You may never read this being and AC, but if you do, remember that you have not made a point in your own favor here.
Here is why, you say 1.5+ million people died due to the sanctions. Fine, that is ok with me. However, the government of Iraq was actively circumventing the sanctions, trading oil for currency under the table. Ok, so the fine and upstanding government of Iraq uses this money to buy food and infrastructure improvements for the people that they love so much, right? Well no, I guess they didn't. In fact, they loved their people so much that they spent all that money on weapons and lining the pockets of the ruling family.
All you have done is point out EXACTLY what I am pointing out. Unfortunately you are like so many people that I see that think that each country lives in a bubble, isolated in all of its decisions, not affecting others outside its borders, never deserving of intervention regardless of the actions of its rulers.
Think on this, you observe a man in his home, his children are starving, he beats his wife, his home is falling apart, the lights are turned off, there is no running water and he is buying lots of guns and bombs instead of feeding his children. This is a microcosm of Iraq. They were falling apart internally and the majority of their funds were spent keeping their people in line and arming themselves for international wars, all the while comitting the most heinous human rights violations imaginable on their own populace.
And the US is unscrupulous for intervening? Where were you when these thing were going on in Iraq? Why speak up against it now that it is changing, even getting better for many of the people in that area of the world?
Because it was hard to learn how to play people didn't spend time on it
Change "hard to learn how to play" to "making me puke...literally" and I think you might get close to the real thing. I REALLY wanted to learn how to play that game (and by play I mean master it). I loved the totally 3D environment and the way it made me think was really cool, however the visual stimulus was making me nauseous after a while. So much so that I actually started retching a bit when I kept playing in spite of the warning pangs from my stomach. Alas, it was not meant to be with me and the 3d.
As for quake, I really loved the idea of the grapling hook. It added a level of 3D movement to the environment that allows me to dominate even most serious players. I have developed personal techniques to accelerate myself to immense speeds, to quickly change direction, to get into another players "blind spot", and accordingly to shoot while doing all these actions. I kinda feel like spiderman sometimes, especially when I can navigate between rooms without touching the floor, all the while moving at least 2x the speed of a walkign character. It makes it hard to hit someone who knows what they are doing with the hook and you have to adjust in all X,Y,Z coordinates to attack them.
As an aside, some of the stuff I do I figured out with the grappling hook I learned from visualizing some of the battles in Ender's Game.
"It was two large, male officers versus one small woman, perhaps they could have easily subdued her physically."
These guys were performing their job. Their job is to embody the collective will of our government and people when they make law. The law that they are enforcing is the substance which holds our society together.
In defying the police in such a manner that "woman" was figuratively giving the finger to every law abiding citizen that has inhabited this country since its founders' time.
What I find even more absurd than her behavior is that people think that a police officer should have to subdue someone like this. She could have had a weapon of some kind. She could have waited till the police officer was half in the car and started to drive off. There is no reason why that police officer, entrusted and empowered with upholding the law that keeps our country alive, should have had to put himself in harms way like that.
What is even worse is that if he had tried to subdue her and had gotten hurt or killed in the process, his family would have to live off of the donations of other officers and the few concerned and respectful citizens. If she had received a scratch or two she would have lived off of our tax dollars, in the lap of luxury, for the rest of her life.
The irony in cases like this is sickening. Someone who flaunts blatant disrespect and disregard for the law could, through the legal system itself, get all the law abiding citizens to chip in and pay for a lottery-winner-like dispensation to them because chose to break the law.
You want a picture of what is really worng with the USA? Don't look at the White House, just look at that "woman."
You got modded funny, but the really funny part is regardless of how much money NK does or dosent spend on things other than food, people will still starve in that country because it is what that government wants.
You think that they lack funds to feed people? Yeah sure, just like Ethiopia lacked the funds and ability to feed their people in the 80's and 90's. Oh wait, I forgot about the hundreds of tons of food that just rotted on the docks while the ruling class held parties and banquets that cost millions of dollars a night. Sorry, but hunger, starvation, and death are the primary tool and self appointed right of a power-centric/communistic government. Remember that the only capital to spend in that government structure is the people. And, just like the capital we have, it can be wasted on whims and thrown away wantonly by those in power. Even worse is the fact that a portion of their country has to be destroyed in this way to make sure that the government stays in power.
And people criticise the USA for being a war-crimes and civil rights abuser of the highest caliber. In a world where the systematic starvation of the majority of a country's population recieves massively less attention than someone putting hood on a guy's head and making him take his clothes off, I wonder if there can be any solution to the problems that plague those of us who react with indignancy to violence and injustice.
It really is that simple. The customer is about to spend a considerable amount of money with you or someone else. They want to hand their hard earned cash to someone that they like. Nothing galls a person more than putting money into the coffers of someone they do not like. It is kind of like handing a donation to a political party that you are idealogically antagonisatic to. It dosen't leave a good taste in your mouth.
All you have to do, as a salesperson, is make sure that you do not do or say anything that abuses the relationship with your customer. Furthermore, if you put the needs and goals of your customer on par with your needs and goals and find a way to achieve BOTH of them you will be amazingly successful.
...scientists discover thet people who are high do stupid shit!
Really though, I would like to see the test repeated with other mind altering substances. Maybe you could jack someone's seratonin levels and see what happens when you do the test, or administer some MDMA (kinda does the tame thing, but has other efects as well). Then grab some drunks and repeat the test.
This may just be a correlation between inhibition levels and "intoxication" or at least "adulteration" of the mind. I think that to see what is really going on there need to be more tests done. That is the problem with behavioral testing, correlation and causality can be easily misconstrued. By this I mean that what they are interpreting to "trust" could easily be "trying to impress" or "bad judgement".
