yama is peculiar in early I-Ir tradition. The RV tradition is ambivalent towards him. He is presented as the might king and the son of the god vivasvat. While in some references, he is a god (e.g., ekaM sad viprA…). In others, he is contrasted
Not central to the map but more related to below discussion. If we for a moment just include everything, i.e., don't make an attempt a priori to distinguish interpolations from the core Mbh (leave aside the "critical"= Pune edition) we have following counts for "distant" peoples
of these the word mlechCha is probably of Harappan provenance & was transferred to Old IA in the late Vedic age. It is 1st attested in the shatapatha brAhmaNa of shuklayajurveda 3.2.1.24. There it is stated that the language of the mlechCha is unintelligible & a v1 is asked not
to speak it as it is the tongue of the asura-s. It could have been originally a group of people in the Harappan domain that more generally acquired the sense of a foreign people by the Mbh. The niShAda ruler nala nAishAda is a historical hero in the Mbh. He is already mentioned
Seeing related posts too, but those who have followed the k'stan issue for a while know that it is not a purely (probably not even primarily) TSPian project. It is a mahAmlechCha deepstate project contracted out in main to its pa~nchanetraka subsidiaries like laNDapura& karNATa.
The deeper roots go back to 1857 CE when an H coalition under marahaTTa leadership with the Mogol remnants made one last attempt to rid the subcontinent of Abrahamoanglo dominance gained via the Anglo-marahaTTa & sikh wars. It was part of the larger global series of events for
Abrahamoanglo world conquest. The Crimean war against the rUs, featuring the well-known mlechCha-marUnmattAbhisaMdhi, the opium wars on the Ching, the Boer war, the world wars 1&2 were all part of the same system of their quest for world dominance. Challenges by Germany & Japan
@Anand_Venkatram @Sapratha by the state. However what is of interest to me is the so-called muskrat: you are right that it is a wrong translation. sutra goes thus: शाल्मली विदारी धान्य सिद्धो मूल वत्सनाभ.सम्युक्तश् छुच्छुन्दरी शोणित प्रलेपेन दिग्धो बाणो यं विध्यति स विद्धो.अन्यान् दश पुरुषान् दशति ते दष्टा
@Anand_Venkatram @Sapratha दश.अन्यान् दशन्ति पुरुषान् ||
word is ChuChundarI which should be correctly translated as shrew. Why it is of interest to me is that kauTilya was ahead of his times & probably the first one to record a shrew toxin. To date the Haitian solenodon the European water shrew, the
@Anand_Venkatram @Sapratha Mediterranean shrew, the American short-tailed shrew,&the East Asian shrew have been shown to be venomous. The American shrew's toxin is related to a toxin of the gila monster & the East Asian shrew's main toxin is related to a snail toxin. No one has studied the toxicity of the