I have Ubuntu 9.10 and installed it via the.deb package obtainable on Googles site.
There is no entry in/etc/apt/sources.list.d added, and consequently apt doesn't know about any updates. Also, the "Update" button in "About" is not present.
The various connections between the neurons is making up a lot of the complexity I'd think. And a bigger brain does not necessarily mean more of those connections, as the human brain has a lot more of these than the dolphin brain.
But yes, structures containing brains are at least as complex as brains.
Except maybe the intellectual-property laws enacted left and right in the US? I'm afraid if it proves remotely feasible Europe, etc. will follow.
I mean how is it possible that canada currently faces their DMCA variant (recent/. article) at all? I'd have thought that the nightmarish consequences in the US would prove enough of a derrent for other so called free countries not to follow suit.
Somehow I was living in a bubble where legislation is only bought in the US.
You really think that the designation of "smart folk" is a correct one for people who ignore posts based on it's/its mistakes?
Otherwise good luck with your effort to change the world... indeed a change seems to be needed and I have the growing suspicion that it might be connected with grammar.
Re:always, Always, ALWAYS, talk to a lawyer...
on
Moving Between Countries?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
One of the creepiest comments I've read in a long time...
Well, how about enlightening us on the aspects of marketeering that are concerned with *generating* new desires then?
"Helping to fulfill already present desires" is only one part of the story.
To link and (probably subvert) a "I need social acceptance" desire with, for instance, consuming alcoholic beverages is in my opinion something different altogether.
That said I'm with you that you are filling a niche that is, at least indirectly, wanted. So I'm not trying to bash you for it.
quite simple, but does the job. i've been rummaging through various multiple desktop environments for windows for years, and have come back to desktop twister regularly.
I purchased the beta-book half a week ago and I'm very impressed and pleased with the quality, let alone the mindset behind the decision to make it available early.
Re:It's a BS experiment.
on
Trust in a Bottle
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Which primarly works on people with a rather low awareness of their own inner workings. And yes, that probably makes the potential "victims" the majority.
Of course the only victim here is the person expressing trustworthy signals while intentionally aiming for manipulation for its own ends, knowing the signals to be fake.
What seems to happen is that the subconsciousness of the "seller" is picking up on the structures and processes involved in faking trust, and the perceived benefit of such behaviour. Consequently, parts of you that you are unaware of (which tend to be quite a few) start to employ this technique to get the "seller" itself into doing stuff based on trust. The net effect seems to be that you can not trust yourself, even while appearing "trustworthy" to you. Basically you start to fool yourself in a very organized and effective way, driving you deeper and deeper down the spiral.
This, of course, comes with quite a bunch of assumptions regarding mental processes, motivation etc. You may or may not agree with it, but it appears to be quite a good working model with outstanding capability to build valid hypotheses regarding possible future outcomes.
Usually you can "ask yourself" when you have betrayed your own trust, only to realize afterwards that you were coaxed into action thats not really in line with your true intentions.
People who have experience with various forms of addictions can probably testify to this without much introspection (if a proper amount of honesty is used).
My personal take on the matter would be that the more trained you become in exploiting trust, the harder it becomes to get trustworthy answers from yourself regarding matters of your own subjective makeup of the world.
Re:It's a BS experiment.
on
Trust in a Bottle
·
· Score: 2, Informative
No, but it gets broken down/metabolized to stuff thats acting neurotoxic. (if I recall correctly)
Prolonged and heavy use will result in actual, physical brain damage and degeneration. Bummer, really, I'm quite fond of the effects of XTC.
A friend of mine whos into chemistry and neurology says that you can probably take it once in a while without adverse effects. Like once or twice per year. Popping one every odd year has the added benefit that the pauses in between really tend to boost the (now rare trips) well beyond everything you experience with regular use. I've never been a regular user, so I have to resort to third person narratives of the effects here. The sum total of XTC taken by me is in the range of about 10 - 15 pills in my lifetime.
It would be easier to increase the frequency if you know what's happening. I'd like to offer you a workable mental image, which is factually (in regard to a scientifc baseline) a bit off and leaves out a lot of details, but seems to be structurally correct.
It seems that most we know and don't know (subconscious et al.) about us is tuned for one thing (amongst a multitude of others of course): extracting structure out of information.
I'd like to see a "gut feeling" as something ladden with information about structural integrity in respect to your current surroundings (including your own thoughts and concepts). If something ties in well with the rest of your knowledge, you grasp it easily, effortlessly and with (at least for me) unmatched speed. These seem to be the situations where you can trust your gut feeling the most.
