Thanks for clarifying. I have read the news stories many times, and saw that he didn't commit what some Americans would call rape, and the women involved didn't want to press charges, but the government persisted.
However, whenever I see Assange discussed online there are so many people posting things that are not even "fact-based" or "based on a true story" with regard to his actions, and doing so with such temerity and with such a chorus of support, that it is hard to keep my bearings. I'm constantly wondering if the facts have changed while I wasn't looking.
One wonders if this could be the result of an intentional misinformation campaign.
Please clarify: Did or did not the two women involved with the accusation and resulting investigation tell the police they no longer want to press charges?
There are plenty of answers to that question, but that's not the question that bothers me. The question that you aren't asking is the one I answered with my conclusion. Namely, "Why keep them (us!) around if the purpose they have served is more efficiently accomplished by infinitely obedient automatons?"
That is the question that needs answering. The line of logic leading toward asking that question in the first place is almost inevitable. Overpopulation, ecological damage, environmental changes, political unrest, climate change, pathogenic mutation, destruction of the food chain; all point toward a "better future" if there just weren't so many damn humans around stressing the system to the breaking point.
I sure hope that when we get to that point someone comes up with a really good answer. I think we will need it.
Some people think that robotics are the solution to the problem of work; that the ascendance of adaptable machines under the control of human direction will usher in an age of previously impossible prosperity for the world. Some think we will all benefit, like a rising tide lifts all boats.
I get the feeling that once the means of production are securely in the hands of a self-sustaining robotic ecosystem, the proletariat, as a whole, will finally be seen by the elites to be as expendable as they already see each of us individually. A rising tide lifts all boats, yes...but what if you can't afford a boat...or worse, if you are chained to a machine.
TL;DR: Some people think the ruling class/elites will eventually move to another planet. Why would they do that when this one is already so nice? They could just have autonomous robots kill everyone they don't absolutely need. Once they are done its just a change of programming and a few attachments to beat the "sword robots" into "plowshare robots."
There's only two options I can think of to head off this kind of Carter catastrophie. One requires the 99% pre-preemptively striking down the 1%, their sycophants, all of their children, and anyone who could take their place. That ultimate expression of schadenfreude aside, the other solution that presents itself would be akin to the Claws of Grendel, i.e turning the tools of your tormentor into your salvation...through Personal Robotics.
Privacy in America: Everything about you is known to faceless corporations and the government. They trade it, sell it, bank on it, experiment on it, and capitalize on it. Oh, yeah, privacy means that people don't know private things about you. We have that! We will keep all of your information about you secret...but only from you!
The way things are now, your insurance company could, indeed have all of that information proving how healthy you are...and then raise your rates based on some irrelevant factor they collected along with all of that other data.
Then you could ask them why they raised your rates and they wouldn't have to tell you.
Personally, I think that any data about me, and any extrapolations made from that data should be perspicuous to me, immediately available if not already disclosed. Monetizing my behavioral traits, studying how to manipulate and control me through massive and ubiquitous data collection combined with behavioral analysis and experimentation, and then hiding all of the information, analysis, and experiments about me from me is one of the things that makes me consider armed insurrection.
Too bad the rest of my American brothers and sisters are content to place themselves, their freedom, privacy, self determination, and agency below that of both government and corporations. That's not how this thing we call America is supposed to work. The pyramid is inverted and we, the People, are being crushed by the weight of it.
There are, count em, 5 government investigations into Uber currently. Pretty hard to wrack up that many concurrent investigations no matter what company you work for. Why would there be that many investigations going on? That has to put a severe strain on their company's legal budget and severely cramps the management team's time.
Pardon me for being suspicious of shit like this. It's almost like the entrenched business interests and our government work together to squash innovative new companies that could compete and ultimately might topple the status quo.
