AncapFTW

Can an infant think for itself? How about a person in a cult? How about any number of people who have given into the indoctrination of others? In fact, I would think it would be impossible to find someone who thinks for themselves 100% because we all base our perceptions on past experiences, which generally include things which we accept without question. I accept that I am living in a real world and not a VR because I lack evidence that what I'm experiencing is a VR. Would that mean that I am not a real person if indead we were living in a VR? What amount of thought is required before you concider them a person? Would it be enough thought when the brain begins to form around 8 weeks, or would it require a fully funtional brain at around 25 weeks? http://brainblogger.com/2009/05/10/medical-controversy-when-does-life-begin/

1) So, exercise can turn you into a rapist? Sounds like a good reason to NOT work out too much. 2) I know it may sound like I'm attacking you, but have you concidered that maybe your additude towards sex is the result of this trama? http://www.researchconsultation.com/InformationArticlesonMentalHealthProblems_05.asp In support of these findings, Schwartz (1993) reported that some victims exhibit Sexual Compulsivity as a primary symptom of PTSD. These victims are hypersexual and experience bingeing and addiction to sex. Schwartz explains that during the course of development, children who have been sexually abused view the compulsive event as natural sexual behavior. During adulthood, these people are compelled to reenact these behaviors and find them pleasurable but are also ashamed of them. These victims also experience an endorphin release (resulting in a "high") due to the flashbacks that occur when practicing these behaviors, thus perpetuating the addiction. I just thought of it because when my parents were foster parents there was a 15 year old girl who, because she was molested, kept trying to seduce her 30-something foster father. It got so bad that they had to move her to a different home.

How about how Jimmy Hoffa became invlolved with both the Teamster's Union and the mafia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Hoffa

So, you're supposed to be proud that you didn't have the self control to take adaquate precautions before having sex, and that you "took care of it" by having another lifeform put to death?

I would suggest you write "You should have bought me a drink first" or "F**K THE TSA" on yourself in metallic paint so that it shows up on the scanner, but they'd probably give you the "alien abductee" treatment (abduction and anal probing). Maybe they realized that you weren't going to take this and decided not to have you falsely arrested, as you would probably have sued them or filed charges against them.

That's part of why I liked Voyager. Replicators were rationed (and the rations used as currency, especially for gambling), and they had to mine, salvage, or trade for the materials they needed.

The more I think about it, the more I think that they must purposefully NOT use robots. There was an episode in TNG where someone made a robot to do repairs in irradiated areas and everyone thought it was amazing. For some reason, though, you never see robots on the ships. As for doctors and engineers being replaced with machines:

I think the only jobs this helps them get is "side effect guy" from medicine ads and auctioneer. They don't even have enough time to breath properly, much less actually think about the issues. If anything, it's teching them to just say whatever they can about an issue as fast as possible and NOT think about it.

6:54 "prices rise because we can yet keep the complex system known as the economy under control" Well, there's you problem. You think you are supposed to control the economy.

Really? My nineth grade science teacher was a non-practicing jew. I assume you just didn't realize it.

One thing that struck me about the video was that she kept using "water usage" as a measure of environmental impact. She does realize that almost all water used to farm animals will be put back into the ecosystem within hours in the form of sweat, urine, or steaming poop, right? Also, by her logic, a human requires .5 gallons of water per day just to drink. That's 3.5 billion gallons per day for the planet and 1.2775 trillion gallons per year. That's far more than the animals use. Because eliminating humans would eliminate the animal farming too, you can't be an environmentalist and a humanitarian at the same time. In fact, if you are an environmentalist you must want to eliminate humanity as well.

Quark prefers pre-federation plastic. Yesterday I started wondering what various episodes of Star Trek would be like if it was an anarchist society. Starfleet is a combined research/exploration/DRO business that gets its funding from businesses, non-profits, and other DROs. The Federation is essentially a free-trade, peace treaty, and free-trade agreement between various Earth factions and alien governments. How many episodes would need major changes?

"There is one who could unite them," said the science officer. "Two thousand years ago a man who embodied the rational, compassionate soul of the species was tortured and murdered on trumped up charges in an effort to halt his revolution." "Are you certain?" said the Admiral. "It also says here that he had magical abilities, such as raising the dead, healing people, walking on water, transmutation, and even illusion. Given their level of technology at the time, it doesn't seem like such feats are possible." "Well, it does say his father was "from heaven" and that he was concieved without intercorse, which could point to fetal implantation by an alien lifeform with more advanced technology, technology which he might have had access to, given that he often spoke with his father. Besides, the book says it's true, and the humans classify the book as non-fiction." "While the first part is concievably possible, the last sentence is illogical, as it is circular reasoning." "Oh," said the science officer. "I'm sorry, my species isn't very logical. I never was good at logic in school." "That's all right," said the Admiral. "It says here that they are starting to abandon such beliefs in favor of reason, and have even started to reject violent coersive authorities which they call "governments". Perhaps in a few decades or a century they will reach a level at which we can safely interact with them."