But what about when you can't?
I'd say train the rest, the unconscious rest, to accept the same rules. Dissect every image and preconception, stereotype etc. you have, ask yourself what you *feel* about it, what your guess is about its structural integrity. If it feels wrong, keep asking, and give you the time to resolve it. If you arrive at the perceived center of this feeling, and find a mental concept not in tune with reality, adjust it. If you are not sure, try to devise an experiment to verify your assumptions against reality.
This takes a fair bit of effort and time, but sooner or later you'll start to feel the effects. (or not, it's reasonable to assume that I left out certain factors that might have been crucial for "success" as defined by my own impressions)
Well, if the projected image behaves like the stroboscope in your favourite bar this might or might not happen to some epileptics.
How about: "Don't look at stuff that makes you seize up?"
If you have a condition thats relatively rare with the rest of the population it's quite natural that you bite the bullet sometimes when the others don't.
Just for the record, I'm a latent epileptic. (No conscious or other than with an EEG measurable seizures up to now.)
Sure, but what do you identify with emotion in this context? When we look at memory, we often abstract to very high levels to describe interactions as we can observe them.
Those guys seem to set up their frame of reference regarding the physical substrate, the mechanics if you will, that may physically realise memory.
If you try to reduce "emotion" in the context of physical implementation, you see... what? Probably still nerves firing (mostly located in the amygdala perhaps?). So, if my hypothesis I just pulled out of my ass holds, one facet of emotion should also be high "nerve activation". Right now I don't see a necessity that nerves doing their learn trick must absolutely know what the "content" of those firing nerves is. Be it emotion, a past memory or a verbal construct - if it's active in the term of learning, it seems to get tied in.
Maybe we should try and masturbate a bit while learning, maybe the notion of an exam will become more pleasurable.;)
Slashdot Mirror
But there is no relief, ever. It just keeps going on and on, generating and amplifying fear along the way. What a miserable way to live life.
plz ignore. the terminal was on the wrong machine.
I have Ubuntu 9.10 and installed it via the .deb package obtainable on Googles site.
There is no entry in /etc/apt/sources.list.d added, and consequently apt doesn't know about any updates.
Also, the "Update" button in "About" is not present.
Gross misspelling of sanskrit maybe?
You may respect the circumstance that this particular faith was able to infect and sustain 1.8b minds. It's not much, but it's a start.
The various connections between the neurons is making up a lot of the complexity I'd think. And a bigger brain does not necessarily mean more of those connections, as the human brain has a lot more of these than the dolphin brain.
But yes, structures containing brains are at least as complex as brains.
... are going to ruin us all!
Hope That Helps, Have A Nice Day
In german, cornficker has exactly this meaning.
Except maybe the intellectual-property laws enacted left and right in the US? I'm afraid if it proves remotely feasible Europe, etc. will follow.
/. article) at all? I'd have thought that the nightmarish consequences in the US would prove enough of a derrent for other so called free countries not to follow suit.
I mean how is it possible that canada currently faces their DMCA variant (recent
Somehow I was living in a bubble where legislation is only bought in the US.
You really think that the designation of "smart folk" is a correct one for people who ignore posts based on it's/its mistakes?
Otherwise good luck with your effort to change the world... indeed a change seems to be needed and I have the growing suspicion that it might be connected with grammar.
One of the creepiest comments I've read in a long time...
Get the Canadian robot manipulators to build Canadian robot manipulators and you might take on the universe!
Well, how about enlightening us on the aspects of marketeering that are concerned with *generating* new desires then?
"Helping to fulfill already present desires" is only one part of the story.
To link and (probably subvert) a "I need social acceptance" desire with, for instance, consuming alcoholic beverages is in my opinion something different altogether.
That said I'm with you that you are filling a niche that is, at least indirectly, wanted. So I'm not trying to bash you for it.
"Even if this is true" ... "I think they can kiss your careers goodbye".
That would be a sorry state of affairs indeed.
quite simple, but does the job. i've been rummaging through various multiple desktop environments for windows for years, and have come back to desktop twister regularly.
z ip
download:
http://members.aol.com/SuperFlago/files/dsktw150.
pardon? what "right of profit" are you talking about?
I'd rather prefer healthy people to a healthy economy.
Is it?
I purchased the beta-book half a week ago and I'm very impressed and pleased with the quality, let alone the mindset behind the decision to make it available early.
Which primarly works on people with a rather low awareness of their own inner workings. And yes, that probably makes the potential "victims" the majority.
