This is extremely reasonable.
further, successful business requires an extremely flexible strategic approach. in this instance - "procure" from another firm if it suits you - and then in a similar instance engage in fervent litigation should another firm engage in similar "procurement" against you. This is especially prudent because Jobs and Apple went to great pains to cultivate goodwill with journalists and the media - virtually guaranteeing favorable slant on any issue Apple engages - a slant that obviously favorably affects the perception of aforementioned litigation.
This is extremely prudent when you consider that being "moral" is not a requirement for a corporation at all.
It's out of context because Jobs used it out of context and applied it to his work ethos. Obviously the original quote wasn't about designing products. So its relevance here is valid. Your fatigue... less so.
i think you're onto something. engineers have the skillset. so like any other employer, terrorists go looking for the best qualified candidates.
also engineers tend to be introverts and introverts tend to not have a worldly social perspective which IMO makes them more susceptible to a fringish pitch.
i have no source and am too lazy to google it - but I once heard Bush was reputed to say that "we'll invade and let MTV do the rest" - in regards to how to prevent terrorism in the future. conformism is an enemy to this sort of thing. you're not gonna suicide bomb when you're scraping pennies together for the latest apple product on your way to Daytona for spring break.
engineers tend to not be conformists (their earning potential and value as an employee revolves around some measure of uncommon thinking) and this same skillset imo makes them vulnerable to the fringe pitch.
also, it helps to be non-white, under 30, unmarried with no children, and harbor some feeling of marginalization to begin with.
I agree with you in general. in regards to religion i'll go further and wager that many people even become skeptical - especially as they get older, but remain committed outwardly mostly for appearances - like an old couple in an empty marriage - the idea being sort of, "leave this and go to what?"
the fact that the slashdot crowd is mostly agnostic/atheistic has a lot to do with things that are not in our control. a more questioning nature, insatiable curiousity, and the need for significant evidence for suspension of disbelief - i suspect over the long haul that engineer/scientist types will prove to have a genetic basis.
for everyone else, people need things to believe in to justify and give external value to their existence. also, i am certain the God/Devil/Evil aliens paradigm is all related and over the long haul we'll reconsider what we term adults. adults, with varying exceptions, are just children who've stopped growing. and any parent or uncle or aunt can tell you you can convince a young child of ANYTHING. My nephew thought i was a powerful magician for about six months despite the fact i only knew two hokey magic tricks. that's until my sister showed him how i was doing them and then he went into a funk for about a week. it was like he almost needed to believe that i had magic - something unexplainable.
i digress. i imagine that the couple of years are gonna be awesome for these types as they face what they perceive is their own encroaching oblivion. i would imagine that their joys and ecstasies will stand out in the sharpest relief now.
i'm just looking for opportunities to fleece some dummies - maybe buying some properties on the cheap because - well - what the hell are you gonna need it for if you think the world is gonna end? is it not you in this instance who is fleecing me?:D
historically science has been dependent on public funding because so much of science is trial and error. the act of finding something saleable can take generations of research/analysis, cultural adoption, etc.
even in playing rts games you see that "research" and "advancement" is something you undertake only after you've amassed a threshold surplus of resources in order to fund the research. in other words, your statement "make something and sell it" is misguided because a lot of important research is SOOOO far away from being market viable that it needs no-strings cash to fund it along.
this is actually the problem with big pharm - I worked at one for two years out of undergrad. There is such a focus on lifestyle/consumer drugs because that's what you can "make" and "sell" based upon the emotional desires of the consumer - often not so much for the greater good but more for short term profit.
in fact some argue that our economy has big problems for this same reason - there is artificial growth - based on ipod sales and back to school and christmas seasons, etc. and such - instead of real healthy growth based on fundamental economic staples. in short, the US has kinda gotten fat and decadent - and the thought process is - how can we keep this gravy train going? I'm as guilty as us all.
the consumer, contrary to popular opinion, is not always right.
i'm also pretty non religious - but find myself veering towards pro-choice.
i have a niece and nephew and thus have had the luxury of observing the "joy" of motherhood firsthand. the kid literally hijacks the body for 40 weeks - often to less than appealing permanent effect and sometimes to actual biological harm.
that said, if a woman wishes to not have her body hijacked - I can imagine that that is her prerogative. I personally would never request a woman i'm involved in to have an abortion - even if the pregnancy were unplanned - because a fetus contains potential for life as real as my own. that said, I cannot force a woman to see a pregnancy to term.
