suomipoi
-
Posts
26 -
Joined
Posts posted by suomipoi
-
-
These are nice.
You can sleep on your side with the wax ones.
+Melatonin
I'm using silicone ear kits currently as they can be re-used quite easily. I'm usually sleeping on my side, I almost never sleep on my back.
I'll have to try the Melatonin thing by eating
- Pineapples
- Bananas
- Oranges
- Rice
I think the revised letter definitely comes across better than your initial letter. Have you asked your roommate if he would be willing to move his voice chat to the kitchen? If so, what was his response to that?
I thought that is out of the question given how he acted on that day.
I talked with him today however. I let him finish his call and then suggested the kitchen thing. He said the stuff that goes on in video and in sound is private and he would not like to share that with others.
We did however agree that we would stop using voice chat at 21.00. That will be in effect for about one week as he will be moving out soon.
I guess I wont need to send anything to my landlord after all.
-
Thanks for the suggestions.
Comments on your replys:
- I tried the white noise. I wasn't able to fall asleep at all unfortunately. I doubt the south park thing would work even less since the volume is not constant and jumps up and down thus making it harder to sleep.
- If I sleep 6-7 hours I get very tired during the day. Once I've slept 9 hours I feel actually alot better.
I applied many of your suggestions in Bold and also added some additional info of my own. I'm planning to send it out within a week.
I removed the word anti-social and the rental agreement quotes.
======================================================================================
(Names have been changed in this text)
Landlord: StevenDifficult roommate: BobPrevious roommate: Peter
Hi Steven,I'm tired and frustrated at the moment.
The first week that Bob moved in I told him that I will use voice chat and if he is going to bed he should tell me so I can stop the voice chat. So far he hasn't requested this.
I used to have noise problems with our neighbours on the opposite side of the wall. I sent them a letter that they would have their renovating done by 8pm. I haven't heard loud noises from their house since.
I got 2 problems:1. I can't rest well due to noise from Bob's room (Chatter / Videos)2. I'm feel threatened around Bob when I make a reasonable request since quite often he starts to yell at me.I need around 8-9 hours of sleep each night in order to feel refreshed in the morning. This would mean that I need to go to bed around 8pm on normal week (wake up at 5am) but the noise I head from Bob's room prevents this. My body clock stays pretty much in the same rhyth on the weekends as during weekdays (on weekends I usually go to bed around 10pm or so).
Sleeping is not easy at the moment because Bob is using voice chat during 8pm-10pm. I usually tell him 10 min in advance before going to bed so he can prepare to end the call. Today for instance I notified him at 8 pm that I'm going to bed. 30 minutes later he starts to use voice chat. I had to use earplugs and pull the bed cover on my ear. I can't fall to sleep when someone is talking right behind the wall. I tried it again tonight (11.2.2014), it wasn't possible. At this point I'm pretty frustrated and tell Bob calmly that he could use the text chat option instead of voice chat.Most of the time when I request this he starts yelling at me and continues the chatter as if nothing happened, this was the case today (11.2.2014) also. When we did it face to face one time, I saw rage in his eyes. I usually get shaky feeling in my body after that (I'm currently shaking while writing this). I'm afraid his behaviour will start to affect me in work (and rental payments when I oversleep due to exhaustion) since I can't sleep enough. I slept 3-4 hours on this night.
On the next day (12.2.2014)
I used white noise machine that would make it easier to sleep. Unfortunately I wasn't able to fall asleep while using this.
I'm trying to stay calm when I request that he use text chat instead of voice chat, but It's getting very hard to do so as he isn't doing any effort to stay calm himself. I'm fearing that I'm not able to act in a reasonable way for very long into the future if he continues to yell at me.
I never had these problems with Peter.
Can you get Peter to move back here or do something about this? I'dd rather not have someone yell at me on weekly basis.
