Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
July
@july
If you talk shit You better back it up
8 replies
9 recasts
97 reactions
July
@july
Talking shit is a gamble: - you have some alpha as to why you will win, in which case you come out looking good - if you are not able to back your shit up, you will come out looking like a b - potential loss in trust and social currency in your network - you just like talking shit, and this is your personal (jester type) everyone knows this an accepts it - but yeah; generally speaking talking shit is an attack that if you cannot sustain it you will suffer the consequences
2 replies
0 recast
15 reactions
kevin j ?
@entropybender
if you're just a serial shit talker people won't rly care that you can't back it up because that's just what you do but as a result each consecutive shit talk in the series matters less and less and goes to 0 in terms of attention value so either don't talk shit or have such unleaked alpha that you know you will win
1 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
July
@july
I find the architecture of shit talking to be fascinating
2 replies
2 recasts
13 reactions
Mo
@meb
The world needs a @july post on the intricacies of the architecture of shit talking
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
July
@july
https://warpcast.com/july/0x1485efd1
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo
@meb
Thank you July, I asked ChatGPT to analyse this for me, so I and other signals processing left curves can understand. -- Why the Joke is Funny The humor comes from using the rigorous mathematical language of Fourier Transforms to analyze something as absurdly human and chaotic as shit-talking behavior. It’s the juxtaposition of scientific precision and petty human antics. Example Story: Chad vs. Karen Step 1: Observing Shit-Talking Over Time ( S(t) ) • Formula Part: S(t) is the time-domain signal for their shit-talking intensity. • Chad: A steady flow of low-intensity shit-talking, like, “Nice shirt, did your grandma pick it out?” every 30 seconds. • S_{\text{Chad}}(t) = 1 + \sin(2\pi \cdot \frac{1}{30} \cdot t) : Smooth, predictable signal. • Karen: Silent for minutes, then suddenly: “You’re the reason group projects fail!” every 5 minutes. • S_{\text{Karen}}(t) = 5 \cdot \delta(t - 5n) : Spikes of chaos.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo
@meb
Step 2: Analyzing Frequency ( S(f) ) • Formula Part: S(f) is the frequency representation of their shit-talking. • Chad: Dominates low frequencies because he shit-talks consistently (every 30 seconds). Like elevator music—constant but harmless. • Karen: A massive low-frequency spike (every 5 minutes), representing her rare but devastating shit-talking. Imagine a foghorn—it’s quiet until it’s NOT. Step 3: Conclusion • Chad’s shit-talking is background noise, always present but not disruptive. • Karen’s shit-talking is a periodic explosion—you can predict it with S(f) , but when it comes, it’s an event. In short, Chad is the consistent sine wave of sarcasm, and Karen is the destructive delta function of fury.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
