shirgall

Compare the behavior in the video to this: http://ktla.com/2014/10/24/strong-arm-robber-terrorizes-88-year-old-man-in-videotaped-attack/ Or this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0FpMgurltk

Instead of focusing on motivation, though, let's consider those that benefit and those that are harmed. Patents benefit first-movers and they benefit those large organizations that can build licensable portfolios that create barriers to entries into certain industries. For a couple of decades IBM collected a "logical logging" tax from anyone that needed to properly handle database transactions. The big guys like Oracle, Microsoft, et al. had their own patent portfolios to do horse swap agreements with. The little guys, like the MySQLs and Postgreses, had to live in fear of being sued. They had to take defensive measures against a piece of paper to make any inroads. They didn't spend time trying to make logical logging better, they spent time making their own system do logical logging differently enough to not get sued. I am more motivated to make something better than to make something that won't get me sued. I once worked in an organization where a lot of people were dedicated to analyzing patents to make sure they didn't cover what we were doing or planning to do. What a colossal waste. What a colossal hurdle for someone else to climb if they wanted to make products in the same industry. This is the inhibition alluded to. Some of your time and money has to be spent on dealing with patents and developing your own. I have a couple of patents under my belt, and they were not a good use of my time (which is why my employer had to use both the carrot of bonuses and the stick of "all must at least make the attempt"), and they actually hurt my reputation with the open source software industry. Software patents are of course an egregious case, but the principles are the same for other areas that are patented. ObligatoryAppealToAuthority -> I used to be one of the managers of the development of what was once the fastest ad hoc database in the world.

Patents have turned into a modern form of protectionism, especially for big-moneyed special interests. I really like this article about it from the Center for Economic and Policy Research: http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/drug-patents-are-protectionism-why-does-the-nyt-feel-the-need-for-quotes (Take the organization with a grain of salt, though, they have Danny Glover of all people on their Board of Directors.)

The appellation "dark" simply means we do not understand it yet. Dark energy (and dark matter) are terms applied to energy required to drive the observed accelerated expansion of the universe. This is one of those mysteries they continue to chase down, similar to the questions of why there is more matter than antimatter in our local star cluster. As you said, there is a staggering amount of things we don't know. Check out this wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics As you point out, unanswered questions are not proof of god, only proof that we don't completely know how things work.

That's an easy one, since God put the fruit of the tree of knowledge in Eden, which allowed Adam and Eve to eat it, and that's when the carnivores started eating everything else. Lions would have been frolicking with fluffy bunnies in peace if it was not for Him. I wonder what would have happened if Adam and Eve fed the fruit of knowledge to a marmoset.

When the Pope endorses atheism and gives all the gold back, let me know.

Again I'll recommend Against The Gods? (which is a free book). Which definition of "god" would you like to use here? In general, when you whittle away the anthropomorphic aspects, they boil down to something that exists outside the observable universe but has an effect on the universe. This is a contradiction.

Speaking of the physics of high temperature fires weakening concrete and steel... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/29/us/29cnd-collapse.html?hp http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Tanker-fire-destroys-part-of-MacArthur-Maze-2-2575285.php

I should add that reading Against The Gods? is helpful here.

The difference is that the extraordinary claim that god exists requires some extraordinary evidence. The ordinary claim that god does not exist (because there is no direct evidence), especially that he does not exist in the form that a particular religion describes does not require an extraordinary lack of evidence, and could be easily proven wrong.

Oddly enough on Steam I'm "shirgall"

The way your dress and prepare yourself is a part of "reframing" which is an important way to set the stage for yourself before doing something. For example, when you prepare to take a test, try to replicate the conditions under which you will take the test for the best results. Another aspect of how you dress affects how other people will treat you. If you look out of place, people will treat you differently than if you blend in. If you stand out in a good way, it has another effect. In the 80s I had to wear a suit to work every day. Nowadays a suit is often only needed for interviewing and formal night on cruise ships.

The original Occupy was all about protesting the bankster bailouts until they were co-opted by the communists, but yes, I judge people by their behavior not their beliefs. Justifying Iraq with religion or wishing to suppress a vote because of religion makes me dislikes the Georges Bush, not religionists. But the common element of pretending to be true what they don't know to be true makes me distrust all the religious, animists, Marxists, and Keynesians.

And his father said Atheists shouldn't be allowed to vote. Winners, all.

The essence of cultural marxism is that no belief system is bad if someone follows it. It's the "whatever floats your boat if it works for you" idea. The point was to undermine culture and get a foothold for communist ideas. I've had better luck saying "all religions are bad" than in pointing out that some particular aspect of Islam, Christianity, or Judaism is bad.

I have done a variety of these personality tools, including the DiSC profile, which I got from Manager Tools here: https://www.manager-tools.com/products/disc-profile All of them were pre-FDR, although the DiSC was most recent, so maybe I'll post those results in some way, but the report is copyrighted and may not be reproduced without permission. I am a 3157, my highest score in Conscientiousness ©, which implies I am analytical, diplomatic, and thrive in structure. What's more interesting is the implication that I'm emotionally restrained and cautious. I should take it again since it's been a year and a half, but it costs $28 a run.

To me the difference between teasing and abuse is contempt. Someone who feels contempt for someone else will tease to hurt them, which is really abuse. What underscored this for me was the short-lived by generally good TV series Lie To Me.

This is an example of The Fallacy Fallacy, which is presuming a claim is wrong because a fallacy was used to support it. The claim is "There are more important problems to spend our limited time on." Just because this is the Fallacy of Relative Privation doesn't mean it is not true. Sorry you got downvoted, Sal9000.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/7/30/5951479/tor-says-unknown-attackers-compromised-hidden-services

Part of the problem is that this is a new strain, and part of the problem is a normalcy bias that gives people the belief that what's in place now is sufficient for anything new that comes along. In fact, before Thomas Eric Duncan was diagnosed, the people treating him had no enhanced protective gear at all.

Probably me boiling plant children alive in full view of the ficus.

You are continuing to use charged language when the fundamental issue is the killing of animals... which all animals do to other living things as a course of natural living. Feel free to watch a lion eat the genitals off of a living wildebeest (because it tastes good) and tell me *that* is necessary because lions don't know better, but the harvesting of cattle (designed to kill animals with minimum stress because it makes the meat taste bad) is not. I have no problem with people having empathy and compassion for animals, but empathy and compassion are not moral arguments. By the way, the link you cited says Where are they getting their B12? There's a lot of hand-waving here.

Are there movies of interest to kids that promote critical thinking, self ownership, mindfulness, and adults can have fun too?

All commodities are down at the moment on a strong dollar, but that's backtracking a little as manufacturing, treasury yields, and more are down on both bad news and on news that quantitative easing is being "rebooted".

It may be a reason, but it's not an argument. There's plenty of value in understanding why it's disgusting and to do things to make it less disgusting but it doesn't change our fundamental nature as omnivores. There are plenty of things that disgust some people and delight others but either thing has no bearing on whether a thing is universally preferable.