I think of it as the same kind of behavior Tesla experienced when they were trying to roll out manufacturer owned dealerships throughout the USA. The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) lobbied the fuck out of many state's legislatures to make damn sure the wedge of franchise law was driven deeply between Tesla and their paying customers. Paying customers....sorry. You know, us...the public. Yeah, that's entrenched business interests using their position and power, through the law and state legislatures, to shit on the free market. Free market....sorry. You know, our freedom...our ability to use innovation, the public domain, and balls to contribute to creating progress.
I still can't buy one in Texas from a dealership. It's against the fucking law.
Don't get me started on Disney and their concerted efforts to bribe away every American's right to innovate with things that were created during their lifetime. Copyright law is already extended so far it fucking creates powerful entities with the ability to influence or outright control the laws about itself. "If you want access to your culture, you will need to pay first. Thank you, now I can buy enough congresspeople to make sure every generation from now until eternity will have to pay to watch Alladin." And we want that kind of monster recursively writing copyright law about itself?
Not that I expect any of you to do anything about this. We just want to watch a show. It's fighting for its survival.
God, where was I before I totally lost it? Oh yeah. Watch those entrenched interests. They won't let anything come between them and the parts of you they already own. Especially you.
Understood. What you are experiencing is not uncommon. You are so put off by someone that given the choice to A) get what you want from them, or B) complain about/antagonize/obstruct/frustrate/attack them, you will pull lever B. Repeatedly. Even until it kills you.
One could appeal to Machiavelli, where the ends justify the means, as a remedy for such a self destructive mindset. The application is, in this context, apropos as we are looking at the political landscape. All that is required is a reorganization of priorities and viewpoint from the model of taking personal offense and returning personal offence toward a model where you have the end result in mind and work backward to the actions that will create that result. Of course, implicit in this is that you must sacrifice your infantile desire to punish and attack the object of your distaste.
Since this is the price of entry, and so few are willing to pay that particular toll, one could easily come to the conclusion that for most people who habitually yank lever B they have no deeper agenda than that. They aren't really concerned with anything other than venting, attacking, obstructing, and whinging. Dr. Phil would say they already have their payoff. Their complaints aren't really about ends, their complaints are personal. That's a question you would have to answer for yourself. From what you posted, it looks as if you already did, whether you acknowledge it or not.
If this is the actual case, "Russia saw Donald as a weak man they could easily manipulate by guiding his ego," (and I believe it is) then you can say many things about Democrats, but you can't call them smart, effective, or mature.
Controlling someone who has their over-inflated ego attached to a very specific self image, and is incredibly eager to present that self image in public, is easy. You appeal to that nature, couch your desires in terms of how it will reinforce the image they want to portray. Play to their ego, mention their legacy, compliment them on possessing those positive traits, and show them how a specific course of action will prove to everyone they possess those positive traits Imply or present scenarios where inaction or action other than what you desire would be detrimental to the image they want to portray or even better, would be seen as evidence their desired image is a fraud. If you are successful, which is incredibly easy if you are mature enough to focus on results rather than your own childish impotent rage, your enemy will bend over backward and crab-walk over fire to show everyone who they are and in the process do exactly what you want.
Democrats have really overdone the second part, impugning his character, saying he's a fraud, a racist, a sexist, a NAZI, a traitor, a heartless ignoramus, etc. They missed the whole first part though, and as such have missed every opportunity to manipulate this man into doing their bidding. They are so emotionally overwrought they have become completely ineffective at politics. It is they, not Trump, who are their own worst enemy. By definition this makes them, as a group, not as intelligent as Trump.
It also makes Putin their political, emotional, and intellectual superior by a huge margin. No wonder they fear him so much. They are incapable of following where his mind goes, impotent to control their actions the way he does, and so helplessly addicted to outbursts of infantile outrage they can't stop, even if doing so meant they could control the White House after a lost election.
If that's not an indictment of the negative effects of partisanship and how it destroys the minds, power, and agency of those who continue to practice it, I don't know what is.
From what he wrote I see he is saying exactly what he wrote and not what you added to it. Namely, that underhanded and dishonest tactics practiced by a political party had repercussions that contributed to that party's loss of an election.
Fruit of the poisoned tree is inadmissible in a court of law, but not in the court of public opinion.
