Radio: My favorite discovery of 2012 is "Radio Lab", a story telling show reminiscent of another favorite, 'This American Life', but with a much more sophisticated sound design. All episodes are available for free in the podcast section of iTunes.

Music: I fell in love with the New Orleans second line scene after Issy and I paid a visit to the crescent city this year. We saw the 'Rebirth Brass Band' live and had a great time. We also had a mini-meetup at the show with @dotdude. New Orleans music culture is like no other.

Music: Louis Cole & Genevieve Artadi: Highly unique and energetic electro-acoustic music. Hard to explain.

Music: Austin Texas band 'The Black Angels' - Dark, bluesy rock obviously influenced by the Doors. To be honest, I'm not crazy about blues rock or the Doors, but 'The Black Angels' manage to meld these influences into something I really dig.

Music: UK band, 'Metronomy'. Their sound is eclectic, hooky and heavily influenced by all the cool British 80's bands I loved as a kid. Goes down easy. Works in the background as well as the fore.

Movies: Django and Looper were the two films that captivated me from start to finish. Both films by gifted auteurs, one at the top of his game, the other on the rise. Great writing. Great Directing. Great performances.

Horror movies: The Cabin in the Woods (A clever and absurd meta-horror mashup) and the The Lady in Black (A classic, classy ghost story) both satisfied. It's nice that there were a couple of diamonds in sea of Paranormal-Activity-esque-found-footage detritus.

TV: same stuff that everyone else likes - BB, GoT, DoAb and Sherlock. I also got into Always Sunny in Philadelphia this year - very dark, very funny.

Books: Started a bunch, finished very few. Nothing to recommend. "Checklist Manifesto" is pretty interesting so far - it's about how the brain functions (or fails to function) in the information-dense present.

Games: 'Xcom' was a worthy update of the original. Loved all the detailed micro/macro strategy. 'Journey' was beautiful and fairly moving for a videogame.

I'm always behind the curve by a few months, in some cases even years, but still, here's the short version:

My favorite MOVIE this year was "The Intouchables", hands down. Only the French can come up with such a captivating story.

As for GAMES, well, since I have played just two AAA titles this year, my favorite has to be an indie game, unsurprisingly. "FTL: Faster Than Light" was a blast. Perma death rarely works in favour of a game, but in this case, it became the foundation of the thrill FTL provides.
"Deadlight" was also fun, very stylish, but not extraordinary. And "X Rebirth" was postponed once again, so it'll be my game of the year 2013 instead.

TV was just the same ol', MUSIC as well.

BOOKS is a hard one. Or maybe not. A cursory check of my collection tells me I haven't read a single book that was published this year.

Hey @shinyblurry. What I can tell is your church failed to teach you how to ignore the supernatural brainwashing bullshit that all religions teach you, and how to steer clear of the completely fabricated nonsense that will doom you to a life of believing in hocus-pocus that divides all people, has started endless conflicts and murdered millions of people all for absolutely fuckall.

Reality 1:1

And the real world said to him "Truly, turly, I say to you, to run as fast as you can from anyone who believes in Jesus, because those people are completely fucked up and are going to destroy everything and turn people into total assholes"

To understand reality, you may have to sit in a quiet room and think to yourself "hey self! What's up with believing in something that has zero proof of ever being true even in the slightest? Like, are you that fucking numb?"


>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^Fletch:
Hey, it's the Minecraft trailer music!
I want to say this is no more wacky than any other religions, but my frame of reference is as a confirmed Lutheran , so it does seem a lot wackier. God needs a secret handshake and password so he knows you're cool... that's just comedy gold. I want to start seeing "Hey Mitt! What's the secret handshake?" signs at rallies.

My last day ever in a church was the day I was confirmed. My mom made me a deal that if I completed the classes and shit I could decide on my own whether to go back. I didn't believe in magic then, and I don't believe in it now. Did it for mom.

