Last one of these was back in February. Back then, I was making "best of" lists. I can include one of those with a short summary of what I wrote about this past week.
Seems like this week, the gravity of the situation facing us became more clear to me. It also became clear to me that people don't like bad news! Hey, at least nobody is shooting me yet for delivering the bad news. But give it time. This is what we call "progress" in this day and age.
Quick post before I go, 9/24/15 [comment: It was about computer security.]
Home again, 9.22.15 [ comment: The problem wasn't really resolved, but is being managed. How? Just keeping up with updates, mainly. Besides that, I figure the desktop got infected when I was powering it up. Now, the modem isn't powered up until the computer is up and running. Before making this change, the modem was ready before the machine was finished loading all security programs, I'm guessing. This was possibly the vulnerability that enabled a virus to get through.]
[comment: looks to be about when I noticed a security problem.]
Fusion ideas [ comment: An idea to use lasers to confine electrons in the Polywell device.]
Quick post, 7/23/15: Stop your bitching? [ comment: a rather short post, and a joke. ]
At the risk of seeming wishy washy... [ comment: About Trump and the Pope. Another way of looking at the situation.]
A little more on the launch failure [ comment: which reminds me: what happened? Need to find out.]
The future: an unknown road [ comment: I get approved to drive for Uber. ]
What was that again about 10 bucks v. a million [comment: The best government that money can buy.]
More on the original thought [ comment: Al Gore and Company would want to punish me for writing this.]
Your butt belongs to us [ comment: a turn of phrase--- "Land of the free ( lunch ), home of the brave ( new world.)"]
Rise and Shine, 4/18/15 [ comment: Daffy Duck, he the man. ]
That's it for now. This goes back to my trip out West. Since I've been back, that is.
Saturday, October 24, 2015
Obligatory, 10.24.15; Just drifting along
An aimless sort of start to the the weekend here. Now that I've gathered myself up enough to do something with this day, I decided to come here and say nothing, like a Seinfeld post.
I was thinking about the interactions on this blog, which do not exist. There is the opportunity to comment here, but it is actually rare that someone does. The last commenter wanted to do it anonymously, but I won't permit that. Evidently, I could get a lot more comments if I did allow it, but the policy will remain the same.
So, why? If you want interaction, there's a way to get it. Why not allow it? The reason is that under a cover of some sort, people will say and do things that they ordinarily will not. That would be true for me as well, as I would probably write differently if I were writing under a pseudonym. Since I am writing with my real name, then I believe my commenters should be willing to do the same. Interesting that nobody seems to want to do that.
What are the alternatives, then? Email? That would be even worse. Presumably, I would be the only one to see the email, so it could really get nasty. Frankly, I'm not interested in any interpersonal wars with critics.
There is on small possibility and that is to publish pageviews each day. I've done variations on that during the history of this blog. I'm not doing it now, though. Perhaps I can bring that back. That may be interesting for readers to see what other readers like and don't like. I've done best of compilations, too. I could bring that back. These aren't much, but it is something. Something is better than nothing, I suppose.
Alright, to show you something about the readership of this blog, I'll take a screenshot of the full history, blogger supplied stats, month-by-month:
As you can see, there was a steady buildup until 2 years ago, then it's been downhill since. I don't get the change, because the blog hasn't fundamentally changed in any way. Perhaps there's something I didn't see?
The numbers are now pretty low. Frankly, the amount of energy I am wiling to supply to it is also low. It may be a subtle thing like that or something else.
Popularity for its own sake isn't sought here. Compromises won't be made just to get pageviews. It has always been about the truth, as much of it as I can see, and/or the way I see it to be. Perhaps that is what the problem is?
How do I feel about it? It may be nice to be popular, but I am pretty used to not being popular, so what have I lose?
I was thinking about the interactions on this blog, which do not exist. There is the opportunity to comment here, but it is actually rare that someone does. The last commenter wanted to do it anonymously, but I won't permit that. Evidently, I could get a lot more comments if I did allow it, but the policy will remain the same.
So, why? If you want interaction, there's a way to get it. Why not allow it? The reason is that under a cover of some sort, people will say and do things that they ordinarily will not. That would be true for me as well, as I would probably write differently if I were writing under a pseudonym. Since I am writing with my real name, then I believe my commenters should be willing to do the same. Interesting that nobody seems to want to do that.
What are the alternatives, then? Email? That would be even worse. Presumably, I would be the only one to see the email, so it could really get nasty. Frankly, I'm not interested in any interpersonal wars with critics.
There is on small possibility and that is to publish pageviews each day. I've done variations on that during the history of this blog. I'm not doing it now, though. Perhaps I can bring that back. That may be interesting for readers to see what other readers like and don't like. I've done best of compilations, too. I could bring that back. These aren't much, but it is something. Something is better than nothing, I suppose.
Alright, to show you something about the readership of this blog, I'll take a screenshot of the full history, blogger supplied stats, month-by-month:
As you can see, there was a steady buildup until 2 years ago, then it's been downhill since. I don't get the change, because the blog hasn't fundamentally changed in any way. Perhaps there's something I didn't see?
The numbers are now pretty low. Frankly, the amount of energy I am wiling to supply to it is also low. It may be a subtle thing like that or something else.
Popularity for its own sake isn't sought here. Compromises won't be made just to get pageviews. It has always been about the truth, as much of it as I can see, and/or the way I see it to be. Perhaps that is what the problem is?