I think you have the association backwards. Attacking heretics, insisting on compliance, not being in favor of fairness are all Clintonesque characteristics, and are what lost her the election.
In short, it was the character and integrity of those Bernie voters that kept them from voting for Clinton.
Remember, the reason the US elected Trump is because they didn't want another Republican.
"One way of understanding her is to realize that she is unfinished with conflicts that occurred in her childhood."
Another way to understand her is that she is constantly recreating conflicts that occurred in her childhood with people who had nothing to do with those childhood conflicts.
This takes a considerable amount of work and intentionality.
You should capitalize "TO ME" instead of "good service." It's the only way to honestly read what you wrote, and its the only honest way to write what you wrote.
You can pick up a story at any point and make a new beginning. It doesn't mean that your interpretation of the beginning is the beginning. Your mind is completely trapped in self referential mode. You do not see the forest, only your own foliage.
What you are saying is that having good service for yourself is infinitely preferable to having good wait staff available for everyone. You want well trained waitstaff who are responsive to your needs and who are eager to give you good service. You're just not willing to participate in creating that if anyone else benefits. That's cool. Just go to 2-3 star Michelin restaurants and pay for the service you want.
It's not uncommon to think the way you do. You think that life is a zero-sum game and you are perfectly happy with this, as long as you get more and others get less. The commons is a place where, when you deign to make an appearance, everyone should sit up, take note, and defer to your every whim.
It's not realistic, but it is self serving, which for someone who is self serving, is all the justification needed.
Sadly, I must admit that I allow myself to be irritated when I receive work emails containing questions with multiple question marks at the end.
One should suffice. Any more and it becomes very difficult to interpret the question in a civil tone. It looks like the person is being derisive, condemning, and condescending.
What a generous and forgiving company. Our company had a 13 questions, 1-10 scale. Anything less than a 100% average for the month meant you lost bonuses and pay, and this was generally between 15 and 25 customers.
Do work. Try different behaviors. Do different things. Focus on different aspects of the job.
Observe tips over time. Large tip when doing this consistently. Small or no tip when doing this. Hmm.
Looks like a pattern. Repeat large tip actions and see if they continue to bring larger tips. Revise as necessary.
That's how it works. You participate and everyone wins. It is not a zero sum game. Your tip for good service, especially if accompanied by communication about what you really liked, is a service to both the waitperson as well as every customer they meet after that.
Ambition is frequently the result of laboring under the illusion of inadequacy. Ambition has the goal of providing the proof to self and other that you are not inadequate. The proof is the target of the ambition. See this whatever? It's proof that I am not inadequate inside. See! I'm worthwhile because I have X.
If meditation relaxes some of the ambition driven by inadequacy I would not be surprised.
Just because your understanding of divine forgiveness is incomplete and fucked up doesn't mean it undermines responsibility or the concepts of salvation, redemption, forgiveness, justification, unconditional love, grace, divine justice, etc.
What becomes completely obvious from your post is you lack the ability to see the "policy of god toward man," called grace, which when identified invests the observer with the ability to then transmit that same grace toward other humans.
Instead you see an excuse to do whatever you want, none of which is informed by or modeled on the characteristics of divinity or the descriptions of the spiritual life detailed in the associated hardcover materials. You incompletely and inaccurately saw one small part of a staggeringly large concept, separated it from all of the other integral parts that make it functional, removed and steadfastly rejected all of the other interdependent concepts from the whole, and declared it unworkable. Well, duh! You broke it, misused it, and falsely represented it. Of course it's easy to vilify. You set it up that way.
But that's just it. That is what you see. Not everyone else sees that. You brought that, you chose to see that, and you made your conclusions based off of yourself instead of the concept that you so sorely misunderstand. Is it any wonder you feel so strongly about it? It's all you, only about you, and your relationship to grace.
Ego death, selflessness, the connection of all things, the first lesson from Adam and Eve's fall: They are all the same. People have been pointing to this phenomena for millennia, if you haven't noticed.
