feelings exist for those who feel them. This is true for animals, plants, social networks.
Consciousness exists for those who have consciousness. Consciousness can be defined as a feeling of a feeling.

As a Christian, I was taught life after death, but I've abandoned that view and moved all those instructions into a category of concepts that are better taken as metaphors than as literal fact. Should we expect to go to a higher plane after we die? I'll answer that with : do others remember us in a positive manner? Since your brain is dead, your identity rests only with those who remember you, or government records of your identity.

Consider a brain that has been chemically lobotomized. After the drugs are removed, that brain is chemically identical to the brain before the lobotomy. But the 'spirit' is gone. The brain is incapable of feeling, therefore consciousness cannot exist. Now is consciousness separate from the brain, or is it simply a part of brain function?

Final question: Are we part of a group consciousness right now? If we're aware of the intent of the group, how the group feels about itself, would it really be any different than if we had wires networking our 10 brains together? Would that awareness be fundamentally different from our own group awareness now?

@bmacs27 I think there could be a satisfactory physical test for consciousness. There's different levels of consciousness after all. Some monkeys will recognize their own self in a mirror, some won't. Is that an example?

@Jigga Quantum consciousness is flawed. After all, it's typical to explain something poorly understood with something that is poorly understood but we hope explains it.

On the other hand, having a larger than average Amygdala appears to be very helpful in forming social networks.

http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/28/how-to-win-friends-have-a-big-amygdala/?xid=rss-topstories

How many people say they're christian just because they want to blend in?
Of those Christians, how many actually go to church?
Of those that go to church, how many go to church purely because they feel they have to or go for secular reason (social networking, etc)
Of all the people who are supposedly christian, how many of them just pray simply because it feels comforting but don't actually think a god is really listening, nor do they believe prayer influences reality.

Christians aren't the majority you think they are.

@GeeSussFreeK

not really fear. maybe hope? if we can all log in to a bank account, or social networking site, the technology is there to effectively change how decisions are made in our "democracy".

we have the technological capacity to essentially end "representative" democracy (a farce) and start to create an actual democracy.
of course this would also require systemic change to our monopoly controlled propaganda/media.

Deathcow,
Back in '92, I used to love EA and Apple. Somehow they became letigiously evil after the dot-com crash.
I play BC2 through Steam, and most of my games through Steam. I have too many friends there to just pick up and switch because of EA's Origin (which I also have used for Warhammer Online and plan on never using again). The difference between Steam and Origin is that Steam supports all sorts of games, not just Valve's, and I can play BC2 without having Steam running when I don't want to be bugged by online friends. Origin, on the other hand, is a distribution system for EA only - it's social network features are shitty. It is required to play BF3 even if you buy the BF3 DVD at the store. Origin doesn't have any incentive to get better, or leaner, as it comes not as an option to the customer, but as a requirement. It's a resource hog already and it will only get worse. Steam has to prove to both vendors and players that it's worth their while. It is an option and not a requirement, and best of all, you own your games for a lifetime. With Origin, you lose all your games after 2 years of inactivity. I do not want to rent my games from EA. I want to own them and use them through a third-party service.

More on this nonsense:
http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&boardid=1&threadid=124661

Let me know where you play, maybe I come squad with you sometime

>> ^hpqp:

Every action has some form of motivation, even a psycho's mass murdering spree; it's all good and fine to look for it, but in the meanwhile it's the protective action that counts, something the police force in GB took ages to do. As for the "bonehead militias", most of them were simply groups of neighbours and friends trying their best to protect their livelihoods. Most of them were immigrants who had worked hard to build a life for themselves abroad, only to find everything ruined because of unruly misguided youths high on violence.
As for blaming the violence on the bad decisions concerning social services, I beg to differ. Look at the protests/riots in Greece, Spain, etc. All of them had major peacefull counterparts, with actual demands being made. It's not like the so-called "disenfranchised youths" (and they were not all poor, nor young btw) of London and elsewhere did not have recent examples of protests that did not involve using social networking to best loot the fashion shop, and burning people's homes (Arab Spring anyone?).
I agree about the ridiculous consummer identity we have going on in society... "you are what you buy" really sickens me to the bone. As does the corporate criminels going on with their billionaire, society-crushing lifestyles. But is it possible to send a more counterproductive message than the one we've seen in England?
p.s.: what's and ASPO?
Judging by the public statements of officials, the "protective action" is bound to overshoot. Like I said, pillories, assembly-line-justice, the calls for harsher sentences, the calls to have the rioters' housing/benefits stripped, the thought of using the military -- civil liberties are put on notice, and that's putting it mildly. Let the rozzers do their job within the regular frame of the law, play it by the book, don't give them any reason whatsoever for another backlash. Take the kettle off the stove. Forcing a lid on the spout will only make matters worse sooner than later.


As for the Greece/Spain comparison, I would like to submit this: UNICEF 2007: An overview of child well-being in rich countries. Prior to the economic meltdown, Greece and Spain were paradise for kids, compared to the UK. I wouldn't dare to make comparisons nowadays, not with 40%+ youth unemployment in Spain and Greece. But it's clear that the UK has been growing worse over years and years. The lid was bound to blow someday. I figured it would be mass protests, nonviolent ones I might add. I certainly didn't see it taking the shape it has, but in retrospect, signs were abundant -- and ignored. The alarming streak of suicides among kids in recent years alone should have been more than enough.

These are long-term developments, long-term failures, not just the recent cuts. But they sure as hell didn't help, and neither does the prospect of even more cuts down the road. Small example: youth centers are closed down, so now you have kids bored out of their minds who are not allowed to loiter (see: ASBO).

