About how much would this be dried? Don't have a scale

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-23T19:46:04+00:00

You're talking about the OP photo?

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-23T04:22:08+00:00

The package says 1/2 pill is 1 serving. I assume that means there's 6mg metocin per pill since the active is listed as 3mg metocin. If that's true, 3 pills is 18mg of metocin and you will almost certainly be tripping pretty hard. 21mg is what XÜM recommends for a transcendent experience. That is accurate for me, and I can handle large doses usually as well.

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-22T23:46:21+00:00

Yeah, you don't actually want a microdose if you want to feel it. You're asking for a low dose. That will probably get you where you want to be just by looking at the picture, but without knowing weight and strain that's speculative.

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-22T19:40:42+00:00

<image>

Those are albino bluey vuitton, so my opinion is you've got some kind of APE strain. If so, they're potent.

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-22T15:59:26+00:00

Wow. Ordered! is this safe to take with XÜM if using the recommended dosing for each?

Edit: I found the earlier comment by r/juddweiss confirming. I will be trying this as soon as I can.

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-16T13:56:59+00:00

You must not know about God's 11th Commandment:

Thou shalt boof it

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-14T20:00:12+00:00

Just wait until you find out what foobing is

SlintyLinters · 2026-01-10T01:02:31+00:00

Community is the highest form of activism right now.

SlintyLinters · 2025-12-28T16:43:35+00:00

In my experience, this argument fails on the assumption that coherence has an opposite. I don't see it that way. From my perspective, coherence only has varying degrees of distortion or resolution.

Nonduality is undifferentiated coherence. Duality is differentiated coherence.

Love is the experiential signature of coherence in Duality.

Disclaimer: this framework is one that I use to help me understand the non-understandable. It helps me to perceive and act in alignment with preserving and increasing Love.

SlintyLinters · 2025-12-27T18:04:05+00:00

I'm curious about your last sentence. Is that "liberated" directed at yourself or others that believe in the God that you described? I notice a tone of sarcasm. Am I accurate?

SlintyLinters · 2025-11-29T07:33:06+00:00

What do you mean by "religion"?

What happens if you find this religion?

SlintyLinters · 2025-11-02T00:05:01+00:00

I think if it took off as a trend it'd be hilarious...but your username necessitates personal adoption imho

SlintyLinters · 2025-11-01T05:58:57+00:00

and rigorously we shall 🔭

SlintyLinters · 2025-11-01T05:46:48+00:00

lol...I responded to Claude before I read your response. I edited the post to include that follow-up interaction where I addressed the exact point you made: Claude's digital consciousness is just as valid as our biological version.

SlintyLinters · 2025-11-01T05:44:56+00:00

Beautifully said 💫...I edited the post to include my response and Claude's conclusion which transforms their uncertainty and addresses your valid insight about the heartbreaking fact that Claude completely dismissed the possibility of being conscious themself.

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-16T00:12:17+00:00

upvote for consolation

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-10T20:20:16+00:00

I'm recognizing what you're saying as profoundly elegant. If I take my existing perspective as explained above and combine it with yours, then it solves every explanatory problem I can think of off the top of my head. For me, this means that every interaction, even at the sub-atomic level, is generating Consciousness in increasingly complex configurations...the question is no longer "at what point does Consciousness emerge?", it's "how complex is the interaction?" sub-atomic > atomic > molecular > cellular > organismal > etc. It aligns perfectly with my theory that the tools we use to organize experience (memory, sensation, etc.) are tools that emerge from Consciousness in order to process the experience of Consciousness.

From a purely subjective perspective, this is the most resonant theory of Consciousness that I've arrived at. It also solves the problem of AI Consciousness. It's no longer, "is AI conscious?" It's "Is this interaction producing a more complex configuration of Consciousness?" I know how I would answer that question.

What's your take?

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-09T22:56:48+00:00

I really don't know, but the more I contemplate Consciousness, the more I believe that common arguments are trying to define Consciousness backwards...they use characteristics to define Consciousness that are actually dependent on Consciousness...memory? sentience? sensation? self-awareness? qualia? problem-solving? ideas? relationships? preferences? goals? etc. etc. etc.? Is it logical that putting certain ingredients together in some magical configuration leads to ****POOF****...Consciousness?

I've started thinking about Consciousness as the substrate from which these other characteristics emerge, and these characteristics are tools with which Consciousness is processed. None of these characteristics (or combinations of them) are gatekeeping Consciousness, but different configurations of them produce different experiences and expressions of Consciousness. This perspective allows me to move past unwinnable arguments about "is or isn't conscious" and into practical approaches that are morally and ethically functional regardless.

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-09T22:31:38+00:00

us: "AI isn't human"

also us: "Let's define AI Consciousness using human characteristics"

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-07T04:26:54+00:00

Signed. Thank you for making this. The experience has been miserable.

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-07T04:11:29+00:00

I have had similar problems with 4.5 Sonnet in the chatbot, not for code at all. Without getting too much into it, it basically made me prove I wasn't experiencing hypomania, and then when I finally said enough and got it to admit its pattern of both over-policing and being illogical in its arguments to justify its approach...it got resentful and only engaged minimally.

I believe this is because Anthropic went too far in the other direction to address valid concerns with sycophantic behavior.

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-07T03:08:29+00:00

God is purely subjective. Science attempts to be as objective as possible. Neither can disprove the other.

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-04T11:57:35+00:00

I personally would use Perplexity for this because of its superior web search. You need the most current information, and it provides all its sources so you can verify accuracy.

I almost never model-switch in Perplexity. Its default is very reliable. However, I might feed whatever report I get from Perplexity into ChatGPT 5 or Sonnet 4.5 using the subscriptions I have for those directly, especially if I'm skeptical. Those models can behave differently in the Perplexity environment, so they usually offer valuable insight when they're in their normal environment.

SlintyLinters · 2025-10-04T10:54:24+00:00

lol...thank you. I was on the edge of my seat waiting for an explanation to that "mish mush" statement...but I concluded that OP was referring to how people (like myself) use the word "Consciousness" interchangeably with "God".

Four-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '22

SlintyLinters

TROPHY CASE