padren

The hardliner republicans have been pushing the idea that the more liberal views that have been expressed over the last 8 years (and especially in the last 4) are part of a bewildered, vanishing minority rendered obsolete in the post 911 world. After trying to hypnotize the country with that mantra for years, it's not surprising some of the hypnotists got pulled in by the sound of their own voices. They got to the point of actually believing their spin, and they just haven't adjusted to the fact they no longer have the benefit of the doubt that people give whatever party that "knows what's going on" well enough to get elected.

I find the idea pretty interesting, but I am still pretty skeptical - as far as high speed, you have to plan for very smooth curves and grades, to offset g-force due to acceleration changes even at a constant forward velocity. In order to prevent "adverse surprise conditions" such as falling rocks and such, the infrastructure would have to be largely underground or impact a lot of the nearby terrain. As for failures, if an air vehicle can manage on 3 of 4 engines, if other systems such as com/nav/sensors etc can have redundant components, I don't think it would catastrophic failures would very often at all. I could be way off, but a blown tire seems far more risky in a densely packed automated road system. I am definitely interested in the idea, it just seems really hard to achieve. The degree of road maintenance would increase to quite a costly level I'd imagine. Are there any good links to conceptual projects of this nature?

I am curious what sort of technologies could automate roadways - it seems easier to automate a flying car system even with current technology (ie we are closer to that) than automate road vehicle highways. With cars densely packed, mechanical failure because a much larger concern, plus factors such as ice, animals, random people - how can an automated system accommodate that in a safe manner? It seems that it would be easier to deal with automating a system in the air, where hazards could be easily identified (birds, wind, ice, other vehicles) against the backdrop of open air, rather than on a road where a puddle hides a pothole the size of a bathtub.

Very good point, especially when you consider what the numbers would look like if the militants had the same weapons Israel has. I can't help but to feel a bit aggravated when I read Palestinian comments on how there is "no such thing as a precision strike" when the area is so densely populated, yet militants are firing unguided missiles at anything they can hit inside Israel - just a touch of a double standard. As far as the response being fair or not - I couldn't even begin to come to a conclusion without being a lot better informed, but the only thing I can say to give the Palestinian side any leeway is the question of how "united" they are in the attacks on Israel, and to raise the question of whether they are thus "fair targets" as a result. Like I said, I don't know enough to make that call, just that it is the only question I can see playing Devil's Advocate.

Even a from-helipad-launch would allow entrance into the current private copter market. From driveway would be harder of course, but it is something I am sure many wealthy people would like to have. It may find a market somewhere like Dubai before it does here though. With massive investment in infrastructure perhaps. It would take me a couple hours by bus to get down town from where I live, or it's a 20 minute drive. As sprawl keeps getting bigger, trying to connect any one place to any one other place gets harder. Mass transit is great for where it works, but the reason people get stuck in rush hour traffic is it's not a perfect fit for all situations. I would like to see improvements in mass transit, it just won't do away with highway congestion by itself.

Well it makes sense to me that it'll hit a luxury market if it becomes viable. Public safety of course is the most critical factor to address, but in an age of corporate jets and helicopters, it seems natural that it will come to pass. If it ever hits high consumer levels is another story. As far as solving a direct need - if it becomes viable for the upper middle class then I could see it having a very positive impact on city roadway congestion.

One thought too - engage in an activity that is made more difficult by smoking, such as high cardio exercise. A friend of mine used to smoke socially but not very often, when he started working out, he ended up quitting because every time he smoked his next work out was a lot more unpleasant - couldn't push himself as far and it took more effort. Swimming may be good for that too, since lung capacity is a factor. When you quit you want to be sure you quit cold turkey, without having another cig - but in the event after a few weeks that you actually do - if you are in a routine like exercise, you'll notice a real heavy negative impact right away... you'll miss the "high" of making those lapse or pushing yourself on the bike or making that extra mile marker on the jog, and it'll help you stick with it even after a momentary lapse.

We aren't just "highly intelligent" creatures, we are also highly emotional, highly creative, and highly self absorbed. The human animal primarily adapts through permutations in thinking, not genetics, which occurs at a much faster rate - which also creates entire branches of "fails" that seem to occur within our lifetime. Combine that with the social aspect in which "group think" can be taken to ridiculous levels through communal reinforcement what we end up seeing is just like genetic mutation, but much faster and not without it's "failures to improve survivability/procreation" in spectacular form. Combine that with what Phi is saying - essentially, if it's happening, and it's weird, Jerry Springer will find it and bring it to your living room... it's easy to get a skewed perspective on it all. But all this permutation is not without merit - and may be helpful in modern life. Some guy with a mundane job and very little passion for life may be very unlikely to gather up the energy to go out and meet someone and raise a family - if it wasn't for that burning foot fetish he has.