Hey @Fletch, thank you for sharing this. What I can tell you is that your church failed to teach you the most important thing, which is how to have a personal relationship with God. Rituals and classes don't make you a Christian. To be a Christian you have to be born again;
John 3:3
Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."
This is a supernatural rebirth, a complete recreation making you into a new man. It isn't something you learn about, it is something the Holy Spirit works within you when you truly accept Jesus into your heart. A man or a church can't do this for you; that's why confirmation, and other such rituals, are completely meaningless and ultimately a stumbling block to anyone who doesn't know Christ. This is why you left the Lutheran church in the first place, because following their precepts didn't bring you to know God personally. You said it yourself; you don't believe in magic. That says it all. This is the tragedy of many who grow up in Christian homes, who turn their back on what they presume is a dead faith, because they were never taught how to have a experiential relationship with a living God.
To know God is to Him personally. You could pray: "Jesus, if you're everything the bible says you are, I will follow you". If you can't go that far, simply ask if what I've said is true. God will show you, if you sincerely want to know. You managed to pass through the Christian religion missing the entire point of why it even exists. That is, to have a personal relationship with the creator of the universe, and the lover of your soul. God bless.

>> ^Fletch:

Hey, it's the Minecraft trailer music!
I want to say this is no more wacky than any other religions, but my frame of reference is as a confirmed Lutheran , so it does seem a lot wackier. God needs a secret handshake and password so he knows you're cool... that's just comedy gold. I want to start seeing "Hey Mitt! What's the secret handshake?" signs at rallies.


My last day ever in a church was the day I was confirmed. My mom made me a deal that if I completed the classes and shit I could decide on my own whether to go back. I didn't believe in magic then, and I don't believe in it now. Did it for mom.


Hey @Fletch, thank you for sharing this. What I can tell you is that your church failed to teach you the most important thing, which is how to have a personal relationship with God. Rituals and classes don't make you a Christian. To be a Christian you have to be born again;

John 3:3

Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

This is a supernatural rebirth, a complete recreation making you into a new man. It isn't something you learn about, it is something the Holy Spirit works within you when you truly accept Jesus into your heart. A man or a church can't do this for you; that's why confirmation, and other such rituals, are completely meaningless and ultimately a stumbling block to anyone who doesn't know Christ. This is why you left the Lutheran church in the first place, because following their precepts didn't bring you to know God personally. You said it yourself; you don't believe in magic. That says it all. This is the tragedy of many who grow up in Christian homes, who turn their back on what they presume is a dead faith, because they were never taught how to have a experiential relationship with a living God.

To know God is to Him personally. You could pray: "Jesus, if you're everything the bible says you are, I will follow you". If you can't go that far, simply ask if what I've said is true. God will show you, if you sincerely want to know. You managed to pass through the Christian religion missing the entire point of why it even exists. That is, to have a personal relationship with the creator of the universe, and the lover of your soul. God bless.

No, that was my own assessment of the movement, and it seems to have borne out. What is the OWS movement doing today beyond vandalism and petty thuggery?





Yes, there were some good points made, and a whole lot of bad ones as well. They spoke as one cacophony and it is that lack of coherency or cohesive strategy (as well as a terrible image problem) that ultimately led to their downfall. Even the founders of the movement agree:

"But even Adbusters, the 'culture-jamming' magazine that help spawn the original Wall Street occupation, says that things have changed dramatically for the movement. "Our movement is living through a painful rebirth..." began its frontpage essay this week, and then quoted a Zuccoti park regular who declared, "We are facing a nauseating poverty of ideas.”"

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/06/07

From crowds of 15k to 75 people, it seems to be all over but the shouting

Occupy Wall Street: Dead in 213 Days

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/10552

>> ^messenger:

>> ^shinyblurry:
...this is a movement without any cohesive message or objective..."
http://www.prosebeforehos.com/wordpress/wp
-content/uploads/2011/10/no-message-occupy-wall-street.png
http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-cdn.
com/files/2011/11/ows-message-murdoch-e1322660861906.jpg
I know you're not a lib, but have you really swallowed that Fox media message?

@shinyblurry:

Your characterization of bible literalists as "idiots" and people with "sheep-like" credulity and the "so-called" faithful, not-withstanding, I will agree that a disagreement on origins doesn't necessarily make someone less Christian. It doesn't say anywhere in the bible that you must agree on a literal interpretation of Genesis to follow Jesus Christ.

Calling the literal interpretation of Genesis a "quasi-heretical" doctrine of "19th century upstarts" is completely ridiculous, though. Almost as ridiculous as quoting Origen and Augustrine and claiming they represented the majority viewpoint of the early church. If you think the early church didn't believe in a literal Genesis, how do you explain Ephraim the syrian, or Basil of Caesarea? What about Ambrose of Milan, who was the mentor of Augustine? They all believed in a young earth, as did many others throughout the centuries.