I got a few suggestions that would eliviate the situation:
A. Bob could have his voice chats done by 8.30pm
B. Voice chat could be used in kitchen since it won't bother anyone if one talks there.
C. Text chat option is available in most chat programs. That won't disturb others.
-
Hello all.
I'm hoping to find some good answers on how to deal with my situation. I've considered turning into anti-social behaviour against my roommate, but I think it might be counter productive in the long run and thus haven't done so. My problem is my roommate on the other side of the wall who prevents me from falling asleep in the evening. He goes to work 1-2 hours later than me and thus goes to sleep later. I often request that he would use text chat option instead of voice chat, then he resorts to yelling most of the time.
On weekdays I wake up at either 5am or 4am. In bed at 8pm.
Here is my message to my landlord that I'm planning to send out. I welcome constructive feedback (doesn't have to relate to the message below).
=======================================================================================================================================
=======================================================================================================================================
=======================================================================================================================================
(Names have been changed in this text)
Landlord: StevenDifficult roommate: BobPrevious roommate: Peter
Hi Steven,I'm tired and frustrated at the moment. If something doesn't change with Bob then something will change in me.I got 2 problems:1. I can't rest well due to noise from Bob's room (Chatter / Videos)2. I'm feel threatened around Bob when I make a reasonable request since quite often he starts to yell at me.I need around 8-9 hours of sleep each night in order to feel refreshed in the morning. This would mean that I need to go to bed around 8pm on normal week (wake up at 5am) but his anti-social behaviour prevents this. My body clock stays pretty much in the same rhyth on the weekends as during weekdays (on weekends I usually go to bed around 10pm or so).
However it's not easy at the moment because Bob is using voice chat during 8pm-10pm. I usually tell him 10 min in advance before going to bed so he can prepare to end the call. Today for instance I notified him at 8 pm that I'm going to bed. 30 minutes later he starts to use voice chat. I had to use earplugs and pull the bed cover on my ear. I can't fall to sleep when someone is talking right behind the wall. I tried it again tonight, it wasn't possible. At this point I'm pretty frustrated and tell Bob calmly that he could use the text chat option instead of voice chat.Most of the time when I request this he starts yelling at me and continues the chatter as if nothing happened, this was the case today also. When we did it face to face once, I saw rage in his eyes. I usually get shaky feeling in my body after that (I'm currently shaking while writing this). I'm afraid his behaviour will start to affect me in work (and rental payments when I oversleep due to exhaustion) since I can't sleep enough.I'm trying to stay calm when I request that he use text chat instead of voice chat, but It's getting very hard to do so as he isn't doing any effort to stay calm himself. I'm fearing that I'm not able to act in a reasonable way for very long into the future if he continues to yell at me.
I checked the rental agreement and it says this:5. That landlord may terminate the tenancy in accordance with the Residential Tendencies Act 2004 due to anti-social behaviour by the tenant, or behaviour permittedby the tenant withing the property.I also checked the Residential Tendencies Act 2004:h) not behave within the dwelling, or in the vicinity of it, in away that is anti-social or allow other occupiers of, or visit-ors to, the dwelling to behave within it, or in the vicinityof it, in such a way,17.—(1) Insection 16—‘‘behave in a way that is anti-social'' means—(a) engage in behaviour that constitutes the commission of anoffence, being an offence the commission of which isreasonably likely to affect directly the well-being or wel-fare of others,(b) engage in behaviour that causes or could cause fear, danger,injury, damage or loss to any person living, working orotherwise lawfully in the dwelling concerned or its vicin-ity and, without prejudice to the generality of the forego-ing, includes violence, intimidation, coercion(1.), harassment (1.)or obstruction of, or threats to, any such person, or( c ) engage, persistently, in behaviour that prevents or interfereswith the peaceful occupation—
I never had these problems with Peter.
Can you get Peter to move back here or do something about this? I'dd rather not have someone yell at me on weekly basis.
=======================================================================================================================================
=======================================================================================================================================
=======================================================================================================================================
Thanks in Advance!