In short, I do not believe that the government has hegemony over the body of a citizen - in this case a woman.
But personally, however, I agree with you. If I were a woman I'm hard pressed to find a circumstance where I'd want an abortion, save to save my own life or if the child were a product of incest, etc., or so ravaged as to be destined for a horrible life of pain, etc.
I'm in favor of pro-choice legislation - with incentives in the legislature to keep the birth rate up. Obviously that's something that needs to be looked at - post modern civilizations have this birth rate problem - they basically birth control themselves into obsolescence. It's a fundamental first world denial of death - but that's another argument/discussion.
once girls hit puberty it supposedly negatively affects performance. also, there is greater flexibility pre-puberty and greater resistance to injury because there is no displacement of the hips as in post pubescent girls. also, puberty comes with body fat woes and breasts. i believe gymnastic girls also benefit the smaller they are - shawn johnson is 4'9" i believe @ 16 years old.
i'm just typing out my ass so don't take any of the above as fact, unless it is right.
lastly, that bela dude said it during a performance - that younger kids tend to perform better under pressure than older kids in gymnastics a lot of times - because younger kids have NO idea what's at stake - the significance of the event. in this instance, ignorance is totally bliss.
lots of techniques are employed to stunt growth and delay puberty in these girls. it's actually really draconian.
just took a hit of that i-doser. i'm feeling good right now.
Re:Pointless scare mongering
on
Digital Drugs
·
· Score: 1
i downloaded off i-doser's site. i'm on a tranquil dose now. nice.
my assessment is that it works. i'm naturally high strung - and i'm really laid back right now.
creationism is an opiate. it makes people who need it feel better about their existence. i can imagine that the guy who spins wonderous tales of magical beings can get laid - depending on his charisma, etc. it got jk rowling billions of dollars. *shrugs*
that's what i thought. for power sellers and ebay vendors, having that kind of ability to deliver on-demand customer service could have a lot of value. archive the chats in case of dispute and it seemed like a strong idea. guess i haven't thought it through.
google had google video. youtube was crushing google video. google did not have a strong presence in video online and realized that internet inertia had hit - youtube was to video what google was to search. by buying youtube - they bought the branding and presence - a presence that is now lucrative because of the content deals, etc.
microsoft is not analogous to time warner. yahoo is not analogous to aol. yahoo has a strong web presence - this is undeniable. microsoft does not and cannot build a strong web presence (MSN gets good numbers but those are cheat numbers because of explorer defaults that most don't change) because it moves too slowly and it doesn't understand how to build a web BRAND. Unfortunately for Microsoft - recent evidence shows that younger execs - younger companies - have a better sense of building brands online. microsoft cannot do this - yahoo is not the answer. but this deal is not analogous to the AOL deal. At the time, it seemed sensible that the internet's premier portal get exclusive access to a huge library of content. Of course in retrospect it seems more sensible to strike deals with content companies so as to not cross-corrupt disparate corporate cultures - and i'm certain somewhere there are rules about the critical mass size of companies before they collapse under their own weight.
building a presence on the web requires core strength. google has search. not sure what yahoo's is, but they have stickiness. microsoft has NO online core strength. NONE. And it's 2008. their search is mediocre in most respects compared to google. they develop also/ran products long after internet phenomenons emerge - despite having the money to chase trends so aggressive so as to appear innovative even if they are not. Their online products do not differentiate on the basis of quality and/or branding. Finally, their inexorable ties to backward compatability - be it to old formats and or dying business models - it's like trying to sprint with a ball and chain. They have a problem.
they need to spin off a lightning quick young group - get the brightest young maverick engineers and call it microlabs or something. Let them build some crazy shit and see what pops up. this strategy here is for the fucking birds and IMO a waste of 40+ billion.
my nephew is sort of an interesting case study. He's 11 - the son of my older cousin, and my nephew's dad is on extended "vacation" courtesy of a few white collar crimes on wall street. consequently, he's a boy raised by women in new york city. my cousin worries (inordinately and unreasonably) for his safety and actually prefers him to play video games at home rather than engage in activities that might have him riding the bus or subway to get to - given that she might not have the wherewithal to get him there herself due to her career (nurse).
