"It was not the church but also the established astronomers of the time that condemned Galileo. The majority of physicists rejected Einsteins Special Relativity Theory in 1905. Einstein himself would not accept anything in Quantum Theory after 1920 no matter how many experiments supported it. Edisons commitment to Direct Current electrical generators led him to insist Alternating Current generators were unsafe for years after their saftey had been proven to everyone else." - RAW "Prometheus Rising
It's very hard for people involved in science to accept the reality that maybe a cherished theory could be wrong, just the same as with a Religious Fundamentalist, in fact the two have some strange similarities to one another when one delves into their so called "laws" or "truths". I find Science to be just as limiting as faith, slightly less insane but insane for reasons other than "faith". If one may be so compelled to believe only what one views in front of their eyes, data graphs, telescopes, microscopes, and various other instruments, then one has taken in a kind of faith in not just the the technology being used but other's eyes, or in the individual's case their own eyes. Just because you can't measure something or view it with your eyes doesn't mean it theoretically can't exist. A UFO or UMO(unidentified moving ground object) occur almost indefinitely on a regular basis, I'm sure all of you can be mistaken from time to time via your own perception of reality, does that mean that you didn't see what you thought you did? I don't know. How rare the sound of those three words in the mouths of a fairly egotistical religious or political or scientific person. We often embrace logo's, figures, organizations, heirarchy, beliefs, theories, specualtions, without much thought as to there actual probability of their actual existence in reality. Much of what passes for education in public schools amounts to commandments to respect your teacher, school, government, church, corporations and parents unflinchingly, and we are somehow shocked that people would say "no thanks" your all unworth my energy and time, leave me alone. Oh, but that means the person has a problem or is ignorant or something according to those that have to define everything in existence, catagorize, classify, compartmentalize and structure existence into something that can be understood in their own nervous system to be "reality". Sorry, I guess we offended your nervous system by not placing you above us in the heirarchy of power. Sometimes people use Science, Religion and Politics as a will to power(Nietsche), over others, sometimes others try to warn of this abuse of power and it's relation to your position or punishment in life(Foucault). The better observation would be to propose that maybe vaccines cause autism or maybe they don't, maybe mercury is toxic, maybe it's harmless, maybe some people have problems with Aids vaccines that increase propensity for acquiring HIV or maybe Bayer Asperin gave tablets with HIV to people in western Europe which caused many to lose jobs and go to jail while excutives that authorized the sale in the US suffer no consequences, maybe somebody that put forth the time to get a PHD in health could be on to something about vaccinations not being needed in such great quantity, maybe we should just create and inject vaccines into people focibly as in Prince Georges MD. Ivan Illich wrote a book called "Limits to medicine" many of you should try to find in your library and also another called "Deschooling Society". In some ways we now have a new Inquistion and it's aimed at the throat of challengers to the status quo, in the same way incumbents go after a challenger in politics, many vested interests play a part, and information may be censored through the use of extended copyright creating a "Intellectual Feudalism" as another writer put it so succintly, if not brought to the people's attention, we could very well have as we do today the technology to advance consciousness but yet sit at the feet of a "scientific oligarch" unwilling t
I was thinking of of how so much of law with regard to copyright and digital property is loaded with hidden meanings. It's fairly certain to say that without treaty and law one could not feel justified in stealing from the public domain, nor one would feel the least bit guilty of stealing say the land under somebody elses feet. In many cases law is used merely to establish monopoly control of, for and in spite of the natural tendency of nature's propensity for non-scarcity. Despite the fact that nature can be infinitely reproducable it wouldn't matter to lawyers and the legal monopoly. They would have no incentive to allow for such advanced and yet primitive already in existence technology. In a sense nature is illegal and in a sense this works out to being a "myth" or a "shared hallucination" on the parts of many individuals unaware of the scientific nor spiritual aspects of the consequences of such a "belief system". Holding further to this "B.S." are so many caught up in suffering and working to increase the stress upon the natural world. OR at least the world that existed prior to human engineering. If we can build or create out of existence "scarcity" then such a fact is lost on those whom fear that they will lose all value in some sort of dystopian "communist" nightmare. If scarcity is a myth, then sometime in the near future one will merely wonder how people could construct such muderous ideological constructs in society and they will point to slaughter of the previous century and wonder why the philosophical thinkers of these eras lost so much of the point of reality. The fact that we socially construct all of these ideas and theories into reality and share them is their own reward, how someone can fail to understand such an important construction means that people don't want to advance or move forward into a future self-directed. Not wanting to self-construct a reality based around freedoms that push our understanding further into more permutations and bricolages only debases understanding, and sets the stage for ideological slaughter. Information can be thought of as a substance, of which we can construct infinite value from such tiny molecular structures, why could any artist not sit in awe or wonderment of the inevitable elimination of obscurity? It must be that the ones that have hogged so much of the spotlight in the controlled or managed press arenas are frightened and scared of the eventual unoriginality of their works being found out. So in this sense they want to obscure and block their own misdeeds and expropriation from lesser knowns and forgotten artists, from whom they owe so much....
