tar

Overtone, no, I will admit the current republican party, led by the Tea Party are a family problem and we should shun the bigots and the folks that have forgotten there is a separation of church and state in this county But I will not, and do not call republican leadership in the last 47 years bad for the country. I don't agree with your take on Iraq or Iran or with your take on the economic downturn. I still maintain that we are a great country, if maybe not as great as we used to be, but part of the reason is that we exported a good deal of wealth and knowledge and good will to the rest of the world. We have taken care of children and poor, we have defeated Imans and dictators, and stopped ethnic cleansing on various occasions. People round the world follow our lead in finance, technology, art, music and science. We are not the only engine of peace and prosperity in the world, but we are still a major engine of good. We have problems, historically and currently, but the best way to address them is together. United, not divided. That is all I am saying. Your tongue lashing is too strong, too wildly directed, too erroneous and too politically slanted, to be helpful in this regard. Regards, TAR

Overtone, You go after the Party AND the constituents. You go after me, just for having announced that I am registered Republican and live in the suburbs. You assume I am also in need of intervention, and use bad judgement, am influenced by manipulators, and have questionable allegiances. I for instance do not consider my take on the crash revisionist history. I don't go by what anybody else has to say. I was friendly with my broker at UBS and spoke with him every day during it, about what was going on, as I "played" the market and bought shorts and longs and double shorts and longs, based on whether we thought things were going up or down. I listened to Bloomberg radio and the various experts they had on, all during the thing. I was not a big investor, but I watched the situation closely, looking for a way to position myself that would increase my holdings. Because of UBS rules (they were under scrutiny themselves) they stopped my ability to buy double short and double long instruments. My investment scheme was no longer workable under the new rules and I had to sell, knowing I could not buy. I chose to keep my short instruments and sell my long, which turned my 50 thousand into nothing in the following years, as the market recovered under the quantitative easing of the Fed. I actually had 100 shares of Citibank that I purchased at under 5 dollars, that I sold, when I sold all my long positions, that would have been worth a lot more, had I kept them. I tell the story, not only to complain about the effects on people of changing the rules in the middle of the game, but to let you know that I was paying attention at the time, saw the whole thing develop from the eyes of knowledgeable financial folk and reporters on Bloomberg and my broker who enjoyed discussing stuff with me, from UBS. I am not doing any revisionist history modifications of the facts. My point in this thread, and in general when speaking to you Overtone, is that you don't give people you don't agree with, the benefit of the doubt. You have the way you think things were, are and should be, that makes you right, and smart, and good, and you have whole blocks of people who are doing it wrong. America, when it does something, is the people, and the leadership, and the power structure, the bosses and the workers, the teachers and the students, the clerks and the CEOs, the brokers and the dealers, the clients and the fiduciaries, the farmers and the artists. It is not only people like you, that make up America. The problem with America is not that there are too many people that are not like you. The problem is you don't accept that somebody could be not like you, and still be a good American. Regards, TAR Overtone, You are, for instance, on general principle, FOR honesty and transparency and fair, realistic dealings. You applaud the regulators for stepping in a halting unfair dealings. How would you feel if the Fed had people that bought stock to keep the market from going down? Would that be a good thing, or a bad thing? Would that be for the people or against us? Would that be something you would support and defend, or something you would rail against? Parties aside, just on general principle, what would you think about that. It is of course hypothetical, but it is a theory that my broker and I had, watching the action of stocks and the size and timing of the purchases, that the Fed had a crash protection team. Regards, TAR

Overtone, Not enough to crash the Western financial world...except that it did. I will continue to not accept your take as factual. I think you are bias in your assessment, and that you don't accept that everybody involved in making loans that turned to junk are partially responsible. It was us that encouraged low income families to become home owners. We can not now say we did no such thing. Regards, TAR Overtone, As to the current state of the Republican party since the Tea Party took over, I would have to side with you. I think we need an intervention. But I am not with you in carrying blame to all Republicans for the last 40 years. Its just not realist, factual, possible or helpful to look at it that way. Regards, TAR