And, come to think of it, it would be handy to know what mix of chemicals made it easiest to get someone to hand over all their money to you.
Regardless, logic and awareness of truth are two entirely different things. Logic, in many circumstances, works to elucidate truth for a myriad of subjects.
Unfortunately I see a disparity in the subjects that you are comparing and the tools you are using.
Namely this: Once you can use logic to explain the creation of the universe and the creation of life you can then legitimately use logic to refute or prove claims on the source, intent, purpose, and meaning of said subjects.
Until that point you are using a mental tool to critically analyze something that it cannot be used to sufficiently explain. Kind of a reverse a fortiori principle if you will. It exposes a weakness in the tool and therefore invalidates the tool at a fundamental level, with respect to the subject at hand.
As an aside, one thing about religions from the ancient past that makes them mentally slippery and shows the foresight and recognition of the same arguments that you are making now: all of the meaning and purpose presupposed in the belief system is redeemable at death, invisible and hidden from those still living, perpetuating the great secret. Pretty slick.
Actually both you and the grandparent poster stated your personal beliefs, nothing more.
One said that the universe has meaning because his God told him what it was.
The other said that there is no purpose to the universe; didn't give a reference to why he believes this, but with the lack of evidence to the contrary (other than all the religious texts in history, dubious as they are to some people) this can be taken at face value.
Take it as an example that both of you could be wrong. There could be a meaning and purpose to the universe/life and it may be different than what the grandparet thinks it is (experience, knowledge, and such).
Stating that the universe has no meaning and life has no purpose has as much weight as someone stating that it does. Until you can stand outside the universe and explain in minute detail the exact workings of all things in and outside of it you can't make a dogmatic statement of this kind without falling prey to the argument of "faith". By the argument of "faith" I mean that you are relying on your own faith and not empirical evidence for your statement.
Just because you have no evidence of the universe caring or having a specific meaning dosen't mean that it dose not. Similarly, just because the grandparent poster thinks it has one dosen't mean that he is right. It either may or may not, and even if it does it might be something different than he believes.
As for anthropomorphising, prove that the universe and life do not have human characteristics or analogues thereof. Don't state your personal belief as proof to the contrary.
You just used the definition of existetntialism as a universal truth and people modded you insightful.
That is tantamount to me saying "Jesus is Lord" or "Allah is the only Way." All three are just one persons belief and they have no evidence to suggest otherwise.
The oddest thing that I can think of is that we live on a planet TEEMING with life and there is evidence of only ONE (1) species that has attained the level of intelligence posessed by humans.
This, in my mind, is the most singular example of how rare intelligence. If intelligence of our kind was even semi-common we would have seen at least a couple of examples of it here on Earth. Add this factor into your equation and then you might come to another conclusion.
Personally I think it would be awesome. Imagine what it would be like to talk to a alien intelligence that happens to have the same geographical frame of refernce.
I never thought of it before, but maybe that is what those wacky dolphin-humpers are looking for. Darn, maybe they aren't so wacky after all, just wishful.
I have thought it would be instructive to show children advanced subjects in a preview type fashon, being aware of those who show perspicacity and insight. Those that start to catch on can be taught more.
Even better would be nursery rhymews that teach the relationship between numerical values in a sing song fashon. A little pre-school brainwashing for higher education. Can't remember if tan is cos/sin or sin/cos? Just remember the nursery thyme about Simon jumping over his cousin. You could even incorporate the the ratio change and the effect on the tangent in the same setting. Make it funny, give it a catchy rythm, maybe a sing-song tune to go along with it and *POOF*, instant calc student at the age of 5! Just let them know what the rhyme really means later and you have won half the battle. Being able to connect an abstract subject to something concrete gives reason and memory an anchor from which understanding can grow. Man I really should take my own advice and write a friggin children's book.
Another thing I thought that might be instructive is to show people how great minds came to their great discoveries. In other words , dispel the myth of the apple on the head by being explicit about what steps the famous thinkers went through to get to their famous ideas. If you can follow that then you can recreate the thoughts of some of the greatest minds in history, right in your own HEAD! Do it enough and you might just learn to be a genius yourself, or at worst, someone who is exceptionally well versed in most of the major advancements in technological history. Of course this would be for higher level classes, but start early and you just might catch some prodigies or special talents and encourage them to be the most that they can be.
By this I mean that I assume industrial espionage is much more lucrative than governmental information, and therefore companies are much more likely to be a target.
As for which is easier, forget the boundaries and roadblocks, if the payoff is high enough someone will find a way around it.
Can't remember where I heard this, but you reminded me of this, you sick bastards... Sometimes I sit on my hand until it goes numb before I masturbate with it.
I call it..."THE STRANGER."
Re:Spoken Like a Good Twitch Gamer
on
Top Mice Compared
·
· Score: 1
I used to feel the same way about mice. Buy one, use it, get used to it.
I went out on a limb and bought a boomslang about 3 years ago. It took over a week of playing to get back to where I was as far as competetion. Then I got better, and better, and better over another 3 or 4 weeks. The response time, precision, and consistency was TONS better than the mice I was used to, it just took awhile for me to get used to the sensitivity.
About 7 months ago my 22" monitor sat on the boomslang's cord, cutting it almost in half. I switched back to one of my old optical mice I had put in the drawer (actually a pretty nice one). Since then my game has suffered and my frustration has been slowly building. I recognize that motions that used to be simple to do are now quite difficult, especially when it comes to turning quickly and accurately over about 60 degrees. Presicion is also a major issue, with losses in the long distance railing/sniping. Definitely has hurt my game and my enjoyment, but I have a new Boomslang on order now!
