Boohickey11

At around the 11 minute mark a scene begins in which we see a (David's) mother who is actually a ghost. When confronted with the consequences of her actions we see her become cold, manipulative, and calculating. What a horror!

I've scheduled a meetup for Louisville, KY. I hope there are some Kentuckiana folks out there who will want to attend! If anyone has any suggestions please throw them at me! The tentative venue as of right now is at a large beer/wine depot with a large quiet seating area near a tap wall (for beer samples). The tentative day is Wednesday, October 15th at 5:30 pm.

I'll give a few observations: -As a BSEE I will tell you that if you want to be an engineer you will need to spend every second studying your discipline in school. You will fail if you try to run a business and try to get an engineering degree at the same time. -As far as creating a revolutionary product is concerned, I applaud the high goals but don't discount taking something and doing it better, or cheaper, or faster. Just building the proverbial "better mousetrap" can get you some good money. If you go to the right school and work your behind off you can probably get a BS in engineering in less than 4 years for under $50k. To do this you will need to sleep, eat, and breath engineering. Here are some names to look up on YouTube if you want to be an entrepreneur: Jeffrey Tucker and Gary Vaynerchuk. They have both given many talks about pleasing customers and making yourself valuable. Also, listen to this podcast with Tom Woods here. I'll post some more if I think of anything.

I would highly recommend listening to this interview by the Mises Institute regarding the Scottish independence vote.

Here is an article I have found that goes over the change in liability in western law tradition. http://www.sefi.be/wp-content/abstracts/1222.pdf Abstract:

There's nothing like opening a can of worms! I'm expanding my search of material related to this topic to the history of liability in fields of specialized knowledge. I want to find out a general history of thought in regards to when architects and engineers were found liable (or not) in any disasters or civil torts going back at least as far back as ancient rome. If anyone knows of some good sources for this information I would greatly appreciate it. I'm interested in what the arguments were in the different times and places. I've found this link so far in a quick search but I'm hoping to find a source that has already covered this topic; it's about roman law and liabilites.

ISO Code of Ethics IEEE Code of Ethics A couple of links directly related to ethics in today's engineering environment. From the other side of the pond... http://www.raeng.org.uk/policy/engineering-ethics

I don't want this forum to drift into the nuclear weapons discussion so if you guys would like we can move that to another thread. It may also already have had a thread previously, I haven't checked. I think for the application of ethics to engineering we need to ask ourselves what actually is the roles of ethics in engineering. Anyone involved in engineering can tell you that when one designs a system safety is always kept in mind but that it is foolish to think that something can be 100% safe. Can we apply UPB to designing to safety standards? (rhetorical) Since ethics is all about how we interact with other people let's look at the people the engineer interacts with: -His self -Stockholders -His boss -His colleagues -Employees he supervises -His clients -His end-customers (customers of the client) Please tell me if I missed any! Perhaps one way to look into this issue is to think of a consulting company. This company (which could exist in a anarcho-society) would be paid to examine companies and ensure they are following an ethical code. Companies may want this stamp of approval as it would help attract investment, good employees, customers, cheaper insurance rates, etc. Let's try to think of what aspects of an engineering firm and its employees behavior might relate to ethics that are outside the scope of law and contracts.

I'm in Kentucky and there is no meetup group in my area as of yet. I was thinking of creating some sort of group but I would want there to be some kind of qualifications for being invited into the group. Maybe just submitting a list of books the individual has read that would be related to the discussions. My original question for this thread was going to be if it is elitist to require anyone who would want to participate to have some sort of college degree. I'm not looking to be a part of a politically active group. I am looking for a group of colleagues who are least around as well-read as I am. While watching hundreds of YouTube videos can be widely informative it still does not compare to reading dozens of books.

Ahh, some interesting points already. First, as far as the topic of nuclear weapons I would refer anyone to Rothbard: An article here. A youtube video here. An even more thorough examination is here by Walter Block. I'm still reading the article by Block but so far so good. It seems it may contain much of the tools we'll need to apply real ethics to engineering.