Thread, Earlier in the thread I speculated that the length of the edge of each diamond of the spherical rhombic dodecahedron, along the surface of the sphere, was either a radius long or 1/6 of a circumference long, I couldn't tell. I now don't think it is either. Using a great circle mapper / distance calculator (http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=0%B0N+90%B0E-35%B023%27N+45%B0E&MS=wls&DU=mi) I found that the three-points of the figure, when placed on the globe, would have equal length sides if they were at approximately 35 degrees 23 minutes north and south. The four points are on the equator 45 degrees East and West of a three-point's longitude. That way the distance from the three point to the pole is 3781 miles and the distance from the three-point to the point on the equator 45 degrees longitude away, was 3782 miles. My original thinking was that the three points would be at 45 degrees latitude, but the calculator using those locations says the distance from the three point to the pole would be 3117miles and the distance from the three point to the equator point would be 4140. So the 35 degree 23 minute positioning seems to be the correct positioning to make each side of each of the 12 diamonds, the same length. The circumference of the Earth is 24,901.55 around the equator and 24,859.82 through the poles. Using the equator figure a 1/6 of this would be 4150 miles. Not 3781 miles. The circumference of 24,901 divided by pi would give you the diameter of 7926. Half of this is 3963, which is also not 3781 miles. Interestingly 3963/3781 equals 1.048 and 1/3 pi is 1.047. So the length of the segment of the great circle that is coincident with the diamond's edge is .955 that of the radius of the sphere. Thus the dimensions of the spherical rhombic dodecahedron diamond, when place over the globe, are approximately 3781 miles per side, with the short diagonal at about 4889 miles (24901 minus 4 times 3781 leaving 9777, which divided by 2 is 4889) and the long diagonals at around 6225 (1/4 circumference of 24900.) Regards, TAR

SwansonT, I am not a financial whiz, but the price of a company's stock, affects the value of the company. If the value of the company goes down, the price of their stock follows. And if the price of the stock goes down, the value of the company is less. Consider the IPOs that have happened. The higher the price of the stock the more equity the company accrues. I know you said secondary market, but the price of the stock is a reflection on the earning power of the company. If a pension fund holds 1000 shares of Citibank and the price goes from 40 dollars to 4 dollars, because they had to write down billions of dollars of loan value, the pension funds just "lost" that value. Regards, TAR

