#development of application with frameworks

[austinbreesjump]

Node js Vs PHP: Which is Better for Your Project? - JumpGrowth

Here's an in-depth look at the node js vs PHP debate so you can discover which one will take your project to the next level.

[mwsprofessionals]

Top 14 Websites for you to learn coding FREE in 2021

Website development for starters 

[thinkstartpl]

Top Flutter App Developer Company to Hire in Beverly Hills, California.

With Flutter attaining so much attention in the market, most of the businesses that reach out to us to build cross-platform app development frameworks,  Flutter is one of the best option for your next app development. So read out this guide about - Top Flutter App Developer Company to Hire in Beverly Hills, California.

[miraculoussoft]

Difference of the Native and Cross-platform Applications

Off course, it’s the time where cross platform mobile app is ahead of the native. But the preference can be changed with the change of technologies and the requirements.

Native App is designed and develop with a focus on particular platforms such as Android, iOS, etc.

With Cross-platform frameworks, you have the opportunity that a single code can work on multiple platform.

Latest technologies like Xamarin, Flutter, React Native, etc. make possible to do so. 

click on: Benefits of Multiplatform app development framework 

[laravelvuejs]

Vuejs Interview Questions and Answers 2019 |Javascript| - VueJs

Vuejs Interview Questions and Answers 2019 |Javascript| – VueJs

Vuejs Interview Questions and Answers 2019 |Javascript| – VueJs

[ad_1]

Vue.js Interview Questions and Answers for Freshers or Beginners 2019

#Vuejs #Javascript #Vue #Framework #Questions #Answers #Tips

For Nodejs: https://youtu.be/CIPY8mEWmOg

For Javascript : https://youtu.be/niqMp3PSjj0

For React Native: https://youtu.be/_kthzrV4h-k

Subscribe To Our Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/Interviewgig

View On WordPress

[n1k0laa5]

information to soothe your doubtful soul

i’ve had this little rant packed in my head to help anytime anxiety, fear or doubts crept up behind my back during shifting attempts and trying to manifest something; and I DO NOT GATEKEEP! so, i hope this helped someone—anyone out there like it helped me!

robert monroe wasn’t a “traditional” scientist, but a pioneering consciousness researcher that i find extremely interesting. he founded the monroe institute, a research and educational organization to explore expanded states of consciousness, such as OBE’s and astral projection.

this institute uses techniques like hemi-sync audio technology, which is sound patterns to affect brainwaves used in programs like the gateaway voyage.

that ring a bell? remember the rave about the CIA documents and the gateway experience?

THAT was a consciousness training system developed by none other than this institute. it was notably investigated by the CIA in the 1980s for its potential applications in psychic research and remote viewing. do i need to repeat myself? THE CIA HAS DOCUMENTS AND WORKED ON THIS.

not only that, in 1978—the US military sent officers to the institute for OBE/OOBE training. in 1983, they sent additional officers.

this institute ALSO publishes scientific papers on studies about altered states of consciousness.

hold onto that.

if this really was woo-woo, would the CIA even consider investigating? would they release documents and the tapes? would the military send ANYONE?

1994, FRONT-PAGE article in the wall street journal stated that the head of the zen buddhist temple in vancouver shared his opinions on the institute, and i quote, “gateaway students can reach meditation states in a week that took me thirty years of sitting.”

going back to the man himself, robert.

key aspects of his scientific approaches were that he used himself as a primary test subject for his research, documenting them as best as he could. his accounts were recorded in his book called “journeys out of the body”.

later, he authored two more books in 1985 and 1994 named: “far journeys” and “ultimate journey”.

he went on to become a prominent researcher in the field of human consciousness. with all that in your mind, let’s move to shifting and manifestation.

given the above—altered states, other planes of existence, the amount of people who doccument their OOBE’s..

do you not believe that there’s more?

if human consciousness can quite literally detach from the body, perceive environments outside of physical sensation, and return with consistent reports… that reality is still fully objective and fixed?

seriously, take one look at astral projection.

i attempted studying it and immediately got hit with non physical realities, vibrational states in the astral plane, focus levels, entire environments that aren’t bound to the physical body at all, yadda yadda yadda..

this isn’t a rant to make you believe in astral projection, you don’t have to. my point is..