-
Watched a few movies on this week that were action movies. I felt those movies were missing something fundamental. There was no feeling involved and they felt superficial.
Cloud atlast was the complete opposite for me. Epic ending with so many good moral convictions at the end. I can't recommend this enough. What I noticed was that none of the characters made their moral choices based on logic but they were rathed shocked about something emotionally and that made them change their path.
The movie trailer was very bad since it was missleading in my opinion. Watch the full version and you will be much better off.
-
As I began to answer the questions, it seemed to me answering some of them were reliant on commiting logical fallacies; for example: (true/false) "Most people are difficult to deal with." I understand the idea is to force a commitment one way or another, but the logician in me doesn't want to make a hasty generalization.
I'm thinking the same way. That kind of questions would get me easily stuck. I don't like how the question is built. When I'm stuck with Yes or No questions I will often choose a third optiom: explain on the paper how I think about this.
I know that they are expecting Yes or No answer but I don't agree that you should just answer Yes or No if the question doesn't make sense.
-
I find it remarkable how well bitch shield/shit test as I read it in PUA community resembles so much of passive aggression. Perhaps bitch shield is just misslabeled passive aggression. It would be easier to be with passive aggressive person if you re-label her behaviour it as bitch shield and tell that all women have this. Rather than have to accept that you accept seconds class behaviour from others.
This resembles alot of idealizing your own parents. "They did they best they can. It's not my mom who is like this. It's all women." VS "It's not this girl. It's all of them."
The following stuff I found in wiki relates to both passive aggressions and shit tests.
1. Ambiguity and cryptic speech: *Just get it!..* What's wrong? *Nothing*
2. Intentional inefficiency, e.g. being late or forgetting things, as a way to exert control or to punish; *Late from date*
3. Convenient forgetfulness: to win any argument with a dishonest denial of actual events;
4. Cold shoulder response: withdrawing into long silences to avoid either confronting or connecting with others.
10. Obstructionism; deliberately delaying or preventing a process or change *Girl: My problem is A. Guy: Solve this by doing B. Girl doesn't do B. Girl: My problem is A.*
11. Sulking; * Too many examples *
-
Perhaps women didn't help men before because they've wanted them to "just get it" – to just step confidently around her "
" and "shit tests" (both of these being instinctual, self-protective, male-qualifying mechanisms) without any hesitation or instruction. But it would seem men really haven't been getting it.In my mind the bitch shield thinking gives me an image of a woman as a helpless victim to her impulses that arise from her brain - unable to control what comes out of her mouth and later on never admitting that she could ever have acted in an inconsistent / abusive / passive aggressive way. Why would anyone want to deal with that crap just get some pussy?
-
If a man was heartless enough to maliciously walk away from his children, then you wouldn't appeal to his protector instinct since he obviously doesn't have one. For shaming to work, you first have to assume possession of the very virtue you then deny exists: "You don't have a protector instinct!" "You don't care about the poor!" "You're evil!" Performative contradiction! Go inject your self-attack poison elsewhere.
Very nice.
-
Also check this if you liked.
-
[View:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UR_Fp09NC_0:560:315]
-
I watched this video: Remote control that is very much related to what you are describing there.
Basicly if you put people in control of other people with no change of being caught it's likely that it will end badly. A related movie to that: Das experiment.
Pretty sick stuff gotta admit.
-
In the long run, stocks greatly increase their purchasing power.
If by purchasing power you mean more benjamins then you are right. On the other if purchasing power is measured by the amount your bejamins can buy stuff then stocks values are not increasing in the long run as a whole. If you look the price of Dow compared to gold from 1900's to 2000's you can notice long cycles there. The stock prices don't go up forever, but there is a saturation point. Once that is reached then the price (measured in goods) returns down. The misconception that stocks in general appreciate in purchasing power is the result of inflation.
But then again you could pick good stocks which provide good returns on a certain timeframe. e.g. 1980-2000.