I travel a lot for business, so I don't see him as much as I'd like, but we're pretty close. So I come home from business trips last summer and he's packed on a few pounds - he has a little belly which I poke fun at a bit. I work out religiously using body weight exercise regimens (they travel well) and one day he sees that I'm working on a bit of a six pack - to which he implies that he'd like to have one as well. So I get my cousin to let him stay with me for a while - and we work out together. We'd go jogging in the park - or rollerblading: we learned how to rollerblade, skateboard, rockclimb, paintball (hey - it's outdoorsy), ice skate. He took about two weeks of kickboxing lessons before dropping out - got him swimming, etc. He very quickly leaned out and was in general a more energetic kid. This happened say between august and october - at which time I had to travel to LA to deal with some urgent business.
I get back home for Christmas, and he's packed on all the weight back on. And it's not necessarily that he's eating bad food - because my cousin is not really into fast food and such - it's that SHE'S NOT ACTIVE and she refuses to cut the umbilical cord so therefore NEITHER IS HE. I've tried to get back to spending more time with him but I think she resents the bond we've developed and is thus playing foil a bit.
The lesson I learned - as relates to boys in particular - BOYS NEED THEIR FATHERS. Not growing up with one myself, it was cathartic for me to get to do those things for him because the kid in me got to enjoy it the way I would have then. But I can't stress it enough - boys need their fathers.
As I hit high school, I wanted to play sports - which required parental signatures. My mother declined - saying that since I'd up to that point been pretty much a nerd, I was only setting myself up to get hurt. I forged her signatures and tried out for every team (football, basketball, baseball, track and field) that interested me EVERY YEAR OF HIGH SCHOOL. My freshman year the basketball coach told me I was the worst player he'd ever seen pick up a basketball. He was right as I'd just started playing about two weeks prior. I wasn't even sure what a travel was. I got cut all four years for basketball (but did score 19 points against the varsity team in a charity game my senior year), but got fast enough to play safety my junior and senior years on the football team and to run a bit on the track and field team. I even did some relief pitching on the baseball team; I think I hold a record for most players walked in an inning (9). I did throw an 82 mile an hour fastball once though (I think there was something wrong with the gun) - and had a.250 lifetime batting average (1hr). That bit of rebellion was the best thing I'd ever done in my life - because it showed me that the artificial striations between social groups like nerds and jocks are largely that - you as an individual can choose who you are - you can design yourself. It's that same thought process that allowed me to later make the potentially dangerous choice to leave a well defined career track at (multinat pharm) to become a consultant in a completely different field using accrued relationships, some saved up cash, and a bit of luck. Best decision I ever made. I hope my nephew will make that choice for himself to cut that umbilical cord - single mothers in my experience use their children as replacement companions (to compensate for not having a mate or strong peer group)
my old boss and three of his peers - now in their 50s - all have had heart attacks and cardiovascular complications linked to their earlier (and recent) cocaine use.
cocaine is pretty addictive. of course one can make the argument that if one has an addictive personality - it matters less the drug. I work in film finance and cocaine is rather prevalent in both worlds. In my experience, when folks are sober - they lament their cocaine addiction and wish they could stop. alas, they cannot.
IANAD.
my perspective on drugs in america:
the war on drugs is to save face - US society is very hypocritical and much of it draws from Christian underpinnings. marijuana is the USes biggest cash crop, estimated at something like 30 billion USD annually. Purposely lax laws allowing Mexicans across the border (incidentally) opens the single most lucrative vector for cocaine into the US - other than through the islands of the Caribbean. the US needs a high (intoxicated) populace - a high populace is a docile populace - a populace unconcerned with issues at large - or even at medium. Funny line from Fight Club when Tyler Durden noted that the emergency flight cards on planes implied that the passengers were high: "... calm as hindu cows..." is the line I think he says - referring to the notion that excess oxygen gets one high and docile - thus more likely to accept one's fate. The war on drugs is this official stance on affairs where the true line is more like - "we'd rather you get high than get involved."
Slashdot Mirror
yes, that is the joke.