Overtone, "The blame for a run on a bank caused by the discovery of massive embezzlement that has precipitated that bank's failure and loss of depositor's money" Citation needed. Regards, TAR Overtone, The derivative market in terms of dollars was larger than the mortgages the derivatives were based upon, but the mortgages at the base of the system were what failed, causing the derivatives to lessen in value. You say that Joe's mortgage was only 1% of the failure. That is like saying that removing the keystone had nothing to do with the arch falling, as it was only 1% of the weight of the arch. Regards, TAR Overtone, Many pension plans and other financial instruments owned by "the people" by their fiduciaries and plans, the retirement plans of university professors and steel workers alike, held some of the derivatives we are talking about. Everybody had to make good on their "bad investments", made bad by Joe's inability to keep his promise to pay. Regards, TAR Overtone, Few people are concerned with what is being burned in order for there to be electricity when they flick the switch. My point here, is that when coal is burned or natural gas is burned, or when Uranium heats up the steam that turns the turbines on the other end of the switch, the person that flicks the switch can not disavow any responsibility for the effect they are having on the environment. It is we who drive our cars that rely on the oil industry. The oil industry is not an enemy. It is part of us. Regards, TAR Back to my picture. A bear killed a hiker in Apshawa preserve, about 2 or 3 miles from the tree pictured. It was the first time in recorded history that a black bear killed a human in NJ. I was at first concerned that it was "my bear" that killed the hiker, as I did not see him after the event, and the guilty bear had been killed when it would not stop circling the partially eaten body when it was found. Fortunately my neighbor saw our bear two days later, so it was not "my bear", that did the deed. What the bear did in Apshawa preserve should not reflect on my bear. On the morning of the picture, my daughter had seen the "big bear" across the street in a yard with some fruit trees, and when my neighbor called to my daughter to be careful of the bear, she said "yeah I see him", and the neighbor said, "no, look up!" There were two bears within "striking distance" of my daughter that morning, as they can run 35 MPH. Some might prefer to kill all the bears. There was a bear hunt after the fatality to lower their population in the area, but most people in town consider it the bear's home, and we coexist with the bears. So we try to make noise, and be big, and not make eye contact, when they are in the area and feeling a little too comfortable around us. We are mostly Republican around here, but have voted in, along with the rest of New Jersey, a Highlands protection act. We cannot build except on existing footprints, and there are many things we do and don't do, to protect the ground water, as we drink from wells, and there are many reservoirs around here that serve more highly populated areas in Passaic and Essex county. We are the stewards of those watersheds, and pay our taxes to maintain services in Paterson, that we have nothing directly to do with. We sacrifice for, and think about our neighbors and our fellow New Jersey inhabitants. On the hornet's nest. My neighbor across the street is allergic to bees. I would like to get rid of it. Have sprayed it, after dark on several occasions with Wasp and Hornet spray, but it is still active. I am reluctant to continue to spray it, because the chemicals drip to the driveway and will eventually get into the ground and the ground water, and the reservoirs. I think about that stuff. My wife was about to use a chemical to get rid of a fungus on our Hemlocks, and we read the label and saw that the main ingredient might kill bees. We rely on the bees to pollinate our pear trees and tomatoes and my wifes flowers, so we returned the stuff and just washed the trees with some soap. But the bear has been in my back yard over the years to eat pears. He has broken my fence a number of times in a number of places. I could get rid of my trees, but I like them. I have some pearple (pear and apple sauce canned in the basement that I will gift and enjoy this winter) as we had a bumper crop of pears that I cleared from the trees, the day after a bear came over the new fence section, broke 5 big branches off the Starking, was treed in one of the hemlocks by my dogs, and generally caused a frightful episode. So, bees and bears are both "a problem" and part of my environment that I consider part of me. I would think, or like to think, that I am a loved member of the country, doing my part, respecting others, respecting the law, respecting the environment. In regards, to this thread, I would like to propose that 90 percent of us are the same way. We are good people, good judgement, good character, good hearts. And our biggest problem is we let the 10% that are not of good will make us think that the world is against us. I I would hope it is proper to instead assume that 90% are good, and together we should intervene between the 10% and their inappropriate actions and desires. A simple back of the envelope calculation would show however, that neither all Republicans, nor all Democrats can fit in the 10% of people of bad will. Therefore most Republicans and most Democrats are probably OK, and we should give them the benefit of the doubt, trust them, and protect them, and consider them fellow Americans. Regards, TAR

SwansonT, Understood. Regards, TAR Overtone, The "left" takes no blame for anything. This is unrealistic, as any one person holds opinions that are sometimes right and sometimes wrong and change all the time to fit with reality. You ranked the causes of the economic downturn according to your preference. What "snowballs" and what effects are reactions to other effects has to be taken into context in any situation. I was "there" as much as you were. I saw the problems as they developed. The inappropriate valuation of bad debt, on the part of financial institutions, that lumped various loans into packages that became worth less and less, as defaults increased, caused the value of collateral that backed up all sorts of investments, tied to home loans, to decrease in value. The banks had to "write down" their equity positions. Since one dollar of equity backed up 10 dollars in loans, the defaults ate up the backing and the thing snowballed to where people where concerned that the banks might not be able to make good on a request for withdrawal. The banks after all, hold our savings accounts and checking accounts and CDs, as liabilities. They owe us those funds. If they loan out our funds and the loans default, somebody is in trouble. In a interrelated financial situation where everybody relies on everybody else, a lack of trust, results in a run on the banks. The blame in a run on the banks belongs to everybody. The banks for closing their doors, and the people making the panic withdrawals, that reduce the equity of the bank even further. There were many packages of loans that included loans with high chance of default, or that had defaulted. Without payments coming in, those packages became junk. Even the good loans, packaged in with the bad, could not prevent the value of the whole package from plummeting to pennies on the dollar. The financial institutions had to write these loans down. Taking billions in losses lowered the value of their stocks, and people sold, reducing the equity of the banks even further. The people backing the people backing the loans took losses. The insurers of loans, took losses. The interconnected financial situation of the whole world took loses. The Federal reserve had to make up funds and shift their balance sheet around to back up everybody's bad loans. Started by Joe Smoe defaulting on his mortgage. This thread is about the biggest problem in America. I suggested it was lack of trust. I would like to add another. Lack of taking responsibility for ones own actions, and blaming someone else. Regards, TAR Its like taking a jet to a global warming convention. People have a tendency not to see where "we" are part of our own problems. Regards, TAR I have bears in my neighborhood. I had one in the tree in front of my house that scared the willies out of me when he hissed at me, me standing on my front steps in the early morning dawn, out to see why the dogs were barking. Is that a "problem"? No, I have bears in my neighborhood. One morning my daughter had this fellow, perched in my neighbor's beautiful ancient oak that overhangs my driveway, watching her get into her car. Notice the hornet's nest as well. Problems? Depends on your point of view.