if consciousness can disengage from the body and enter another environment,

if awareness can move independently of matter,

if perception is not locked to the brain the way we were taught,

and if such oddity comes from reliable research on our consciousness—

why is it suddenly ridiculous to suggest that consciousness could tune into a different reality entirely?

why does “leaving your body” sound more reasonable to people than “entering another reality,” when both rely on the same foundational idea: consciousness is not confined to one physical framework?

shifting doesn’t come out of nowhere. manifestation doesn’t either.

they sit on the same damn axis as astral projection. altered states of awareness, changes in perception, and interaction with reality through consciousness rather than force. hello???

the anecdotal evidence of shifting, manifestation success stories, the entire fucking life of neville goddard; which i can DEFINITELY go into deep detail into. the same way the monroe institute taught many, so did he. he had students, he was a teacher, he HAD a teacher himself. neville and robert both produced repeatable results for people willing to engage seriously.

these weren’t anonymous tiktok accounts, these were real people who lived entire lives studying consciousness and left behind a legacy and systems that people still use today, and the fact that modern documentation shows up as sparkly tumblr posts, reddit threads, or personal journals doesn’t invalidate the data.

it just reflects the era we’re in.

the same way science didn’t stop being real when it moved from handwritten notes to PDFs,

consciousness research doesn’t stop being real because it’s shared online.

so when people say:

“well, shifting and manifestation just sound fake”

what they’re really saying is: “i’m comfortable with consciousness being weird but only up to a point that doesn’t challenge how i live.”

and look, and you don’t have to believe in shifting or manifestation either!

but pretending it came out of nowhere is intellectually dishonest.

i rest my case, your honor.

[aretheygayvideos]

Calling a technology "bad for the environment" is a politically vacuous framework. It makes invisible the ways classes of people intentionally develop tech in a resource-intensive way. It erases the fact that tech is controlled by PEOPLE who should be held accountable. Saying that anything is "bad for the environment" isn't useful framing. Throwing a napkin in the street is bad for the environment but negligible compared to driving a car or eating meat. Yet, the negligible act feels worse. The better framing is: is the resource cost worth the benefit provided?

I think the resources required to develop genAI and machine learning are worth the cost. BUT there's no reason for dozens of companies to build huge proprietary models or for aggressive data center expansion. AI CAN be developed sustainably. But a for-profit system doesn't incentivize this.

Some might argue that any use of AI is a waste of resources. This is disingenuous and ignores the active applications of AI in education, medicine, and admin. And even if it were frivolous, it's okay for societies to produce frivolous things as long as it's produced sustainably. Communist societies will still produce soda, stylish hats, and video games.

Even if you think AI is frivolous, it CAN be produced sustainably, but we live in a for profit system where big tech companies are using a ton of unnecessary resources in ways that hurt the public. But we know tech (not just AI) can be sustainable & energy efficient. Computing is one of the most energy efficient things humans do compared to how much we rely on it, and is only increasing in efficiency.

If you're critical of AI, framing it as uniquely bad for the environment isn't useful and isn't true. At the individual level, it's less wasteful than eating meat and slightly less energy intensive than watching Netflix. Some models can be run locally on your computer. Training can be energy intensive but is infrequent, and only needs to be done once per model.

Also, there are real harms in overstating AI energy use! Energy and utility companies are using overinflated AI energy numbers to justify a huge buildout of oil and gas.

If you're critical of AI, you should instead ask: What are we getting for the resources used? What outcome are we trying to get out of AI & tech development? Are all these resources necessary for the outcomes we seek? AI CAN be environmentally sustainable, but there are systems and people who want to foreclose this possibility. Headlines like "ChatGPT uses 10x more energy than Google search" (not even true), shift blame from institutional actors onto individuals, from profit-motives onto technology.

[alrightnightlight]

Writing Complex Dissociation: Which Disorder Does (/Should) My Character Have?

I want to say first and foremost that not all dissociative disorders inherently make someone a system. Not even dissociative tendencies. You can have complex PTSD, for example, and dissociate a lot, and not be a system. In the same way you can have a dissociative disorder and not be a system -- the only subtype of OSDD that implies systemhood is OSDD-1; types 2, 3, and 4 don't.

Dissociation on its own is a symptom of a lot of things, and we all experience mild forms of it daily throughout our lives (ex: sleep/wake transition stage, getting lost in thought). It is the structural elements, interference in day-to-day life, and the complexity of said dissociation that inform whether 1) someone's dissociation is disabling, and 2) whether that disability is related to systemhood. This post is going to be centering writing system characters in particular.