How do I feel about it? It may be nice to be popular, but I am pretty used to not being popular, so what have I lose?
Friday, October 23, 2015
Matrix Reloaded
The thought amuses me. I can see Mr. Smith saying to Mr. Anderson: "Mr. Anderson! You disappoint me."
I've made the analogy before on this blog. Maybe we really are living in the Matrix. We are required to run on a treadmill in order to make money. The money is the "energy" that runs the Matrix machine. The Matrix machine generates for us a fantasy, a dream world, that is totally at odds with reality.
How do you unplug from the Matrix? It may be impossible. But there are those who have come pretty close. These people are called the Amish. Well, that's the impression I got from the movie Witness (1985).
What I'm getting at is that people would have to separate from the system somehow. In the movie, they gathered into a faith based community that gave up all of the modern day conveniences. There was a scene I remember where the community gathered together to build a barn in just one afternoon. What does this do? It is hard for me to see how the government can tax such an event. The Amish removed the need for money. Perhaps not the entire need, but much of it. An Amish person doesn't need to work at a job for money. They just run their farms and take care of each other.
That's what we lost when we "modernized". Instead of freedom, we got enslaved by the need to make money. The money is what runs the Matrix, and the Matrix controls us.
Mr. Anderson! You disappoint me! Indeed.
I've made the analogy before on this blog. Maybe we really are living in the Matrix. We are required to run on a treadmill in order to make money. The money is the "energy" that runs the Matrix machine. The Matrix machine generates for us a fantasy, a dream world, that is totally at odds with reality.
How do you unplug from the Matrix? It may be impossible. But there are those who have come pretty close. These people are called the Amish. Well, that's the impression I got from the movie Witness (1985).
What I'm getting at is that people would have to separate from the system somehow. In the movie, they gathered into a faith based community that gave up all of the modern day conveniences. There was a scene I remember where the community gathered together to build a barn in just one afternoon. What does this do? It is hard for me to see how the government can tax such an event. The Amish removed the need for money. Perhaps not the entire need, but much of it. An Amish person doesn't need to work at a job for money. They just run their farms and take care of each other.
That's what we lost when we "modernized". Instead of freedom, we got enslaved by the need to make money. The money is what runs the Matrix, and the Matrix controls us.
Mr. Anderson! You disappoint me! Indeed.
Obligatory, 10.23.15; Money runs the show
Reading between the lines and you will see that the donor class will get what they want, the voters are out of luck.
Paul Ryan says he doesn't want to be speaker, but then maybe he does. The donor class wants him, so the donor class will get him. That's how it works. They're just negotiating the terms of surrender.
Now, what about the presidency? Trump and Carson are ahead in most polls. Might it be possible that they have already been selected for us? There hasn't been any primaries or caucuses yet. But the nomination may already be a done deal. No matter who wins, it's the money.
How?
Trump gets a lot of free air time. What about Carson? Seems like somebody out there said that he's getting free time. I'm not sure of that, but what if he is? Big money runs the media too. What if big media decided that they wanted Trump and Carson? That's how this is getting decided for us. We aren't organized, they are. That's the bottom line. Money decides it all because organization costs money.
"Democracy" ain't.
Paul Ryan says he doesn't want to be speaker, but then maybe he does. The donor class wants him, so the donor class will get him. That's how it works. They're just negotiating the terms of surrender.
Now, what about the presidency? Trump and Carson are ahead in most polls. Might it be possible that they have already been selected for us? There hasn't been any primaries or caucuses yet. But the nomination may already be a done deal. No matter who wins, it's the money.
How?
Trump gets a lot of free air time. What about Carson? Seems like somebody out there said that he's getting free time. I'm not sure of that, but what if he is? Big money runs the media too. What if big media decided that they wanted Trump and Carson? That's how this is getting decided for us. We aren't organized, they are. That's the bottom line. Money decides it all because organization costs money.
"Democracy" ain't.
Thursday, October 22, 2015
Irwin Schiff, Patriot?
Not taking a stand on this one in either direction. Followed a link from Instapundit to this article, which tells something of his story. Picked up more from the Wikipedia.
I think I've expressed my view. Here it is again: The government is necessary, but that doesn't mean that it is good. Indeed, governments are evil, because men are evil. Men are ruled by vice; for if it were the way around, by virtue, then angels would be governing us. But such is obviously not the case, as these politicians are definitely not angels. I think our government, as it was set up originally under the Constitution, was the wisest government that humans could produce. Yet, it is failing. It began failing almost as soon as it was ratified. The natural thing for politicians to do is to increase their power, and that is what is happening, and continues to happen.
In order to save this government, you have to bring the people back to where they were before. This may prove to be impossible. It would take an act of God to bring this country back to where it once was.
Tax protests aren't going to work because they don't get at the source of the trouble. The trouble is what is in people's spirit. It's not a good thing. People keep looking to government and the politicians. That's looking in the wrong direction. You can't clean up the people's thoughts with a tax protest.
I think I've expressed my view. Here it is again: The government is necessary, but that doesn't mean that it is good. Indeed, governments are evil, because men are evil. Men are ruled by vice; for if it were the way around, by virtue, then angels would be governing us. But such is obviously not the case, as these politicians are definitely not angels. I think our government, as it was set up originally under the Constitution, was the wisest government that humans could produce. Yet, it is failing. It began failing almost as soon as it was ratified. The natural thing for politicians to do is to increase their power, and that is what is happening, and continues to happen.