Your comments lead me to the thought that if we are able to effectively simulate or duplicate human intelligence in a constructed information structure, then there should be no impediment to creating an intelligence from scratch to fill that same structure.
In other words, if we can model a human being in a computer so effectively that it is considered a duplicate then we should also be able to create an artificial intelligence with human level intelligence in that computer as well.
Personally I do not think that humans are anywhere close to being able to do either of these things, but when/if they can I think that the artificial intelligence would come first, albiet in a reduced capacity.
"basically, advertise the 'snob' value of classically mined diamonds, even if they are less perfect.
Being in the auto industry I have seen the pinnacle example of this reverse marketing idea, ie. taking a weakness and selling it as somthing a client would want to have.
I wandered past a Jaguar display one year at a trade show and there was a huge display screen playing a video of a proper English gentleman (pipe, tweed jacket with the elbow patches, moustache, etc. you get the picture) extolling the virtues of owning a Jaguar. He talked of the luxury, the prestige, the status, the legacy, and the style of the car in loving detail.
Then he began to talk about how often he had his Jag in the shop and how it was a sign of true preeminence that he could endure the time without it. He basically said that it was an honor to have his car break down on him repeatedly.
At that point, right there, in front of about 20 people who were watching the video with me, and who looked like they were just about to fall for it, I started laughing hysterically. I think it kinda broke the spell that codgy old British bastard was casting because they also saw the complete bullshit in what they were seeing and started laughing as well.
The rest of the week I would take my friends and associates by the Jaguar booth and show them the video. Eventually people in the booth started turning off the display when they saw me coming.
"One effect is that a "pure" diamond glows in certain wavelengths of light (blacklights, I think"
The term for what you are talking about is flouresence. Alot of diamonds will flouresce, regardless of purity. One problem with flourescence is that it changes invisible light (ultraviolet-the blacklight you are talking about) into visible light. This means that the diamond could appear to posess a better color grade than it deserves to based on its inclusions, etc.. A little flourescence is not bad, but it can sometimes make a "bad" diamond look alot better than it should, defrauding an unwary customer.
The good thing is that flourescent diamonds look better than normal ones. Also, a good diamond that also flouresces can look really great and can sometimes be had for a lower price as well, to those who know what they are doing.
I can vouch for the use of cocaine as a local anesthetic by doctors. My niece was bitten by a dog on the mouth a few years ago and they uesd it to numb her face while they did the initial repairs. Not sure about what was used by the plastic surgeon in the later operations.
As for PCP it did have a recent resurgence of use experimentally for treatment of stroke patients. Most stroke patients have the majority of their brain destruction caused by the production of glutamic acid. It is produced in large quantities when oxygen is REINTRODUCED into the brain after the stroke happens. PCP prevents this glutamic acid production, but it was considered unsuitable for use in the general population for obvius reasons. Other drugs have now been created that will eliminate the symptoms without making the patient see angry purple midgets.
The angels had free will as well and ALL of them were created to bring God glory. The question you have to ask yourself is this...with a third of the angels in rebellion, promised to the lake of fire, why create mankind at that time. Sure it is impossible to know the mind of God, however, it is easy to realize that there is a connection between the promise to Satan of the lake of fire(which was never intended for mankind) and the fact that people who do not believe in Jesus will inhabit it with Satan and his angels.
Sure, free will is important, it is a fantastic gift and singular demonstration of Grace. However, I take issue with your mentioning that we can hurt God. God is completely self sufficient. He posesses happiness as an intrinsic resulting from His integrity. The fact that mankind does not choose Him does not hurt him in the way that mankind would be hurt by rejection. Please consider also that God, being omniscient, understood all of the actions, motivations, thoughts, antecedents and factors involved in every decision ever made in Creation before it was ever made. Also consider that omniscience contains all of the possibilities that could have been and holds them in immediate frame of reference with those things that have and will occur. Based on this, and the fact that God is eternally happy by his own description, I think that it is anthropopathism to say that humans hurt God by rejecting Jesus Christ.
As for my sounding like a Satanist I will just say that I am definitely not, and that my understanding of the history (and future history) of the universe as described in the Bible is probably fundamentally different than yours with respect to motivations and development of repercussions in interaction of Satan and his angels and God and his angels.
Sorry about the link, I may have inadvertently edited it out, I definitely forgot that it was.org! Check out this page on Satanology for some info on the thoughts and motivations of Satan . The five "I will" statements are in themselves enough to refute the idea of Satan as merely a spoiling influence with only the motivation of harming God's plan. There is a deeper agenda there and this page might clue you in to some of it. There is more, however, and the info is available, but you might need to read a little systematic theological study of the subject and digest that first, even see if you want to believe what is presented before exploring further.
"Satan does not in any way want what is best for mankind, he would love to destroy mankind. He wanted the same things as God, to be glorified above all,
This sentence combo is contradictory. If mankind was created to give glory to God, and Santan wants to be glorified above all, he therefore seeks the glorification that mankind will give to God for himself. Destroying the creation of God does nothing for Satan, he wants to rule over it and receive all the glory and worship (remember when Satan offerd Christ all the kingdoms of the world if He would worship him?) that God the Father should receive.