(I really wish FF let you save textareas in the event of back button mishap) A few things about the Moller 400: 1) It's supposed to be fully "fly by autoNav" of some sort, though I'd expect you'd need manual control too. 2) It should be fully fly by wire, so the computer actually interprets your input request, then executes what needs to be done to do it, and no input (remain stationary) actually results in the computer keeping you stationary. 3) The mileage is supposed to be about 20 miles to the gallon on regular gasoline. I don't know if this is "their target" and pure fantasy or the actual results of their engineering. 4) It is supposed to be able to make a full controlled landing on three of four engines, for safety. It's also worth noting, that we have far too many people die every year due to poor road conditions, and the proximity of head on traffic. Flying cars could be safer than road cars. The biggest problem I see that is not technological/economical is social - if you can just "pop up and over" at 400 miles an hour in a border city, how can you track that? Smuggling would become far easier. Also, you'd pretty much need a "starwars defense system" for the White house, and other structures, as "roadblocks" would be nearly useless. Drive-by shootings could start looking like something out of a peanuts cartoon.

If you are referring to what I said about "pot is not available, so someone tries meth" I think it depends on the area. Where I lived, most people that would sell pot wouldn't point someone to a meth dealer for any amount of money in the world. One fellow had to skip town after people figured out he was selling people pot laced with meth (without their knowledge) to get people hooked on it - a lot of people were out for his blood. I am sure people become more comfortable and experienced tracking things down though, once they learn how to find pot, they can find almost anything if it's available. But I suspect in other areas it is more common for someone to sell both pot and meth, and generally care less about the welfare of the individual - but those are cities where pot is less likely to dry up in the first place. I can't really speak to it other than the experience I had where I lived. For the record I actually don't smoke myself, I just know a lot of people that do.

I'll take it a degree further - regardless of the double standard factor (alcohol is legal, pot is not) I just can't get past the part where no one knows the "right way to live" for someone else. If someone goes to the state for help I would say - sure, give them an idea of how to help their life out, based on whatever principles the society has to go on. But short of that, why should someone tell me how to live my own life? I only get to live once, and I sure as heck don't want to be forced into spending it in it's entirety as part of a state experiment on how people should live. I am happy to make all the wrong decisions if I get to make them - and I can live with that. Do we need skydiving, or extreme sports, or a million other things people choose to do that could "reduce the sum productivity" of the nation? I understand the need to regulate things that directly impact the well being of others, but the preemptive thing really bothers me. Throw into it that we are a diverse people - and you really get a mess when you try to create welfare through social conformity. We allow natives on reservations to use peyote because it's use is part of their heritage, yet the rest of us are just mutts without a heritage, so we are now forced to conform to whatever theory abides the most generalized and politically fueled social norms of our day? For me, that's a mentality I just cannot accept.

A few other thoughts on the legalization of marijuana: 1) In the last town I lived, I honestly believe the fact that marijuana was illegal lead to an increase in use of drugs like meth: The reason is, the schools teach kids how evil "illegal drugs are" and that is everything from pot to meth. If they try pot and find it doesn't impact their life very much, they suddenly become suspect of all drug education - if they can handle pot and it's as bad as all the others, why should any other drug be different? Second, many start by smoking pot, which then dries intermittently as the police crack down, because pot has to be brought in from other areas. Meth, can be produced locally and never dries up, which means it's constantly available. So, someone tries meth because what they are used to is not available, and next thing you know they are in the grips of a seriously harsh drug. 2) Why are we so concerned as a society about controlling how other people live? How many great artists and poets that we love to celebrate as a society were heavily self medicated? Who has the final say on "the right way to live" when we are all just winging it the whole time? 3) I do support the idea that if someone goes on welfare, they should be assessed for "dysfunctional self medication" after a month of so - essentially, anybody can choose the sort of life they want to live, but if it starts to cost society, I think it is fair to intervene, if it's done carefully. What I disagree with is preemptive intervention. The truth is too, if you get under the surface just a little, there are a lot of things that a lot of people don't want to tolerate. There are a lot of Christians that believe only through Christianity can people be truly moral - but due to our culture they can't just "clamp down" on those who aren't... but that doesn't mean those fundamentalists wouldn't like to. There are "fundamental atheists" that have similar views about religion. It just feels to me like either we have a society where we respect the right of others to choose their own path whether it is to their own destruction or to some epic win that benefits us all... or we don't, and the only mitigating factor is the strength of competing forces to "conform" society into their ideal (and completely untested) mold.

Well, clearly if this had happened in New Zealand the courts would already be in it (if this is any precedent) http://www.stuff.co.nz/4628719a10.html

The mandatory...