In order to save this government, you have to bring the people back to where they were before. This may prove to be impossible. It would take an act of God to bring this country back to where it once was.
Tax protests aren't going to work because they don't get at the source of the trouble. The trouble is what is in people's spirit. It's not a good thing. People keep looking to government and the politicians. That's looking in the wrong direction. You can't clean up the people's thoughts with a tax protest.
Obligatory, 10.22.15; Ryan looks like the next speaker
It looks as if Paul Ryan will be the next Speaker of the House. However, it looks as though the reviews are negative.
One has to wonder what it was that they accomplished in throwing Boner out. It is beginning to look as if things are even worse than before. Ryan may have negotiated a way to stay in no matter what he does.
One Freeper commented that there are only a few true conservatives in the GOP. The rest are fake. It doesn't surprise me. I suspected that conservatism may be dying or dead anyway. It is beginning to look quite grim.
One has to wonder what it was that they accomplished in throwing Boner out. It is beginning to look as if things are even worse than before. Ryan may have negotiated a way to stay in no matter what he does.
One Freeper commented that there are only a few true conservatives in the GOP. The rest are fake. It doesn't surprise me. I suspected that conservatism may be dying or dead anyway. It is beginning to look quite grim.
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
Home again, 10.21.15; My connection to the world
For a moment there, I had this feeling come over me that I wanted to quit the blog. There's no reward to it, I thought. Only frustration.
Not only that, sometimes I write something that I cannot truly believe to be true. I hate that when I do it. It happens sometimes. Not that I lie. It isn't exaggeration either. It's a lack of sincerity that I sometimes suspect myself of.
Nobody is that committed to freedom that they will risk everything for it. That kind of person doesn't exist anymore. For whatever reason, it has disappeared. Would I risk everything for freedom? I'd like to think I would, but the answer is probably no. Like so many of people in this society, I am just not that committed to anything. It may be the thing that is killing our culture.
Once before, not that long ago, I had the same feeling of giving up. What snapped me out of it was to realize that the blog is my connection to the world. Even if the world doesn't care and isn't interested, as long as there's a blog, I'm connected. Once I quit the blog, the connection is gone. It would be like dying.
Would I miss it? I dunno. The blog may not need me, and maybe I need the blog. But why? There's nothing in it for me but pain. It is not as if I like pain. I avoid pain. It hurts me. ( stealing Daffy Duck's line )
Yeah, sure. Joke about it. But it isn't really funny. If I won't commit to anything, perhaps I can commit to this blog. Hell or high water, it goes on. ( If I am able.)
Not only that, sometimes I write something that I cannot truly believe to be true. I hate that when I do it. It happens sometimes. Not that I lie. It isn't exaggeration either. It's a lack of sincerity that I sometimes suspect myself of.
Nobody is that committed to freedom that they will risk everything for it. That kind of person doesn't exist anymore. For whatever reason, it has disappeared. Would I risk everything for freedom? I'd like to think I would, but the answer is probably no. Like so many of people in this society, I am just not that committed to anything. It may be the thing that is killing our culture.
Once before, not that long ago, I had the same feeling of giving up. What snapped me out of it was to realize that the blog is my connection to the world. Even if the world doesn't care and isn't interested, as long as there's a blog, I'm connected. Once I quit the blog, the connection is gone. It would be like dying.
Would I miss it? I dunno. The blog may not need me, and maybe I need the blog. But why? There's nothing in it for me but pain. It is not as if I like pain. I avoid pain. It hurts me. ( stealing Daffy Duck's line )
Yeah, sure. Joke about it. But it isn't really funny. If I won't commit to anything, perhaps I can commit to this blog. Hell or high water, it goes on. ( If I am able.)
Quick post, 10.21.15; Gun-grabber threat must not be underestimated
This is the big one that they just dropped. If this is allowed to ever become law, then the rule of law and the rights to self-government of a free people will be lost---probably forever.
This must never become law of the land. It simply cannot be tolerated.
There are people who believe that the next election can deal with this. I am not so sure. There is this tendency of people to give in to authority. But what happens when the authority has become perverse? It must be resisted---even at all costs. But it must be done intelligently. Something like a tax strike will never do the trick here.
People won't resist is my point. Once this takes hold as law, it become legit. Opposition to it become delegitimized. It may well be too late by that time. It is already very late as it is.
There's just too much complacency. I fear the worst.
Update ( 10.23.15)
Instapundit has a link to a write up about this, which explains what's going on from a legal perspective. It is clear that the battle lines are drawn--- the left wants gun control and will have it unless something changes. They'll push it through the courts once they get enough justices appointed to the Supreme Court. Eventually, they'll get the justices they want on the Court.
That's why you need an Article V convention. Unless they court's powers are cut back through an amendment, the left will be able to impose their version of law upon the rest of us.
You can see that the reliance upon elections has accomplished with Roe v. Wade. Not only did that fail, but we got another Roe with the homosexual marriage decision.
This must never become law of the land. It simply cannot be tolerated.
There are people who believe that the next election can deal with this. I am not so sure. There is this tendency of people to give in to authority. But what happens when the authority has become perverse? It must be resisted---even at all costs. But it must be done intelligently. Something like a tax strike will never do the trick here.
People won't resist is my point. Once this takes hold as law, it become legit. Opposition to it become delegitimized. It may well be too late by that time. It is already very late as it is.
There's just too much complacency. I fear the worst.
