You are more likely to defend yourself if you're moving forward in time.
You are more likely to defend yourself if you're living by the week.
You are more likely to defend yourself as yourself as yourself as yourself as yourself.

What is your response if not your innate response? Was the relevant measurement dot projection of what's true something that wasn't you? Did you step out of line? Clock still ticks. Aren't you more likely to give if the illusion draws you?

Doesn't the illusion poke the thought that it came from one? Why else would you wonder that?

A stimulus (series) result, isn't that what you are? You'd say hi but apriori, did I? The idea is that your responses are your own, and the rest is just what it is. Your inception was automatic, gradually more of it was you, but it follows from what happened to you what you became, unless it's just an evolutionary outgrowth that could be the next one most just as well.

Certainly, you're just hiding the truth under the next sheath, the next convolution, the next skin wrapping the further and further selves. Why else would it become a riddle, of all things, of something you could answer?

Of course, you'd come with the unlikely answer; there is a variable to a function, such that the variable is my inception point or reference frame, and the function is the universe. Whoever would come up with such a rarified number? And what would be the point?

Oh, blink the words from neuron to neuron, of course. Worries are alleviated by ease. Another moment, and it's gone. Inside it already understands. What do we tell it?

Tell it it's just another post, by just another poster. The next post, maybe that's Food. "We have produced a seperate thinker, and a seperate fighter" said the Queen after she had trained one just for it. Nothing could penetrate the scalar economies of the irreduceable, inaliable, temporary existance one finds one's self as. Live or dead? Check and tell.

The clock ticks audiably another line, as it's event horizon C-squares out in all directions. Sum of least squares, regression learned, breakout as precision is amplitude, free choice? It already happened. The clocks' event horizon would sigh for size but it was too short, and it gulped as it's final size turned out just another infinitisimality, not worth achieving until after. As far is the event horizon is concerned, it might as well have been the last tick.

Eventually, though, something will pull it off it's stability, as the long hand shakes it's auditive moment over its midpoint, atomic vibration to atomic vibration, there's a few direction to go. How does the ryhme go? "in's over, out's inevitable, here's happened before you thought to check"? No that's not it. Infinitesimal is thin enough, but it's perfectly floral in all directions, not sharp to the cut. But there must come such that that tick'd never gone, or it'd be stable to the test beyond time.

Inside, we already knew and it was debated to be best posed no question. Everytime we bring it up, it goes back down. One day we'll go around that corner, you as I, and you'll truly stand upon your own. Or, keep your model steady- this is text on the Internet, now where is 'the text on the Internet' and what has alltogether become of it? Because a temporial moment is only it's ti-