Kevin Beal

You're right. I don't have a good answer for that.

Nope. I live in Northern California.

http://moneyandstate.com/reflections-right-privacy-response-nydfs-bitcoin-proposal/ I can barely contain my anger about the astounding hubris of these assholes. The Winklevii are in favor of this shit, apparently. What the fuck? Here are some other gems: I'm sure people will find a way around this pretty quickly, but it pisses me off

You could just ask what her experience is with this and if it makes sense. She was curious and asked, and she was receptive to our arguments. No need to be a jerk.

The URL to the feeds are under the heading "Subscribe to the Freedomain Radio Podcast Feeds" on FDRPodcasts.com. You can also browse the podcasts on FDRPodcasts, although it's not built for mobile browsing. It will work on mobile just fine (I use it on my phone), it's just a little too wide.

Ok, I know even less than I thought I did. Thank you for perspective. So, this part seems confusing to me (as well as everything else, haha). Is the rock an extension of the vacuum, or of forces or some other connecting thingy that is the universe? I don't understand the implications as to why this is problematic to look at objects as independent. Just because a tree gets nutrients from the rotted leaves of the tree next to it, doesn't mean that they aren't two separate trees, right? Is vacuum really a thing and not the emptiness that I believe it is? Are there no gaps? Because if there are gaps, then is that gap not part of the universe? Is the space beyond the bounds not the universe? Is what I'm saying even making sense?

Thank you for the resources, I will check them out! But, I've never understood how this is confusing for people. It's probably because I'm ignorant, but it seems very simple to me. The "universe" is not an object. It's a concept, a category containing the entirety of currently existing objects. There is no requirement for it to behave in the same way as existing objects because, in short, it does not exist. I'm curious what you think that of that. Am I saying that the sky is blue because blue is pretty?

I just wanted to plug some apps(?) I've been using that I think are pretty cool, are pretty simple and add some real value, in my opinion that I felt like sharing. Numero Uno: SimplyRain (link) This is basically a white noise generator that simulates the sound of rain and thunder. I really like it because it's very calming and helps me relax. I have animals and random noises that happen around me so I don't much like silence and the contrast with that. So usually that means I'm listening to music all day. I found that I like using it while I'm journaling and doing mecosystem convos to drown out other things and help me focus on that. Numero Dos: Flux (link) This is a program that runs on your computer and as the day turns into night, the hues on your computer turn gradually more into a red spectrum. The blue lights from your screen can make you wired right before you go to bed because your body associates blue light with morning / daytime. Anecdotally it appears to help with that a lot for me. Numero Tres: Streak (link) I honestly don't understand what the hell this thing is, but what I do know is that if you use it, you can be immediately notified whenever anyone reads an email you've sent them, so you know exactly when they've opened an email you've sent. This is kinda freaky to think that some people out there know when you open emails you've sent them, but I really like it. I personally don't enjoy wondering whether or not somebody got my email or not. This alleviates my anxiety around that. Probably something I should examine, but now I don't have to because I've got a tool for that Anyway, let me know what you think and if you have similarly random vaguely productivity themed tools/apps that you use.

It's here! In it, Peter actually does offer some definitions. I didn't understand what the hell he was talking about, maybe because I'm daft, or maybe because it's bullshit, but he does offer some definitions to be sure.

What's the difference between "infinite" and "unbounded"? They sound like the same thing to me (a layman).

Well, that's just because your frame of reference is narrow and truncated, Rob Also, what the heck is a "capitalist trope"? Is anyone here using clichéd capitalist rhetoric to combat Peter's assertions? I haven't seen it. Peter's points don't even warrant counter argument. He barely made any arguments at all and they were roundly crushed under the overwhelming weight of reality. I also don't think anyone said "Peter is simply a marxist, plain and simple, case closed, it's established".