Update ( 10.23.15)
Instapundit has a link to a write up about this, which explains what's going on from a legal perspective. It is clear that the battle lines are drawn--- the left wants gun control and will have it unless something changes. They'll push it through the courts once they get enough justices appointed to the Supreme Court. Eventually, they'll get the justices they want on the Court.
That's why you need an Article V convention. Unless they court's powers are cut back through an amendment, the left will be able to impose their version of law upon the rest of us.
You can see that the reliance upon elections has accomplished with Roe v. Wade. Not only did that fail, but we got another Roe with the homosexual marriage decision.
Heap Bad Medicine, Kemo Sabe ( repost from 2011!)
Note:
Somebody clicked on this recently and so I looked it up. Here's the post in its original form. I might add that things have gotten a whole lot worse since then. The post begins thus...
After what I just found out about the Chinese getting out of Treasuries, plus all of what I've been covering with regards to our space program, and science programs, I think it all boils down to that phrase, which I found in a google search.
I may be inclined to change my perspective away from optimism. Instead of Houston, We have a solution. It could be changed to We in heap big doo-doo, Kemo Sabe. [emphasis added]
Somebody clicked on this recently and so I looked it up. Here's the post in its original form. I might add that things have gotten a whole lot worse since then. The post begins thus...
After what I just found out about the Chinese getting out of Treasuries, plus all of what I've been covering with regards to our space program, and science programs, I think it all boils down to that phrase, which I found in a google search.
I may be inclined to change my perspective away from optimism. Instead of Houston, We have a solution. It could be changed to We in heap big doo-doo, Kemo Sabe. [emphasis added]
New York SAFE Act of 2013 about to go national?
American Thinker
The gun-grabbers are very, very close to complete confiscation of guns in this country. A judge has ruled that the New York SAFE Act is constitutional, which can accomplish the cultural Marxists dream. If this decision is challenged in the US Supreme Court, the Court could also rule it to be constitutional, and we would be stuck with it like ObamaCare and homosexual marriage.
Then what?
The gun-grabbers are very, very close to complete confiscation of guns in this country. A judge has ruled that the New York SAFE Act is constitutional, which can accomplish the cultural Marxists dream. If this decision is challenged in the US Supreme Court, the Court could also rule it to be constitutional, and we would be stuck with it like ObamaCare and homosexual marriage.
Then what?
Where to take complaints
Just spent a lot of very precious time screwing around with the tablet. Accomplished nothing.
It seems to be a metaphor for the times. You spend a lot of time on things that accomplish nothing. There's no control. This tablet downloads stuff I don't want, nor use, nor need. It doesn't seem to allow you to uninstall any of it either. So, the tablet's memory fills up and there's nothing you can do about it. Lot of the same is true of our political system. Choices are forced upon us that we don't want, nor use, nor need. There's no way to change any of it except an armed rebellion, which nobody can lead, nor nobody can organize, nor nobody would participate.
As for that last sentence, what would happen if you openly started campaigning for an armed rebellion? Is there a law against it? The government can send armed agents after you. Why do you have to accept whatever the government decides for you? Isn't self-determination a right? Seems to me that is what the Declaration of Independence said--- it is a right to throw off all government that wears off its welcome.
More than likely, no government will allow its own overthrow. But the Constitution does provide a way to change this government. Legally. But nobody seems interested. Don't all these people realize that they're just wasting time when they fool around with something that won't let you change it in any meaningful way?
It seems to be a metaphor for the times. You spend a lot of time on things that accomplish nothing. There's no control. This tablet downloads stuff I don't want, nor use, nor need. It doesn't seem to allow you to uninstall any of it either. So, the tablet's memory fills up and there's nothing you can do about it. Lot of the same is true of our political system. Choices are forced upon us that we don't want, nor use, nor need. There's no way to change any of it except an armed rebellion, which nobody can lead, nor nobody can organize, nor nobody would participate.
As for that last sentence, what would happen if you openly started campaigning for an armed rebellion? Is there a law against it? The government can send armed agents after you. Why do you have to accept whatever the government decides for you? Isn't self-determination a right? Seems to me that is what the Declaration of Independence said--- it is a right to throw off all government that wears off its welcome.
More than likely, no government will allow its own overthrow. But the Constitution does provide a way to change this government. Legally. But nobody seems interested. Don't all these people realize that they're just wasting time when they fool around with something that won't let you change it in any meaningful way?
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Van to RV conversion
This topic has moved to front row and center lately. I've been doing some stuff in regards to it, so this post is to take notes of that for future reference. Of course, other concerns may move this topic out of the picture, so that's why the notes are needed.
There's a bit of a debate between making the whole thing, or salvaging pieces around the apartment, and then using those pieces for the conversion. Yesterday, I wondered if it may be best to build it from scratch. However, I could still use the computer desk and metal shelving as materials. But these will have to be de-constructed and then reconstructed so as to do what I want it to do.
I want to use the driver's side for a clothes closet. Heavy clothes will be needed for wintry weather. It will have to be stored somewhere, as well as the usual clothes. Using the computer desk as is won't match up well with this goal. Hence, the need to tear down the desk and use it for parts.
The passenger side can be used for tools since the tire changing tool is on that side. This should be near the rear doors for easy access.