-
....That's really all I have to say about it. If you disagree, feel free to continue talking to people using the labels. I predict it will get you confusing data that will not accurately reflect what many people actually believe. At some point you might test out using the other method and see if it helps. It's really your choice at this point.
Did you check the Videos that were posted on this thread recently. They touched the issue with labels pretty well.
I especially liked the examples with fairies. The court example didnt really open up to me.
-
Atheism is a belief that accepting theism is not merited.
Nope, atheism is NOT having the belief that accepting theism IS merited (more precise: that there is a god). One word in a different place, huge implications.
Atheism is not a belief, it is the lack thereof. In order to be an atheist you don't have to believe anything about any theistic belief having any merits or not. You don't have to have any even remotely connected belief about theism at all and still be an atheist (without knowing it). An atheist just doesn't hold that belief himself. A-theism means not being a theist. Being a theist means believing in a deity. It is literally that simple.
Check these videos out: The Atheist experience with Matt Dillahunty:
Take My Burden of Proof Please! - The Atheist Experience #747
That cleared things up quite a bit. Thanks.
-
You stated that god is whatever people
say god is. I say I am god and so is my dog. I am 100% certain that I
exist and that my dog exists, therefor I am 100% certain that your
"god," exists. I just gave an accurate rendition of what you were asking
people to report about their beliefs. Do you not agree that it is
absurd?Nope, your not a God. I know this simply because I'm the one and only God.
It would seem rather absurd if people could define words (god, atheist,theist) that are being used. If that was the case then they would not be speaking English anymore.
I'm saying since people inevitably respond to the word in too many different ways, it's rather useless to assume when you say the word that they are responding to it as you think they should. This is why in research, people have to define even the most commonplace terms. You are learning about other people, not yourself. It doesn't matter how clear you think the definition of God is. If you want to find out their beliefs accurately, you have to make sure they understand what you're asking about as you mean it. It's irrelevant if you think their idea of what "God" is is completely wrong. What's relevant is that if you want to learn about their beliefs on something you have to make sure they're responding to the question you mean to ask and not some other interpretation of it, no matter how false you may think that misinterpretation is.
So my point is do people want to learn the answer to what they really are trying to ask? Then if so simply define your terms clearly for the other person. Or if they are talking about something else without realizing it, make that explicit with them so you know what they're actually referring to.
So it's important to describe the terms you are using?
It seems rather annoying that you yourself use term god and Atheism continuously while never once defining what those mean to you. When we asked what you mean with these you simply state that people have different views of the words "god" and "Atheist".
See what you did there? You are not defining your terms, but you rather give us a non-answer. Therefore making it impossible for anyone to get anywhere with the methdology you suggested to be used.
What do you mean when you say god? Describe it's properties.
What is Theism? What does a theist claim? Is the claim based on measurable evidence in the external world. Or a subjective impulse in the brain? Or something else?
What is an Atheist? Is this person making a claim about something, or rather evaluating what claims others are making?
On what basis do you make these percentage claims about the existence of a god/gods. Eyet again do you extend these percentage claims for Unicorns, Santa and Cave Trolls?
What are you looking for in this thread?
-
I liked the video someone posted. Thx.
I still don't see why percentage points have anything to do with this. God either exist or doesn't. What someone personally believes about the existence of gods is irrelevant to the actual existence/nonexistence of those gods.
Where do you pull these percentage points anyway? From some objective measurable standard or from someones personal opinions?
-
Again, according to your ideas, Socrates wasted his whole life doing philosophy. He said that he knew NOTHING. That includes not knowing if contradictions can exist. He didn't say "I know nothing except the properties of identity are consistent." He knew nothing. I feel the same as him. And I don't think that precludes the purpose of debating things and trying to find out as much as we can.