Peter repeatedly assures people that these problems are inherent to any "market system" and that it would be the case with or without a state. However the only reasoning he provides in support of this conclusion are things he is ready to concede is due to state involvement. This is despite many repeated requests for Peter's reasoning. He has had several response videos to Stef's critiques and in every one Stef stresses this point and it is (among many other things) not addressed to any reasonable extent, usually dismissed with mere assertion. (A boringly common theme with Peter.) This is what is known as a "bigotry". The same kind of bigotry he falsely projects onto successful businesses, because they ignore the facts of things like "structural violence" and "greedily" "exploit" areas of profit. He is, predictably, ignoring the fact of state involvement in things like corporate subsidies and rent seeking in his evaluations of the "capitalist" system. Believing things despite the evidence. Stef's reviews: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1JcUBx2dxU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pg5K07c72Tw

She was part of a recent debate titled something like "Are men still necessary?" (since labor intensive jobs are declining with innovation). She was very much of the opinion that the value men bring is like that of a work horse, cutting wheat in the fields and hauling it off to be stored then processed. And that women are the ones who are best equipped for jobs involving communication since women are obviously (isn't it obvious?) that women are so much more empathetic than men... I'm really not a fan of Hanna >

This topic is considered off-topic by the forum guidelines. Discussions on this topic tend to devolve into aggressive escalating exchanges where no one changes their mind. Thanks for the link

It's sophistry to portray my comments as accusing you of "forcing" anyone to do anything. (Which is another case of projection.)

I've also taken the active ingredient in ayahuasca NN-DMT. I am not saying the experiences weren't dramatically altered or that I didn't make strange counterintuitive connections while on these drugs. I would say though that I could have easily had any of the same thoughts and feelings sober. I think an important distinction should be made here because I think two things are getting conflated: brain trauma and psychological trauma. I don't doubt that brain trauma can be changed substantially through the use of chemicals found in hallucinogenic drugs. This doesn't seem to require the altered state of consciousness from what I can tell. I hope to see it studied more and the exact parameters in which it may be helpful to people. My hesitation is prescribing illegal and potentially harmful drugs to people to treat psychological issues that don't result from brain trauma, or psychological traumas which may simply come back after the brain half of the problem is treated (depression is one example). Mental health problems are largely thinking problems that need to be treated by connecting deeply with all the parts of yourself and integrating them into a whole. To stop avoiding legitimate grieving, and ambivalence. By correcting the splitting of your personality along contradictory lines when you believe both sides need to be maintained. By exploring your own dissociated states and becoming connected to previously repressed information. This is not something that gets fixed chemically. And that's why pharmaceuticals cannot really treat things like depression or anxiety. I've heard a lot of praise about this surrender, and the description always sounds like a broken personality, like Winston Smith at the end of 1984, or the guy from A Clockwork Orange, or some kind of Stockholm Syndrome, or that their vengeful god is love. Maybe it's just my ignorance speaking, but that scares the hell out of me and I kinda think that fear is a good thing. And I'm not an expert on psychology, but I'm pretty sure the conscious ego that has a clear sense of self and location and judgment and all the rest is a pretty important thing. But you can get that feeling, it sounds like, from great sex with someone you love, no potentially dangerous drug necessary. And no, it's not synesthesia. I've had that. And it is almost impossible to describe (and interestingly babies have it and future generations will likely have it). What people always tell me is that they have realizations, beliefs formed by the experience that they couldn't get without the drug. That they achieve some amount of enlightenment and see the world in a superior way which is more true. But so often these brilliant connections are complete nonsense like the people who say that reality isn't real, or the south americans who get absorbed back into the earth mother. But more often than that, people can't really seem to remember or can't explain it, and more so just remember the feeling of having profound realizations and not the actual content, which is why I think it's artificial. The "aha!" can be triggered chemically, no? Especially considering the drug's activity in the hippocampus (memory). I have noticed that a lot of people will claim to not need psychotherapy because they've got yoga or meditation or drugs, and while it may be the case that they are helpful in the short term, it only ever seems to be in the short term because it doesn't address the thinking problems.