DID, P-DID, and OSDD-1 are all complex disorders that are all too often simplified and demonized in stories meant to "include" us. Taking the first step into doing proper research is already miles above what most people do, and I and so many others appreciate that!

And I'm glad you're starting here, with what you're going to be writing in particular.

That said: even if you don't want to outright say in direct words what your dissociative character has, and would rather show it subtextually, it'd be good to have an idea so you have a framework to build off of, and so you have a consistent, well-established facet of your OC's identity.

DID, OSDD, P-DID - What's the Difference?

Good question! And it's important to note before anything else that the diagnostic criteria for something like DID versus, say, OSDD-1, will vary in some ways depending on where you live! In one country, what is considered OSDD might be read as DID if the exact same person is seen somewhere else!

Systems and dissociative disorders ARE observed globally. This is not a "Western phenomenon" or "something US Americans made up" -- DID has been observed as far south or east as South Africa, Australia, Japan. Population ratios between those with DID and without it are also very consistent in countries that have performed that research!

(It is very much a worldwide thing, and very much an intersectional thing. We are not all Cis White Man From Boston. Just doesn't work that way!)

And on top of that, covert dissociative disorders can be incredibly hard to diagnose due to how well they can slip under the radar or mask as other things. Standalone PTSD, personality disorders, that sort of thing -- the lines can be very blurry, and what you're seen as to a professional can vary from PTSD to DID to OSDD depending on how you present that day. So cases aren't often clear-cut, especially not from an outside point of view!

By no means am I making a comprehensive post here, but it's good to have a baseline idea for the differences so that you can do more applicable research moving forward. This is generally what those differences compose of:

[Long post (VERY long post) under the cut!]

Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID)

– “Disruption of identity characterized by two or more distinct personality states, which may be described in some cultures as an experience of possession (...)” and “marked discontinuity in sense of self and sense of agency, accompanied by related alterations in affect, behavior, consciousness, memory, perception, cognition, and/or sensory-motor functioning.”

"Two or more": keep that in mind! There is a minimum number of two alters a system can have (host included, the host is also an alter), but no maximum. This is due to how individual each DID experience can be! Someone can have exactly two alters in their system, while others can have 100+. (These experiences are known as polyfragmented DID. This type of DID is developed under very specific circumstances, highly complex, and highly under-researched, to the point where I'm only not going over it longer because I feel as if it warrants its own post.)

The average reported system count is around 8-13. If you need a baseline, go off of that!

Marked discontinuity in "sense of self and agency" can be a lot of different things; affect and motor functioning refers to tone, cadence, the way you speak and move and hold yourself, cognition/perception/memory refers to amnesiac barriers, outlook, morals, likes and dislikes -- everything down to the way you think can and will differ.

People with DID often feel indecisive, or inconsistent, and don't understand quite why until it's revealed (if ever). You can have one opinion one day and the complete opposite the next because of conflicting interests in alters. You may have to explain why your feelings and views contradict so frequently without consciously remembering that conflict happening.

It's also noted that changes in behavior may be noticed by others, but not always. And if they do, it rarely is thought to be DID -- my sibling, for example, while I was still in high school, would notice blatant switches and assume I was just having a "weird day" or I was "stressed". They noticed the consistency in behavioral changes, but thought nothing of it because I'd always been like that. EXTREMELY subtle symptom presentation is the norm.

– “Recurrent gaps in the recall of everyday events, important personal information, and/or traumatic events that are inconsistent with ordinary forgetting.”

Day-to-day life, important events, personal details, years and years of childhood and later, will just be gone. It's not there. Inaccessible. You might not even notice it's missing, either.

Due to the nature of dissociative disorders being dissociative, these gaps are very good at camouflaging themselves. You aren't paying attention to these things like your peers are, so you don't pick up on warning signs right away. And it takes even longer to notice patterns.

This can also look like having the same realization about the same thing multiple times. And it feeling new, and world changing, Every Time. It can feel like you're going in circles indefinitely with everything you do.

– “The symptoms cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.”

It's A Disability If It Disables You Basically. Again, some level of dissociation is normal to experience, it is the severity that is the problem. Like how daydreaming itself is fine, but could become maladaptive and disrupting in daily life.