From the perspective of God, of course Satan is defeated. He was defeated before he ever sinned because of who and what God is. This, however, does not stop God from allowing him to carry out his plans. Why? Because the failure of Satan and the glorification of mere humans above the angels through the inheritance of Christ is an example of the character of God that all the angels need to see. That among other things, but to consider Satan defeated in his own mind, to think that he has no other goal than to disrupt God's plan for mankind, is in direct conflict with the scripture as well as logic. If you consider that God's plan for mankind also is intertwined with Satan being deposited into the lake of fire then I guess your statement if technically correct, however there is more going on than just obstructionism.
"In the Star Wars universe, the only reason the Jedi can get away with using lightsabers is because the Force gives them the ability to see a little bit into the future."
It's the end of chivalry in Star Wars just as it was here
Further proof of the chivalrous, knight-like analogy of the Jedi: If you go bad you get lightning projectile weapons. The implication is that you are cheating and violating an unwritten code.
Simple really. Satan and his angels who did not participate in the angelic salvation event (whatever it was we do not know but it seperated permanently the 1/3 of the angels and Satan himself from Eternity in the presence of God and damned them to the Lake of Fire) claimed that God was unjust when he condemed them. In essence they said "how can a God who is love condemn them to eternal damnataion? Isn't that a conflict of character?" This declaration was made in front of the entire heavenly host. God, being who He is created mankind in order to prove that he is just, loving and righteous, as he has discribed Himself.
Your appeal to free will is trumped by the fact that angels had the same ability, before man was ever created. Satan and his angels had the same problem that Adam had in the garden, rebellion. Why recreate the free will play again when you had not dealt witht he first one? Of course the reason is above.
Unfortunately I do not think that you have ever heard of the angelic conflict. This is established Christian doctrine, regardless of the fact that many churches do not teach on it (this problem is epidemic in that many church teachers teach things that are patently false and ignore things that are part of systematic Christian theology. But who could tell you the differnce unless they teach systematic theology like in seminary and break down the scriptures from the original languages?). It explains why God allows Satan to continue to do what he does on the Earth as well as the reasoning for the creation of mankind. It explains (among many other things) why there are fallen angels, why believers achieve a status higher than angels after death, the events in Revelation, the steps that Satan has taken to try to assert himself over the creation of God, and that he has taken to try to prove God false, fallible, or devoid of the character and integrity that God himself claims that He has.
As for Satan knowing that he is defeated, I think that you possibly know on an academic level the kind of power and intelligence that Satan has, however you seem to think that he posesses pride in quantities greater than either, to the point of shortcircuting his power and intelligence. It is easy to see how someone like a human could deny the character of God, however, if you had sat in the presence of God, posessed the knowledge of the Bible and an intimate knowledge of the Divine it is a different story. Your analogy tries to imply that a being with vastly greater understanding will behave like a being with lesser understanding, that a better perspective will lead to the same behavior that a poor perspective will. Not a strong argument.
"He doesn't, he knows hes defeted, he knows what he has coming, the only thing he does is try to mess up God's creation and turn mankind against God
Actually, Satan wants what is best for mankind, only he wants it apart from God himself. In this respect he does not see that there this is a differnce withut a distinction. Satan wats to achieve the goals listed in Isaiah. To do this he needs to achieve the goals that God set out to do that He says only He can accomplish. Like the establishment of the Millenium on Earth (1000 years of peace for the unitiated and thus Christ's promise that there will be literally large wars and small wars until he returns). Similarly, Satan used angels to try to pollute the genetic heritage of Christ in order to destroy the ability of Christ to achieve the position of High Priest and mediator from God toward mankind. If you understand priesthood you will know that to represent mankind to God the Father Christ Christ to be fully human, and to represent God to mankind he had to be fully God. The introduction of angelic ancestry into the history of mankind was a direct frontal asault on the incarnation of Christ and the work He was going to accomplish on the Cross.
There is quite a bit more ont eh subject, however I think that you might benefit from the reference I noted on Bible.com, if on
"Last time a democrat tried to object to provisions of an Iraq spending bill...
A perfect example of my theory of current US politics.
What is this theory you ask? Well...
Partisan politics (among other things) is being used by both parties to distract the public from the most important issues at hand. Kind of like a magician who distracts you from his hand while he is palming the coin. In this case what is dissappearing is our rights. The result is centralizing power in the federal government and further weakening the states where the populace still weilds some direct influence.
Case in point: ALL the senators voted for this bill. If it was such a big deal to the Democrats they could have used their considerable media pull to expose the REAL-ID card to the public.
Instead we hear all about how one guy needs to be held to a different standard than all the other congressmen because he is a leader. Or politicians arguing about ETHICS rules (damn that is hilarious!) Or we get steroid hearings in congress. Or we have a thousand other distractions that seem to me like a bunch of fighting third graders on the playground. Meanwhile constituents issues stagnate and things like the DMCA, the patriot act, etc get passed with huge majorities and with no disclosure and little accountability to the public by the representatives that WE elected.
The reason that these things (DMCA, PATRIOT, etc ad nauseum) get passed while other things just sit there is simple: It furthers the goals of the rulers. Call me a conspiracy theorist, or a doomsday nut, but I see a progression towards the resurcence of an aristocracy. By this I mean a ruling elite that use the government to their own benefit, at the expense of the people. Some of you already see this in the laws that are being passed, however what I am proposing is COLLUSION by both parties. By this I mean willing involvement by both parties in a system designed to defraud the American people of their rights and the fruits of thir labor.
Slashdot Mirror
You may never read this being and AC, but if you do, remember that you have not made a point in your own favor here.
