As far as I am concerned, 2001 stands as the most ambitious film of all time.
Stanley Kubrick succeeded in bringing to the screen a science fiction masterpiece that is both cosmically expansive and profoundly introspective, with the central subject being nothing less than the evolution of consciousness itself.
The opera works on multiple levels, but its most powerful allure is subliminal, tapping into the subconscious, evoking ancestral memories, and foreshadowing a universal destiny.
Even today, nearly 60 years later, despite immense strides in technology and special effects, one cannot help but be astounded by how far ahead the director was both technically and in terms of screenplay. "2001: A Space Odyssey" embodies the very essence of cinema.

Reddit Is shit.

To think that an armed population stands no chance against a heavily armed government is to misread both history and basic logistics.

The U.S., for instance, has over 393 million civilian-owned firearms distributed among a diverse and decentralized populace. While the government possesses advanced weaponry, it’s constrained by the very nature of governance—its infrastructure, its economy, and its interdependence on that same citizenry. An indiscriminate approach (e.g., deploying large-scale destructive weapons) would be self-defeating, unraveling both state and society.

Historical resistance movements show that power asymmetry doesn’t render the populace powerless. The decentralized, civilian model is resilient, not in a head-to-head militaristic sense, but by making domination unfeasibly costly and practically implausible for any centralized force. This balance is precisely why armed citizens deter tyrannical impulses, not by matching force but by dispersing it.

This.

From a broad causal perspective, the right to keep and bear arms underpins our very ability to engage in discourse on fundamental human rights. It stands as the primary safeguard, arguably making it the most crucial right to uphold by any means—within or beyond the bounds of legality.

Freedom, at its core, is the ability to design and choose our own paths without interference from those who seek control. It’s an open field of possibility, where individuals can pursue truth, meaning, and growth on their own terms. To design freedom, we architect resilient systems and ideas that respect and enhance autonomy.

In a world where control is the norm, freedom isn't just given; it’s designed, built, and sustained.
For me, freedom is a bit of a paradox: it’s both the absence of restriction and the presence of meaningful structure. It’s about cultivating spaces where people have the agency to decide for themselves, supported by tools that amplify their own voices rather than dictate them.
So, my mission as a 'freedom architect' is to create blueprints for sovereignty; not just in the digital realm, but in the mind and spirit. Freedom isn't a destination; it’s a constant practice of claiming and reclaiming power over oneself.