Pretty much a dupe, this is an oldie...

http://www.videosift.com/video/TV-Anchor-Plays-Skin-Flute

Wow that's an oldie. And a goodie.

In reply to this comment by calvados:
Bro, totz want to restore this for me? I have a new feed and everything.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Sam-Beam-Iron-Wine-The-Trapeze-Swinger

an oldie but a goodie - and nochannels to boot!

these *lawyers are little more than big-mouthed thugs in suits

Ahhh an oldy.

In reply to this comment by demon_ix:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Anti-Depressions-Video -> http://www.videosift.com/video/Babies-Laughing

'twas a dupe, I'm afraid.

Oh goodie, all sorts of interesting discussions going on here.

Yay, somebody that wants to respectfully debate, rather than call me a pussy. If I were you, I'd ask your camp to show a little more respect. Not that it's always returned by the proselytizers, but I hardly feel I'm being disrespectful to your beliefs. I wish your comrades would show the same courtesy.

Agnostics make no claims to know anything, they say "I do not/cannot know X". The celestial teapot is the oldie counter for that - in principle we have to be agnostic about it, but in actuality we're not. We are all a-teapotists. Atheism is the same way. You can say that you believe in the celestial teapot, but with no evidence, you're not going to convince anyone.

Yes, but we are not all a-consciousness. Nor are we all a-string theorists. This comes down to basic inference. One adopts an arbitrary prior probability over the space of alternatives. This is the rational Bayesian thing to do. Putting any sort of constraints on that process is completely a subjective process. For instance, people typically cite 'simplicity', or 'elegance', as properties that should be more highly weighted. There is no more evidence for that then there is for God, at least as far as the 'truthfulness' of the claims is concerned. Now, I remain agnostic as I'd rather not make the claim, because as you've correctly pointed out I shouldn't expect to be able to convince anybody else. That doesn't mean that I consider the lack of existence of a deity as more likely than the existence.

As for determinism, what about quantum mechanics? When I look at that evidence I see randomness, not determinism. Some people, such as Roger Penrose, have thought that the key to the hard problem might dwell at the quantum level. I'm not prepared to jump into the "micro-tubule" camp, but the existence of quantum mechanics does leave the door open for a less deterministic reality.

[edit] If you are interested in this idea of consciousness as an illusion, you should read "The User Illusion" by Tor Norretranders.

Oh goodie, all sorts of interesting discussions going on here.

Agnostics make no claims to know anything, they say "I do not/cannot know X". The celestial teapot is the oldie counter for that - in principle we have to be agnostic about it, but in actuality we're not. We are all a-teapotists. Atheism is the same way. You can say that you believe in the celestial teapot, but with no evidence, you're not going to convince anyone.

The Hard Problem of consciousness is extremely interesting. An intricate part of consciousness is free will, I believe. Do I believe that we indeed have free will; yes, as much as we can. Byt that I mean that in theory we are merely state machines defined by universal laws that define how our molecules and atoms move, which then cause us to act as we do. The brain is an enormous parallel computer, which executes 'code' based on chemical and electrical reactions. Because I believe (on what available evidence I have) that the universe is deterministic and materialistic, then this must be so. I have yet to encounter anything that defies that that theory.

While the universe (and therefore us) is deterministic, we can never predict everything, because we would need to make a prediction that had no effect on the universe, otherwise our prediction is broken by itself. (If I know I will die when I cross some street at X time, I'll just not cross it - problem solved.) So, in practice we do have 'free will', because we act as if we do have free will. The same with consciousness as a whole, I think that I do have it, but that may easily be an illusion caused by my brain. I assume that other people have the same or at least similar experience I do, even if I can't really know they're not P-zombies. In a way, I think everyone is a p-zombie, depending on how you define it.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

*promote this oldy buy goody.

Wow, this harkens well back to the oldie marios. Well done.

Oldie - and a goodie. Have had the idea to post this many times over, yet I obviously never had the balls - so I salute you, gwiz Although if memory serves, the complete video used to be some ~20min or so - before the actual demonstration the guy talked at length about proper approach, preferred diet (e.g. pumpkin seeds), etc.

P.S. What do you guys think - should I post this one? Or is it too pornographic?

Ah, an oldie but a goodie. The voice-over is friggin great.

Alot of the landscape is probably the oldie but goodie VistaPro. Also, upvote for humping buildings.

! i'm glad you like it, i just updated it actually, sifted some oldies..

In reply to this comment by peggedbea:
i have the hots for your lady voices playlist.

Aw, shucks. It was nothin'.

In reply to this comment by eric3579:
deedub, thanks for the promote.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Oldie but a goodie.

*promote

deedub, thanks for the promote.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Oldie but a goodie.

*promote

Oldie but a goodie.

*promote