Here is why, you say 1.5+ million people died due to the sanctions. Fine, that is ok with me. However, the government of Iraq was actively circumventing the sanctions, trading oil for currency under the table. Ok, so the fine and upstanding government of Iraq uses this money to buy food and infrastructure improvements for the people that they love so much, right? Well no, I guess they didn't. In fact, they loved their people so much that they spent all that money on weapons and lining the pockets of the ruling family.
All you have done is point out EXACTLY what I am pointing out. Unfortunately you are like so many people that I see that think that each country lives in a bubble, isolated in all of its decisions, not affecting others outside its borders, never deserving of intervention regardless of the actions of its rulers.
Think on this, you observe a man in his home, his children are starving, he beats his wife, his home is falling apart, the lights are turned off, there is no running water and he is buying lots of guns and bombs instead of feeding his children. This is a microcosm of Iraq. They were falling apart internally and the majority of their funds were spent keeping their people in line and arming themselves for international wars, all the while comitting the most heinous human rights violations imaginable on their own populace.
And the US is unscrupulous for intervening? Where were you when these thing were going on in Iraq? Why speak up against it now that it is changing, even getting better for many of the people in that area of the world?
Because it was hard to learn how to play people didn't spend time on it
Change "hard to learn how to play" to "making me puke...literally" and I think you might get close to the real thing. I REALLY wanted to learn how to play that game (and by play I mean master it). I loved the totally 3D environment and the way it made me think was really cool, however the visual stimulus was making me nauseous after a while. So much so that I actually started retching a bit when I kept playing in spite of the warning pangs from my stomach. Alas, it was not meant to be with me and the 3d.
As for quake, I really loved the idea of the grapling hook. It added a level of 3D movement to the environment that allows me to dominate even most serious players. I have developed personal techniques to accelerate myself to immense speeds, to quickly change direction, to get into another players "blind spot", and accordingly to shoot while doing all these actions. I kinda feel like spiderman sometimes, especially when I can navigate between rooms without touching the floor, all the while moving at least 2x the speed of a walkign character. It makes it hard to hit someone who knows what they are doing with the hook and you have to adjust in all X,Y,Z coordinates to attack them.
As an aside, some of the stuff I do I figured out with the grappling hook I learned from visualizing some of the battles in Ender's Game.
"It was two large, male officers versus one small woman, perhaps they could have easily subdued her physically."
These guys were performing their job. Their job is to embody the collective will of our government and people when they make law. The law that they are enforcing is the substance which holds our society together.
In defying the police in such a manner that "woman" was figuratively giving the finger to every law abiding citizen that has inhabited this country since its founders' time.
What I find even more absurd than her behavior is that people think that a police officer should have to subdue someone like this. She could have had a weapon of some kind. She could have waited till the police officer was half in the car and started to drive off. There is no reason why that police officer, entrusted and empowered with upholding the law that keeps our country alive, should have had to put himself in harms way like that.
What is even worse is that if he had tried to subdue her and had gotten hurt or killed in the process, his family would have to live off of the donations of other officers and the few concerned and respectful citizens. If she had received a scratch or two she would have lived off of our tax dollars, in the lap of luxury, for the rest of her life.
The irony in cases like this is sickening. Someone who flaunts blatant disrespect and disregard for the law could, through the legal system itself, get all the law abiding citizens to chip in and pay for a lottery-winner-like dispensation to them because chose to break the law.
You want a picture of what is really worng with the USA? Don't look at the White House, just look at that "woman."
You got modded funny, but the really funny part is regardless of how much money NK does or dosent spend on things other than food, people will still starve in that country because it is what that government wants.
You think that they lack funds to feed people? Yeah sure, just like Ethiopia lacked the funds and ability to feed their people in the 80's and 90's. Oh wait, I forgot about the hundreds of tons of food that just rotted on the docks while the ruling class held parties and banquets that cost millions of dollars a night. Sorry, but hunger, starvation, and death are the primary tool and self appointed right of a power-centric/communistic government. Remember that the only capital to spend in that government structure is the people. And, just like the capital we have, it can be wasted on whims and thrown away wantonly by those in power. Even worse is the fact that a portion of their country has to be destroyed in this way to make sure that the government stays in power.
And people criticise the USA for being a war-crimes and civil rights abuser of the highest caliber. In a world where the systematic starvation of the majority of a country's population recieves massively less attention than someone putting hood on a guy's head and making him take his clothes off, I wonder if there can be any solution to the problems that plague those of us who react with indignancy to violence and injustice.
Absolutely correct.
If your customer likes you they will trust you.
If they trust you, they will buy from you.
It really is that simple. The customer is about to spend a considerable amount of money with you or someone else. They want to hand their hard earned cash to someone that they like. Nothing galls a person more than putting money into the coffers of someone they do not like. It is kind of like handing a donation to a political party that you are idealogically antagonisatic to. It dosen't leave a good taste in your mouth.
All you have to do, as a salesperson, is make sure that you do not do or say anything that abuses the relationship with your customer. Furthermore, if you put the needs and goals of your customer on par with your needs and goals and find a way to achieve BOTH of them you will be amazingly successful.
...scientists discover thet people who are high do stupid shit!
Really though, I would like to see the test repeated with other mind altering substances. Maybe you could jack someone's seratonin levels and see what happens when you do the test, or administer some MDMA (kinda does the tame thing, but has other efects as well). Then grab some drunks and repeat the test.
This may just be a correlation between inhibition levels and "intoxication" or at least "adulteration" of the mind. I think that to see what is really going on there need to be more tests done. That is the problem with behavioral testing, correlation and causality can be easily misconstrued. By this I mean that what they are interpreting to "trust" could easily be "trying to impress" or "bad judgement".
And, come to think of it, it would be handy to know what mix of chemicals made it easiest to get someone to hand over all their money to you.