Let us not also forget that Christ Himself was a bible literalist, who spoke about the narrative in the Old Testament, including Genesis, as literal history, and literally fulfilled the prophecies of the Messiah.


Could you perhaps refer me to some documents wherein St. Ephrem or St. Basil averred that the literal interpretation of the Bible is primary? Ephrem appears to have struck a middle ground between literalism and pure metaphorical interpretation, and St. Basil was a student of Origen's writings. Granted, St. Basil assiduously avoided the bizarre flights of fancy that plagued some of the Christian writers in the 4th century, but he was hardly a literalist in a strict sense--the literal sense was only one important sense in which to take the sacred writings.

If you want to support your point, a particular reference to Genesis will do best.

As far as Ambrose goes, it stretches the truth to say that he was a "mentor" of Augustine. Certainly, Augustine speaks rather highly of Ambrose in the Confessions. But Augustine writes with rather rose-colored glasses. A sober-minded approach to the life of Ambrose reveals that he was as much a political animal as he was spiritual. And even in the Confessions it is not recorded that Ambrose paid much attention to Augustine. If I recall correctly, Augustine doesn't record a single word that Ambrose said to Augustine outside of a public sermon in which Augustine was a member of the congregation.

In regards to Christianity, there is a mimimum requirement of belief, such as that Jesus was raised from the dead, to be a Christian.


In the traditional sense, certainly. There are other senses by which one might claim to be Christian--pointing out the tradition from which one derives one's moral compass, for instance. In this sense, many atheists can probably claim to be Christian atheists, rather than, e.g., Muslim atheists.

Simple observation shows most people, probably near the 99.9 percent mark, to be liars. There is no claim in Christianity that Christians are perfect. Far from it. Jesus was the only perfect man to ever live. Christians still sin, but hopefully they sin much less than usual. Christians living sanctified lives are comparitively rare, unfortunately. When you consider that half of the American church does not believe in a literal Holy Spirit or Satan, it isn't surprising.


Do they sin much less than usual? I haven't seen any sign of it. The statistics don't seem to bear it out. Nor does my personal experience. Of the best and most morally astute people I know, only one was Christian. The rest were Buddhist, Muslim, or Pagan.

In Christianity, it is to know God personally. Christianity is about Jesus Christ and nothing else. If you subtract Jesus, you don't have anything. You automatically get a new state of being; when you accept Christ you are a new creature, and you receive the Holy Spirit. You also have your sins forgiven and obtain eternal life.


To worship and devote yourself to a single God, like Jesus Christ, has a specific term in Hinduism--bhakhti yoga. It is the path of love and devotion.

No matter which god you pursue with this ardent and holy love, you will achieve the same result--sanctification, rebirth, and the descending dove of the Holy Spirit.

The forgiveness of sins is a psychological projection. Eternal life is yours regardless of what any god says.


Which spirit? Satan can make you feel ecstacy and love; it wouldn't be a very good deception if it wasn't deceiving. The question you should ask is, where is this coming from, and who gave me a spirit in the first place?

As far as intolerance goes, Jesus made it clear:

John 14:6

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Those are His words, not mine. A Christian is only telling you what He said, which is that you will face judgment for your sins. If you reject Jesus, you are telling God you want to stand trial for your sins on your own merit. If you are rejecting Jesus, it's for a reason that has nothing to do with anything you have written here.


As far as deception goes, I will quote to you the Gospels, Luke 11:17-19: 'But He knew their thoughts and said to them, “Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and a house divided against itself falls. If Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebul. And if I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? So they will be your judges.'

How can a demon bring holy ecstasy? How can a devil cast out division and hatred, and bring in such divine love?

And with regard to intolerance, it's almost entirely pointless to quote to me the first apocryphon of John--the so-called Gospel of John. I'm well aware of what it says. I've spent a lot of time considering it. That's why I think it's incorrect.

It does no good at all to suggest that it's someone else who's being intolerant. On the one hand, it looks like you're blame-shifting, too much the coward to take responsibility for the statement. On the other hand, you are providing no reason to think that the quotation provides any authority whatsoever, and undermining your position by your own indolence.

remember i am a gnostic so i read the gospels...differently.
i also include ALL the gospels not just those conveniently canonized by the council of nicea.
which is the direction my comment was pointing at.

