Yoseph

Yes! That was what I was trying to get at. The main question I guess is whether it's nature or nurture that gives us the ability to see ourselves in this way, if there is a line that seperates people who can do this and people who can't, or whether it's an illusion that gets stronger the more you understand about the human mind and the way it operates.

In a sober state I'm inclined to agree with you now. Although is it not more than just the content of people's beliefs, more like I way of thinking, a way of processing information. I do understand how the topic sounded self-important or arrogant but do you not think that there's a next level above just being self aware?

Me and my friend were talking about how we think their is a minority in the human population who have not only consciousness, but a perception of consciousness; the ability to analyse their consciousness from an external perspective. They see the fascade humans have put up for themselves from a sociological point of view; as a meaningless structure we've set up to distract from the animals that we really are.

I was thinking the other day about this, specifically what makes someone insane rather than just habitually weird. Take for example a man who dresses up in a scary clown suit and sits in a park perhaps, from his perspective he is attention seeking and is amused by the way people react to seeing him, to anyone else he seems to be insane. That is just the first example I can think of, but I see lots of strange looking/acting people who have weird habits (and I imagine philosphies), but where is the line between someone who's a "weirdo" and someone who is insane? When does your view of the world become so different from everyone elses that you should be labelled insane? Why is your perspective considered insane when it is just a culmination of all your past experiences, why the perspective "wrong"?

All animals experience population spikes, and humans are no different. I think that something should be done about the population rises before nature does something for us. Although I don't know if limiting children allowed in developed countries is the way, and I don't know if we can tell anyone in undeveloped countries not to have kids. The only ways I can think of to solve the problem are inhumane, but one day we're going to have to be ruthless to survive.

Alcohol is used to numb people to the empty and meaningless lives they live, something that someone in an unfulfilling job can work for and look forward to at the end of the week. I would say that it used to control people and make them work, but really we use it on ourselves because we are weak and it blocks our life pains.

Hey man, being like you I have also experienced this problem but in the web design industry. I've already been deploying the "cocoon" method as it were by secretly adding all projects I do to a portfolio site, which when released will hopefully get me independant business where I don't have to rely on my boss. This will mean I get 3 times the money, as he takes 2 thirds just for having a reputable company which can get customers. I would reiterate what Marat said, take as much as you can (knowledge wise) from those around you and look like someone who wants to learn rather than someone who wants to teach, after saving up some money, invest it in your own company and break away. Good luck

How old are you chaseman? When you talk about how you were before the coma it reminds me of me before the age of 14/15. I too was extremely interested and keen in science, and knowledge in general, but like you said, I too have lost my spark as it were. I believe it's just part of growing up, just like a young puppy jumps around and is easily excited, and a dog not as much so. It depresses me slightly that I'm not energetic anymore, but I too have found that I'm better at different things. Personally I have become much more interested in art and music, going from someone who wanted to be a chemist to a software developer now to a music artist. This is biased advice but maybe try learning an instrument, if you now have the patience you might find it very rewarding with enough practice, in the same way knowledge was once rewarding before.

Hi guys, I'm about to make a "life changing decision" and I wanted some advice from an outside perspective of people who aren't my family or friends. I've always been someone who is very indecisive about what they want to do in life, possibly because I take naturally to most things. I get interested in something easily, but get bored of it quite quickly. I've been doing website development for 5 years, but less and less until this year when I got a job doing it to make some money. I applied to do computer science at uni because I saw it as a broad field which I couldn't easily tire of as it has many different branches. I also chose it as it has good job prospects, and could potentially make me rich... After travelling in the East my perspective has changed, I have been playing guitar for a long time, but really just got into the jamming with other people, experimenting and playing different instruments. This was great as I was able to socialize with some people similar to me, as I find computer people on the whole boring and "nerdy" and don't share many interests with them. I've also been making some music on my laptop, singing, trying to learn keyboard etc. And this has really started to be my drive recently, and seems much more fun than computer science, which I was interested in mainly for it's creative side. I also feel that by knowing about networks, databases, hardware and a lot of the other modules that I don't care about on my course, will just make me more suited to a job that involves them, and I really don't want that, however good the pay is. Without going into too much more reasoning for both sides, as it really comes down to one thing (job prospects), should I change my course to Music Tech before I start in September? The only thing that's holding me back is that there are a lot of other musicians, producers and artists, and unless I really hit it hard and come up with some music that everyone likes and get popular, I could end up in a bad job? Or could I? Do you know anyone who did Music Tech and has a good job and isn't famous? Is it a risk to change considering my tendancy to get bored of something easily? Essentially... Do I follow my heart, risk it and do music, or do I follow my head, settle down in a job that I don't want which pays well? Maybe there are jobs in IT that I'd like, but they'd be creative ones, like a game designer (who bosses round programmers rather than is one), and maybe computer science wouldn't actually help me get there? Having a good job would allow me to have the money to buy music equipment is one thing to consider... Ah I just can't make my mind up, someone help?

So I don't have to start a new topic, could someone explain to me something I was wondering while travelling in the east... Surely making a loud noise takes a lot of energy, how do insects have enough energy to create such loud noises for such long periods of time? They don't eat much, and they're very small...

The problem I see lies in the units... Let's say the unit for time is seconds and the unit for space is in meters... How can "Everything" be defined in Meter Seconds? You need to define your "Everything" better. Is there a use for this equation your suggesting?