If we weren't supposed to eat the other proto-sapiens, why were they made of tasty meat?
Regardless, logic and awareness of truth are two entirely different things. Logic, in many circumstances, works to elucidate truth for a myriad of subjects.
Unfortunately I see a disparity in the subjects that you are comparing and the tools you are using.
Namely this: Once you can use logic to explain the creation of the universe and the creation of life you can then legitimately use logic to refute or prove claims on the source, intent, purpose, and meaning of said subjects.
Until that point you are using a mental tool to critically analyze something that it cannot be used to sufficiently explain. Kind of a reverse a fortiori principle if you will. It exposes a weakness in the tool and therefore invalidates the tool at a fundamental level, with respect to the subject at hand.
As an aside, one thing about religions from the ancient past that makes them mentally slippery and shows the foresight and recognition of the same arguments that you are making now: all of the meaning and purpose presupposed in the belief system is redeemable at death, invisible and hidden from those still living, perpetuating the great secret. Pretty slick.
Actually both you and the grandparent poster stated your personal beliefs, nothing more.
One said that the universe has meaning because his God told him what it was.
The other said that there is no purpose to the universe; didn't give a reference to why he believes this, but with the lack of evidence to the contrary (other than all the religious texts in history, dubious as they are to some people) this can be taken at face value.
Take it as an example that both of you could be wrong. There could be a meaning and purpose to the universe/life and it may be different than what the grandparet thinks it is (experience, knowledge, and such).
Stating that the universe has no meaning and life has no purpose has as much weight as someone stating that it does. Until you can stand outside the universe and explain in minute detail the exact workings of all things in and outside of it you can't make a dogmatic statement of this kind without falling prey to the argument of "faith". By the argument of "faith" I mean that you are relying on your own faith and not empirical evidence for your statement.
Just because you have no evidence of the universe caring or having a specific meaning dosen't mean that it dose not. Similarly, just because the grandparent poster thinks it has one dosen't mean that he is right. It either may or may not, and even if it does it might be something different than he believes.
As for anthropomorphising, prove that the universe and life do not have human characteristics or analogues thereof. Don't state your personal belief as proof to the contrary.
You just used the definition of existetntialism as a universal truth and people modded you insightful.
That is tantamount to me saying "Jesus is Lord" or "Allah is the only Way." All three are just one persons belief and they have no evidence to suggest otherwise.
I don't know which is funnier, you or the mods!
Forget the rest of the universe.
The oddest thing that I can think of is that we live on a planet TEEMING with life and there is evidence of only ONE (1) species that has attained the level of intelligence posessed by humans.
This, in my mind, is the most singular example of how rare intelligence. If intelligence of our kind was even semi-common we would have seen at least a couple of examples of it here on Earth. Add this factor into your equation and then you might come to another conclusion.
Personally I think it would be awesome. Imagine what it would be like to talk to a alien intelligence that happens to have the same geographical frame of refernce.
I never thought of it before, but maybe that is
what those wacky dolphin-humpers are looking for. Darn, maybe they aren't so wacky after all, just wishful.
I have thought it would be instructive to show children advanced subjects in a preview type fashon, being aware of those who show perspicacity and insight. Those that start to catch on can be taught more.
Even better would be nursery rhymews that teach the relationship between numerical values in a sing song fashon. A little pre-school brainwashing for higher education. Can't remember if tan is cos/sin or sin/cos? Just remember the nursery thyme about Simon jumping over his cousin. You could even incorporate the the ratio change and the effect on the tangent in the same setting. Make it funny, give it a catchy rythm, maybe a sing-song tune to go along with it and *POOF*, instant calc student at the age of 5! Just let them know what the rhyme really means later and you have won half the battle. Being able to connect an abstract subject to something concrete gives reason and memory an anchor from which understanding can grow. Man I really should take my own advice and write a friggin children's book.
Another thing I thought that might be instructive is to show people how great minds came to their great discoveries. In other words , dispel the myth of the apple on the head by being explicit about what steps the famous thinkers went through to get to their famous ideas. If you can follow that then you can recreate the thoughts of some of the greatest minds in history, right in your own HEAD! Do it enough and you might just learn to be a genius yourself, or at worst, someone who is exceptionally well versed in most of the major advancements in technological history. Of course this would be for higher level classes, but start early and you just might catch some prodigies or special talents and encourage them to be the most that they can be.
...FOLLOW THE MONEY!
By this I mean that I assume industrial espionage is much more lucrative than governmental information, and therefore companies are much more likely to be a target.
As for which is easier, forget the boundaries and roadblocks, if the payoff is high enough someone will find a way around it.
Can't remember where I heard this, but you reminded me of this, you sick bastards...
Sometimes I sit on my hand until it goes numb before I masturbate with it.
I call it..."THE STRANGER."
I used to feel the same way about mice. Buy one, use it, get used to it.
I went out on a limb and bought a boomslang about 3 years ago. It took over a week of playing to get back to where I was as far as competetion. Then I got better, and better, and better over another 3 or 4 weeks. The response time, precision, and consistency was TONS better than the mice I was used to, it just took awhile for me to get used to the sensitivity.
About 7 months ago my 22" monitor sat on the boomslang's cord, cutting it almost in half. I switched back to one of my old optical mice I had put in the drawer (actually a pretty nice one). Since then my game has suffered and my frustration has been slowly building. I recognize that motions that used to be simple to do are now quite difficult, especially when it comes to turning quickly and accurately over about 60 degrees. Presicion is also a major issue, with losses in the long distance railing/sniping. Definitely has hurt my game and my enjoyment, but I have a new Boomslang on order now!