Look! Here come a bunch of self serving, arrogant, isolated, status-seeking people who stretch and think hard about how cool they look in their yoga pants. After looking at themselves in the mirror for an hour, comparing themselves to all of the other scantily clad people in their class, and meditating on how many people they are going to make want to fuck them because they do Yoga, no increase in selflessness was discovered. Big fucking surprise. FYI, this world will supply you with an infinite number of straw men to attack and hold up as proof that thinking you are not the center of the universe is a worthless pursuit.
When you can get past the bullshit inherent in any human system you may find what other people have found: There is no superiority in losing your separation. Compassion, contribution, empathy, and service are more likely results.
You don't get that in a posh yoga studio, surrounded by rich people trying to look good while trying to look good at looking good. How obvious can obvious be? The answer is, of course, "Not obvious enough."
A river, a lap, and a fist walk into a bar. The first one dries up, the second one stands up, and the third one opens up. The bartender yells, "Hey! No Crossdressers!"
"I don't want a brand new car that needs to be repaired because it wasn't adequately QCd in the first place."
Then you won't want to ever buy a car from companies such as Honda or Toyota (or any car company for that matter), provided it is the first model year of a new engine, new body, or both. Every car company has issues with the first year model of a new model or engine, guaranteed.
Pretending like they don't so you can shoot darts at Tesla is disingenuous.
As for why people pre-ordered, we both know why they did it. They are interested in disrupting the oil-centric automotive model for any number of sub-reasons under that heading.
Your opinions are so prejudiced, emotional, one-sided, and lacking foresight that it looks as if you have a separate, unspoken agenda that is informing and shaping them.
The original experiments weren't sexual in nature. Adding in sex, and the payoffs of sexual experience, to the dominance/submission routine is a confounding factor, not a clarifying one.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for clarifying. I have read the news stories many times, and saw that he didn't commit what some Americans would call rape, and the women involved didn't want to press charges, but the government persisted.
However, whenever I see Assange discussed online there are so many people posting things that are not even "fact-based" or "based on a true story" with regard to his actions, and doing so with such temerity and with such a chorus of support, that it is hard to keep my bearings. I'm constantly wondering if the facts have changed while I wasn't looking.
One wonders if this could be the result of an intentional misinformation campaign.
Please clarify: Did or did not the two women involved with the accusation and resulting investigation tell the police they no longer want to press charges?
This is seriously confusing.
One thing I have learned about chores. If you want some alone time where no one will interrupt what you are doing, go do the dishes.
No one dares.
Is that like the game of "tag"?
NUKE!! No nuke back!
There are plenty of answers to that question, but that's not the question that bothers me. The question that you aren't asking is the one I answered with my conclusion. Namely, "Why keep them (us!) around if the purpose they have served is more efficiently accomplished by infinitely obedient automatons?"
That is the question that needs answering. The line of logic leading toward asking that question in the first place is almost inevitable. Overpopulation, ecological damage, environmental changes, political unrest, climate change, pathogenic mutation, destruction of the food chain; all point toward a "better future" if there just weren't so many damn humans around stressing the system to the breaking point.
I sure hope that when we get to that point someone comes up with a really good answer. I think we will need it.
Do it quietly, but please do it.
Some people think that robotics are the solution to the problem of work; that the ascendance of adaptable machines under the control of human direction will usher in an age of previously impossible prosperity for the world. Some think we will all benefit, like a rising tide lifts all boats.
I get the feeling that once the means of production are securely in the hands of a self-sustaining robotic ecosystem, the proletariat, as a whole, will finally be seen by the elites to be as expendable as they already see each of us individually. A rising tide lifts all boats, yes...but what if you can't afford a boat...or worse, if you are chained to a machine.
TL;DR: Some people think the ruling class/elites will eventually move to another planet. Why would they do that when this one is already so nice? They could just have autonomous robots kill everyone they don't absolutely need. Once they are done its just a change of programming and a few attachments to beat the "sword robots" into "plowshare robots."