I had an idea for where to place the toilet, and it is a bit humorous. However, it may conflict with other ideas, so that may not be a practical idea. Between the seats! But that won't work. Actually, I want to put the freezer against the cage, but that creates an access difficulty between the front and back. The freezer is 28" wide and it will have to sit in the middle where the cage door is. I can offset it towards the side doors, but that eliminates the possibility of using that area for the batteries.
Just now I realized that there may be a space problem. I'd like to use the freezer to store a lot of water, which can be frozen into ice and used for food preservation on the ranch. But the freezer is large. It will have to take up all of the area that it occupies and cannot be used for multiple uses.
If the door to the front is to be used, then that space must be reserved. Incidentally, I could still put the toilet there, with a screen for privacy. The toilet and the screen must be in place and/or easily removable. In a pinch, that may take too much time.
I'd really like to be able to use all of the space available. There may be a way to do that with the toilet.
If the toilet is to be in the doorway, then the batteries will have be next to the side doors.
A quick look at the computer desk makes me think that to cut it up would not be a good thing.
Could try using wood fencing and 2x4's to connect them together. Not an elegant solution, but looks cheap.
Probably less than $100 will do the trick in terms of lumber. Use plywood doors and plain old hinges. Plus a latch to keep them shut. Shelving inside? Can possibly still use the metal shelving, but that would be good only for one side. The other side will be like a closet anyway, Will want to attach some kind of bar to hang clothes on. These cabinents won't be but 36" tall, so there's not going to be a lot of storage space added. Is it worth it?
This will go into construction subseries of the off-the-grid main series of posts.
Prev Next
There's a bit of a debate between making the whole thing, or salvaging pieces around the apartment, and then using those pieces for the conversion. Yesterday, I wondered if it may be best to build it from scratch. However, I could still use the computer desk and metal shelving as materials. But these will have to be de-constructed and then reconstructed so as to do what I want it to do.
I want to use the driver's side for a clothes closet. Heavy clothes will be needed for wintry weather. It will have to be stored somewhere, as well as the usual clothes. Using the computer desk as is won't match up well with this goal. Hence, the need to tear down the desk and use it for parts.
The passenger side can be used for tools since the tire changing tool is on that side. This should be near the rear doors for easy access.
I had an idea for where to place the toilet, and it is a bit humorous. However, it may conflict with other ideas, so that may not be a practical idea. Between the seats! But that won't work. Actually, I want to put the freezer against the cage, but that creates an access difficulty between the front and back. The freezer is 28" wide and it will have to sit in the middle where the cage door is. I can offset it towards the side doors, but that eliminates the possibility of using that area for the batteries.
Just now I realized that there may be a space problem. I'd like to use the freezer to store a lot of water, which can be frozen into ice and used for food preservation on the ranch. But the freezer is large. It will have to take up all of the area that it occupies and cannot be used for multiple uses.
If the door to the front is to be used, then that space must be reserved. Incidentally, I could still put the toilet there, with a screen for privacy. The toilet and the screen must be in place and/or easily removable. In a pinch, that may take too much time.
I'd really like to be able to use all of the space available. There may be a way to do that with the toilet.
If the toilet is to be in the doorway, then the batteries will have be next to the side doors.
A quick look at the computer desk makes me think that to cut it up would not be a good thing.
Could try using wood fencing and 2x4's to connect them together. Not an elegant solution, but looks cheap.
Probably less than $100 will do the trick in terms of lumber. Use plywood doors and plain old hinges. Plus a latch to keep them shut. Shelving inside? Can possibly still use the metal shelving, but that would be good only for one side. The other side will be like a closet anyway, Will want to attach some kind of bar to hang clothes on. These cabinents won't be but 36" tall, so there's not going to be a lot of storage space added. Is it worth it?
This will go into construction subseries of the off-the-grid main series of posts.
Prev Next
Obligatory, 10.20.15; Trump in the news
About a year out from the presidential elections now. So, why is Trump still on top of the polls? It may be because he is nationalist, and that is the anti-dote to globalism.
Globalism is the belief that unlimited free trade will make everybody happy and bring on world peace.
The problem with that is that it makes corporations very happy and very powerful, and these same corporations gain too much power and influence over society. International corporatism is as bad as international communism. In fact, the two go together like hands in gloves. No wonder then, that a socialist wins in Canada, that we've got a communist in the White House, and Bernie Sanders seems so popular. People are reacting to the corporatism by voting for Big Government to go against it.
My theory on Trump is that he doesn't rely upon corporatism for his wealth, so he can fight with them on even terms. He can give voice to those who still care about the country and haven't gone mad searching for the latest trade deal. People will believe Trump when he says he will look out after America's interests. He isn't bought and paid for by the corporate elite.
So Trump should win. So-called GOP conservatives should be happy because they have probably got a winner, but since the corporations are not happy with Trump, they must try to take Trump down. It probably won't work, but these people shouldn't be underestimated.
If Trump doesn't win, then a socialist will.
Globalism is the belief that unlimited free trade will make everybody happy and bring on world peace.
The problem with that is that it makes corporations very happy and very powerful, and these same corporations gain too much power and influence over society. International corporatism is as bad as international communism. In fact, the two go together like hands in gloves. No wonder then, that a socialist wins in Canada, that we've got a communist in the White House, and Bernie Sanders seems so popular. People are reacting to the corporatism by voting for Big Government to go against it.
My theory on Trump is that he doesn't rely upon corporatism for his wealth, so he can fight with them on even terms. He can give voice to those who still care about the country and haven't gone mad searching for the latest trade deal. People will believe Trump when he says he will look out after America's interests. He isn't bought and paid for by the corporate elite.