Your comments lead me to the thought that if we are able to effectively simulate or duplicate human intelligence in a constructed information structure, then there should be no impediment to creating an intelligence from scratch to fill that same structure.
In other words, if we can model a human being in a computer so effectively that it is considered a duplicate then we should also be able to create an artificial intelligence with human level intelligence in that computer as well.
Personally I do not think that humans are anywhere close to being able to do either of these things, but when/if they can I think that the artificial intelligence would come first, albiet in a reduced capacity.
"basically, advertise the 'snob' value of classically mined diamonds, even if they are less perfect.
Being in the auto industry I have seen the pinnacle example of this reverse marketing idea, ie. taking a weakness and selling it as somthing a client would want to have.
I wandered past a Jaguar display one year at a trade show and there was a huge display screen playing a video of a proper English gentleman (pipe, tweed jacket with the elbow patches, moustache, etc. you get the picture) extolling the virtues of owning a Jaguar. He talked of the luxury, the prestige, the status, the legacy, and the style of the car in loving detail.
Then he began to talk about how often he had his Jag in the shop and how it was a sign of true preeminence that he could endure the time without it. He basically said that it was an honor to have his car break down on him repeatedly.
At that point, right there, in front of about 20 people who were watching the video with me, and who looked like they were just about to fall for it, I started laughing hysterically. I think it kinda broke the spell that codgy old British bastard was casting because they also saw the complete bullshit in what they were seeing and started laughing as well.
The rest of the week I would take my friends and associates by the Jaguar booth and show them the video. Eventually people in the booth started turning off the display when they saw me coming.
"One effect is that a "pure" diamond glows in certain wavelengths of light (blacklights, I think"
The term for what you are talking about is flouresence. Alot of diamonds will flouresce, regardless of purity. One problem with flourescence is that it changes invisible light (ultraviolet-the blacklight you are talking about) into visible light. This means that the diamond could appear to posess a better color grade than it deserves to based on its inclusions, etc.. A little flourescence is not bad, but it can sometimes make a "bad" diamond look alot better than it should, defrauding an unwary customer.
The good thing is that flourescent diamonds look better than normal ones. Also, a good diamond that also flouresces can look really great and can sometimes be had for a lower price as well, to those who know what they are doing.
Check out this site for details on flourescence and alot more about diamonds http://diamonds.pricescope.com/fluor.asp/.
"who doesn't actually contribute to the project"
"he seems to have large issues with the (lack of) progress Freenet has taken over these past few years
Ample time to complain, no time to contribute. Hmmmmmm, wonder what his
"Cocaine was once used as a local anesthetic
I can vouch for the use of cocaine as a local anesthetic by doctors. My niece was bitten by a dog on the mouth a few years ago and they uesd it to numb her face while they did the initial repairs. Not sure about what was used by the plastic surgeon in the later operations.
As for PCP it did have a recent resurgence of use experimentally for treatment of stroke patients. Most stroke patients have the majority of their brain destruction caused by the production of glutamic acid. It is produced in large quantities when oxygen is REINTRODUCED into the brain after the stroke happens. PCP prevents this glutamic acid production, but it was considered unsuitable for use in the general population for obvius reasons. Other drugs have now been created that will eliminate the symptoms without making the patient see angry purple midgets.
"God created free will because..."
.org! Check out this page on Satanology for some info on the thoughts and motivations of Satan . The five "I will" statements are in themselves enough to refute the idea of Satan as merely a spoiling influence with only the motivation of harming God's plan. There is a deeper agenda there and this page might clue you in to some of it. There is more, however, and the info is available, but you might need to read a little systematic theological study of the subject and digest that first, even see if you want to believe what is presented before exploring further.
The angels had free will as well and ALL of them were created to bring God glory. The question you have to ask yourself is this...with a third of the angels in rebellion, promised to the lake of fire, why create mankind at that time. Sure it is impossible to know the mind of God, however, it is easy to realize that there is a connection between the promise to Satan of the lake of fire(which was never intended for mankind) and the fact that people who do not believe in Jesus will inhabit it with Satan and his angels.
Sure, free will is important, it is a fantastic gift and singular demonstration of Grace. However, I take issue with your mentioning that we can hurt God. God is completely self sufficient. He posesses happiness as an intrinsic resulting from His integrity. The fact that mankind does not choose Him does not hurt him in the way that mankind would be hurt by rejection. Please consider also that God, being omniscient, understood all of the actions, motivations, thoughts, antecedents and factors involved in every decision ever made in Creation before it was ever made. Also consider that omniscience contains all of the possibilities that could have been and holds them in immediate frame of reference with those things that have and will occur. Based on this, and the fact that God is eternally happy by his own description, I think that it is anthropopathism to say that humans hurt God by rejecting Jesus Christ.
As for my sounding like a Satanist I will just say that I am definitely not, and that my understanding of the history (and future history) of the universe as described in the Bible is probably fundamentally different than yours with respect to motivations and development of repercussions in interaction of Satan and his angels and God and his angels.
Sorry about the link, I may have inadvertently edited it out, I definitely forgot that it was
"Satan does not in any way want what is best for mankind, he would love to destroy mankind. He wanted the same things as God, to be glorified above all,
This sentence combo is contradictory. If mankind was created to give glory to God, and Santan wants to be glorified above all, he therefore seeks the glorification that mankind will give to God for himself. Destroying the creation of God does nothing for Satan, he wants to rule over it and receive all the glory and worship (remember when Satan offerd Christ all the kingdoms of the world if He would worship him?) that God the Father should receive.
