Well, I woke up to bunch of twinkly today! So many new stars...and all thanks to you!
Yay!! thank you Llama!

VLC is great for WinXP systems since you won't have to install a seperate DVD decoder, but as mentioned above most formats play back at lower quality than if using the original codecs. Another advatange of VLC is the ability to ignore QT and RMP, though the same can be said for Media Player Classic.

Nothing beats WinAmp for general audio playback though, including a lot of my old tracker mods from the 80s and 90s It really whips the llama's ass!

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by Sagemind.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by dotdude. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/The-Llama-Song

>> ^dannym3141:

This guy is such an obnoxious arse. This video leads me to believe that he's just a drama llama. He loves drama.
"And me?..................... (dramatic pause)............... i did................what i had to do!!! ..............................................."
("LAUD ME NOT FOR I AM A MERE MORTAL WHO STOOD TO BE COUNTED. DO NOT PRAISE ME, DO NOT WORSHIP ME, I ONLY DID WHAT WAS NECESSARY!!!!!!!!!!")
He does something that is probably a decent move for free speech, and then ruins it all with 10 minutes of self-backslapping and solo-high-fiving.
Serious negative respect for this frood.


Yeah, his initial videos were entertaining, but he has indeed become far too wrapped up in his own self importance. I haven't upvoted his last couple of videos for that very reason, he's not really being part of the solution at all.

And who the f*ck does he think he is to be giving out scores to others... get stuffed.

'I did what I had to do'... um... made a couple of videos from the safety of anonymity, well done sir... well done.

This guy is such an obnoxious arse. This video leads me to believe that he's just a drama llama. He loves drama.

"And me?..................... (dramatic pause)............... i did................what i had to do!!! ..............................................."

("LAUD ME NOT FOR I AM A MERE MORTAL WHO STOOD TO BE COUNTED. DO NOT PRAISE ME, DO NOT WORSHIP ME, I ONLY DID WHAT WAS NECESSARY!!!!!!!!!!")

He does something that is probably a decent move for free speech, and then ruins it all with 10 minutes of self-backslapping and solo-high-fiving.

Serious negative respect for this frood.

@rebuilder

I'm not trying to defend everything the guy says, but I think you're simplifying the nuance of his argument a little. He used the simplified example of chess to illustrate a point and then expanded it to another subject, female bodies, which he discussed in much greater detail. In real life, the example of chess would be expanded to include the option of not playing, or something like playing in a way that tries to prove a point to your opponent rather than just to win.

When he presents the argument about the Dalai Llama and Ted Bundy, I don't see how that could make you repulsed. How is it exactly that saying it's possible to be right or wrong about a moral choice naturally leads to genocide in your mind?

Moral decisions don't happen in a vacuum. They happen in a continuum of human existence. They happen in a factual situation. So, imagine your community is starving and you or a friend of yours makes the decision that to kill your/their child to serve the greater good by reducing the number of mouths to feed...or imagine someone who chooses cannibalism like in the movie "Alive". That might normally be considered morally wrong, but in a specific situation it could be considered understandable. Well, we all live in specific situations, and as a global community, that continuum of situations is constantly changing. The only way we can make proper moral judgments is to continually examine our situation and evolve our morals along with the course of human events. Even religions can change when presented with new information (Galileo, evolution), so doesn't that mean that information is affecting our morals? So, why not embrace and study that information which affects us so?

I like turtles

In reply to this comment by schmawy:
No, the pleasure was mine! And the turtles.



In reply to this comment by SlipperyPete:
Llamas & turtles - thanks for browsing!

No, the pleasure was mine! And the turtles.



In reply to this comment by SlipperyPete:
Llamas & turtles - thanks for browsing!

Llamas & turtles - thanks for browsing!

Oh hardy har har.

In reply to this comment by Llama:
I wonder if Gwiz665 calls it a rapier because it's long and very thin.. .... ...

Ok... I still see this line as completely arbitrary. How are our actions not "probabilistic events?" The amoeba is operating off the same basic principals. It's exerting energy to maintain certain ion concentrations. It's moving matter in order to seek out food, and even flexing its pseudopods along the shortest path between food sources in proportion to their delivery frequency. There is even a paper showing that it will respond to periodic stimuli (such as cold shocks at particular intervals) with predictive changes of behavior. How is that any different?

Further, comparison and recall? Why is memory necessary for experience? For the successful completion of certain cognitive tasks, sure, but I keep needing to remind you that isn't what we're talking about here. As for comparison, it's happening everywhere all the time. Electrons are "comparing" electric fields when they settle into a state, otherwise they couldn't obey their physical laws. I think the problem here is that your thinking is boxed into the human sensory modalities. As far as I'm concerned an electron is sensing an electrical field in the same way I am sensing visual band EM. It just can't image it as well, and thus can't respond to complex patterns at much distance. Again, not to diminish that extraordinary decrease in entropy, but I don't know why it should be so fundamental.

Also, to be clear, I've never claimed that what I'm looking for is something immaterial. I just believe that consciousness is a fundamental property of matter. Being matter, and conscious, I have no reason to think otherwise. Again, this consciousness is distinct from "thinking". It's the sheer fact that there is a phenomenal experience, not the particular nature of those phenomena. You've presented me no evidence that I should only expect phenomenal experience in a complex organism, as you have no test for phenomenal experience. This is why Chalmers, and others, have argued that consciousness is not necessarily best studied by traditional english empiricism. It's wholly inadequate to investigate the phenomenon. A better solution might draw on Eastern traditions of meditation, for instance. Many monks, including the Dali Llama have been interested in cooperating.

But you have made a claim, that for some particular X, P(X) > P(!X). On the basis of that statement, and the assumption that you are rational, I draw the conclusion that you have some concept of what X is, or at least what its consequences are, otherwise you are making a non-sequitur claim.

I do have some very general concept of what x is, but not such a certain idea that I would ever make a claim like P(X) > P(!X). That is, unless you toe a hard Bayesian line, and accept that my claim is completely a subjective degree of belief. Otherwise, my claim was something like "I believe that P(X) > P(!X)". Something you shouldn't really care to contest, but I'll defend my priors against your priors till you're blue in the face. I won't be bullied by the tyranny of some arbitrary model selection criteria.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'music, llamas, hoods, wolves, countryside, woods, singers' to 'music, llamas, hoods, wolves, countryside, woods, singers, usa, mount equinox, 00s' - edited by Eklek

Oh, and Llama, if you're out there, you might want to avert your eyes.