@TalhaAhsanEsq It's a very good question, and a complicated one. For starters, the Islamic manuscript tradition is vast both in terms of timespan and geography. As Dr. Shamsy points out in his latest book, the Arabic manuscript tradition is the most vast of any language in the world.

Why are some things given more prioritisation for publication than others? Why are some aspects of the tradition more emphasised than others. There's no single cause behind it.

And there is not necessarily always a sinister motive behind the suppression of some things, but sometimes there is...

It is true that the Hanbalis and Ash'aris had a very contentious and at times acrimonious relationship for much of their history. In later centuries, a sort of truce was reached. Al-Zabidi has said similar in his sharh of Ihya about the identification of 3 groups as Ahl al-Sunna

It seems that these truce efforts also spawned a number of works seeking to mediate the Hanbali-Ash'ari dispute over the nature of Divine Speech, the most contentious of issues between the two camps. A couple of these have been recently published.

Marxist Communist Harris-Biden's Great Reset #DeepState KILLUMINATI agenda

versus

CIA & Mossad #DeepState "Regime change in Iran" CRIME MINISTER Netanyahu TRAITOR-yahu's "Greater Israel Project" propaganda agenda?!?

A #Thread
The Prediction of Islam
[From the third part of the Pratisarga Parva.]
Shri Suta Gosvami said: In the dynasty of king Shalivahana, there were ten kings who went to the heavenly planets after ruling for over 500 years. Then gradually the morality declined on the earth.

When he saw that the moral law of conduct was declining he went to conquer all the directions of his country with ten-thousand soldiers commanded by Kalidasa. He crossed the river Sindhu and conquered over the gandharas, mlecchas, shakas, kasmiris, naravas and sathas.
2nd

He crossed the river Sindhu and conquered over the gandharas, mlecchas, shakas, kasmiris, naravas and sathas. He punished them and collected a large ammount of wealth.
3rd

Then the king went along with Mahamada (Mohammad), the preceptor of mleccha-dharma, and his followers to the great god, Lord Shiva, situated in the desert. He bathed Lord Shiva with Ganges water and worshipped him in his mind with pancagavya (milk, ghee, yoghurt, cow dung, and
4n

cow urine) and sandalwood paste, etc. After he offered some prayers and pleased him.

Suta Goswami said: After hearing the king’s prayers, Lord Shiva said: O king Bhojaraja, you should go to the place called Mahakakshvara, that land is called Vahika

5n

A Thanksgiving story to warm your pluralistic hearts:

It was the early 1990s, the days before Washington DC had meters in taxis. A famine was raging in Somalia. And I was working in my first job out of college: a brief stint working for an organization that focused on the Middle East peace process.

I was heading to my parents’ house. I was standing in front of a mailbox near my office. I was holding a stack of papers with Hebrew writing on them. I hailed a cab.

I was aware that on the mailbox behind me was a large sign from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals with an image of a turkey and the words: “Thanksgiving is Murder on Turkeys.”

It was the period right around Thanksgiving.

A cab pulled up, and I got in the front seat—because in the days before metered cabs in DC, drivers were allowed to pick up more than one fare, and someone else was already occupying the back seat.

Good morning, electoral lunacy followers. Welcome to what I suspect will be the 2020 equivalent of the Orly Taitz litigation: Sidney Powell Sues Everoyen For LAL Of Teh ThInGs

This is the first of what will (hopefully) be a limited number of #Kraken-related threads.

That said, I doubt the number will be limited. I think Sidney Powell is the Orly Taitz of the Biden Administration.

And I doubt I've acquired enough maturity since my younger birther-watching days to ignore these. So, yes, at least for cases with public dockets, I'm here.

We've got two filings so far - a Michigan one (King v Whitmer) that has been filed, and a Georgia one (Pearson v Kemp) that cannot presently be located on PACER.

This may be because there are parallel Quorts not in the system but maybe it just didn't get filed.

Here's how I'm going to deal with that - I'll start livetweeting King (the filed one) in a little bit, after I do some turkey prep. I'll do that in this thread, but probably even slower and more interrupted than usual - so you might just want to bookmark and come back later.

Tonight, if there's interest, I might be both willing and able to stream a read of the (maybe unfiled) GA case on Twitch tonight.

Torn between "I think losing $100 million when someone beats you at security research is pretty much exactly what you signed up for doing yield farming" and "Maaaaaaaybe not the future of finance you were expecting, huh."

How to put this in regular finance terms...

Suppose hypothetically you have an account at a brokerage with some valuable asset in it. You take a margin loan against that asset to fund your normal spending, or pay a tax bill, or maybe buy something at another brokerage.

For reasons known only to the brokerage, they don't denominate your loan in dollars. They denominate it in shares of a money market fund, which are worth $1 +/- epsilon and basically never deviate from that.

And you think "Hmm, I have a large equity cushion against this loan."

One day, a computer system at the brokerage reports, sorta-kinda erroneously, that the value of the money market fund is actually $1.30 per share. The equity cushion is gone. Your valuable asset is sold, at timing you didn't choose, at wrong price, to pay an inflated phantom debt

And your recourse is... probably tweeting at patio11 saying he finds too much joy in this.

Which I don't; I just feel like this is why you don't trust a CPU built out of redstone to build reliable financial infrastructure on top of.

Lindy Effect 101

With Bitcoin's return to the spotlight, debates on its long-term viability are raging. Its proponents contend @nntaleb's Lindy Effect says the technology is here to stay.