That's another title worth considering reading along with "Jekyll Island", the "End of Economic Man" was written by a former CEO for Norton Publishing in the early 90's. It points out how Economics is more or less a belief system, nothing at all similar to a science such as Physics, yet many people are bumped over the head with a Ideology of Economics as certainty or "science", when in fact it's a belief system. The only question I would like to know is how people can pledge allegiance towards a belief system that hides it's identity from the public, though it's understandable in the light of other certain fundamentalisms throughout the world.
what if like globalist corps people just set up a satellite network outside the states that caters to open standards....somebody else just mentioned it...I was thinking if they can run sweatshops in China and run wages down everywhere else why not set up businesses that gut existing business models that are closed in an effort to circumvent the ability of these companies to circumvent and restrict technologies? In the same way someone brings in goods from China or imports workers from Mexico or elsewhere, why not disrupt the technology infrastructure by setting up in unregulated lands?
These people claim to be unbiased or balanced as opposed to unblanced? In other words we say we are sane...we say you are losers. That's the mainstream opinion of the bloggers, mostly since they expect and maintain priority over what is news. Maybe the FCC recognizes the fallacy of "unbiased" information. Whoever decides the story decides the debate, why on earth should a centralized media system command control over a decentralized international system? Bottom line they can't control the world and they were trying to implement some kind of control over ideas that are political.
I presume you didn't flip around with the clicker...it sounds fairly consistent with prolonged activity. The remote control is almost forgotten in the sense that today you could just click out of a commercial...this is what became for the most part Add. The coercive ideology or story would be unable to exert control over your mind, in the same sense that in the past you would rather sit through the commercial rather than get up to change the channel. There are some people with real add but I would bet that maybe the majority are people that are trying to avoid being programmed by the tv, family members, religions, ideologies. This drives marketers insane, thus the "disease" of people that will not sit still for the commercial and their hijacking of the branding process.
where i found that information. It worked for Bush Senior, Reagan, Oliver North and too many to list. For all we know they found it on the interent somewhere and that site might not even exist anymore, so how are you going to find that source? Especially if they can't recall?
so paypal is evil. HMMMM something tells me this is a con job. Attack the small business or simple business exchanges but let the billion dollar vultures get off scott free. Something tells me Enron, Global Crossing and Halliburton ought to be investigated under this Patriot Act. Otherwise it's as useless as the ink that it's printed with. It's time for a repealin'.
Maybe this has already been said but why not stop having music stores for music cd's anymore? Seems a very wasteful practice. Back in the late 80's when all the record companies tore all the cardboard packaging off the stocks of cd's to place them in jewel case keepers they wasted tons of cardboard or paper. An industry that has flipped formats at least every decade for the last 30-40 years shouldn't continue to be rewarded for excess. Audio cd's are going the way of the 8 track and DVD is on the way. Why doesn't the music industry work out some deal with the movie industry to rent their entire recorded works across the nation. If i can go down to the store and rent the cd for $2 a disc and maybe some special 5 for $5 for older audio discs i might rent one while looking for a movie to rent. It would certainly free up internet bandwith, though people would still download. You could even create entire album cable music channels for subscription. Why not have a cable channel where you can pay as you go. Say $5 per album...maybe a few extras like the making of the album as a movie?? I'm really tired of the recording industrys complete lack of ingenuity and imagination. Where are the artists pushing the boundaries on how music is presented? Mp3's are great for bringing out lost musics and forgotten treasures. This in turn is educated a vast amount of the public and is it any wonder why people could care less about "modern" music that mostly is created for people aged 12-17? People that have very little knowledge about music overall. Could it be that these kids are finding out how lame and useless popular music is and are finding artists on the edges of the underground or historical dustbin?
In what way is this not going to be used to justify very bad music? I can hear hundreds of different artists everyday on the college radio station. Why on earth would people think this program can determine what makes everyone like certain songs? Do some experiments. Run it on a beatles song from the 60's...and then tell me it's going to predict that song being a hit in today's world. Otherwise it's just marketing gimmicks. I'll bet Beatles songs would fail to be hits even if they were hits in the past.
We already kill our own. How many people on death row have been wrongly convicted and later released through DNA testing? How many sit in a jail cell at this moment for some minor drug use violation...or glass bong seller violation?