There's only two options I can think of to head off this kind of Carter catastrophie. One requires the 99% pre-preemptively striking down the 1%, their sycophants, all of their children, and anyone who could take their place. That ultimate expression of schadenfreude aside, the other solution that presents itself would be akin to the Claws of Grendel, i.e turning the tools of your tormentor into your salvation...through Personal Robotics.
Yes please, sign me up.
Privacy in America: Everything about you is known to faceless corporations and the government. They trade it, sell it, bank on it, experiment on it, and capitalize on it. Oh, yeah, privacy means that people don't know private things about you. We have that! We will keep all of your information about you secret...but only from you!
The way things are now, your insurance company could, indeed have all of that information proving how healthy you are...and then raise your rates based on some irrelevant factor they collected along with all of that other data.
Then you could ask them why they raised your rates and they wouldn't have to tell you.
Personally, I think that any data about me, and any extrapolations made from that data should be perspicuous to me, immediately available if not already disclosed. Monetizing my behavioral traits, studying how to manipulate and control me through massive and ubiquitous data collection combined with behavioral analysis and experimentation, and then hiding all of the information, analysis, and experiments about me from me is one of the things that makes me consider armed insurrection.
Too bad the rest of my American brothers and sisters are content to place themselves, their freedom, privacy, self determination, and agency below that of both government and corporations. That's not how this thing we call America is supposed to work. The pyramid is inverted and we, the People, are being crushed by the weight of it.
There are, count em, 5 government investigations into Uber currently. Pretty hard to wrack up that many concurrent investigations no matter what company you work for. Why would there be that many investigations going on? That has to put a severe strain on their company's legal budget and severely cramps the management team's time.
Pardon me for being suspicious of shit like this. It's almost like the entrenched business interests and our government work together to squash innovative new companies that could compete and ultimately might topple the status quo.
I think of it as the same kind of behavior Tesla experienced when they were trying to roll out manufacturer owned dealerships throughout the USA. The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) lobbied the fuck out of many state's legislatures to make damn sure the wedge of franchise law was driven deeply between Tesla and their paying customers. Paying customers....sorry. You know, us...the public. Yeah, that's entrenched business interests using their position and power, through the law and state legislatures, to shit on the free market. Free market....sorry. You know, our freedom...our ability to use innovation, the public domain, and balls to contribute to creating progress.
I still can't buy one in Texas from a dealership. It's against the fucking law.
Don't get me started on Disney and their concerted efforts to bribe away every American's right to innovate with things that were created during their lifetime. Copyright law is already extended so far it fucking creates powerful entities with the ability to influence or outright control the laws about itself. "If you want access to your culture, you will need to pay first. Thank you, now I can buy enough congresspeople to make sure every generation from now until eternity will have to pay to watch Alladin." And we want that kind of monster recursively writing copyright law about itself?
Not that I expect any of you to do anything about this. We just want to watch a show. It's fighting for its survival.
God, where was I before I totally lost it? Oh yeah. Watch those entrenched interests. They won't let anything come between them and the parts of you they already own. Especially you.
Understood. What you are experiencing is not uncommon. You are so put off by someone that given the choice to A) get what you want from them, or B) complain about/antagonize/obstruct/frustrate/attack them, you will pull lever B. Repeatedly. Even until it kills you.
One could appeal to Machiavelli, where the ends justify the means, as a remedy for such a self destructive mindset. The application is, in this context, apropos as we are looking at the political landscape. All that is required is a reorganization of priorities and viewpoint from the model of taking personal offense and returning personal offence toward a model where you have the end result in mind and work backward to the actions that will create that result. Of course, implicit in this is that you must sacrifice your infantile desire to punish and attack the object of your distaste.
Since this is the price of entry, and so few are willing to pay that particular toll, one could easily come to the conclusion that for most people who habitually yank lever B they have no deeper agenda than that. They aren't really concerned with anything other than venting, attacking, obstructing, and whinging. Dr. Phil would say they already have their payoff. Their complaints aren't really about ends, their complaints are personal. That's a question you would have to answer for yourself. From what you posted, it looks as if you already did, whether you acknowledge it or not.