SwansonT, Asserting things that aren't true is different than having a reason for holding an opinion. There are plenty of areas in human interactions, where trust and hope and love and other somewhat unweighable considerations are in play. For instance, I, as an atheist can watch an interfaith service and understand the real, truthful components of the ideas in play. I might know that "the Holy father" is not a true entity, but the collective will of a billion people, all referring to the same entity that I was brought up being taught was real and true, actually makes a "true" objective, real objective judge of me. The Pope today didn't talk so much about God, as he talked about all of us being part of the same creation. There is not a bit of that that is untrue. So my point is that if one person takes something literally and another takes it figuratively and another does it for pay and another does it for self actualization, and one frames it as creation, an another frames it as the universe an another frames it as being math, it is difficult to tell one they are making an untrue claim, because the other is making a "true" claim. For instance, I have followed the arguments about the cause of the bad loan recession. Some blame banks, some blame bad loan originators, some blame federal law seeking to make home ownership more accessible to all. None of those things are untrue. I was there. I watched it happen. We wanted people to have homes and we relaxed the requirements a little too much, and let people who could not maintain payments, take loans. WE did it. It is stupid in my estimation to try to prove it was "them" that did. Regards, TAR If the Pope talks about the aspirations of every human heart...that is why he is loved, and honored, listened to, and followed. Boehner's resignation was not unrelated to his talk with the Pope.

Well, for my part in this discussion, I would just say that the strong defense of the Democrats by the democrats and the Republicans by the republicans, is based on the desire that each of us has, to "be right", and to have made choices and affiliations in the past, that were wise, based on good judgment, and consistent with the survival and prosperity of our families, friends, neighbors and the associations of men and women that we care about, and believe in. Such a desire is evident by the partisan reactions to each other's comments, here. I would like to offer the middle ground, where certain of our decisions and affiliations are more consistent with our will, desires and hopes, than others. I don't think its a black and white world, but instead very complex, and ever changing. Forgiveness and reconciliation, from time to time, has its place. But sometimes it is hard. Right now, I have on the multifaith service being held underground at the retaining wall beneath the 9/11 memorial. The twin towers were taken down by fundamentalist Muslims in the name of God. Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Christian & Muslim clergy are now together saying something different. There is a common humanity that there is to appeal to. In regards, to the service, we are talking about the world. In regards, to this thread we are talking about America, but the lesson, the point, the idea of a multi-faith service is to reach across the isle, and find the common ground, where everybody wins and losers are not generated. It is difficult to be at the site of such a raw wound, and consider words like peace and forgiveness... The Pope is now talking. I will listen. Regards, TAR

