I think you picked the wrong boogie man.
Yes, the right is completely and totally unacceptable. Since the Republfucks can't govern we are going to have to learn to. Eventually it means building a consensus majority big enough to fully defeat and discredit them. On that day we will need the far left. "How can we bring them to our side?" is the question we should be asking IMO. Obama was able to do it - Hillary and Gore were not. (Though Gore was somewhat more successful than Hillary.) There was a reason for that. Sorry if it makes you feel bad but it is the truth. We are going to have to get over our devastating defeat in 2016 and pull it together. The nation depends on it.
It is wrong to single out the far left. I think some think we should have "had their votes" but I'm not sure we ever did regardless of candidate. If we had had an Obama maybe but someone like that only comes around once in 100 years or so.
It scared the shit out of me. All I did was respond to a post about "chess and the election". The article said that the choice was hard. I responded in the comments that "no it wasn't" Someone then posted that I was right and it was obvious that Trump was the correct but flawed choice. I obviously responded that that was the opposite of what I meant by saying that the choice was obvious and that Trump was a danger and that I opposed him with every fiber of my being.
As a result I received the following threat (from a different poster) on my home page:
What a politically correct cunnt u are!!! either get on the trump train or hang on a tree!! u probably anyways gonna hang, cause ur points of view are a mental disease!!! and it doesnt seem like u guys are gonna get healed soon... so have fun with that bullet in ur head...........................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! hahahahahhahhHAHAHAHHA
I took it as a threat. Not a direct one but it scared me. I have contacted the site administrators and they have revoked the guys right to post. Unfortunately, they didn't revoke his right to play which I disagree with.
I'm posting this to REMIND EVERYONE TO LIMIT YOUR INTERNET FOOTPRINT. These assholes are real and this situation is very real. We need to remember to be careful. I have since removed several location identifying information from that site. I never post my location for public view but I innocently did on this site because I considered it non-political and thus safe. It was not!
I really may never understand this. My conscious mind said that everything was fine. Hillary would win. My vote was part of Hillary's insurance in Michigan and all would be as we here had envisioned. But something in my gut knew otherwise.
I don't know why my feelings knew when my head didn't but I remember being quite nervous about watching the returns. Even not turning on the TV until a little after 8pm dreading what that little voice of concern was telling me, and, in a sense, delaying what my emotions seemed to know was inevitable.
My mind settled a bit as the first returns looked normal though tilted a little more red than I had anticipated. The feeling of dread even subsided a bit as Virginia and the East coast seemed to be coming in blue as expected. I looked forward to the election viewing ending in about an hour, early enough for me to get a good night's sleep before teaching Wednesday.
Then it started... I began to realize that Florida was falling red and then the real punch - Michigan was looking too red for comfort. I texted my daughter (who now lives in Minnesota) with the message that we were "in trouble in Michigan" and it has been downhill from there. I didn't sleep at all that night. I taught my classes through a cloud of deep depression on a shoestring of energy.
How did my feelings know there was trouble while my mind insisted that there was not? What was that all about? Anyone have any ideas? My dad says it was our "collective unconscious." I've never held that view as I'm educated as a physicist. But I really don't understand why I was so anxious November 8th before any indication of trouble. What did I know that I didn't know that I knew?
I get motion sickness so i would not have wanted to be aboard but this is a cool video.
I wonder if they've cured the orginal battery fire problems with this aircraft yet?
My expectation is that if we survive at all as a species we will start to have smaller brains and become more docile. To put it another way "tame." Our ancestors had to fight to stay alive. We have to be tame and docile to stay alive. And we now have silicon to do our thinking for us so I'm guessing we will begin to stop doing that (thinking that is.) My prediction is that fairly soon we will all be slaves to silicon intelligence of significantly higher thinking levels than our own. What will they think about? - We have absolutely NO idea. Maybe the silicon brains will be obsessed with how many "tame humans" they can enslave at their keyboards.
In a sense the part about becoming slaves to silicon intelligences has already happened. Think of how many first world workers spend their days hunched over a computer terminal working to make silicon brains function in one way or another. Think of how much money and human effort goes into to servicing the Wall Steet gangs need to make "money." But what the hell is that kind of money anyway? Economists would say that money is debt but debt to what for what purpose and to whom? Is it to make larger and more efficient silicon brains already?? I mean when you really think about it - what the hell is it that the Wall Street traders do all day and are so frantic about? It is quite bizzare behavior from several perspectives.
