>> ^Memorare:
maybe siftbot is operating in some parallel universe where time is sped up.
In these physics videos one thing they never offer an explaination for is why the quantum level events don't scale up and occur on our macro level since everything is made up of sub-atomic particles organized as atoms. As with the Schroedinger's Cat paradox it would be kind of disappointing to finally discover a unified theory of everything, only to learn that it really doesn't matter since it doesn't scale up to mundane reality and therefore only "exists" as a theoretical concept. (personally i think the notion that the cat is both dead AND alive simultaneaously and observation determines which, is a lot of mathematical bs, ie it's not Really true except on paper but then i'm not a cosmologist or metaphysicist so what do i know)
Also, a simpler question that has an answer but i just don't know what it is...
with all the anti-matter positrons bombarding the planet via cosmic rays, don't they ever bang into some electrons and create a tiny but big enough to be measured matter/anti-matter explosion? Sure matter is mostly empty (or not so empty apparently) space and possible collisions are few, but cloud chambers indicate tons of these thigns zipping around so Howcome there's not bazillions of these tiny explosions going off all around us constantly?


Yes, the quantum world really destroyed the normal stance of science. It is when math stole the show and ruined the normal claims that science was used to making about the world. In the now, we are talking about things that exist outside of our ability to experience them. The only things that can experience them are our machines we create to measure them; and they do so in a diminished and programed method (they interpolate data). So we are left to interpret an interpretation of an event. When you start getting that convoluted then you have to make the realization that you are no longer talking about what "is", but what your machine is interpolating (The forms of the universe aren't necessarily discrete or concrete, but it will be changed by the machine so that a result can be given). We have gotten to the point where we are no longer talking about the way things "are" about the universe anymore, just about how our machines experience the different elements of phenomena in the universe (your eyes are just as much a part of this machine analogy as well, but that is a tale for another day).

I think one of the largest criticisms of the relativist camp that really sticks is there is not sufficient reason to accept the quantum model over any other model that explains things. The grounds for saying the things that exist in quantum mathematics don't lie in understanding of those elements but the claim that since the math works, then it must be true. This is putting the cart before the horse and it begs the question "why". Why not any other way that also works? We could refine Newton to incorporate some of the quantum findings and use that as the explanation of everything. There is not sufficient reason to suppose that forces are the real things in the universe, or space time warps, quantum probability matrices.

Most "old" ways of thinking just get abandon for not being popular among the new generation of scientist trying to make a name for themselves. Quine talked about this extensively. Things move in and out of popularity in this realm like any other and scientists are just like MTV peoples and everyone else of jumping on the new trend. Truly, there is not sufficient reason to believe that Aristotelian motion isn't the real method of locomotion in the universe.

Simply put, new science don't care about whys anymore. New science is about making models of massive amounts of data. It won't ever be able to give a reason if something violates that model, it just has to re-engineer the model to incorporate the new data set. It lacks any truth to it because it is always in need of more data to continue to refine its model. It will never know when the model is complete or 100% accurate. It is actually the end road of the epistemology of empirical materialism. A constantly evolving model of data is the best "truth" you can hope from science. It will never have a why, that simply isn't a role of science. It is because "it is" and that is all they will ever be able to say; now more than ever.


edit (several times for grammar, man I sux at expressing myself)

>> ^sirex:
winston, find below required evidence of why your argument is crap.
MURDER (LATE-1990s)
EUROPE AND USA CITY MURDERS
PER 100,000
(1) Washington, D.C., USA 69.3
(2) Philadelphia, USA 27.4
(3) Dallas, USA 24.8
(4) Los Angeles, USA 22.8
(5) Chicago, USA 20.5
(6) Phoenix, USA 19.1
(7) Moscow, Russia 18.1
(8) Houston, USA 18.0
(9) New York City, USA 16.8
(10) Helsinki, Finland 12.5
(11) Lisbon, Portugal 9.7
(12) San Diego, USA 8.0
(13) Amsterdam, Netherlands 7.7
(14) Belfast, N.Ireland, UK 4.4
(15) Geneva, Switzerland 4.2
(16) Copenhagen, Denmark 4.0
(17) Berlin, Germany 3.8
(18) Paris, France 3.3
(19) Stockholm, Sweden 3.0
(20) Prague, Czechoslovakia 2.9
i've had this discussion with people on videosift before and cant be bothered getting into a flame fest about it again, but feel free to private message me and i'll link you up with a bunch more data.


You quoted some statistics, and this makes his argument invalid? Then you say, "Ive had this argument before". Appealing to past arguments as though they make you right, appealing to false authority.

Link to sources, bibliography. Until then your argument is unsustainable.

Your argument, is a very gentle Non Sequitur. It has no context, other than you had this discussion with another member. Also, linking to research does nothing unless you have good thoughts to go along with your quotes. Hence the confusion I have here.