Seems like you are talking about beliefs. Beliefs might or might not have anything to do with reality. I haven't seen any proof about the existence of god in any of anyone's posts so far. The only thing I see from you is talk about personal preferences. "Some people think god exist with 100% certainty. What do you think the certainty is?" etc. None of these beliefs are based on scientific evidence, but about opinion. Once you make a claim that god exists you have left the realm of opinion and entered in the world of testable fenomenon.
If I make a claim that rocks fall at the speed of 9.81 m/s^2 then that hypothesis is testable. We can drop a rock and see how it behaves while it falls. "Rocks fall at the speed of 9.81 m/s^2 is a testable hypothesis and a scientific claim.
That's what most people here are expecting you to show us. A test on the basis of which we could conclude if god exists or not. If it's not testable then it's not a scientific claim, but you are rather arguing an opinion.
Some definitions that we could start with:
An opinion, whether it is grounded in fact or completely unsupportable,
is an idea that an individual or group holds to be true. An opinion does
not necessarily have to be supportable or based on anything but one's
own personal feelings, or what one has been taught.An argument is an assertion or claim that is supported with concrete,
real-world evidence. Many people confuse or lump the two terms because
they cannot recognize the difference between evidence and reasons. In
this case, reasons are typically associated with 'feelings' or commonly
accepted ideals, while evidence is associated with measurable, objective
truths or realities. While arguments may not always be ''right'' or
true, they must at least be supported by some kind of external evidence.Quotes from STer
The sad thing is we overwhelmingly agree. But the
fact that I allow room for that tiny possibility leads to endless,
probably irresolvable, debates. That's why I rarely get involved in
the agnostic/atheist debate anymore, especially when it ends up just
being a semantic debate on those labels rather than the actual beliefs. But for some reason I felt like indulging in this aspect of it today for a bit.I have long found these discussions annoying because they end up being more about the labels than the issue at hand. All of this could be avoided if we just skipped the labels and went right to the heart of the matter.
......
Schemantics seem to be the starting point of any debate. If we can't agree on the meaning of words then it's equivalent us trying to have a debate while the other one speaks Klingon and the other one speaks Egnlish - Neither one is going to understand what the other one is trying to say.
-
This Book gave me alot of usefull information about investing in gold and silver. Mike Maloney also has seems to have plenty of videos on youtube. The book gives you the big picture of what's going on and the videos are more specific. Take in account that He is a seller of gold and silver product so that could have some impact on the truth factor of what he is saying.
Inflation makes it hard to see the true value of some good. You can avoid this by measuring relative worth of 2 things.
Measure silver/gold in terms of how many stocks of DOW you can buy. How many ounces does it take to buy a bushel of wheet etc. That way it's easier to see the real purchasing power of your metal.
Example of dow/gold Ratio
Note that this chart is outdated.
You can see that in 1980 one stock of dow could be bought with one ounce of gold. Then in 1999 gold was the most undervalued compared to stocks it has ever been (42 ounces to buy one stock). The average of this chart is 12.5 so if you buy above that line you are likely to have your gold appreciate in value compared to stocks. Currently the ratio is somewhere near 7. When/if the ratio goes below 3-4 it might be a time to start trading your gold for stocks or other things.
The benefit in this graph is that inflation doesn't affect this chart. The value of a good here is only determined by the relative value of 2 items. Therefore this makes it easier to buy stuff that is actually underpriced.
-
Usually the definitions are the most important part of the debate. If we can't agree on terms we are using then it's not worth continuing this conversation.
-
I haven't really found either side of the free will vs determinism debate to be very persuasive. With the following definitions I assume free will to be true.
Free will: The power or ability to some times do otherwise than one in fact does.
Determinism: All events withouth exception are cause by antecedent events, such that any given state of affairs follows necessarily from those prior events.
Found some points in video.
1. "Our senses are instruments of choice making."
2. Senses would be useless in a deterministic world.
3. If you take free will away then filosophy would be useless.
Thoughts on those:
1. Senses simply transmit electical signals from different
parts of your body. I don't see how choice making has anything to do
with this. The decision making (or stimulus response) comes after the signal arrives to the brain.