So Trump should win. So-called GOP conservatives should be happy because they have probably got a winner, but since the corporations are not happy with Trump, they must try to take Trump down. It probably won't work, but these people shouldn't be underestimated.
If Trump doesn't win, then a socialist will.
Monday, October 19, 2015
The Martian : making a religion out of science?
American Thinker
A review and commentary upon the film. This quote stands out to me:
Yes, I agree. Indeed, I was thinking of this this very morning. Science and religion are mutually exclusive, in my opinion. Science has a foundation in philosophy, that without it, it is meaningless. The foundation is how do we know what we know? In philosophy, it is called epistemology. My understanding of science is that you know something if you can observe it directly or indirectly. Now, contrast this with faith. There's no epistemology to it. Indeed, if there were, it wouldn't be faith.
Faith requires a belief in something without the requirement of evidence to support that belief.
This may draw some criticism, I suppose.
Look at it another way. In a PBS documentary about "the theory of everything", there was the assertion that you can't teach a dog physics. The knowledge of physics is beyond the dog. Dogs are limited, but so are we. It would take a lot of arrogance to proclaim that human kind is the ultimate in the ability to comprehend knowledge. In fact, there may be intelligences in the universe far greater than our own. So much so, that we may as well be like a dog is to man with respect to physics. Indeed all knowledge can be included in that. Would it be too much then, if you accept that premise, that there is an ultimate knowledge that beyond all others?
Such could be faith then, since it requires no evidence to support it and yet you can believe it.
Science and faith can complement each other. But one should not be a substitute for the other.
A review and commentary upon the film. This quote stands out to me:
It pains me to hear people speak as if science and faith are polar opposites.
Yes, I agree. Indeed, I was thinking of this this very morning. Science and religion are mutually exclusive, in my opinion. Science has a foundation in philosophy, that without it, it is meaningless. The foundation is how do we know what we know? In philosophy, it is called epistemology. My understanding of science is that you know something if you can observe it directly or indirectly. Now, contrast this with faith. There's no epistemology to it. Indeed, if there were, it wouldn't be faith.
Faith requires a belief in something without the requirement of evidence to support that belief.
This may draw some criticism, I suppose.
Look at it another way. In a PBS documentary about "the theory of everything", there was the assertion that you can't teach a dog physics. The knowledge of physics is beyond the dog. Dogs are limited, but so are we. It would take a lot of arrogance to proclaim that human kind is the ultimate in the ability to comprehend knowledge. In fact, there may be intelligences in the universe far greater than our own. So much so, that we may as well be like a dog is to man with respect to physics. Indeed all knowledge can be included in that. Would it be too much then, if you accept that premise, that there is an ultimate knowledge that beyond all others?
Such could be faith then, since it requires no evidence to support it and yet you can believe it.
Science and faith can complement each other. But one should not be a substitute for the other.
If society has a problem, can it deal with it?
This blog started off with the notion that there are solutions to our problems. Hence, the saying: Houston, we have a solution. That is opposed to focusing on the problems and throwing up your hands in frustration, and giving up.
I suggested that the solution was to master energy and space. This was begun previously in modern societies, but for some reason, has stopped. Humans seem to have lost confidence in themselves and their abilities to solve their own problems. We seem to regressing into a more primitive state.
History is repeating itself, as what happened to Rome is now happening to us. Did Rome fail because it could not ( nor would not ) adapt to changing times?
Rome's adaptation was to invite barbarians into its realm. Eventually, the barbarians took over and that was all she wrote for Rome. Seems to be happening again in modern times.
Rome didn't have technology, but it had the opportunity to develop it. But once you kill off the incentive to innovate, you will certainly get stagnation. What I'm referring to here is what I call the Tiberius Syndrome. This Syndrome occurs when the powerful stifle any material progress because it is deemed to be a threat to their self-interests. For example, the Emperor Tiberius of ancient Rome had a man executed for inventing a way to mine a new metal which we now know as aluminum. It stands to reason that if a man can be executed for coming up with something new, then new things won't be invented. The new things that could have helped Rome advance weren't developed. Rome could have had an industrial revolution, but it never did happen.
Modern civilization did have an industrial revolution, but this is being deemed as a threat. Hence, we have had a movement toward Limits to Growth. Limits to Growth is the new Tiberius Syndrome. Anything that is man-made is now deemed to be a threat. The only exception to this seems to be in electronics, which does not seem to threaten anyone powerful---yet.
But nuclear energy has been thwarted. It is like the aluminum of ancient Rome. Nobody has been executed for developing nuclear energy in these modern times, but there is now a vast bureaucracy that is devoted towards suppressing it. If the molten-salt reactor had been commercialized, instead of suppressed like it was and is, many things can become possible. For one, you could recycle virtually everything. It could be converted to plasma and then reconstituted from its elemental parts. The plasma takes a lot of energy, and that's what one of things that nuclear energy promised. Instead of recycling things, we continue to mine the stuff we need, and then we throw it away. Not a good solution. It feeds the notion that technology only causes problems and can't solve any.
Space travel has been thwarted as well. A nuclear powered upper stage was developed in the Apollo Era, but shelved. Likewise, a half-hearted attempt was made with the Shuttle that was purportedly developed so as to make space more accessible. If the attempt was more sincere, it would certainly succeeded. Somebody in powerful positions didn't want it to succeed. As a consequence, space as the new frontier still awaits, and may never be achieved because nobody believes we can do it, or nobody really wants to do it that badly. Or more accurately, some powerful people do not want it.