Overtone, I think the danger is in putting a label on someone and then expecting they have to live up to the label. Once, years ago, I was in an elevator with about 12 to 15 people in NYC. I tried to guess, by dress and bearing and age and race, whether each was a Republican, or a Democrat. Never knew whether my guesses were correct or incorrect, but that is the point. You can't tell a person's affiliations, you have to ask. Somebody might go to church and not believe in god for instance. Or someone might have been stuck by a Republican Campaign pin when they were twelve and hated everything Republican, since. Couple years ago, when people were downgrading the angel believing right wing delusional crowd, and raising up the Pragmatic president, the pragmatic president crowd seemed to me to be a little surprised or taken aback, by a multifaith service the president held in Washington. I remember watching Biden at the service, and thought he looked a little uncomfortable. I always, from that, figured him as an atheist. Was surprised today to see him and Boehner behind the pope as the highest ranking Catholics in congress. Just can't tell, by looking at a person, about their beliefs, affiliations, hopes and dreams. But most importantly, one's judgement, intelligence and character is not either correlated to or caused by their political party or religion. Regards, TAR

Overtone, Good. Regards, TAR

couldn't it tell by the new room it was in, surrounded by the plasma generating equipment, and not the scanning equipment, that it was the clone? maybe we need to put the original to sleep before the procedure, and not revive the clone until we have moved him into the bed where the original was put to sleep...then I have a problem telling you where I am, if you have in addition placed the original me in a bed in the plasma suite then the original me would think he was the clone, and the clone would think he was the original me I still think I would be the one that thought I was the clone. Continuity wise.

Well wait. It is a real copy of me. Its memories are real, but yes, it would know it was a copy and not the original me. It has the memory of being hooked up on the scanner in preparation to be cloned. In terms of theory of mind, it knows there is another mind just like its own, in another body/brain/heart group. It is aware of the existence of the original TAR as a different consciousness. Therefore, the clone would not think it was TAR, it would think it was clone of TAR.

I am absolutely NOT separate from my body/brain/heart group. I am my body/brain/heart group. Strange, Not magic. The simple fact that I am here and the clone is there. Regards, TAR Although, there is some amazing thing that is involved in being alive. Some "spark of life" the requires all the pieces and parts are functioning and in the right complex arrangement to each other. I would not call it magic, as it is real and apparent in every living thing, but it is a "something" that requires mechanisms to achieve. It is a victory over the universe's tendency toward increased entropy, and the holding on to a pattern, and passing it on to you children, is quite an accomplishment, though a tiny, fleeting one, in a universe immense in size and duration. But the victory, the consciousness, the awareness of time and place, belongs to the entity aware of their existence. TAR has achieved this victory. The clone has achieved this victory. But there are now two victorious entities, each with their own identity and each with a different history, and different parents to whom they might be beholding.

Since the days of mass production of an item, there is a notion that form and function makes the thing and is the important part of the thing. The pattern, the form, the recipe is the thing, and imposing that, on the right material, will give the material, that identity. I am not sure that works with consciousness. I cannot be interchanged with another human, and have my wife not notice the difference. I cannot be made on an assembly line. Of course, that is the question being asked in the thread. Can I be made on the assembly line. I say not. I am not JUST a pattern. I am not just a recipe of chemicals. I am not just organs and neurons in a unique pattern, that can be copied and which will then be me. It will be like me, but it will be the clone, with its own consciousness, that is not magically connected to mine. Strange, I do not argue that A consciousness would not emerge in the exact clone. I argue it would not be me. I would still be conscious in the original body/brain/heart group, and this new one, though identical in every way (but position) would have its own consciousness that has about zero to do with my consciousness. My consciousness is over here. That consciousness is over there, to me. Regards, TAR so sure, A consciousness emerges from the collection of stuff, but it belongs to clone of TAR, not to TAR

Commander, | | | | | | Regards, TAR

Strange, But it is the product of the material. An emergent property that belongs to the collection of material, that is not a property of any of the components. I don't see where I ever suggested "the ghost in the machine". I have always tried to argue the opposite. The identity, that is TAR cannot move to the clone, exactly because it is NOT separate from the material that is currently the original TAR. If you can move TAR by reconstructing the pattern in a different lump of material, that is not TAR, that would indicate that TAR was a separate entity than the material. A program, a pattern, a movable entity, that had a separate existence from any particular material. I am arguing in this thread, that that is NOT the case. You can not magically move TAR into another vessel. I am the vessel I am currently "inhabiting". If my vessel dies, I die with it. Regards, TAR