Of course the only victim here is the person expressing trustworthy signals while intentionally aiming for manipulation for its own ends, knowing the signals to be fake.
What seems to happen is that the subconsciousness of the "seller" is picking up on the structures and processes involved in faking trust, and the perceived benefit of such behaviour. Consequently, parts of you that you are unaware of (which tend to be quite a few) start to employ this technique to get the "seller" itself into doing stuff based on trust. The net effect seems to be that you can not trust yourself, even while appearing "trustworthy" to you. Basically you start to fool yourself in a very organized and effective way, driving you deeper and deeper down the spiral.
This, of course, comes with quite a bunch of assumptions regarding mental processes, motivation etc. You may or may not agree with it, but it appears to be quite a good working model with outstanding capability to build valid hypotheses regarding possible future outcomes.
Usually you can "ask yourself" when you have betrayed your own trust, only to realize afterwards that you were coaxed into action thats not really in line with your true intentions.
People who have experience with various forms of addictions can probably testify to this without much introspection (if a proper amount of honesty is used).
My personal take on the matter would be that the more trained you become in exploiting trust, the harder it becomes to get trustworthy answers from yourself regarding matters of your own subjective makeup of the world.
No, but it gets broken down/metabolized to stuff thats acting neurotoxic. (if I recall correctly)
Prolonged and heavy use will result in actual, physical brain damage and degeneration. Bummer, really, I'm quite fond of the effects of XTC.
A friend of mine whos into chemistry and neurology says that you can probably take it once in a while without adverse effects. Like once or twice per year. Popping one every odd year has the added benefit that the pauses in between really tend to boost the (now rare trips) well beyond everything you experience with regular use. I've never been a regular user, so I have to resort to third person narratives of the effects here. The sum total of XTC taken by me is in the range of about 10 - 15 pills in my lifetime.
It would be easier to increase the frequency if you know what's happening. I'd like to offer you a workable mental image, which is factually (in regard to a scientifc baseline) a bit off and leaves out a lot of details, but seems to be structurally correct.
It seems that most we know and don't know (subconscious et al.) about us is tuned for one thing (amongst a multitude of others of course): extracting structure out of information.
I'd like to see a "gut feeling" as something ladden with information about structural integrity in respect to your current surroundings (including your own thoughts and concepts). If something ties in well with the rest of your knowledge, you grasp it easily, effortlessly and with (at least for me) unmatched speed. These seem to be the situations where you can trust your gut feeling the most.
But what about when you can't?
I'd say train the rest, the unconscious rest, to accept the same rules. Dissect every image and preconception, stereotype etc. you have, ask yourself what you *feel* about it, what your guess is about its structural integrity. If it feels wrong, keep asking, and give you the time to resolve it. If you arrive at the perceived center of this feeling, and find a mental concept not in tune with reality, adjust it. If you are not sure, try to devise an experiment to verify your assumptions against reality.
This takes a fair bit of effort and time, but sooner or later you'll start to feel the effects. (or not, it's reasonable to assume that I left out certain factors that might have been crucial for "success" as defined by my own impressions)
For further reference I'd suggest "Science and Sanity" by Alfred Korzybski and "Philosophy of Science" by Sir Karl Popper.
Well, if the projected image behaves like the stroboscope in your favourite bar this might or might not happen to some epileptics.
How about: "Don't look at stuff that makes you seize up?"
If you have a condition thats relatively rare with the rest of the population it's quite natural that you bite the bullet sometimes when the others don't.
Just for the record, I'm a latent epileptic. (No conscious or other than with an EEG measurable seizures up to now.)
Me too, hence the ";)". Guess that may be part of the explanation that I generally associate learning with pleasurable terms.
Sure, but what do you identify with emotion in this context? When we look at memory, we often abstract to very high levels to describe interactions as we can observe them.
;)
Those guys seem to set up their frame of reference regarding the physical substrate, the mechanics if you will, that may physically realise memory.
If you try to reduce "emotion" in the context of physical implementation, you see... what? Probably still nerves firing (mostly located in the amygdala perhaps?). So, if my hypothesis I just pulled out of my ass holds, one facet of emotion should also be high "nerve activation". Right now I don't see a necessity that nerves doing their learn trick must absolutely know what the "content" of those firing nerves is. Be it emotion, a past memory or a verbal construct - if it's active in the term of learning, it seems to get tied in.
Maybe we should try and masturbate a bit while learning, maybe the notion of an exam will become more pleasurable.