This is extremely reasonable. further, successful business requires an extremely flexible strategic approach. in this instance - "procure" from another firm if it suits you - and then in a similar instance engage in fervent litigation should another firm engage in similar "procurement" against you. This is especially prudent because Jobs and Apple went to great pains to cultivate goodwill with journalists and the media - virtually guaranteeing favorable slant on any issue Apple engages - a slant that obviously favorably affects the perception of aforementioned litigation. This is extremely prudent when you consider that being "moral" is not a requirement for a corporation at all.
It's out of context because Jobs used it out of context and applied it to his work ethos. Obviously the original quote wasn't about designing products. So its relevance here is valid. Your fatigue... less so.
i like this. good post man.
corporations paying taxes? LOL
i think you're onto something. engineers have the skillset. so like any other employer, terrorists go looking for the best qualified candidates.
also engineers tend to be introverts and introverts tend to not have a worldly social perspective which IMO makes them more susceptible to a fringish pitch.
i have no source and am too lazy to google it - but I once heard Bush was reputed to say that "we'll invade and let MTV do the rest" - in regards to how to prevent terrorism in the future. conformism is an enemy to this sort of thing. you're not gonna suicide bomb when you're scraping pennies together for the latest apple product on your way to Daytona for spring break.
engineers tend to not be conformists (their earning potential and value as an employee revolves around some measure of uncommon thinking) and this same skillset imo makes them vulnerable to the fringe pitch.
also, it helps to be non-white, under 30, unmarried with no children, and harbor some feeling of marginalization to begin with.
no. we are bothered by microsoft and google and facebook. and twitter.
I agree with you in general. in regards to religion i'll go further and wager that many people even become skeptical - especially as they get older, but remain committed outwardly mostly for appearances - like an old couple in an empty marriage - the idea being sort of, "leave this and go to what?" the fact that the slashdot crowd is mostly agnostic/atheistic has a lot to do with things that are not in our control. a more questioning nature, insatiable curiousity, and the need for significant evidence for suspension of disbelief - i suspect over the long haul that engineer/scientist types will prove to have a genetic basis. for everyone else, people need things to believe in to justify and give external value to their existence. also, i am certain the God/Devil/Evil aliens paradigm is all related and over the long haul we'll reconsider what we term adults. adults, with varying exceptions, are just children who've stopped growing. and any parent or uncle or aunt can tell you you can convince a young child of ANYTHING. My nephew thought i was a powerful magician for about six months despite the fact i only knew two hokey magic tricks. that's until my sister showed him how i was doing them and then he went into a funk for about a week. it was like he almost needed to believe that i had magic - something unexplainable. i digress. i imagine that the couple of years are gonna be awesome for these types as they face what they perceive is their own encroaching oblivion. i would imagine that their joys and ecstasies will stand out in the sharpest relief now. i'm just looking for opportunities to fleece some dummies - maybe buying some properties on the cheap because - well - what the hell are you gonna need it for if you think the world is gonna end? is it not you in this instance who is fleecing me? :D
removing the battery is the only sure way. but alas, iphone users....
exactly. all of those things are awesome. *sniff*
a 15 year old interning @ morgan stanley perfectly represents their target audience?
devil's advocate: google?
historically science has been dependent on public funding because so much of science is trial and error. the act of finding something saleable can take generations of research/analysis, cultural adoption, etc.
even in playing rts games you see that "research" and "advancement" is something you undertake only after you've amassed a threshold surplus of resources in order to fund the research. in other words, your statement "make something and sell it" is misguided because a lot of important research is SOOOO far away from being market viable that it needs no-strings cash to fund it along.
this is actually the problem with big pharm - I worked at one for two years out of undergrad. There is such a focus on lifestyle/consumer drugs because that's what you can "make" and "sell" based upon the emotional desires of the consumer - often not so much for the greater good but more for short term profit.
in fact some argue that our economy has big problems for this same reason - there is artificial growth - based on ipod sales and back to school and christmas seasons, etc. and such - instead of real healthy growth based on fundamental economic staples. in short, the US has kinda gotten fat and decadent - and the thought process is - how can we keep this gravy train going? I'm as guilty as us all.
the consumer, contrary to popular opinion, is not always right.
i'm also pretty non religious - but find myself veering towards pro-choice.
i have a niece and nephew and thus have had the luxury of observing the "joy" of motherhood firsthand. the kid literally hijacks the body for 40 weeks - often to less than appealing permanent effect and sometimes to actual biological harm.
that said, if a woman wishes to not have her body hijacked - I can imagine that that is her prerogative. I personally would never request a woman i'm involved in to have an abortion - even if the pregnancy were unplanned - because a fetus contains potential for life as real as my own. that said, I cannot force a woman to see a pregnancy to term.