If this is the actual case, "Russia saw Donald as a weak man they could easily manipulate by guiding his ego," (and I believe it is) then you can say many things about Democrats, but you can't call them smart, effective, or mature.
Controlling someone who has their over-inflated ego attached to a very specific self image, and is incredibly eager to present that self image in public, is easy. You appeal to that nature, couch your desires in terms of how it will reinforce the image they want to portray. Play to their ego, mention their legacy, compliment them on possessing those positive traits, and show them how a specific course of action will prove to everyone they possess those positive traits Imply or present scenarios where inaction or action other than what you desire would be detrimental to the image they want to portray or even better, would be seen as evidence their desired image is a fraud. If you are successful, which is incredibly easy if you are mature enough to focus on results rather than your own childish impotent rage, your enemy will bend over backward and crab-walk over fire to show everyone who they are and in the process do exactly what you want.
Democrats have really overdone the second part, impugning his character, saying he's a fraud, a racist, a sexist, a NAZI, a traitor, a heartless ignoramus, etc. They missed the whole first part though, and as such have missed every opportunity to manipulate this man into doing their bidding. They are so emotionally overwrought they have become completely ineffective at politics. It is they, not Trump, who are their own worst enemy. By definition this makes them, as a group, not as intelligent as Trump.
It also makes Putin their political, emotional, and intellectual superior by a huge margin. No wonder they fear him so much. They are incapable of following where his mind goes, impotent to control their actions the way he does, and so helplessly addicted to outbursts of infantile outrage they can't stop, even if doing so meant they could control the White House after a lost election.
If that's not an indictment of the negative effects of partisanship and how it destroys the minds, power, and agency of those who continue to practice it, I don't know what is.
From what he wrote I see he is saying exactly what he wrote and not what you added to it. Namely, that underhanded and dishonest tactics practiced by a political party had repercussions that contributed to that party's loss of an election.
Fruit of the poisoned tree is inadmissible in a court of law, but not in the court of public opinion.
I think you have the association backwards. Attacking heretics, insisting on compliance, not being in favor of fairness are all Clintonesque characteristics, and are what lost her the election.
In short, it was the character and integrity of those Bernie voters that kept them from voting for Clinton.
Remember, the reason the US elected Trump is because they didn't want another Republican.
"One way of understanding her is to realize that she is unfinished with conflicts that occurred in her childhood."
Another way to understand her is that she is constantly recreating conflicts that occurred in her childhood with people who had nothing to do with those childhood conflicts.
This takes a considerable amount of work and intentionality.
You should capitalize "TO ME" instead of "good service." It's the only way to honestly read what you wrote, and its the only honest way to write what you wrote.
You can pick up a story at any point and make a new beginning. It doesn't mean that your interpretation of the beginning is the beginning. Your mind is completely trapped in self referential mode. You do not see the forest, only your own foliage.
What you are saying is that having good service for yourself is infinitely preferable to having good wait staff available for everyone. You want well trained waitstaff who are responsive to your needs and who are eager to give you good service. You're just not willing to participate in creating that if anyone else benefits. That's cool. Just go to 2-3 star Michelin restaurants and pay for the service you want.
It's not uncommon to think the way you do. You think that life is a zero-sum game and you are perfectly happy with this, as long as you get more and others get less. The commons is a place where, when you deign to make an appearance, everyone should sit up, take note, and defer to your every whim.
It's not realistic, but it is self serving, which for someone who is self serving, is all the justification needed.
Sadly, I must admit that I allow myself to be irritated when I receive work emails containing questions with multiple question marks at the end.
One should suffice. Any more and it becomes very difficult to interpret the question in a civil tone. It looks like the person is being derisive, condemning, and condescending.
What a generous and forgiving company. Our company had a 13 questions, 1-10 scale. Anything less than a 100% average for the month meant you lost bonuses and pay, and this was generally between 15 and 25 customers.