– “The disturbance is not a normal part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice. Note: In children, the symptoms are not better explained by imaginary playmates or other fantasy play.”

This is why tulpamancy is not and should not be lumped in with dissociative disorders. It is a religion-specific practice, and something only a Tibetan Buddhist can speak on, which I am not, so I can't. What I will say: the implications you might see from people that tulpamancy is in any way comparable to a trauma-centric dissociative disorder are both ableist (implying OSDDID is a "practice" or something somebody can decide to "do") and extremely culturally insensitive (there is nothing disordered about Buddhist practices).

On topic again:

(Additionally: the idea of "tulpas" the way most Westerners practice it when divorced from the religion is a skewed interpretation of something only lightly "inspired" by Tibetan Buddhism. It is a very similar situation to how white people will talk about the "seven chakras" when that is nothing at all close to what chakras are. Not only is it appropriation, people are also defining it incorrectly! I plan on compiling my own post about misinformation related to these things once I have enough applied knowledge to be able to do that.)

(Update (September 1, 2025): Tibetan Buddhism in itself is NOT a closed religion! It is open for people to practice! I wasn't aware of this and have corrected it! That said, practices are still related to that sect of Buddhism, and the appropriation I was referring to was when people say they're practicing tulpamancy separate from Buddhism and divorced from the context, which is literally when appropriation happens. And which I see people doing all the time, specifically IN system spaces, trying to equate things that cannot be equated. THIS is what I was referencing, people that are not Buddhist and say they are not Buddhist trying to redefine what Buddhism is.)

(The religion is open but that does not mean its practices shouldn't be handled with respect. That is what I meant by "taking inspiration," when people that otherwise have no interest in the faith are only ever involved for one thing they think Looks Cool. That Sucks. And, STILL, a cultural practice of religious significance is still not the same as a complex trauma response.)

If the experiences line up with cultural or religious practice and are not disabling to the person, it is not OSDDID because it did not form the same way. If a child is engaging in escapism via fantasy play and said play is controllable by the child, it is not OSDDID because the motions are voluntary.

These experiences are all still real! And deserve respect! But they cannot be categorized the same -- like how generalized epilepsy and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures present similarly in some ways but aren't the same thing, or how a fainting spell might look like a seizure but isn't a seizure. It'd do a disservice to both to lump them in with one another, if that makes sense!

– “The symptoms are not attributable to the physiological effects of a substance (e.g., blackouts or chaotic behavior during alcohol intoxication) or other medical condition (e.g., complex partial seizures) (American Psychiatric Association, 2022).”

Speaks for itself but I'm Including It Anyway.

— All criteria backed by the DSM-5. All quoted text brought from the linked organization (DID Research) and goes into further detail than I have, if that's something you're interested in. (And you should be! Don't take my word alone for it, look deeper!)

———

All other types (OSDD, P-DID) are disorders that mostly fall under this criteria, but diverge in some significant way. This does NOT make anyone with these disorders "less real", it only means they have a different experience with structural dissociation -- and structural dissociation is highly individual, dependent on the person and their situation (so you'll be hard pressed to find two systems that experience their disorder the exact same way).

This is just something that happens. Very confusing disorder to have!

———

Partial Dissociative Identity Disorder (P-DID)

– All criteria for DID diagnosis is met, EXCEPT:

– “(...) the person still experiences a disruption of their identity, like in DID, but there is a ‘dominant’ personality which is usually at the front. Intrusions from other parts are infrequent and irregular, perhaps only happening during a particularly distressing or emotional experience.” — “What are the Dissociative Disorders?”, International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation

By "intrusions", people mean switching, or executive control. Different terms that mean the same thing.

In OSDDID cases outside of P-DID, alters will have the ability to take executive control of the body -- this is something that, most of the time, is not present in P-DID. I've seen it described by a P-DID system through the roommates allegory: that collective is there in the building, and they all share the space, but only one of them answers the door.

This is usually the case, but a P-DID system can break out of that -- switching, etc. can still happen in some P-DID systems, particularly when under severe distress.

P-DID, as said by the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation, is most commonly recognized and diagnosed outside of North America. P-DID is also the least discussed from what I've seen, which may or may not be correlated in some way. (Again, how these things are labeled and understood will vary from place to place and group to group! It's important to get multiple perspectives on a given subject for that reason.)