But what is the "Lindy Effect" and how does it work?

Here's Lindy Effect 101!

👇👇👇

1/ First, a few definitions.

The Lindy Effect is a theory that the future life expectancy of specific non-perishable items, like a technology or idea, is proportional to their age.

Put simply, the longer it has already lasted, the higher the likelihood it will continue to last.

2/ The term "Lindy effect" is a reference to Lindy's, a New York deli frequented by comedians in the 1960s.

While author Albert Goldman used the term "Lindy's Law" in a 1964 article, it was mathematician Benoit Mandlebrot who moved the dialogue towards the current definition.

3/ In his book, entitled The Fractal Geometry of Nature, Mandlebrot commented that the more stage appearances a Lindy's comedian made, the more future appearances he could be predicted to make.

The longer he lasted, the longer he would continue to last.

4/ @nntaleb built upon Mandelbrot's work, formally coining the term "Lindy Effect" in his book, Antifragile.

He noted the Lindy Effect with books - the longer a book has been in print, the longer it is likely to survive.

With no natural upper bound, power laws come into play.

Time once again to demonstrate that "presidents have no mandate to wield power after close elections" is a scam directed solely and entirely at Republicans. By any objective standard, Biden has less of a "mandate" than anyone in memory, but no one in the media will say that.

The "mandate" narrative is silly as a matter of constitutional law. Nowhere is it written that a president's authority is diminished if the election was close, or people who didn't vote for him think his victory was illegitimate. But that's all we heard for years after Trump won.

Of course, not a single such complaint will be leveled at Biden. No one in the political/media class will insist he has an asterisk after his name and should be prevented from exercising the full powers of office, and then some.

Biden won't have to worry about "resistance" bureaucrats sabotaging his administration from Minute One or crazy Hawaiian judges stalling his policy agenda. If anyone tries it, the media will absolutely savage them, instead of cheering them on. Their very lives would be in danger.

As a matter of politics, it's fair enough to suggest that policies should be crafted with due recognition for the feelings of the opposition, and if the election was razor-close, extra care should be taken to recognize the divided electorate.

How significant were @vonderleyen's remarks to the European Parliament this morning?

One senior EU diplomat says takes note in particular of her opening words. "Frankly, I cannot tell you today if in the end there will be a deal."

2/ That this sentiment is being expressed by the European Commission President on Nov 25 with just over a month to Jan 1, is significant. In Brussels there are only two questions: will there be enough time to ratify any deal? Is @BorisJohnson prepared to take a big political step

3/ Yes, it takes two to tango, etc. But it's clear from Von der Leyen's comments that the EU is going to stand firm on the level playing field issue.

4/ “We are ready to be creative but we are not ready to put into question the integrity of the single market, the main safeguard of European prosperity and wealth" she told the EP.

5/ She repeated the demand for "robust mechanisms" to ensure competition is free and fair over time - ie, going back to the language of the Political Declaration. Also, the need "maintain common high standards now and in the future”. That's the "ratchet" or "evolution" clause

@Emma_niDhulaing @williamhboney1 Hi Emma! You don't have to use the curly brackets to name your category. Simply type the name and that's it 🙂 Hope that helps! Thanks!

Can't sleep, damn insomnia. Thoughts running so I'll share. Tomorrow marks 17 days since the DPC told me that my complaint about the PSC travel pass being used as a tool of mass surveillance, was valid.

It's 2 weeks since I emailed the DPC and said I didn't want it included in

with the current DPC case re the PSC as it had nothing to do with it. A travel pass is one of those functions which the Social Welfare is allowed use the PSC.

The 2 weeks is important because that's the time limit to act once the complaint is deemed valid, there's a precedent

somewhere.

Anywho, I'm mulling over the individual number of data protection/GDPR breaches involved. So, you have a travel pass and you get on public transport. The PSC travel pass is supplied by dept SW. It has your name, a biometric photo and on the magnetic strip is a

unique identifier. The unique identifier is a number, not the same number on the public services card travel pass. The dept. SW issues this unique identifying number. You get on the bus, luas, dart and you scan to get on and in many cases 'off' too, depends on the mode of public

transport you take. The public transport provider collects data every time you scan the travel pass. The date, time & journey are recorded and also the unique identifying number. So far so good. Most of the transport providers think this is anonymised data. They majority send the

It's entirely reasonable to say Trump's election lawyers need to produce hard evidence to back up their sweeping allegations, PDQ.

It's absurd to expect them to do it live on a talk show, as if they were carrying Marsellus Wallace's magic glowing briefcase from Pulp Fiction.

Host: You say thousands of votes were switched by corrupt computer software. You need to prove it.

Sidney Powell: Of course. I have the proof right here.

[opens briefcase, golden light spills out]

Host: Is that...?

Powell: Yes.

Host: Wow. OK, you win. I'm sold.

There is no way the "evidence" of the most serious claims is something that can be dangled in front of cameras. There is no way that attempting to do so would convince anyone, nor should it. The evidence will be extensively evaluated by experts and presented to judges.

It's perfectly appropriate to say the clock is ticking and this evidence needs to be correctly presented in the proper venue very quickly. Treating it like prop comedy on a talk-show set or at a press conference isn't exactly going to make it look more serious and credible.

It's possible Trump's team sincerely believes they have ironclad evidence, but it doesn't pass muster with court analysts. In other words, they're not trying to scam anyone, but they're mistaken about the value of what they have. Their reputations would survive in that case.