Slashdot Mirror
"It was not the church but also the established astronomers of the time that condemned Galileo. The majority of physicists rejected Einsteins Special Relativity Theory in 1905. Einstein himself would not accept anything in Quantum Theory after 1920 no matter how many experiments supported it. Edisons commitment to Direct Current electrical generators led him to insist Alternating Current generators were unsafe for years after their saftey had been proven to everyone else." - RAW "Prometheus Rising It's very hard for people involved in science to accept the reality that maybe a cherished theory could be wrong, just the same as with a Religious Fundamentalist, in fact the two have some strange similarities to one another when one delves into their so called "laws" or "truths". I find Science to be just as limiting as faith, slightly less insane but insane for reasons other than "faith". If one may be so compelled to believe only what one views in front of their eyes, data graphs, telescopes, microscopes, and various other instruments, then one has taken in a kind of faith in not just the the technology being used but other's eyes, or in the individual's case their own eyes. Just because you can't measure something or view it with your eyes doesn't mean it theoretically can't exist. A UFO or UMO(unidentified moving ground object) occur almost indefinitely on a regular basis, I'm sure all of you can be mistaken from time to time via your own perception of reality, does that mean that you didn't see what you thought you did? I don't know. How rare the sound of those three words in the mouths of a fairly egotistical religious or political or scientific person. We often embrace logo's, figures, organizations, heirarchy, beliefs, theories, specualtions, without much thought as to there actual probability of their actual existence in reality. Much of what passes for education in public schools amounts to commandments to respect your teacher, school, government, church, corporations and parents unflinchingly, and we are somehow shocked that people would say "no thanks" your all unworth my energy and time, leave me alone. Oh, but that means the person has a problem or is ignorant or something according to those that have to define everything in existence, catagorize, classify, compartmentalize and structure existence into something that can be understood in their own nervous system to be "reality". Sorry, I guess we offended your nervous system by not placing you above us in the heirarchy of power. Sometimes people use Science, Religion and Politics as a will to power(Nietsche), over others, sometimes others try to warn of this abuse of power and it's relation to your position or punishment in life(Foucault). The better observation would be to propose that maybe vaccines cause autism or maybe they don't, maybe mercury is toxic, maybe it's harmless, maybe some people have problems with Aids vaccines that increase propensity for acquiring HIV or maybe Bayer Asperin gave tablets with HIV to people in western Europe which caused many to lose jobs and go to jail while excutives that authorized the sale in the US suffer no consequences, maybe somebody that put forth the time to get a PHD in health could be on to something about vaccinations not being needed in such great quantity, maybe we should just create and inject vaccines into people focibly as in Prince Georges MD. Ivan Illich wrote a book called "Limits to medicine" many of you should try to find in your library and also another called "Deschooling Society". In some ways we now have a new Inquistion and it's aimed at the throat of challengers to the status quo, in the same way incumbents go after a challenger in politics, many vested interests play a part, and information may be censored through the use of extended copyright creating a "Intellectual Feudalism" as another writer put it so succintly, if not brought to the people's attention, we could very well have as we do today the technology to advance consciousness but yet sit at the feet of a "scientific oligarch" unwilling t
I was thinking of of how so much of law with regard to copyright and digital property is loaded with hidden meanings. It's fairly certain to say that without treaty and law one could not feel justified in stealing from the public domain, nor one would feel the least bit guilty of stealing say the land under somebody elses feet. In many cases law is used merely to establish monopoly control of, for and in spite of the natural tendency of nature's propensity for non-scarcity. Despite the fact that nature can be infinitely reproducable it wouldn't matter to lawyers and the legal monopoly. They would have no incentive to allow for such advanced and yet primitive already in existence technology. In a sense nature is illegal and in a sense this works out to being a "myth" or a "shared hallucination" on the parts of many individuals unaware of the scientific nor spiritual aspects of the consequences of such a "belief system". Holding further to this "B.S." are so many caught up in suffering and working to increase the stress upon the natural world. OR at least the world that existed prior to human engineering. If we can build or create out of existence "scarcity" then such a fact is lost on those whom fear that they will lose all value in some sort of dystopian "communist" nightmare. If scarcity is a myth, then sometime in the near future one will merely wonder how people could construct such muderous ideological constructs in society and they will point to slaughter of the previous century and wonder why the philosophical thinkers of these eras lost so much of the point of reality. The fact that we socially construct all of these ideas and theories into reality and share them is their own reward, how someone can fail to understand such an important construction means that people don't want to advance or move forward into a future self-directed. Not wanting to self-construct a reality based around freedoms that push our understanding further into more permutations and bricolages only debases understanding, and sets the stage for ideological slaughter. Information can be thought of as a substance, of which we can construct infinite value from such tiny molecular structures, why could any artist not sit in awe or wonderment of the inevitable elimination of obscurity? It must be that the ones that have hogged so much of the spotlight in the controlled or managed press arenas are frightened and scared of the eventual unoriginality of their works being found out. So in this sense they want to obscure and block their own misdeeds and expropriation from lesser knowns and forgotten artists, from whom they owe so much....