Commander, I will try this. | | | | | | | | | | Regards, TAR

Commander, Sorry, I didn't notice the error. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Regards, TAR

Strange, How so? I am thinking you have to have the material you to have the immaterial you. Like a hurricane. It is made up of just water and air, heat and pressure. It's pattern is a particular one, happening at a particular place though. If tropical storm 37 turns into hurricane Tim and an identical pattern forms behind it, tropical storm 38, and the same winds and sheer, temperatures and pressures turn 38 into a hurricane, it does not become Tim. It becomes Ursula. Tim is hitting Cuba. Regards, TAR

Commander, Yes, I should be a little more nimble, and a bit more of a challenge. | | | | | | | | | | | | Regards, TAR

Overtone, This page sums it up pretty nicely. http://www.diffen.com/difference/Conservative_vs_Liberal Regards, TAR Overtone, I am thinking of a solution to the problem. Or at least a way to look at other people, and to look at yourself, from an undelusional perspective, in terms of your views, as opposed to "their" views. Stephen Pinker, a linguist pointed out in one of his books, the importance of first person, second person and third person, in the way we talk and how that effects the way we think and vice-a-versa. He suggests, that the same idea, when framed in the first person is viewed as good, when framed in the second person is viewed as neutral and when framed in the third person is viewed as bad. As in: I am exploring my sexuality. You are loose. She is a slut. Or: I am thin. You are skinny. He is emaciated. If one were to take any issue, challenge, idea, action, plan, or position and call it their own, frame it in the first person, use I and we and us, when talking about it and thinking about it, the thing can be seen in its best light. Using the second person, the you, relieves one of the responsibility or ownership of the thing and makes it somebody else's problem...wasn't me...I had nothing to do with it, you did it. Using the third person you take yourself completely out of it, and can ascribe all the evil in the world to it, or at least things you want to announce as out of your control and done in a manner you do not associate yourself with. To this, as long as somebody is a republican and you are a democrat, the whole trouble, the whole problem has been caused by "them", whereas you and your team, your "we", has done it right. And of course with the tables flipped, with someone associating with the republicans, the virtue and strength and capability and trustworthiness and all the "good" stuff accrues to you and all the bad stuff, the crime and drugs and broken marriages and poverty and cheating and whatever are assigned to "them" that are not "us". To this, I propose an exercise. Attempt to use the words we, and us, in a manner that ignores party lines. Regards, TAR Or in line with the Pope, think of this as "our" world, and each other as family members.

Commander, OK. You move first. Regards, TAR

Strange, Because there is no way for your consciousness to get to the arbitrarily new location. Like the hydrogen atom that was in my pinky. It has an identity of its own, that has nothing to do with the fact that another atom has the same arrangement of quarks, protons and neutrons and electrons, all spinning in the same way. The identity of a singular person belongs only to that person. If it was a legal issue, and a person made a clone of himself, could he have the clone serve his jail sentence. I don't think so. The clone did not commit the crime. He might remember doing it, but he would also know it wasn't actually him at the scene. That was the original TAR and the copy would have no responsibility to serve the sentence, as you would have no obligation to pay both me and my clone the 20 dollars you owe me. Regards, TAR

Strange, No, I am arguing that the pattern that is you, is unique, and NOT transferable. You are completely involved in the material AND the pattern, and neither, alone, is liable to do as you. The thought experiment, in other words, is not going to work, in its goal of recreating you. Regards, TAR I am thinking that "you" are the sum total of all your experiences, all that you have sensed and remembered in your life. Every place you have been, every person you have met, every event you have witnessed, and every thought and dream you have had. In addition, your pattern works, and works because it is a copy of what has already worked, what has "fit" with the world, as the world has evolved. All that "memory" is built into a person. The evolutionary history of the human specie, the geologic history of the Earth, the cosmic history of stars and planet that brought the solar system about, and forged the elements of which we are composed. The web of carbon based life, each part dependent on the others to set the stage, fix the carbon, and provide food for energy and cellular structure. It is all "part" of you. "You" is not something you can send by wire.