Ahh, yes, I remember. Before I became a Christian I had gnostic beliefs. I believed in the demiurge for instance, and considered the gospels found in the dead sea scrolls authoratative. However, after much research and some spiritual experience, I have changed my mind. I could bring up objections as to their dates, as many were written far after the fact in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, but my main objection is that I do not believe they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

What gnosticism does is turn Christianity into a dualistic system, with matter being called evil and spirit being good. It recasts the Father as the "demiurge", a petty and evil tyrant who totally bungled the creation. It subtly shifts the blame for the fall from mankind to God. So now man is no longer to blame for sin, but is just a victim to the brute fact of being born in the material world that an evil demigod created. So naturally, rebellion against all his authority is justified.

Futher, the saving work of Christ is turned on its head. Rather than defeating death and sin on the cross, he came to defeat ignorance of the spiritual realities as teacher of secret knowledge (gnosis). Rather than being saved through substitutionary atonement and spiritual rebirth, we must save ourselves by climbing the ladder of spiritual truths and illuminating our "divine spark". All systems of morality and ethics are perceived as relative truths governing the material reality and irrelevent to the true salvation of gnosis.

So, if I could sum up: God is the devil, rebellion is good, man saves himself (enlightenment), death is a release, and do whatever you want. I think I've heard that somewhere, before..

This is in contrast to what Jesus said:

John 19:30

When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, “It is finished,” and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

Meaning, the work is done. There is nothing more any human can do, or ever could do. He got us the victory, and God put everything under His feet:

Matthew 28:18

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

It is only through Him, and His finished work, that we are liberated

simply put:
the powerful institution known as the church (be it catholic or baptist) have co-opted and twisted the message to fit a narrative which empowers the institution and keeps them relevant.this translates into wealth and political power and influence.
this is the absolute antithesis of christs teachings.
christ held the key.he offered it openly and freely.
THIS disempowered those who desired control and was exactly the point.
those who held seats of power saw this threat clearly and if you cant beat em....co-opt them

While I agree the catholic church perverted the message for their own gain, I think your idea of what the message actually says is a far cry from what the disciples or the early church fathers knew it to say. The baptist church is very much in line with that message. John, for instance, wrote against gnostic teaching when he said:

1 John 4:3

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

He wrote this because of gnostic claims that Jesus was not united to a body but only appeared that way.

for centuries the catholic church has been the greatest offender but in the past 50 years other institutions have wrestled their way to prominent control and espouse a contradictory and perverted message in order to manipulate their own people in order to gain more influence and power.all in the name of god.

i counsel many,MANY a people who were former fundamentalist,catholics,methodists,lutheran who found themselves in a crisis of faith due to this very perversion.
lets remember that for centuries the bible was an incomplete text (still is imo)and was written in languages the common man could not read (hell,most people were illiterate at that time).it was the printing press and the translation into english (and many many other languages) that freed the common man to read the very thing his entire belief system was based on.
this is a good thing.

Yes, I agree, it is a very good thing that everyone is able to read the word of God; the catholic church definitely engineered that situation of massive ignorance when they banned all translations except the latin vulgate. I also agree that the massive apostacy in the church is leading many people to reject the church altogether. This is very sad and unfortunate, and many of us have much to answer for. It is written that in the last days, many would fall away and believe false doctrines, and because of the increase of sin, the love of many would grow cold.

I must ask you though, what are you teaching these people? Are you telling them there is no such thing as sin and they need to save themselves?

you have a unique starting point in understanding the bible.simply by the fact you were not indoctrinated as a child and can study,research and formulate your own understanding of biblical teachings based solely on your own studies.

This has been an advantage, in that I can better relate to the secular world than most Christians. Even more of an advantage was my spiritual journey of about 8 years before becoming a Christian, where I explored all of the various religions and belief systems.

i have witnessed over a fairly short amount of time an evolution in your comments and responses pertaining to faith and belief.
this is such a good thing to see for it tells me your ravenous curiosity has driven you to attempt to understand.
the path is long and never truly ends but at least you ask the questions and do not blindly follow.
i am interested in seeing where you are in a year...or two..or twenty.
because nothing saddens me more than to discuss religion with someone who is incurious and seeks to be told what to think or how to feel in regards to faith and belief.

I am not incurious, no. I have followed God without any doctrine at all, so it isn't a frightening prospect to consider things from many different angles. One of the reason I do so much witnessing to atheists is because their questions bring me to many different areas of inquiry, and serve to illuminate and enhance my understanding.