Whether or not the response to this stimulus is caused by free will or
determinism is up to debate.2. Why would senses be useless in a deterministic world?
3. I understood that number 3 is appealing to consequences.
Sample below:
Believing in Vishnu gives me all good things in life. If I didn't believe in Vishnu I would not get good things in my life. I want to have good things in my life. Therefore Vishnu exists.
Philosophy is a good thing in life. If determinism was true there would be no point to have philosophy. I want to be philosophical. Therefore I have free will
PS this example might not be the mostly accurate one, but he main idea is this:
(Belief in) p leads to good consequences. (Where p is irrelevant o the truth factor of p.)
Therefore, p is true. -
Could you start off by defining what you are talking about.
Define: Determinism
Define: Free will
I had to stop watching since I don't understand the relevance of this video. This could be because there are atleast 10 different kind of determinisms you could be talking about and I don't know which of them (if any) you are talking about. (Determinism Wiki: Logical determinism, Fatalism, theological determinism, etc..)
I recently found
about how to start thinking about this problem in a new way. The guy in there also providesin a way I understand them. -
....junk here removed..... I suggest that just as an excercise, you start building a notion of truth, falsity etc. that will work well regardless of the form of time evolution, and then compare it to your old one (if the old one is even well-defined) to see if it is really lacking any essential qualities. I suspect you'll find that the new one is at least as good as the old one.
As Far I'm understoof Metric is talking about Logical determinism which is merely a description of true false statements. Metric is this the only type of determinism you are identified with or are there others?
Logical determinism or Determinateness is the notion that all
propositions, whether about the past, present, or future, are either true or false.AFAIK Arius refers to Theological Determinism or Predeterminism aka ALL events are predetermined (only one possible future outcome).
The first one, strong theological determinism, is based on the concept of a creator deity
dictating all events in history: "everything that happens has been
predestined to happen by an omniscient, omnipotent divinity".Predeterminism is the idea that all events are determined in advance. The concept of predeterminism is often argued by invoking causal determinism, implying that there is an unbroken chain of prior occurrences stretching back to the origin of the universe. In the case of predeterminism, this chain of events has been pre-established, and human actions cannot interfere with the outcomes of this pre-established chain
Feel free to correct If In understood something wrong.
-
About the bartender thing... It's so hard to figure out the real intent on it on the web. I think it can be both. I don't know the facial expressions, body language and other stuff that took place in the bar. So I can't really say what did the bartender mean. It's so easy to misinterpret when you only see a short written expression about something.
My first assumption in the bartender question was that she was using guilt/social pressure to encourage larger tips.
Some side notes:
Seriously - anyone who has listened to Stef
and taken on the ideas here, and LIVES them, know that Stef is a good
personI wouldn't use past behaviour as a proof for someone being right in the here and now.
... The question "Do you think the bartender was
saying this because he has found it to be an effective way to apply
social pressure to encourage larger tips?" implies that Stef lies and
manipulates to garnish larger donations, which is completely unfounded,
unjust and a defamation of character - Awhich falls more into the hate
category than the rational discussion one...I myself don't understand how you get "manipulate" from "encourage" the only person here using that word is you. I think the previous speaker even toned down his wording when he used the word "encourage" instead of anything else.
-
FDR - 953 - Sound volume inequal between left and right side
in Freedomain Show Lists
Posted
Sound levels for left ear are very quiet for FDR 953
http://feeds.feedburner.com/FreedomainRadioVolume4Shows898
I only checked the mp3 file. I don't know if youtube video has same problem.
Here is normalized mp3 file that I made:
http://www.filedropper.com/fdr953freedomainradiotheanarchistroundtable1ronpaul
It's twice as big as the original file. I'm not sure why.
#EDIT: I wasn't able to fix it. at around 30-40 minutes the audio will change again aka.my fix didn't work very well.
Can someone fix the audio in the original file? Thanks.