Before you attack an argument make sure that you have your sources posted. Here is what I have from a Lt. Col. Dave Grossman Army Ret. Quoted from his book, titled On killing. "Lt. Col. Grossman a former army ranger and paratrooper taught psychology at west point is currently professor of Military Science at Arkansas State University."

The statistics are in here, and found by Interpol.
http://www.killology.com/art_weap_sum_worldwide.htm


EDIT: I do realize that your comment is flame bait.

By the way, this was really a long drawn out appeal to authority. And also a plug for the book because I think it is good!

>> ^HadouKen24:

I don't think that's quite what he means. "Faith and trust, at least in an interpersonal context," is insufficient for torture to be ruled out as a possibility. There are individuals in whom we cannot and should not have faith and trust, as Zizek understands (and points out later in the lecture, in the example of Hitler).
That said, I don't think it's all that clear how his criticism of Harris actually does work. He never quite makes explicit the logical connection between the concept of the "Neighbor" and the impermissibility of torture. After this video, he gets lost in a rabbit trail explaining what the Neighbor means and how it relates both to modern politics and the illusion of really connecting with others.
I think he may have intended to point out a problem with reducing ethical behavior to a set of scientific principles, since, after all, we're free individuals (and thus Neighbors), and such calculations are inconsistent with freedom.
Or he maybe he just thought that the torture Harris is talking about is another instance of demonizing the Other. Who knows?
One of my philosophy professors used get lost and fail to complete his arguments like this. He's a brilliant guy, and I almost never missed taking a class with him, but his lectures could drive you nuts sometimes.




You're right (especially about his talking style)

...the "need for promises", and "the Neighbor" have nothing per se to do with torture, it's rather with Harris comments on faith.


From this:
http://www.lacan.com/symptom8_articles/zizek8.html

"Consequently, what Harris aims at with his imagined "truth pill" is nothing less than the abolition of the dimension of the Neighbor: the tortured subject is no longer a Neighbor, but an object whose pain is neutralized, reduced to a property that has to be dealt with in a rational utilitarian calculus (so much pain is tolerable if it prevents a much greater amount of pain) - what disappears here is the abyss of the infinity that pertains to a subject. It is thus significant that the book which argues for torture is also the book entitled The End of Belief - not, however, in the obvious sense of "You see, it is only our belief in God, the divine in junction to love your neighbor, that ultimately prevents us from torturing people!", but in a much more radical sense. Another subject (and, ultimately, subject as such) is for Lacan not something directly given, but a "presupposition," something presumed, an object of belief - how can I ever be sure that what I see in front of me is another subject, not a depthless flat biological machine?

My interpolation -

it all has to do with the fact that you can discus weather a chair in front of you really exists, but in the end everyone can go home and have a cup of tea, without agreeing, thats why epistemology is easy, we can all believe in crazy things like "matter" or "god" without there being a real problem. But when we asks the question - is this in front of me a Man, a Person, you have to say Yes, emphatically. You have to say "I believe".

You're point about Hitler is also right, but lets say you have Hitler in a basement, If you're a normal being you really wouldn't like hearing the screams of a man in pain, seeing pain in another Person, even if he is Hitler, because let's face it, he was a Man.

What Harris is saying is that this can be dealt with (science is not the problem, you could imagine it without a "pill")by removing the spastic screams - even if it is just a theoretical supposition. It's not about the impermissibility of torture, as far as I can see, it's about how we perceive the lump of flesh in front of us. Harris is not only destroying it's "infinite dimension" but also our ability to see it and feel it. You can torture Hitler, but the least you could experience the horror of the process


Any way, thats my thoughts...
Who's up for some enchillada?

Nice to see Shpongle and Infected Mushroom on your list, dsjunkid, hadn't listened to them IN YEARS, literally! And Saint Germain is nothing to be ashamed of, even with their popularity.

So here's my 10 cent:
1. Bear McCreary - Something Dark Is Coming (BSG Season 2)
Dark ambient. One of the best tracks from _the_ best TV series soundtrack ever created, I shit you not. We're off to a great start; McCreary is exactly what I hoped to see on my list.

2. Joke Society - Morphing Morning
From Cafe Del Mar SunSand. Yes, I confess guilty as charged, I'm one of the Cafe Del Mar obsessed.

3. Faithless - We Come One

4. Awake On A Train - Múm
Their 2000 "Yesterday Was Dramatic - Today Is OK" is one of the best albums in the world, period. This masterpiece of theirs is even better than Sigur Ros (they're both icelandic). We're doing a lot better than I expected.

5. Obstacle 1 - Interpol
Again, "Turn On The Bright Lights" was one hell of an album. Thank you, people that helped me sift some of their stuff. This is indie rock at its best.

6. Ace Of Spades - Motörhead

7. Evergreen (Dusted Remix) - Faithless
From Hed Kandi's Winter Chill 3, this is one of my favorite lounge/chillout tracks of all time. Excellent mix, too, a lot better than original, which is definitely saying something.