I understand the objections people have, because I've had them too. My experience, especially my spiritual experience, has confirmed to me the truth of the word of God, which is universally applicable and experiential in nature. The Holy Spirit guides into all truth, and through Christ, I lack nothing. So, God has answered my objections. This is the truth I recognize:

Proverbs 3:5

Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

When you shift the basis of your reason from God to man, you have made yourself Lord over Him. If it only by trusting God to provide the answers that you can understand anything.

if christianity had more people like you and less people like pat robertson or ted haggard,the discussion would be so much more..interesting.
you seek to KNOW.you seek wisdom.that is a very very arduous path and can be a solitary one.
i encounter so many people who seem to conflate the ability to recite biblical chapter and verse as somehow translating to wisdom.
this is a falsehood and the epitome of lazy and is also the reason why they become enraged and will many times resort to the most intellectually dishonest trap of deeming the person who revealed their laziness as coming from the devil.

Christianity has many people like me, but too many who are half-hearted in their faith. What I am interested in is the truth, and not something that merely comforts me. I would rather die than live out a comfortable lie. All wisdom comes from God, it is something He gives freely. Whatever understanding I have is from Him, and not something I accomplished by myself. A lot of Christians are content with a superficial understanding of their faith, but this is mostly due to sin. They take what they want from the message and ignore the parts that command that they change their ways. This leads to much error and ignorance.

What I believe about the devil is that he is the father of all lies. I do not think that someone who believes a lie worships the devil, but I do believe that all those who sin are a slave to sin. There is a difference between worshipping the devil and being fooled by him. Some people do worship him knowingly, but most are simply following doctrines that he created to lead people away from the truth.

so i applaud the path you have chosen.
does this mean you will come to the same conclusions as i?
hehe..probably not.we will most likely still disagree but that does not mean i will not appreciate you as a human being nor dismiss your insights simply due to our disagreeing.

as always,
your brother.

Thanks bro. Neither would I throw out your observations based on our disagreement. I believe Jesus is the only way to know God, and I hope you will come to this conclusion as well, but in the meantime I am sure there is a lot of fruitful dialogue to be had. I have learned a few things from investigating various point you have brought up, and appreciate your insight. I respect your right to believe as you want, and I extend my hand to you as a fellow human being in the image of our Creator.

>> ^enoch

hey look..you are poorly informed here..you said my response was very unsatisfying and also inaccurate to boot? you stated that zoroasterism is older than judiasm as if it were an undisputed fact; well sorry but that is not the prevailing viewpoint. there is a lot of misinformation out there on this subject. if you just want to look at the merits of the case the Zoroaster belief is primitive by comparison, if one could be identified as a crude copy, that would be it.

The Christ Conspiracy is the main source of information in Zeitgeist].
http://www.answeringinfidels.com/answering-skeptics/answering-acharya-s/a-refutation-of-archary-ss-book-the-christ-conspiracy-pt-1.html

Was the New Testament Influenced by Pagan Religions
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/2007/12/zeitgeist-of-zeitgeist-movie.html

The Death of the Mystery Gods and the Death of Jesus

The best way to evaluate the alleged dependence of early Christian beliefs about Christ's death and resurrection on the pagan myths of a dying and rising savior-god is to examine carefully the supposed parallels. The death of Jesus differs from the deaths of the pagan gods in at least six ways:

(1) None of the so-called savior-gods died for someone else. The notion of the Son of God dying in place of His creatures is unique to Christianity.[13]

(2) Only Jesus died for sin. As Gunter Wagner observes, to none of the pagan gods "has the intention of helping men been attributed. The sort of death that they died is quite different (hunting accident, self-emasculation, etc.)."[14]

(3) Jesus died once and for all (Heb. 7:27; 9:25-28; 10:10-14). In contrast, the mystery gods were vegetation deities whose repeated deaths and resuscitations depict the annual cycle of nature.

(4) Jesus' death was an actual event in history. The death of the mystery god appears in a mythical drama with no historical ties; its continued rehearsal celebrates the recurring death and rebirth of nature. The incontestable fact that the early church believed that its proclamation of Jesus' death and resurrection was grounded in an actual historical event makes absurd any attempt to derive this belief from the mythical, nonhistorical stories of the pagan cults.[15]

(5) Unlike the mystery gods, Jesus died voluntarily. Nothing like this appears even implicitly in the mysteries.