That's what I meant when I said disenfranchised. The state has been on the retreat since Thatcher, the educational system is focused on testing, intolerance for kids in public places has been on the rise for decades and the social gap is wider than anywhere else in Europe. So the ones who drew the short straw are fucked. And so are their children. And theirs, until the cycle is broken. Look at the UN report, page 22: "Relationships" and page 26: "Behaviour and Risks". That doesn't appear overnight, it's at least two generations of failure. No stable relationships, no communities, no values, no respect, no prospect.

As for ASPOs: that's a typo. Or more precisely, a brain failure, because typing a P instead of a B is not an error I can blame on my fingers.

ASBO or anti-social behaviour order is the tool of choice to stop kids from loitering. Anywhere. The street, the park, the yard, the staircase, you name it. It is the formalized dislike for children in the public space. There are, of course, reasonable uses for it, but in certain areas it is used to harass kids. At least it was, no idea if it still is.

Quasi ein Platzverweis, der keines Anlasses benötigt.

Every action has some form of motivation, even a psycho's mass murdering spree; it's all good and fine to look for it, but in the meanwhile it's the protective action that counts, something the police force in GB took ages to do. As for the "bonehead militias", most of them were simply groups of neighbours and friends trying their best to protect their livelihoods. Most of them were immigrants who had worked hard to build a life for themselves abroad, only to find everything ruined because of unruly misguided youths high on violence.

As for blaming the violence on the bad decisions concerning social services, I beg to differ. Look at the protests/riots in Greece, Spain, etc. All of them had major peacefull counterparts, with actual demands being made. It's not like the so-called "disenfranchised youths" (and they were not all poor, nor young btw) of London and elsewhere did not have recent examples of protests that did not involve using social networking to best loot the fashion shop, and burning people's homes (Arab Spring anyone?).

I agree about the ridiculous consummer identity we have going on in society... "you are what you buy" really sickens me to the bone. As does the corporate criminels going on with their billionaire, society-crushing lifestyles. But is it possible to send a more counterproductive message than the one we've seen in England?

p.s.: what's and ASPO?

>> ^radx:

Unjustifiable as their actions are, calling it mindless destruction by spoilt children does no good in my book. There is a reason, there always is a reason, and I highly doubt it is as simple as it is presented to be in most articles I've read so far. They are criminals, yes, but what's their motivation, what's their reasoning? Without knowing the deeper cause, any actions -- crackdowns as many suggest -- will only suppress the problem for the time being, making a later outbreak all the worse.
Particularly if law enforcement plays dirty, pushes the boundaries of the rule of law -- and the use of billboards and social media by the police as a modern pillory, that's on the fucking edge, if you ask me. If one of those bonehead militias acts upon it, the shit could turn ugly real quick.
Anyway, there's no wisdom, no insight I can claim to have from within the isolation of what is commonly known as the middle class; only impressions and thoughts.
However, the violence cannot come as a surprise, given the unrest last winter caused by a raise in tuition fees; it cannot come as a surprise, given the sheer volume of social cuts, particularly small programs. How can anyone be caught off guard by their blatant disregard of the law given how disenfranchised many of them are, and given how the crooks working in the City of London walked away scot-free after the damage they caused, which was magnitude higher. Who speaks out on their behalf? Politicians? Unions? Seems to me, they're on their own, destined to remain invisible -- until they lash out. They appear to be farther removed from the democratic process than anyone would like to admit. Politics, society, community, whatever you want to call it: they have no stakes in the game.
And how surprising is it, really, to find them looting expensive comsumer products -- you are what you wear, right? It's in your face, everywhere, all the time, particularly in a city like London. So now the folks who were cut off from this just snapped and went for it, no matter the rules? I'm shocked!
As for their treatment by the coppers: are ASPOs still handed out left, right and center in certain districts?
But hey, like I said, I'm too far removed from their reality of life to make any meaningful statements, much less suggestions. Just poking in the dark, that's what this is.

Whats with the poor quality video?? every other video i've seen from Anonymous

Can't see anything on http://www.whatis-theplan.org/forum either.....

Targetting FB when Social Networking has helped to encourage revolution.... i'm confused.

>> ^digitalbombdog:

Privacy on Facebook is only an issue if you put your private stuff on Facebook. And if you put your private stuff on Facebook, then it's not really private then is it. It's called SOCIAL NETWORKING. You are willingly sharing your information with everyone out there. People need to learn to just keep their shit to themselves.


The problem is that all your friends put up stuff about you and themselves. From there on anyone with that data can make educated guesses about you.

Privacy on Facebook is only an issue if you put your private stuff on Facebook. And if you put your private stuff on Facebook, then it's not really private then is it. It's called SOCIAL NETWORKING. You are willingly sharing your information with everyone out there. People need to learn to just keep their shit to themselves.

No voting system unless I have a social-network account?
That's internet-racism!!

I don't use social networks much. How about we have both?

No!
I keep my VideoSift opinions separate from my Facebook/Social network connections.
I feel okay about sharing my opinions here on the sift because it's outside (mostly) of my actual world. I don't share all my opinions with everyone I know and I'd like to keep it that way.

Also, I don't want to spam everyone I know each time I post a comment, a video or upvote a Sift.

And to ad to this, the last thing I'd hate to see is the Sift becoming another slave to the Facebook conglomerate that it has become. Everything connected with FB is governed by their rules and controlled by their methods. The sift would only become a "Feature" on FB and would loose it's own identity altogether - not to mention it's core members.

I don't care for the trend of social network integration. Even the times I do want to share a video on Facebook, I copy and paste the URL myself. I'm not paranoid about being tracked but that doesn't mean I want to be a breadcrumb trail artificer either.