That should never happen, because you communicate this to the waitperson every time, right?
Do work. Try different behaviors. Do different things. Focus on different aspects of the job.
Observe tips over time. Large tip when doing this consistently. Small or no tip when doing this. Hmm.
Looks like a pattern. Repeat large tip actions and see if they continue to bring larger tips. Revise as necessary.
That's how it works. You participate and everyone wins. It is not a zero sum game. Your tip for good service, especially if accompanied by communication about what you really liked, is a service to both the waitperson as well as every customer they meet after that.
Ambition is frequently the result of laboring under the illusion of inadequacy. Ambition has the goal of providing the proof to self and other that you are not inadequate. The proof is the target of the ambition. See this whatever? It's proof that I am not inadequate inside. See! I'm worthwhile because I have X.
If meditation relaxes some of the ambition driven by inadequacy I would not be surprised.
Just because your understanding of divine forgiveness is incomplete and fucked up doesn't mean it undermines responsibility or the concepts of salvation, redemption, forgiveness, justification, unconditional love, grace, divine justice, etc.
What becomes completely obvious from your post is you lack the ability to see the "policy of god toward man," called grace, which when identified invests the observer with the ability to then transmit that same grace toward other humans.
Instead you see an excuse to do whatever you want, none of which is informed by or modeled on the characteristics of divinity or the descriptions of the spiritual life detailed in the associated hardcover materials. You incompletely and inaccurately saw one small part of a staggeringly large concept, separated it from all of the other integral parts that make it functional, removed and steadfastly rejected all of the other interdependent concepts from the whole, and declared it unworkable. Well, duh! You broke it, misused it, and falsely represented it. Of course it's easy to vilify. You set it up that way.
But that's just it. That is what you see. Not everyone else sees that. You brought that, you chose to see that, and you made your conclusions based off of yourself instead of the concept that you so sorely misunderstand. Is it any wonder you feel so strongly about it? It's all you, only about you, and your relationship to grace.
Ego death, selflessness, the connection of all things, the first lesson from Adam and Eve's fall: They are all the same. People have been pointing to this phenomena for millennia, if you haven't noticed.
Look! Here come a bunch of self serving, arrogant, isolated, status-seeking people who stretch and think hard about how cool they look in their yoga pants. After looking at themselves in the mirror for an hour, comparing themselves to all of the other scantily clad people in their class, and meditating on how many people they are going to make want to fuck them because they do Yoga, no increase in selflessness was discovered. Big fucking surprise. FYI, this world will supply you with an infinite number of straw men to attack and hold up as proof that thinking you are not the center of the universe is a worthless pursuit.
When you can get past the bullshit inherent in any human system you may find what other people have found: There is no superiority in losing your separation. Compassion, contribution, empathy, and service are more likely results.
You don't get that in a posh yoga studio, surrounded by rich people trying to look good while trying to look good at looking good. How obvious can obvious be? The answer is, of course, "Not obvious enough."
A river, a lap, and a fist walk into a bar. The first one dries up, the second one stands up, and the third one opens up. The bartender yells, "Hey! No Crossdressers!"
On the underside of one of the megaliths:
For the LAST time!
Show your WORK Billy!! F-!
"I don't want a brand new car that needs to be repaired because it wasn't adequately QCd in the first place."
Then you won't want to ever buy a car from companies such as Honda or Toyota (or any car company for that matter), provided it is the first model year of a new engine, new body, or both. Every car company has issues with the first year model of a new model or engine, guaranteed.
Pretending like they don't so you can shoot darts at Tesla is disingenuous.
As for why people pre-ordered, we both know why they did it. They are interested in disrupting the oil-centric automotive model for any number of sub-reasons under that heading.
Your opinions are so prejudiced, emotional, one-sided, and lacking foresight that it looks as if you have a separate, unspoken agenda that is informing and shaping them.
The original experiments weren't sexual in nature. Adding in sex, and the payoffs of sexual experience, to the dominance/submission routine is a confounding factor, not a clarifying one.
Do you even science, bro?