There is a saying---"Two men looked out from prison bars. One saw the mud, the other saw the stars." Will human societies lift their thoughts from the mud, and towards the stars? Or will we relive the history of the Romans who didn't. Not because they couldn't, it was because they wouldn't.
I suggested that the solution was to master energy and space. This was begun previously in modern societies, but for some reason, has stopped. Humans seem to have lost confidence in themselves and their abilities to solve their own problems. We seem to regressing into a more primitive state.
History is repeating itself, as what happened to Rome is now happening to us. Did Rome fail because it could not ( nor would not ) adapt to changing times?
Rome's adaptation was to invite barbarians into its realm. Eventually, the barbarians took over and that was all she wrote for Rome. Seems to be happening again in modern times.
Rome didn't have technology, but it had the opportunity to develop it. But once you kill off the incentive to innovate, you will certainly get stagnation. What I'm referring to here is what I call the Tiberius Syndrome. This Syndrome occurs when the powerful stifle any material progress because it is deemed to be a threat to their self-interests. For example, the Emperor Tiberius of ancient Rome had a man executed for inventing a way to mine a new metal which we now know as aluminum. It stands to reason that if a man can be executed for coming up with something new, then new things won't be invented. The new things that could have helped Rome advance weren't developed. Rome could have had an industrial revolution, but it never did happen.
Modern civilization did have an industrial revolution, but this is being deemed as a threat. Hence, we have had a movement toward Limits to Growth. Limits to Growth is the new Tiberius Syndrome. Anything that is man-made is now deemed to be a threat. The only exception to this seems to be in electronics, which does not seem to threaten anyone powerful---yet.
But nuclear energy has been thwarted. It is like the aluminum of ancient Rome. Nobody has been executed for developing nuclear energy in these modern times, but there is now a vast bureaucracy that is devoted towards suppressing it. If the molten-salt reactor had been commercialized, instead of suppressed like it was and is, many things can become possible. For one, you could recycle virtually everything. It could be converted to plasma and then reconstituted from its elemental parts. The plasma takes a lot of energy, and that's what one of things that nuclear energy promised. Instead of recycling things, we continue to mine the stuff we need, and then we throw it away. Not a good solution. It feeds the notion that technology only causes problems and can't solve any.
Space travel has been thwarted as well. A nuclear powered upper stage was developed in the Apollo Era, but shelved. Likewise, a half-hearted attempt was made with the Shuttle that was purportedly developed so as to make space more accessible. If the attempt was more sincere, it would certainly succeeded. Somebody in powerful positions didn't want it to succeed. As a consequence, space as the new frontier still awaits, and may never be achieved because nobody believes we can do it, or nobody really wants to do it that badly. Or more accurately, some powerful people do not want it.
There is a saying---"Two men looked out from prison bars. One saw the mud, the other saw the stars." Will human societies lift their thoughts from the mud, and towards the stars? Or will we relive the history of the Romans who didn't. Not because they couldn't, it was because they wouldn't.
Perhaps a new one to add to the list of inevitable things
There is said to be only two things that are inevitable: death and taxes. I propose a third thing to add to the list: the unwillingness of societies to face the former.
The unwillingness to face death could lead to some rather bizarre outcomes. People being born out of artificial wombs, for one. What kind of society would that be when all the children are born out of machines? Would they still be human as we have known it. Likewise, when a society becomes filled with super old people who have had multiple rejuvenations, and having had these procedures, become rather freakish monsters. You have odd people being born into a society of equally odd people.
I've thought about that latter possibility of rejuvenation a bit. What happens to the body when you replace all of the internal organs? Wouldn't that leave scars? Wouldn't there be some after effect of having your old guts replaced with new ones? And what about the brain? Could you ever replace your brain? What if you have a stroke even after all the internal organs have been replaced? Is rejuvenation really practical?
Modern societies can't deal with death, so they try to change this fact, but will ultimately fail. A prediction made that I will never be able to see because it is probably too far off into the future.
The unwillingness to face death could lead to some rather bizarre outcomes. People being born out of artificial wombs, for one. What kind of society would that be when all the children are born out of machines? Would they still be human as we have known it. Likewise, when a society becomes filled with super old people who have had multiple rejuvenations, and having had these procedures, become rather freakish monsters. You have odd people being born into a society of equally odd people.
I've thought about that latter possibility of rejuvenation a bit. What happens to the body when you replace all of the internal organs? Wouldn't that leave scars? Wouldn't there be some after effect of having your old guts replaced with new ones? And what about the brain? Could you ever replace your brain? What if you have a stroke even after all the internal organs have been replaced? Is rejuvenation really practical?
Modern societies can't deal with death, so they try to change this fact, but will ultimately fail. A prediction made that I will never be able to see because it is probably too far off into the future.
Brave New World and Artificial Wombs
Could it be possible to gestate a human being outside of the womb? Over at Al Fin's blog, there is a lengthy discussion of the possibility.
This is remarkably like the way human procreation was accomplished in the novel Brave New World. Not so sure that this is a good thing if it were to become reality. If women won't have children, it may well be the only thing that can save what we like to refer to as civilization. The advanced nations of the world are following ancient Rome's footsteps.
