I don't know why, but this performance still speaks to me. You'd think the style would be stale by now. The guy is off-key, somewhat unintelligible, he imitates the most cliched performer in history, the band's accompanyment is bad; yet, I found this highly enjoyable.

Maybe this is what art is: work that can transcend a particular fad or style and communicate timelessly.

"As human arrogance and tyranny expands, the cars shrink."
-quantumushroom, April 7, 2009

Ah, the timeless wisdom of qm.

Your video, Goldie - 'Inner City Life' - timeless drum and bass anthem!!, has made it into your personal Highest Rated Videos listing. Congratulations on a job well done. For you contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Ahhhh, the timeless cool of aviator sun-glasses.

And coming up next "Once, Twice, Three Times a Lady"!

I disagree with the notion that you must stick with things you know, as dag mentions. I've heard this adage timeless times from people in the filmmaking world ("write what you know"), but if that was true, then we'd never have science fiction or comic book movies.

I make nearly all of my income as a programmer, and I never went to school for programming. It was a side-career I got into because it interested me. Once again another reason to shuck any thoughts of doing only what you know about. It's important in life to do what interests you instead.

I'm a big follower of Joeseph Campbell, and he says you must always follow your bliss and all other things will follow. That's easy advice in a financial crisis, I know, but if there's something you are passionate about, others will see that passion and you will find they will want to be a part of your passion.

I used to work for corporate companies here in LA, but now I freelance which means: I work from home, I make a great hourly wage instead of a salary, I don't have to pay into a payroll tax (though I have other taxes I have to pay as being self-employed), and I don't have a boss to look busy in front of. There are down sides, but they don't outweigh the positives.

I Love the "Mission Accomplished" at 0:35. Such timeless words.

If any videogame can truly be a "timeless" classic, it's the original Half-Life.

I must admit that I also don't find Margaret Cho funny, but I upvoted for her quoting, chapter and verse, of that timeless Christian value, "Shut the fuck up!"

Upvote for timeless sexiness. (And yeah, she's still hot.)

The problem with making a science-favorable video explaining why evolution is is spiffy is the same problem with making a turtles-all-the-way-down-favorable video featuring such experts as Bill Q. Mortimer, Grandmaster Turtle-Philosophy Symposium, Professor Emeritus of the Pittsburg National Convention of Turtle Universology, and editor-in-chief of Infinite Turtles, the timeless and esteemed periodical of world turtle systemic deduction. There's no credibility if you've got degrees in the field you're arguing for, when the demographic for the video is people who think your degree is roughly equivalent to Elmo.

^mentality:
"If you believe in democracy (rule by majority), you believe that 9/10 people can choose to kill the 10th person."

That's only true for "pure" democracies, and is a gross oversimplification.

No, its true for all democracies. There are no laws in a democracy, there is only majority rule. If it appears that there are "laws" it is only because the majority agrees with them. "Laws" in a democracy are not based on any system of morality, they are merely rules set by the whims of the majority. This is why slavery can be legal in a democracy in one century, and illegal in another. There never really was a "law"--only the illusion of "law" by majority consensus.

When I say "9/10 people can chose to kill the 10th person" what I also mean is "9/10 people can chose to forbid the 10th from smoking in restaurants". The only difference between these two statements is that in the former, the majority condemns murder, whereas in the latter, the majority condemns smoking. In either case, the reason one is prevented from murder and preventing from smoking is that the majority dictates it--not that the person has unalienable rights protect by law.

I would not want to live in a....democracy without laws.

You live in a democracy. What then?

In a republic, individuals have certain unalienable rights (sound familiar?) which are timeless. They do not depend on the whims of the majority or the orders of a despot, they are true for all men for all time. The method in which government officials are selected is irrelevant, whats important is the fact that humans have basic rights which must be protected by law. In a republic, by definition, whatever system is selected would have majority support--for how else could it persist when the illegal use of force is forbidden by law? Thus, a republic could utilize elected representatives, an elected monarch, a birthright monarch, or even a series of randomly selected people--if it was so desired.

Majority support and majority rule are two very, very different things.

Two of my favorite rockers, wonderful song, timeless musicians and performers...Thanks KP-

Beautiful Day wasn't already here, crazy! Upvote for a a timeless classic no doubt.

>> ^omnistegan:
Then what is the reference point for speed in space? For speed on Earth we can use the surface of the Earth as a reference point for speed, and in our own solar system we can use the Sun, but at what speed is the Sun moving? And in reference to what? And what does that make of the speed and direction of motion of the Earth? And us? So are we really moving? or is everything moving around us in reference to our own perception?



That has 2 answers really, a metaphysical one and a physical one.

First, let us use the physical reality in which we experience. The most modern explanation of motion is the law of relativity. The law of relativity states that each observer has a valid claim in saying the they are moving and the object in reference is staying still. So in other words. The person on the train has just a valid assertion that the train is moving and the man is staying still, as the man on the ground saying he is moving and the train is standing still. In other words, it is your observation that is true for you, and it is their observation that is true to them. Both are valid claims. One is not righter than the other.

This realization was huge for science. To quote wikipidia on the matter:

“Special relativity overthrows Newtonian notions of absolute space and time by stating that time and space are perceived differently by observers in different states of motion. “

So, in essence, there is no such idea in relativity as what is “really” moving or not moving. Everything is happening as you experience it in your own frame of reference! Mind blowing I know. This is what is known as special relativity however, general relativity has to deal with gravity and acceleration which complicate matters greatly because of time dilation and space time curvature.

Now, metaphysically speaking space and time might not be real things in and of themselves. They might be complete fabrications of the mind. There is no necessity for time to exist, the universe could exist very much like a formula which is timeless and without space. In other words, the idea of time, space, motion, and all these fundamental things could really just be a subject of the mind and not of the universe itself. I personally believe that there is not objective time, space, or motion. These are all subjects of the mind and not of the universe itself. I think of the universe as a formula and those ideas of time and space and motion only occur inside the formula; that huge equation of everything we know.

So in essence, my metaphysical understanding of the universe actually gives way to special relativity. I would say the truth of what you observe is an unshakable experience. In other words, no one can say that you didn't experience something the way that you experience it. But that experiences in and of itself doesn't point to any underlying truth of how the universe actually works. In other words, your experience with the stuff of the universe is filtered through your mind and changed from the stuff it actually is to the stuff your brain understands; it is no longer the actual but the interpreted. We have no subjective way to show any of the stuff we experience actually maps onto the actual, it just isn't possible.

"You know, Frederick-fucking-Chopin." His portrayal of Doc Holiday is timeless.