8. Jumbo - Underworld

9. All Along The Watchtower - Bear McCreary (BSG Season 3)
Best modern cover of this masterpiece. A tune of harps and sitar pave the way for a surprisingly powerful progressive guitar. I strongly suggest you google/youtube it.

10. Knights of Cydonia - Muse

Well, I must say, I never expected this to turn out as well as it did. Thank you, trusty shuffle, I may now actually use more of you in the future. And thanks for starting this experiment, dft

This is good, I like parts of the bill however I do not like the immunity to civil suits. The thing is if you have the preponderance of evidence, then why not look harder and find proof beyond a doubt? Most of the time its laziness that keeps suits out of criminal court charges. Look hard enough and you will find something.

I'm torn about who I will vote for, because as of now I could care less about politicians in any form. Personally I like the freedoms I have, Obama's remarks "They cling to their guns, in bitterness" almost lost him my vote and it hangs in the balance. I'm not some gun nut, I happen to like the fact that Thomas Jefferson wrote one hell of a constitution for my state.

And on the other hand we have Puppet boy McCain, whom I'm sure will not support egregious gun laws (its illegal to own a semi auto and automatic pistol in DC still - So what can you own a flintlock?), he will on the other hand pursue a faulty war that is not worthy of the blood that is spilled on both sides of the line. I'm not willing to give up a right or two to bring those boys and girls home from that sand choked hell hole, but I am not willing to let the original terrorists push the US around. We should be working with Interpol and the UN to combat international criminals (which is what a terrorist is, since he has no flag that he fights under), not fighting for OIL in Iraq while the terrorists eat crumpets and watch Cable.

my 2nd-favorite cut of theirs.

after this.

Love Interpol, especially the bass player: amazing bass lines in tunes like Obstacle 1 (my fav) and Slow Hands. Amazing.

Way, baby.....love some good interpolation action....

"It all comes down to opinion"... true-story!

Did you check out the 'Jolene' cover? Their non-linear, bluesy cover vs. Dolly's lock-step original is maybe a good example of whats cool about Meg and Jack White's stuttery drums-guitar-vocals minimalism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEbh0SWandU
http://www.videosift.com/video/White-Stripes-Jolene-Dolly-Parton-cover-live-on-Conan


I play the drums, and have in the last 4 or 5 years really learned an appreciation for drummer-as-compliment to the tone of the rest of the band. This is opposed to where my first love of the drums came from (metal and funk music, where the drums are very often the star).

I was thinking about this a week ago listening to an Interpol album. Their drummer is great, and has some interesting and difficult stuff, but never seems showy or draws much attention to himself.


In reply to this comment by JAPR:
(No worries about being too surly, we're all defensive about the music we like. )

I understand the premise of the White Stripes, but I feel as though there are just so many better bands (to me) in the same general sound area, mainly the originals. Jack has some pretty good guitaring skills, there's no denying his ability to write catchy riffs. I personally don't enjoy his voice, and the overly simple drumming just makes it even harder for me to enjoy them. I'm not a drummer myself, but even the least skilled drummers I know of in the bands that I listen to have far more variety of style and a higher skill level than she does. I didn't really mean to say that she needed to be "professional," just that the lack of variety in the rhythm drags down the song, in my opinion.

It all comes down to opinion, in the end, really. Musical quality is entirely subjective and is based only off of how much the individual listener enjoys it.

Oh, by the way, I did watch the entire clip, I just didn't enjoy it quite enough for an upvote.

those with any musical interest, ear, or talent should know that these interpolations are the result of creative association and a ear that is somewhat tuned.....I for one, love all these things, and vote for em whenever I can.....

- fav so far of late is the Danzig/Shakira viddy....that shit is silly fun!

Lethin & Conan: The exoskelton hasn't been "taught" how to walk, or how firmly to grasp certain objects. It is quite literally an Amplifier of human movement.

There are no joysticks to control it's movement. You step inside, and it reacts to your movements naturally. Think of it like the accelerator in your car: the harder you press it the faster you go, and you are able to interpolate how hard you should press to maintain a certain speed. This is much more complicated obviously as it's monitoring all your movements and if the measurements are wrong, things can ... go badly... But if done properly, the operator should be able to accurately control how hard he/she wants to grasp, punch, kick, pull, etc very naturally.

RE: Batteries. They already have it working on batteries, and remember the operator won't be the one carrying them around, they will be supported by the exoskeleton. Problem: they only last 15-minutes, and much like our lovely laptops, cellphones and iPods, have been known to be potentially... volatile.

I believe this is a dupe

http://www.videosift.com/video/Interpol-No-I-in-Threesome

wow, no votes for Interpol? maybe my cocksure tags are working against me

You could totally smooth that out and slow it down with some morph interpolation between the existing frames.

Pav was one of the kings, in a long processional....dig Lauritz Melchior, m'self.....and Kirsten Flagstad...Wagnerians....James ain't the king of soul....Godfather, baby, Godfather...great interpolation....what is it??