———

“Other specified dissociative disorder (OSDD) is a dissociative disorder that serves as a catch-all category for symptom clusters that do not fit neatly within another dissociative disorder diagnosis.” — “DID Versus OSDD-1”, DID Research

Otherwise Specified Dissociative Disorder, Type 1A (OSDD-1A)

– All criteria for DID diagnosis is met, EXCEPT:

– Alters are not distinct enough for the circumstances to be treated the same as DID. For this reason, this particular type of system will especially go under the radar, often misdiagnosed as PTSD or BPD, or not read as a disorder at all.

Otherwise Specified Dissociative Disorder, Type 1B (OSDD-1B)

– All criteria for DID diagnosis is met, EXCEPT:

– Inter-identity amnesia is not present. Emotional amnesia is more common than complete blackouts; I hear the term "greyout" used quite often in reference to this kind of amnesia.

NOTABLY: I distinguish between the two here because they used to be more heavily utilized in the diagnostic process, but aren't anymore. It is NOW mostly refered to as OSDD-1 and that is IT, but I wanted to include this information anyway because of how often it circulates. The labels may be outdated in some places, but they will come up in research so it's handy to at least know what they mean.

AND ANOTHER THING TO ADD: because of this some systems with OSDD have been diagnosed under the old criteria and may self-identity as having 1A or 1B instead of OSDD-1 on its own. It is their right to self-label how they feel fits their circumstances. Please do not go around telling people not to call their disorder the name they've been using for forever. It's not like the case of autism versus "Asperger's" it is NOTHING like that the context is SO different PLEASE!!

Back on topic, and As Said Above. Both of these OSDD types above fall under type 1. Types 2, 3, and 4 are also considered OSDD, but are not system disorders.

Presentation of a dissociative disorder, overt and covert, is also nearly never this cut-and-dry. [For all intents and purposes you CAN be very straightforward as you build your character at first, but the disorder is complex and messy, so if somebody doesn't seem to fit cleanly into one type as you write at first, that's alright!]

What About UDD?

Unspecified dissociative disorder (UDD), from my understanding, is used in the way that DDNOS (dissociative disorder not otherwise specified) used to be. A medical note of UDD is there to clarify that a given patient has a dissociative disorder, but it is not yet clear which category they fall into.

UDD encompasses any disordered experiences outside of specific known conditions, and many (but not all) people with a UDD diagnosis are given more specific names for their condition later -- someone could have P-DID and have UDD in their medical record because they haven't got the chance to be fully evaluated yet, for example!

“This diagnosis, along with Other Specified Dissociative Disorder, act as a "residual category for dissociative symptoms which do not fit within a more specific category" and either the clinician decides not to specify the reason that the criteria for other Dissociative Disorders aren't met, or not information information exists to make a more specific diagnosis.”

“If a reason can be specified, e.g., dissociative trance, then Other Specified Dissociative Disorder should be diagnosed instead.” — “Unspecified Dissociative Disorders”, Trauma Dissociation

The ICD approaches unspecified dissociative disorder the same way the DSM does: “it cannot be diagnosed when a more specific diagnosis is appropriate.”

If your character is going to have experiences that would fall into the unspecified category, then go right ahead! Because people do have experiences that may fall outside of a typical presentation for a dissociative disorder, but still have a dissociative disorder. UDD just encompasses all of those cases, so be very specific with what kind of experiences you're going to be writing so it isn't unrealistic or disrespectful. Make sure you don't write something contradictory without intent!

Writing Complex Dissociation: Narrow Down What Type, Then Do Specific Research

Overall: I ask that you be very mindful of exactly what condition you're writing and why. (And where -- remember, regional differences can impact labels, perception, treatment, everything!) But if your character's story is a more complicated one, that's perfectly fine, I'd even say it's more realistic! The nature of complex dissociation is that it isn't clean and clear-cut and easy to define!

Nothing is as blatant or linear as how it looks on paper. I recommend before starting any specific writing, of course, to pinpoint which type of structural dissociation you're going to be modeling off of and what you want to achieve by doing that; we can get into all the gritty details once that foundation is established!

And again, this is a GENERAL post! I did not go NEARLY as in-depth as I could have and encourage everyone to do their own research (with discretion)!

———

References:

– DID Research.

– International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation.

– Trauma Dissociation.

———

Next: Comorbidity in OSDDID [In Progress] →