In short, I do not believe that the government has hegemony over the body of a citizen - in this case a woman.
But personally, however, I agree with you. If I were a woman I'm hard pressed to find a circumstance where I'd want an abortion, save to save my own life or if the child were a product of incest, etc., or so ravaged as to be destined for a horrible life of pain, etc.
I'm in favor of pro-choice legislation - with incentives in the legislature to keep the birth rate up. Obviously that's something that needs to be looked at - post modern civilizations have this birth rate problem - they basically birth control themselves into obsolescence. It's a fundamental first world denial of death - but that's another argument/discussion.
once girls hit puberty it supposedly negatively affects performance. also, there is greater flexibility pre-puberty and greater resistance to injury because there is no displacement of the hips as in post pubescent girls. also, puberty comes with body fat woes and breasts. i believe gymnastic girls also benefit the smaller they are - shawn johnson is 4'9" i believe @ 16 years old.
i'm just typing out my ass so don't take any of the above as fact, unless it is right.
lastly, that bela dude said it during a performance - that younger kids tend to perform better under pressure than older kids in gymnastics a lot of times - because younger kids have NO idea what's at stake - the significance of the event. in this instance, ignorance is totally bliss.
lots of techniques are employed to stunt growth and delay puberty in these girls. it's actually really draconian.
just took a hit of that i-doser. i'm feeling good right now.
i downloaded off i-doser's site. i'm on a tranquil dose now. nice. my assessment is that it works. i'm naturally high strung - and i'm really laid back right now.
trying it now. it works for me. tranquil has me relaxed 34% into the dose. nice. i'm using i-doser for reference.
you propose giving money to the poor?
creationism is an opiate. it makes people who need it feel better about their existence. i can imagine that the guy who spins wonderous tales of magical beings can get laid - depending on his charisma, etc. it got jk rowling billions of dollars. *shrugs*
and yes i did compare the bible to harry potter.
flat-earthers? these guys do not get laid.
that's what i thought. for power sellers and ebay vendors, having that kind of ability to deliver on-demand customer service could have a lot of value. archive the chats in case of dispute and it seemed like a strong idea. guess i haven't thought it through.
how about taking out the battery? just curious for no reason.
branding and user base.
google had google video. youtube was crushing google video. google did not have a strong presence in video online and realized that internet inertia had hit - youtube was to video what google was to search. by buying youtube - they bought the branding and presence - a presence that is now lucrative because of the content deals, etc.
microsoft is not analogous to time warner. yahoo is not analogous to aol. yahoo has a strong web presence - this is undeniable. microsoft does not and cannot build a strong web presence (MSN gets good numbers but those are cheat numbers because of explorer defaults that most don't change) because it moves too slowly and it doesn't understand how to build a web BRAND. Unfortunately for Microsoft - recent evidence shows that younger execs - younger companies - have a better sense of building brands online. microsoft cannot do this - yahoo is not the answer. but this deal is not analogous to the AOL deal. At the time, it seemed sensible that the internet's premier portal get exclusive access to a huge library of content. Of course in retrospect it seems more sensible to strike deals with content companies so as to not cross-corrupt disparate corporate cultures - and i'm certain somewhere there are rules about the critical mass size of companies before they collapse under their own weight.
building a presence on the web requires core strength. google has search. not sure what yahoo's is, but they have stickiness. microsoft has NO online core strength. NONE. And it's 2008. their search is mediocre in most respects compared to google. they develop also/ran products long after internet phenomenons emerge - despite having the money to chase trends so aggressive so as to appear innovative even if they are not. Their online products do not differentiate on the basis of quality and/or branding. Finally, their inexorable ties to backward compatability - be it to old formats and or dying business models - it's like trying to sprint with a ball and chain. They have a problem.
they need to spin off a lightning quick young group - get the brightest young maverick engineers and call it microlabs or something. Let them build some crazy shit and see what pops up. this strategy here is for the fucking birds and IMO a waste of 40+ billion.
my nephew is sort of an interesting case study. He's 11 - the son of my older cousin, and my nephew's dad is on extended "vacation" courtesy of a few white collar crimes on wall street. consequently, he's a boy raised by women in new york city. my cousin worries (inordinately and unreasonably) for his safety and actually prefers him to play video games at home rather than engage in activities that might have him riding the bus or subway to get to - given that she might not have the wherewithal to get him there herself due to her career (nurse).