I do think Bush intentionally misled us about the specific details cited as evidence, and I don't think it bothered him to do it because he was so certain he'd be able to say "okay, we didn't find the yellow cake...but had we not moved in we wouldn't have found all of these smoking guns" and he expected to be vindicated either way. Granted that is my opinion based on my observations of what all went down and on how I think he thinks - not a body of evidence. Of course, a friend of mine had some evidence following a trip he took to Africa, but I was warned repeatedly not to use it in my post as it was shaky at best.

The first post that raises the dead thread does seem to be - but for forum regulars, what is annoying is when you see a thread in the #2 spot in "General Discussion" or something, and go in and read it, only to realize you're reading stuff from years ago. It's probably not too bad for people who have been avid users for quite a few years, but I guess in my experience since I miss a lot when I get busy it's easy to read a very old thread and not realize for a while it's one raised from the dead. I guess when you go to reply, a nice little red text warning that "it is a long since dead thread...so make sure you have a fair reason to post" before you start typing could help with the newcomers.

I didn't find anything on the forums via search, so I'll post it - it's worth checking out for sure: http://www.emotiv.com/ The "demo" videos are pretty interesting - it basically reads brainwave patterns to identify facial expressions, emotions, and even more complex things like detecting hand motion via the sensors over the user's head. They say they'll sell units for about $300 each, which is pretty cheap considering the technology. I wonder what Moore's law can do with this over the next few years. What are all your thoughts?

...I am tempted to find a way to blow up the universe before then, just to show up those snobby Mayans. That'll shows em...

I think the biggest problem with necroed threads, is you don't realize it at first (it's easy to miss) and you start reading the posts through and start thinking "I thought this was discredited ages ago...." or whatnot... only to realize you are reading 3 yr old posts and only the last one was from yesterday. At least that's why they bother me - and you also see people reply to posts where the original poster has long since moved on, or no longer needs advice about "the prom" or whatever. A very simple edit that could reduce that issue (if that's what bothers others too) would be a mod that checks if the "post date" is over (n) months old, and if so, set the date's color to red. It would be non-intrusive, easy to spot, and hopefully cut down on errant posting when a user misses the older posts' ages.

And of course, our representatives will see large amounts of that exact money coming into their own campaigns through the industry's lobbyists, so why wouldn't they buy it hook, line and sinker? I am beside myself to understand how this can happen and everything just rolls along as normal. The sheer scale of abuse of the public trust is astounding. It erodes the deepest foundation of our society's stability - faith in law. Now that we are being legally screwed over to such a degree it makes you wonder why you should even bother with this "legal" system in the first place - why not cheat on your taxes? They screwed you first after all. If a CEO can line his pockets with your money because of a legal loop hole, why can you loot his house to get some of it back? Because a law says you have to bend over for him, and you should just accept that? To be clear - I am not advocating tax fraud, anarchy, or burglary... I am saying such abuses of public trust erode the social fabric that keeps these mentalities in check. That damage angers me just as much as the money.

I'd say it's more like sacrificing our way of life to safeguard our way of life. (Torture, patriot act, wiretaps etc)

That really does sound like sleep paralysis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_paralysis As for the ears popping and heart racing, that could have been from fear, as apparently the experience can cause very strong emotional responses. When I get that, it can be really hard and take a lot of focus to move, and if I settle at all again, it can come back very fast and be hard to shake off again. I usually roll onto my side as soon as I can, and it lessens the "crushing" sensation. It usually happens to me as I fall asleep, or wake up in the night, my mornings are so messed up sleep/dream wise I can't recall if it happens then at all.

Well, personally while I support gay marriage, the "animals do it too" argument doesn't hold too much weight for me, as they do just about everything we have laws against too. I could help but to post this article though when I read it, about the gay penguins that turn out to be good parents: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1094977/Gay-penguins-expelled-zoo-colony-stealing-eggs-given-look-following-animal-rights-protest.html

Sorry Severian, an alternate of me in another Universe bought this Universe weeks ago! If it's any consolation, I was supposed to in turn buy his Universe from here as well, but your alternate there beat me to it. Deed collisions are mathematically highly probable. Since this site probably exists in a great many parallel universes, and each one sells say, 100 parallel universes, double-deeding is bound to occur. Maybe we could sell coins that (albeit in an alternate universe) always land on heads.

What about the Moon landing? A lot of science went into making it possible, and it resulted in a lot of data that could be studied scientifically, but was it technically "science" itself? I guess science makes new forms of exploration possible, and gives us an indication as to good directions to explore, and the exploration itself results in data that can be scientifically analyzed to advance science. I get what you are saying about hypothesis driven science, but I think if the hypothesis is as simple as "we should find out a bunch of stuff we didn't know before by doing this" and makes a sound case then it is worth consideration for scientific funding. As long as the reasoning for the expectation of fruitful exploration is scientifically sound, I think it could fall into that camp.