I used to like the idea of looking into a mirror is actually looking into another universe. However I just thought of one problem with that idea, and that is... What is the limit to this? Is every reflective surface another universe? When does the reflectivity become so little that it is no longer another universe? If the reflective surface is curved is the corresponding universe curved? If you make a ripple in a flat water surface, did you just create a new universe(s)? Is there another universe in the surface of the beer can next to me? etc. As for your diagram, I think you would see room D, just how your diagram depicts. It's hard to talk about what room you'd be seeing as they're all actually the same room. Why don't you set two mirrors up and test it?

Maybe I misunderstood the idea, but isn't it less cpu hungry to use light calculations rather than recreating the whole scene "backwards" in mirrors? Doing so would also make it easier to use multiple mirrors?

Maybe try a different topic, there isn't much logic when talking about god...

Really like your videos man, I'll suscribe 1. You're asking in the wrong place. 2. You shouldn't have explained your idea as it's quite original and people might steal it! If I were you I would go to a proper computer forum and ask the question without talkin about youtube etc. I'd also delete this thread. Well I depends on how much you care about people copying you but I think your video is much more interesting to watch than the UKFDubstep logo

If the copper is deposited evenly you can just do (width after electrolysis - width before electrolysis) / 2? "Width" being the width of the cross section of the cathode... Or am I missing something? If it's not distributed evenly then I think it might be better to weigh the cathode before and after the electrolysis and compare the weights. By doing that you could even guess how many atoms of copper were deposited as we know the atomic mass of copper and aluminium from the periodic table. You would need to use fairly pure water though.

I have no clue as to what you're having to write about, but I think he just wants you to change the structure of the essay. If we take the topic "the happiness of dogs", your essay would be 3 sections in which you discuss: - what makes dogs happy - what makes dogs unhappy - how to give a dog balanced lifestyle to make it happy Whereas I think he wants you to take a specific investigation / "motivation" such as "The dogs in India" where you take a specific dog after a brief introduction about dogs and their lifestyle in india. You would then talk about how this specific dog has been treated, why this dog is unhappy, how to make this dog happier, why this method is better than other methods for this specific dog. I know this a very different topic, but I hope you understand what I'm getting at. Take a specific case of Constraint Processing in Automated Planning, or take an example where CPiAP is needed, talk about why it's needed, how it would work etc. if you take a case local to you, you can do an investigation, write up the results, questionaires, etc. I hope this applies for your topic, as I have no idea what CPiAP is

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the bacteria computers would be for specific purposes, and not used for their speed. I don't think it will be something useful for the public, merely for solving complicated algorithms quickly in puzzels such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancake_sorting. It would be nice to see bacteria PCs which would be ecofriendly on the electrical side of things but would still need to be fed energy(sugar?), warmth, (and water?). But I'm not sure it will be practical, or necessary.

It looks quite hardwarey your course, but that doesn't mean it can't help you with programming. C++ especially allows you to be very efficient with your programming, and by understanding how hardware works allows you to program faster, more efficient, more robust code. I'm about to start Computer Science at uni, and I'm hoping my course is quite flexible as I'm more interested in programming as you are.

Downing a pint of water before bed works for me, if I'm really drunk sometimes it just makes me throw up, but at least the water diffuses your stomach acid, and the alcahol which was in your stomach can't make you more drunk while you're sleeping. I heard that the diced carrots are actually part of your intestines which aren't fond of alcahol and have broken off :S

If that is the purpose of humans, I don't see it being fulfilled. The freedom belongs to the rich which use the poor to fund this freedom. I think that the more people living in this corrupt system in place, the more power the people at the top will have and the more corruption will occur. Humans are capable of a lot, but there are reasons why we don't see some of this breakthrough technology, and it's not because it doesn't work or wouldn't benefit people. Take ideas like everlasting lightbulbs, technologys like these would mean that poor people had less things to waste their money on to fund the rich people. I don't think it's our intelligence that is limiting our technological developments, just the corruption in the system. I agree that allowing diseases to kill people shouldn't be a cure for global hunger, I just don't see our new technologys coming into place in time. The population is growing very fast, and movements in science and technology are relatively slow.

The question is, will all these new things we are inventing to help people individually help the world as a whole? What happens when we have robots which can do everything faster and more efficiently than humans without stopping. I personally see a very dark future ahead, what happens when we find cures/vaccines for HIV, Malaria and Cancer? The world will be completely full of hungry humans who have no use or purpose...

There a lot of things we can predict about "tomorrow" by using simple laws like Moore's law (http://en.wikipedia....i/Moore%27s_law). Using these ideas we can guess how powerful our computers will be and what they will be capable of simulating. You can use population laws and economic laws to predict whether we'll be able to afford things like robots in every house, or contrastly, food to eat. Anyway there are a lot of different opinions and perspectives and predictions and really, everyone has there own idea of what the future will be like and none of them can be proven right or wrong. There could even be things that we don't anticipate (meeting aliens, wireless electricity, antigravity) which could distort the picture a lot. So really we know quite a lot and yet nothing at all. The actual subject is called futurology, you can read a lot about it here: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Futurology and all over the web. There are even some magazines purely based on the subject which you should check out: Scientific American, New Scientist, Popular Science, and probably many more. Hope this helps you in some way

Indeed, but more defined and symetrical