From the perspective of God, of course Satan is defeated. He was defeated before he ever sinned because of who and what God is. This, however, does not stop God from allowing him to carry out his plans. Why? Because the failure of Satan and the glorification of mere humans above the angels through the inheritance of Christ is an example of the character of God that all the angels need to see. That among other things, but to consider Satan defeated in his own mind, to think that he has no other goal than to disrupt God's plan for mankind, is in direct conflict with the scripture as well as logic. If you consider that God's plan for mankind also is intertwined with Satan being deposited into the lake of fire then I guess your statement if technically correct, however there is more going on than just obstructionism.
"In the Star Wars universe, the only reason the Jedi can get away with using lightsabers is because the Force gives them the ability to see a little bit into the future."
Actually that's just how the script is written.
It's the end of chivalry in Star Wars just as it was here
Further proof of the chivalrous, knight-like analogy of the Jedi: If you go bad you get lightning projectile weapons. The implication is that you are cheating and violating an unwritten code.
Simple really. Satan and his angels who did not participate in the angelic salvation event (whatever it was we do not know but it seperated permanently the 1/3 of the angels and Satan himself from Eternity in the presence of God and damned them to the Lake of Fire) claimed that God was unjust when he condemed them. In essence they said "how can a God who is love condemn them to eternal damnataion? Isn't that a conflict of character?" This declaration was made in front of the entire heavenly host. God, being who He is created mankind in order to prove that he is just, loving and righteous, as he has discribed Himself.
Your appeal to free will is trumped by the fact that angels had the same ability, before man was ever created. Satan and his angels had the same problem that Adam had in the garden, rebellion. Why recreate the free will play again when you had not dealt witht he first one? Of course the reason is above.
Unfortunately I do not think that you have ever heard of the angelic conflict. This is established Christian doctrine, regardless of the fact that many churches do not teach on it (this problem is epidemic in that many church teachers teach things that are patently false and ignore things that are part of systematic Christian theology. But who could tell you the differnce unless they teach systematic theology like in seminary and break down the scriptures from the original languages?). It explains why God allows Satan to continue to do what he does on the Earth as well as the reasoning for the creation of mankind. It explains (among many other things) why there are fallen angels, why believers achieve a status higher than angels after death, the events in Revelation, the steps that Satan has taken to try to assert himself over the creation of God, and that he has taken to try to prove God false, fallible, or devoid of the character and integrity that God himself claims that He has.
As for Satan knowing that he is defeated, I think that you possibly know on an academic level the kind of power and intelligence that Satan has, however you seem to think that he posesses pride in quantities greater than either, to the point of shortcircuting his power and intelligence. It is easy to see how someone like a human could deny the character of God, however, if you had sat in the presence of God, posessed the knowledge of the Bible and an intimate knowledge of the Divine it is a different story. Your analogy tries to imply that a being with vastly greater understanding will behave like a being with lesser understanding, that a better perspective will lead to the same behavior that a poor perspective will. Not a strong argument.
"He doesn't, he knows hes defeted, he knows what he has coming, the only thing he does is try to mess up God's creation and turn mankind against God
Actually, Satan wants what is best for mankind, only he wants it apart from God himself. In this respect he does not see that there this is a differnce withut a distinction. Satan wats to achieve the goals listed in Isaiah. To do this he needs to achieve the goals that God set out to do that He says only He can accomplish. Like the establishment of the Millenium on Earth (1000 years of peace for the unitiated and thus Christ's promise that there will be literally large wars and small wars until he returns). Similarly, Satan used angels to try to pollute the genetic heritage of Christ in order to destroy the ability of Christ to achieve the position of High Priest and mediator from God toward mankind. If you understand priesthood you will know that to represent mankind to God the Father Christ Christ to be fully human, and to represent God to mankind he had to be fully God. The introduction of angelic ancestry into the history of mankind was a direct frontal asault on the incarnation of Christ and the work He was going to accomplish on the Cross.
There is quite a bit more ont eh subject, however I think that you might benefit from the reference I noted on Bible.com, if on
"Last time a democrat tried to object to provisions of an Iraq spending bill...
A perfect example of my theory of current US politics.
What is this theory you ask? Well...
Partisan politics (among other things) is being used by both parties to distract the public from the most important issues at hand. Kind of like a magician who distracts you from his hand while he is palming the coin. In this case what is dissappearing is our rights. The result is centralizing power in the federal government and further weakening the states where the populace still weilds some direct influence.
Case in point: ALL the senators voted for this bill. If it was such a big deal to the Democrats they could have used their considerable media pull to expose the REAL-ID card to the public.
Instead we hear all about how one guy needs to be held to a different standard than all the other congressmen because he is a leader. Or politicians arguing about ETHICS rules (damn that is hilarious!) Or we get steroid hearings in congress. Or we have a thousand other distractions that seem to me like a bunch of fighting third graders on the playground. Meanwhile constituents issues stagnate and things like the DMCA, the patriot act, etc get passed with huge majorities and with no disclosure and little accountability to the public by the representatives that WE elected.
The reason that these things (DMCA, PATRIOT, etc ad nauseum) get passed while other things just sit there is simple: It furthers the goals of the rulers. Call me a conspiracy theorist, or a doomsday nut, but I see a progression towards the resurcence of an aristocracy. By this I mean a ruling elite that use the government to their own benefit, at the expense of the people. Some of you already see this in the laws that are being passed, however what I am proposing is COLLUSION by both parties. By this I mean willing involvement by both parties in a system designed to defraud the American people of their rights and the fruits of thir labor.