That's another title worth considering reading along with "Jekyll Island", the "End of Economic Man" was written by a former CEO for Norton Publishing in the early 90's. It points out how Economics is more or less a belief system, nothing at all similar to a science such as Physics, yet many people are bumped over the head with a Ideology of Economics as certainty or "science", when in fact it's a belief system. The only question I would like to know is how people can pledge allegiance towards a belief system that hides it's identity from the public, though it's understandable in the light of other certain fundamentalisms throughout the world.
what if like globalist corps people just set up a satellite network outside the states that caters to open standards....somebody else just mentioned it...I was thinking if they can run sweatshops in China and run wages down everywhere else why not set up businesses that gut existing business models that are closed in an effort to circumvent the ability of these companies to circumvent and restrict technologies? In the same way someone brings in goods from China or imports workers from Mexico or elsewhere, why not disrupt the technology infrastructure by setting up in unregulated lands?
These people claim to be unbiased or balanced as opposed to unblanced? In other words we say we are sane...we say you are losers. That's the mainstream opinion of the bloggers, mostly since they expect and maintain priority over what is news. Maybe the FCC recognizes the fallacy of "unbiased" information. Whoever decides the story decides the debate, why on earth should a centralized media system command control over a decentralized international system? Bottom line they can't control the world and they were trying to implement some kind of control over ideas that are political.
I presume you didn't flip around with the clicker...it sounds fairly consistent with prolonged activity. The remote control is almost forgotten in the sense that today you could just click out of a commercial...this is what became for the most part Add. The coercive ideology or story would be unable to exert control over your mind, in the same sense that in the past you would rather sit through the commercial rather than get up to change the channel. There are some people with real add but I would bet that maybe the majority are people that are trying to avoid being programmed by the tv, family members, religions, ideologies. This drives marketers insane, thus the "disease" of people that will not sit still for the commercial and their hijacking of the branding process.
where i found that information. It worked for Bush Senior, Reagan, Oliver North and too many to list. For all we know they found it on the interent somewhere and that site might not even exist anymore, so how are you going to find that source? Especially if they can't recall?
so paypal is evil. HMMMM something tells me this is a con job. Attack the small business or simple business exchanges but let the billion dollar vultures get off scott free. Something tells me Enron, Global Crossing and Halliburton ought to be investigated under this Patriot Act. Otherwise it's as useless as the ink that it's printed with. It's time for a repealin'.
Maybe this has already been said but why not stop having music stores for music cd's anymore? Seems a very wasteful practice. Back in the late 80's when all the record companies tore all the cardboard packaging off the stocks of cd's to place them in jewel case keepers they wasted tons of cardboard or paper. An industry that has flipped formats at least every decade for the last 30-40 years shouldn't continue to be rewarded for excess. Audio cd's are going the way of the 8 track and DVD is on the way. Why doesn't the music industry work out some deal with the movie industry to rent their entire recorded works across the nation. If i can go down to the store and rent the cd for $2 a disc and maybe some special 5 for $5 for older audio discs i might rent one while looking for a movie to rent. It would certainly free up internet bandwith, though people would still download. You could even create entire album cable music channels for subscription. Why not have a cable channel where you can pay as you go. Say $5 per album...maybe a few extras like the making of the album as a movie?? I'm really tired of the recording industrys complete lack of ingenuity and imagination. Where are the artists pushing the boundaries on how music is presented? Mp3's are great for bringing out lost musics and forgotten treasures. This in turn is educated a vast amount of the public and is it any wonder why people could care less about "modern" music that mostly is created for people aged 12-17? People that have very little knowledge about music overall. Could it be that these kids are finding out how lame and useless popular music is and are finding artists on the edges of the underground or historical dustbin?
In what way is this not going to be used to justify very bad music? I can hear hundreds of different artists everyday on the college radio station. Why on earth would people think this program can determine what makes everyone like certain songs? Do some experiments. Run it on a beatles song from the 60's...and then tell me it's going to predict that song being a hit in today's world. Otherwise it's just marketing gimmicks.
I'll bet Beatles songs would fail to be hits even if they were hits in the past.
We already kill our own. How many people on death row have been wrongly convicted and later released through DNA testing? How many sit in a jail cell at this moment for some minor drug use violation...or glass bong seller violation?
blah blah blah....why did the aztecs worship the sun and the moon?