Another angle to this is the space migration to the stars. Let's say that you were to save the embryos until you get to your destination. Lots easier to do that than to keep people alive on the entire journey. Robots would operate the artificial wombs and then raise the children after the destination is reached. These children would never see the Earth.
At any rate, the future holds a much different possibilities than what was presented on Star Trek, that's for sure.
This is remarkably like the way human procreation was accomplished in the novel Brave New World. Not so sure that this is a good thing if it were to become reality. If women won't have children, it may well be the only thing that can save what we like to refer to as civilization. The advanced nations of the world are following ancient Rome's footsteps.
Another angle to this is the space migration to the stars. Let's say that you were to save the embryos until you get to your destination. Lots easier to do that than to keep people alive on the entire journey. Robots would operate the artificial wombs and then raise the children after the destination is reached. These children would never see the Earth.
At any rate, the future holds a much different possibilities than what was presented on Star Trek, that's for sure.
Sunday, October 18, 2015
The weekend is over.
Too short like always. Seems like today got away from me. Don't know what it was, but after that burrito this morning, I felt groggy and slept almost until noon. Then the football games were on, and that's enough to wipe out the rest of the day. Spent a little time on the van conversion, but now is the time to be careful.
One thing that I found out. If you get your own bean working, sometimes it is hard to stop it. When that happens, it may be hard to get to sleep.
There are some tricks to get to sleep. One of them that works for me is to learn how to relax the muscles in the entire body at once. Not saying to snap a finger and go limp. Starting with the toes, proceed upward until all the body is relaxed. If the mind won't stop working, try saying "ohm" without stopping until you need to breathe. Don't laugh, it stops the brain from working and that's the key. The relaxed state and the clearing of the mind will help get to sleep. Don't quit on it. Eventually sleep will take over.
So, that's that. Best to not get the old bean working overtime. You need your rest. I know I do.
One thing that I found out. If you get your own bean working, sometimes it is hard to stop it. When that happens, it may be hard to get to sleep.
There are some tricks to get to sleep. One of them that works for me is to learn how to relax the muscles in the entire body at once. Not saying to snap a finger and go limp. Starting with the toes, proceed upward until all the body is relaxed. If the mind won't stop working, try saying "ohm" without stopping until you need to breathe. Don't laugh, it stops the brain from working and that's the key. The relaxed state and the clearing of the mind will help get to sleep. Don't quit on it. Eventually sleep will take over.
So, that's that. Best to not get the old bean working overtime. You need your rest. I know I do.
Living in interesting times
Got some breakfast from a fast food joint. I know it isn't healthy, but I like it. A breakfast burrito---eggs, cheese, and sausage. Yummy.
I don't usually go to the place that I went to just now. I remembered a visit there not long ago. They were rather generous with the eggs and sausage, but the price wasn't necessarily such that it was a bargain. But it was worth the trip back.
While waiting for my food, I noticed that a religious program was on. Perhaps one might feel gratified, if one is so inclined, but the content may have set you back just a little. ( maybe ) I don't know if the preacher talking was really meaning to say that God is a unconditional, loving parent. That phrase kept getting repeated over and over.
Actually, good parents will discipline their children. "Spare the rod, and spoil the child." Yep, I'd say that the ideas these days is of the God that is more like a doting grandparent that spoils the kids. A grandparent isn't responsible for the child, and will likely be a lot more permissive than a parent. As a parent, you should want your kids to be ready for the time when they have to be out on their own. A kid needs correction when he starts to screw up.
Maybe the preacher really didn't mean it that way, but given the trends in our society, I sorta suspected the worst.
Earlier this morning, I noted that there was a bar open. A bar open on a Sunday morning. It wasn't that long ago that you could not have seen this. Not to mention that in the seventies, back a little further in time, when I was in high school, there weren't any bars at all because they were illegal. Clearly, the moral fiber has been giving way as time passes by. There are those who may be given to call that "progress". I'm not so sure.
I don't usually go to the place that I went to just now. I remembered a visit there not long ago. They were rather generous with the eggs and sausage, but the price wasn't necessarily such that it was a bargain. But it was worth the trip back.
While waiting for my food, I noticed that a religious program was on. Perhaps one might feel gratified, if one is so inclined, but the content may have set you back just a little. ( maybe ) I don't know if the preacher talking was really meaning to say that God is a unconditional, loving parent. That phrase kept getting repeated over and over.
Actually, good parents will discipline their children. "Spare the rod, and spoil the child." Yep, I'd say that the ideas these days is of the God that is more like a doting grandparent that spoils the kids. A grandparent isn't responsible for the child, and will likely be a lot more permissive than a parent. As a parent, you should want your kids to be ready for the time when they have to be out on their own. A kid needs correction when he starts to screw up.
Maybe the preacher really didn't mean it that way, but given the trends in our society, I sorta suspected the worst.
Earlier this morning, I noted that there was a bar open. A bar open on a Sunday morning. It wasn't that long ago that you could not have seen this. Not to mention that in the seventies, back a little further in time, when I was in high school, there weren't any bars at all because they were illegal. Clearly, the moral fiber has been giving way as time passes by. There are those who may be given to call that "progress". I'm not so sure.
Obligatory, 10.18.15; using the tablet to compose this post
Plus this wireless keyboard. Funny how it did not seem to work before, but now it does work okay. It may take some getting used to. The thing is, I will really need to cut power usage and space requirements down, and this tablet will work better than what I am using now. So, the ability to use this thing successfully is important for that reason.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)