I've been thinking about IEEE and the ethics of engineering we were taught in college. One thing I've noticed is that engineers who were a part of large government spending/killing projects are praised. See http://spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/profiles/where-are-todays-engineering-heroes It made me think that maybe us UPB engineers need to come up with a REAL structure of ethics for engineers; one that would NOT praise those who create weapons of war that could be used for indiscriminate war (as opposed to 'just war'). If there are any engineers on the forum who are interested please contribute to this discussion. I want any relative feedback from anyone but I think engineers will have a better understanding of what ethical standards they are faced with in today's engineering environment. Perhaps a question to begin the discussion: What is the ethical relationship between an engineer and that which he designs/creates? For instance, a gun can be used violently and ethically (self-defense) but a nuclear bomb cannot be used ethically in war. However, in the distant future, what if we used nuclear explosive devices for asteroid mining or something of that nature? Is the engineering of a dangerous thing (that can be used unethically) a violation of UPB? Was the act of designing the first atomic bomb unethical in and of itself or was the (known) intended use of the bomb what makes it a (possible) violation of UPB? I also want to say that I don't want this discussion to keep only to such grand topics as nuclear weapons but to also applied (probably more effectively) to more common engineering ethical dilemmas that an engineer is likely to face day to day in his career! It's easier to be ethical when it is obvious.

I'm a HAM and have occasionally thought about how amateur radio can be used to support the freedom movement. While many believe that amateur radio has been stale for many decades, I believe that it is the, dare I say, duty of ham operators to use their collective knowledge to push technology related to their hobbies towards something that can be used for freedom in the same way that the programmers of bitcoin technology are doing. At this moment I am just announcing myself and will look into the topic more and come back with any insight I acquire. Also, now that I think of it, it might make an interesting topic to discuss the role of amateur radio, the ARRL, the FCC, etc in libertarianism. What I mean is that I don't think anyone has developed any theory (not sure though) as to how amateur radio can be privatized. This would be necessary in order to approach a more voluntarist community and it has already been done (mostly by Walter Block) for the privatizing of roads. I'll start a thread on this as soon as I have enough worked out.

But it is not about finding people who are like-minded to me but who are also as well read. I've met plenty of people who love the freedom movement. The only libertarian meetup (that I know of) in my area is a (L)ibertarian meetup group. If I went to the meeting I am fairly sure that I would spend all my time explaining why I don't vote or go to political party... parties. What's funny is that I (and my girlfriend who is looking for a female friend who is not so... dumb... for lack of a better word) am trying to find like-minded people who we can connect with. So what comes first? Connect with people and then talk about liberty or find liberty-minded individuals and connect with them. Put that in your metaphorical pipe and smoke it! XD

I'm looking to join/start a libertarian/anarcho group in my area. Over the years I've met many different people who are involved, in one way or another, with the "liberty movement" that has been going on for a few years. However, I haven't been satisfied with much of the conversations I've had with most people. The only exception was in attending a Mises Institute event a while back. The best way to explain my situation is to say that the kind of people I would like to meet with and discuss these issues are NOT the kind who were suprised by the RNC in 2012. I appreciate the effort that went into the Ron Paul campaign but I was not naive enough to have been surprised by what went on there. Another way to put it, also, is to say that I don't want to explain to anyone why I don't vote or participate in the political process. I want to be able to meet with a few people every few weeks or so and just discuss current events, economics, philosophy, history, etc. without feeling like I'm years ahead of those who I am speaking with. I have dedicated much time and effort in my pursuit of knowledge in the realm of freedom, libertarianism, etc. and I have spent a great deal of time educating those around me about what I have learned but sometimes it would be nice to have a conversation with someone who has already read Molyneux, Mises, Rand, Rothbard, Hoppe and the like. Is there anyone in this position or who takes offense to it?