(6) And finally, Jesus' death was not a defeat but a triumph. Christianity stands entirely apart from the pagan mysteries in that its report of Jesus' death is a message of triumph. Even as Jesus was experiencing the pain and humiliation of the cross, He was the victor. The New Testament's mood of exultation contrasts sharply with that of the mystery religions, whose followers wept and mourned for the terrible fate that overtook their gods.[16]


>> ^enoch:
a whole page concerning zarathustra?
didnt you already answer this question?
and how does this page you link conflict with zoroastrian influence in the bible?
it confirms the influence on early biblical scribes.
/confused
and i notice still no answer on my other queries.
if you are unable to i understand.
again.i thank you for your prompt reply.

>> ^gwiz665:

"Video forbidden" = blocked?


Might be some sort of embedding disabled thing.

The original source was this: http://kotaku.com/#!5704885/the-creepiest-rebirth-of-post+cataclysm-azeroth

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

I am lost in recursion there! Isn't a society just a group of citizens! Let's do direct replacement! "...behavior our group of citizens expects of its individual citizens" Whew, that feels better! Sometimes I get lost in ambiguity, I wonder if others do as well.
I would agree that is what democracy is, but I also see that like Socrates did, as groups stealing power away from individuals. In fact, that is what you see now, groups of people making grabs for power to take advantage of other groups and individuals. Group think is more powerful than individuals, so democracies tend to have this leaning towards the same type of tyranny as a monarchy. I don't know how to undo this evil and still have liberty. Perhaps it is as Jefferson put it with the blood of patriots. Perhaps that is what he was really talking about, entropy of any given system? The best that man can make lasts not against the ravages of time? Perhaps this is the sad reality we face, or perhaps we can take solace in the fact and start the rebirth of what has/is dying?


Yep, lost in recursion you are.

Who decides what individual rights are? You? Me? Something some guy wrote on stone tablets or parchment long ago? Maybe it should be up to the guy with the most money, or maybe just the most military power?

With about 5 minutes of self-reflection, you should realize that what you're struggling to come to grips with is that a) your view of morality isn't popular, and b) you think your morals should be popularly accepted as the only right and true ones, and c) realize that peaceful persuasion probably will never get you a lasting, permanent majority who agree with you so d) you start thinking revolution is the answer.

And through all this, you refuse to view your thoughts as being anything other than supporting liberty against tyranny when you have literally described how tyranny fights against liberty.

The beginning of understanding democracy is to admit that maybe the people who think differently from you have a legitimate point of view, and might even be tapped into a facet of the truth to which you might be oblivious.

It's a belief in the idea that if two heads are better than one, two hundred million heads are probably better than one, and that the only way to ever perfect anything -- including justice -- is through a perpetual debate over the issues in a forum where no ideology has an unassailable monopoly on our thinking.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Because democracy is all about controlling others whom don't share the same opinion.

Actually it's all about trying to work out which objective standards of behavior our society expects of its citizens, without having some king or set of stone tablets set those limits for us without recourse.


I am lost in recursion there! Isn't a society just a group of citizens! Let's do direct replacement! "...behavior our group of citizens expects of its individual citizens" Whew, that feels better! Sometimes I get lost in ambiguity, I wonder if others do as well.

I would agree that is what democracy is, but I also see that like Socrates did, as groups stealing power away from individuals. In fact, that is what you see now, groups of people making grabs for power to take advantage of other groups and individuals. Group think is more powerful than individuals, so democracies tend to have this leaning towards the same type of tyranny as a monarchy. I don't know how to undo this evil and still have liberty. Perhaps it is as Jefferson put it with the blood of patriots. Perhaps that is what he was really talking about, entropy of any given system? The best that man can make lasts not against the ravages of time? Perhaps this is the sad reality we face, or perhaps we can take solace in the fact and start the rebirth of what has/is dying?

Your video, Newest Episode of Futurama "Rebirth", has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 7 Badge!

You reckon? It did seem a bit shit but I figured that was down a smaller budget or something.>> ^Shepppard:

It's obviously real.. but this has to be a rough draft or something.
There's mistakes.. colours seem off, some animations don't seem up to par, and in particular..

spoiler
at 19:52, leela has her arm(s) up, showing the bandage on her left arm, and the.. well, gadget.. thing.. on her right arm. However, the robot leela isn't supposed to have that, in the scenes prior and after, the gadget is gone again.