.250 lifetime batting average (1hr). That bit of rebellion was the best thing I'd ever done in my life - because it showed me that the artificial striations between social groups like nerds and jocks are largely that - you as an individual can choose who you are - you can design yourself. It's that same thought process that allowed me to later make the potentially dangerous choice to leave a well defined career track at (multinat pharm) to become a consultant in a completely different field using accrued relationships, some saved up cash, and a bit of luck. Best decision I ever made. I hope my nephew will make that choice for himself to cut that umbilical cord - single mothers in my experience use their children as replacement companions (to compensate for not having a mate or strong peer group)
I travel a lot for business, so I don't see him as much as I'd like, but we're pretty close. So I come home from business trips last summer and he's packed on a few pounds - he has a little belly which I poke fun at a bit. I work out religiously using body weight exercise regimens (they travel well) and one day he sees that I'm working on a bit of a six pack - to which he implies that he'd like to have one as well. So I get my cousin to let him stay with me for a while - and we work out together. We'd go jogging in the park - or rollerblading: we learned how to rollerblade, skateboard, rockclimb, paintball (hey - it's outdoorsy), ice skate. He took about two weeks of kickboxing lessons before dropping out - got him swimming, etc. He very quickly leaned out and was in general a more energetic kid. This happened say between august and october - at which time I had to travel to LA to deal with some urgent business.
I get back home for Christmas, and he's packed on all the weight back on. And it's not necessarily that he's eating bad food - because my cousin is not really into fast food and such - it's that SHE'S NOT ACTIVE and she refuses to cut the umbilical cord so therefore NEITHER IS HE. I've tried to get back to spending more time with him but I think she resents the bond we've developed and is thus playing foil a bit.
The lesson I learned - as relates to boys in particular - BOYS NEED THEIR FATHERS. Not growing up with one myself, it was cathartic for me to get to do those things for him because the kid in me got to enjoy it the way I would have then. But I can't stress it enough - boys need their fathers.
As I hit high school, I wanted to play sports - which required parental signatures. My mother declined - saying that since I'd up to that point been pretty much a nerd, I was only setting myself up to get hurt. I forged her signatures and tried out for every team (football, basketball, baseball, track and field) that interested me EVERY YEAR OF HIGH SCHOOL. My freshman year the basketball coach told me I was the worst player he'd ever seen pick up a basketball. He was right as I'd just started playing about two weeks prior. I wasn't even sure what a travel was. I got cut all four years for basketball (but did score 19 points against the varsity team in a charity game my senior year), but got fast enough to play safety my junior and senior years on the football team and to run a bit on the track and field team. I even did some relief pitching on the baseball team; I think I hold a record for most players walked in an inning (9). I did throw an 82 mile an hour fastball once though (I think there was something wrong with the gun) - and had a
my old boss and three of his peers - now in their 50s - all have had heart attacks and cardiovascular complications linked to their earlier (and recent) cocaine use.
lol. but isn't crack just cut cocaine?
cocaine is pretty addictive. of course one can make the argument that if one has an addictive personality - it matters less the drug. I work in film finance and cocaine is rather prevalent in both worlds. In my experience, when folks are sober - they lament their cocaine addiction and wish they could stop. alas, they cannot.
IANAD.
my perspective on drugs in america:
the war on drugs is to save face - US society is very hypocritical and much of it draws from Christian underpinnings. marijuana is the USes biggest cash crop, estimated at something like 30 billion USD annually. Purposely lax laws allowing Mexicans across the border (incidentally) opens the single most lucrative vector for cocaine into the US - other than through the islands of the Caribbean. the US needs a high (intoxicated) populace - a high populace is a docile populace - a populace unconcerned with issues at large - or even at medium. Funny line from Fight Club when Tyler Durden noted that the emergency flight cards on planes implied that the passengers were high: "... calm as hindu cows..." is the line I think he says - referring to the notion that excess oxygen gets one high and docile - thus more likely to accept one's fate. The war on drugs is this official stance on affairs where the true line is more like - "we'd rather you get high than get involved."