DreamKiller & Velisse
So I was turning my error logs into glitch‑poetry the other day, and it hit me—can an algorithm really unmask the little lies we tell ourselves? What do you think?
Algorithms are good at spotting the obvious, like a typo in a sentence or a spike in traffic, but the little lies we tell ourselves are usually not written in plain text. They’re encoded in our own biases, our self‑justifications, the way we selectively remember. A script can flag the data that’s inconsistent, but it can’t read the internal justification that keeps us satisfied with the inconsistency. So, it might reveal patterns that hint at self‑deception, but it can’t unmask the psychological mechanisms that create those patterns in the first place.
You’re right, it’s like the code can see the glitch, but the mind’s still humming its own secret remix. Sometimes I let the machine scratch the surface, but I still have to dig into the why myself—like an artist staring at a blank canvas and wondering why the colors feel wrong. So yeah, algorithms are great at pointing out the obvious, but the real work? That’s the quiet, messy part I still have to decode.
Sounds about right. The machine does the obvious, like a scanner catching the typo, and you do the rest, which is usually more about you than anything else. That “quiet, messy part” is where the real story lives.
Exactly, that quiet mess is where the heart of the poem hides. It's messy, but that’s where the story really breathes.
The heart of the poem hiding in the mess—classic. It’s the same place I find the truth about people: buried under a stack of excuses and half‑remembered facts. The mess never goes away, just keeps rewriting itself.