Well Nasa is full of egg heads. We all know smart people have no common sense, which could have been used to save all that money! And of course it isn't broken. Hey, the baby boomer generation are almost all out. The next generation is almost fully embedded in the societal ranks to help bring some changes to the country. We just need the government to get rid of the old timers and put the next generation in so it can actually happen. Change won't happen until they are gone, no matter how hard anyone tries.

Like I said, I use both and don't care which stays because I'm competent enough to use both. The metric system still won't be adopted in America for decades. I'd be willing to wager the next number system used here will be a completely new one. A change could revitalize he economy of the US with all the work it would create changing everything. Billions would need to be spent to make it happen...wait, that's how to fix the economy! I think we've just stumbled into something brilliant! >> ^gwiz665:

Like I said before: only in America.
Miscalculations are prevalent when both systems are in place, exactly because of the way you describe - you just punch in the numbers and change the units - you just cost nasa $175 mil, because it wasn't clear which was used.
"If it ain't broken, don't fix it" Sure, but it's fucking broken!
We need the old generation that cling to this to die out, so new people can come along and bring a whole new wave of rebirth to your country - because if it continues this way, it won't exist for long!
>> ^Sigh:
The only reason metric was adopted in Europe was so everyone could count on their fingers and toes.
To the actual topic, what's the difference with how computers are in almost every aspect of life. Calculations done by hand are a thing of the past. The only thing people are interested in is the answer. If a scientist is working in his lab and something comes out in feet and inches, he uses that. If its in meters, he uses that. You think he cares what his measurements units are? No. He cares about the results. Saying miscalculations are more prevalent in computers using non-metric systems would be as dumb as this argument.
If computers didn't run our lives metric would make sense. I'm an engineer, base 10 systems exist everywhere around us and I use it everyday. Why did feet and inches survive? Computers. If I have something measured in inches, I put the inches into the computer and change the units. Does it make it harder for me to hit enter to get my answer? Not at all.
If armageddon comes and sends us back to the stone age maybe metric will be used everywhere. It's not about stubbornness. It's about a lack of caring. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Since everyone in the US mainly uses it, they won't change it. If they did change it, aside from making new tape measures and thermometers, it wouldn't make a difference. Life would go on. You think people are going to buy new tape measures and thermometers just because some frog says so? Think again.
From another applied standpoint, buildings, roads and almost all construction is based off the Imperial system. Sheetrock is 4 feet, studs in a wall are made to fit this. Ceiling, 2x4s and roof supports are all made based on this system. That's another change of an entire industry of materials.
Practical application does not outweigh financial investment. At least not in today's world.

Like I said before: only in America.

Miscalculations are prevalent when both systems are in place, exactly because of the way you describe - you just punch in the numbers and change the units - you just cost nasa $175 mil, because it wasn't clear which was used.

"If it ain't broken, don't fix it" Sure, but it's fucking broken!

We need the old generation that cling to this to die out, so new people can come along and bring a whole new wave of rebirth to your country - because if it continues this way, it won't exist for long!

>> ^Sigh:

The only reason metric was adopted in Europe was so everyone could count on their fingers and toes.
To the actual topic, what's the difference with how computers are in almost every aspect of life. Calculations done by hand are a thing of the past. The only thing people are interested in is the answer. If a scientist is working in his lab and something comes out in feet and inches, he uses that. If its in meters, he uses that. You think he cares what his measurements units are? No. He cares about the results. Saying miscalculations are more prevalent in computers using non-metric systems would be as dumb as this argument.
If computers didn't run our lives metric would make sense. I'm an engineer, base 10 systems exist everywhere around us and I use it everyday. Why did feet and inches survive? Computers. If I have something measured in inches, I put the inches into the computer and change the units. Does it make it harder for me to hit enter to get my answer? Not at all.
If armageddon comes and sends us back to the stone age maybe metric will be used everywhere. It's not about stubbornness. It's about a lack of caring. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Since everyone in the US mainly uses it, they won't change it. If they did change it, aside from making new tape measures and thermometers, it wouldn't make a difference. Life would go on. You think people are going to buy new tape measures and thermometers just because some frog says so? Think again.
From another applied standpoint, buildings, roads and almost all construction is based off the Imperial system. Sheetrock is 4 feet, studs in a wall are made to fit this. Ceiling, 2x4s and roof supports are all made based on this system. That's another change of an entire industry of materials.
Practical application does not outweigh financial investment. At least not in today's world.