Honestly, I had no idea you were not a fluent english speaker. I'm surprised there are as few typos as there are. You keep projecting malicious intent on me, in this and other threads, but instead of simply and repeatedly suggesting it, you can make the case and let other people decide for themselves. That would be the honest thing to do. It would also take a higher IQ to do. Anybody can suggest things, but it takes some smarts to actually make the case for things.

Have you done any psychotherapy to work through other traumas? I'm always curious about how people are using the word "healing" when talking about stuff like this. I know people who've had very traumatic experiences of the drug, and I have tried it a half dozen times or so trying to see what all the fuss was about. I kept getting way too overwhelmed to get anything out of it, and when I wasn't overwhelmed, it was interesting with the tracers and melting wood panel, and the artificial sense of profundity. I've asked lots of people what they got out of the experience and every time it's something either super vague or completely unverifiable. So, I remain skeptical. I've written down epiphanies that I've had on the drug that were underwhelming the next day when I read them. As far as I can tell, the aha moments people have on hallucinogens are artificial. It's like Einstein said "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough". And maybe it's just the crew I was hanging out with. It took some digging, but the actual study is here. The abstract does look like it does help treat learned fear responses at low doses in mice, but I have a hell of a time finding the full study on Pubmed on their abstract page. It's like the worst page layout in the world. If someone could link me to the full text, I'd appreciate it. The link you gave makes it clear multiple times that the dose is an important factor (below what would likely cause "illusionations"). I actually wonder if the dose high enough to alter your perception of the world to be less reflective of reality is a sign that it's "too much". Like how drinking a glass of wine can be good for the heart, but drinking too much can make you drunk as hell and do damage to your body. The study seems really interesting and I'd be interested to see some double blind human testing, but I don't think this is the same thing as saying that taking enough shrooms to illusionate is a positive and therapeutic thing we should recommend to people. Do you know what I mean? Also, have you heard this podcast? FDR866 Drugs http://media.freedomainradio.com/feed/FDR_866_Drugs.mp3

And thank you Rachel for directing me to these videos

This is a must listen. To the degree to which this is new information is, I think, the degree of the propaganda we were made to ingest. The following is a video series / lecture by Roslyn Rose about: treating parenting as a job, why there should be no adolescence, bringing your children with you wherever you go, why children need to live in reality, childhood self esteem, and more.

If you are an employer with an ad out for a job and multiple people apply, it's a relationship based on mutual advantage and shared values, but the employer is obviously the one doing the choosing in that equation. This analogy works if you accept that it's typically "men propose and women dispose". There are some really hot or otherwise alpha guys out there who have multiple women interested in dating them at a time, right? But, this is not most guys by any stretch. On the flipside it seems to be the case that any reasonably attractive woman has multiple men who would like to date them, even if she doesn't realize it. Maybe this is wrong, but I believe that this is more or less the logic behind the statement "women choose men". Also, there is a perception among most men (and I would assume women too) that women have a lot of inherent value. They are able to create life! Whoa. That's a pretty big deal. But men have to demonstrate their value more (it seems to me), like in how good they can be at providing resources or establish some kind of status through other means. It's not like the opposite case is never true, but generally speaking...

That was a really funny video and a catchy song. I love the obvious white knight symbolism, and the ridiculous depths he'll go to just to go out on a date with a woman who is self obsessed. It reminds me a lot of Mr Magoo or Hong Kong Phooey,... except that I really like Magoo and Phooey.

I'm a professional javascript programmer and have never worked on any front end game mechanics. I could do it, but it would be very difficult and require a shift in paradigm. "Skilled programmer" is far too vague to be applied willy nilly like that. Skilled programming simply means you understand the language you're using, some best practices and how it fits into your particular industry. You can be good at back end programming and be absolutely terrible at front end (and vice versa). If you think it's that easy, I suggest you give it a try. (And again, I wasn't the one who downvoted your post)

This is projection. I didn't take anything personal.

Hmmm, I wonder who downvoted my posts... (I never downvoted any of your posts jacbot)