I thought that combat only cut your accuracy in half. For example, with my AK-47, using iron sights, I can hit a target the size of the human head 17 out of twenty times at 30ft. From what I heard, combat would put them at 15 ft before I got that level of accuracy. I assumed that with 9mm pistols the cop's accuracy would be much higher. As for stopping people with a handgun, I assume that a bigger round would have more of it, so I bought a 1911.

I seem to remember another police shooting where they were arguing over whether the cop fire 4 or 5 times. Aparently, they confused real life with "No Russian".

If by "convert them to virtue" you mean convince them of the truth of non-violently solving problems, then that's good. The problem comes when you use dishonest means to do this. Then it's a case of the ends justifying the means. Also, how can you use non-virtuous means to show people the value of virtue? That's like fighting for peace, a contradiction at best.

Actually, I'm comparing them to sleazy used car salesmen who manipulate and try to trick you into buying a car they know won't live up to their promises. Neither are being honest in order to give you a fair deal and make sure you actually know what you're buying. I guess the sex would be the closest thing to a used car in this situation, as that's what they are defrauding the woman to get her to accept a trade over. Because I put forward the idea that the methods some "pick up artists" and, presumably him, are manipulating women into having sex with them through fraud, which I see as rape.

Maybe they have a minimum threshold of need for materials, and if you convince them your project meets this minimum, the ruling council put in on a list. They could then give them out first come/first serve basis. It wouldn't be very efficient, but with most raw materials being ridiculously cheap, it might be good enough to function given their tech. You see a bit of this bureaucracy throughout the show, For example, in TNG they meet a scientist that is in desperate need of a rare material for his research. He thinks that the Enterprise is there to verify his need. In DS9, Chief O'Brian needs a part for the station, and gets put on a several month waiting list. Only Nog's trading gets it to him within the week. Then there are the references to certain raw materials being in high demand, such as dilithium, or that they'll want to mine an area with a rare material. I still don't know why people would do the work, though. In some cases they think it's fun, in some they have a sense of "duty", but most of the people in Star fleet seem to be filling a job just so that they can get the benefits of Starfleet service, like training or getting to visit new worlds, etc. Maybe everyone is just indoctrinated from birth to think that they have a duty to do everything they can for society and for others. Basically altruism in the extreme.

Wait, so without chain stores providing low-cost supplies for you to build things, you would have a stronger economy? How does it help the economy if they pay more for what they are getting? The money they spend doesn't disappear, it just goes to wherever the supplies they are buying comes from. Or do you prefer to keep the supply local, thereby limiting the variety of what they get and weakening the economy elsewhere? Does the local economic good mean that people should have a lower standard of living?

The best I can guess is that replicators cover all of the basic needs. It's the ultimate labor saving device. Because rocks can be converted into food, clothing, housing, etc., everything is ridiculously cheap. The only things of real value are those which can't be replicated (High-grade foods are too complex to make properly, Latinum is impossible to produce with it, etc.) Other than that, mass equivalence and power usage are about the only things that matter. It doesn't fix the situation, but it keeps people from starving or freezing when you do run into problems.

Only if you count the various colonies, usually human, that they come across, or the fact that the Vulcans and Romulans are the same species.

Women know that the guy selling them a used car is going to try and sell them a hunk of junk for too much money. They aren't looking for a car for the rest of their lives, just a vehicle for the short term. They are probably desperate, and are exercising bad judgement, but they are adults who are responsible for their choices. See, I can use your "logic" to rationalize selling people a junk car based on lies too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U0s4_e9y38 I just watched this video on youtube. I thought I'd share it with everyone here. I was also wondering if anyone could think of an actual free-market society in Star Trek. The Ferengi are the closest I can think of, and they are actually a monarchy with a strong, but dictatorially controlled, market.

So what's keeping you from starting your own business? Do you not have your own idea? Will the bank not approve your loan? Could you not get investors? You certainly seem to have an interesting idea for a business model. Surely there are plenty of people who would be willing to start a coop with you. I even had my own idea for a co-op, a farm where anyone could come by and work for a cut of the produce, or trade their work for prepared food, a bed to sleep in, certain basic goods, etc. Basically, it would be a place where the homeless and poor could come to earn what they needed to live. I don't think that idea would work for you because you would actually have overhead, such as land costs, fertilizer costs, the work people did getting the goods people trade for, etc. Maybe if you could get enough donations you could cover your overhead and pay everyone exactly what their labor resulted in, but it would take quite a bit of donations. If you don't want to work for someone else, start your own business. Don't scream that it's the company's fault that you can't earn a living. If you can't earn a living working for them, or are unhappy with work conditions, then do something about it. They aren't you "master" any more than anyone you do business with is your slave.

So your argument is based on company towns which were essentially monopolies on providing products and services in a given area. They were pretty much tiny countries. How does that have anything to do with an actually person in modern society in which there are dozens, hundreds, or thousands of potential places for them to work and also that many places to exchange their money for goods and services?