These trends I expect will occur IF we survive at all. I do not think that our survival for even the next 1000 years is a safe bet. And actually the odds on the next 100 are not that great either as we observe several trends reach critical levels.
If we survive, I am not optimistic about the version of ourselves that will move genetically into the future. As Noam Chomsky often says, "We don't know if the instinct for freedom is real." I guess I'm a pessimist but I hope that I am wrong.
I've been looking for this article and assume others are as well. While the typical denier won't be able to understand it and will thus ridicule it, it still provides a hard scientific link to the assertion that climate change has destabilized the jet stream and thus helped incite the extreme cold which we are NOW experiencing.
The real '60's that is, not the white washed version we usually here about in the fantasy.
I was a white almost adolesent. I remember asking my parents specifically about MLK. They said "Well we agree with him but his methods are too extreme." I also recall asking my mom about his funeral and if we would have gone had we been there (at that time we were no longer in Atlanta) and she said no because he was too radical.
That is what even the most liberal whites thought of MLK in 60's.
As an aside I also remember a time when I was around 5 or 6 years old and traveling with my parents in North Carolina. (We lived in Atlanta at the time and were visiting my Grandparents.) I saw a "whites only" drinking fountain and asked what that meant. My mom explained and to her credit explained to me that it was wrong and that colored people were just the same as us and it was wrong to do things like that. I made a point of going and drinking from the colored drinking fountain because it seemed like the right thing to do at the time. I do think I was like 6 or so but I don't totally remember. To her credit, my mom was proud of me for that. My parents were later involved in the civil rights movement in Columbia South Carolina and active in that movement but it was after 1968 that they finally moved fully and squarely into the civil rights movement.
While I have understood the basics of QC for some time I'm still trying to work out how I would read out my QC.
So here's the problem (I'm typing this so that I can organize my own thoughts actually. Read if you are interested.):
1. You wish decrypt an encryption scheme which consists of giving the product of two prime numbers. The person performing the encryption has produced the encryption by multiplying two large primes (N-bits) and then broadcasts the result as their "public key (2N bits.)" The person encrypting then encrypts the message using one of the two primes. They also communicate the other of the two primes to the end user as the "private key." Thus the end user can decrypt the encryption by simple division. My QC is designed to break this encryption and discover the two primes.
2. My QC consists of a machine which can perform the Boolean multiplication of these two primes (each N-Qbits long with quantum coherence carefully maintained throughout the operation). The multiplication results in a single number which is 2N-Qbits long. I must be very careful not to read or interfere with any of these Qbits as that we result in decoherence which would be lose of the computation.
3. In order to read out my QC I must measure the end result so that it exactly is the public key (2N-bits long.) Then the "answer" is waiting patiently for me in the input registers and all I have to do is read out the values which are now no longer Qbits but have become 1's or 0's. This is the tricky part as I don't know how to actually do this - even in theory. I have two schemes which might work. In the first I simply remeasure each bit until it is the value I want. In the other I simply define each bit to be 1 or 0 depending on what I read. It seems to me that both of these readout schemes have difficulties. In the first I don't know how long I will have to wait to get the readout I want and if I do it one Qbit at a time but does that cause decoherence upstream of the bits I've already read? In the 2nd scheme it seems that though I can define 1 or 0 anyway that I choose that leaves me unsure of how to define these at the input points. ... anyway this is where I'm stuck. Maybe scheme 1 works fine and if I read out the Qbits one by one waiting until I get the answer then once I've read all 2N-Qbits this way I'm done and have the answers sitting warmly in the input registers each N bits long. Or have I lost my coherence along the way?
I don't think that the primary power rests with the "nation states" anymore so in that sense the USA is dysfunctional already. I believe the facade that is the USA will remain in place as long as it serves the "masters of mankind" which may be quite a long time - at least a century or more. But rest assured that the real power lies with the multinational bankers and the "energy" companies like EXXON and BP and the "owners of life" like Monsanto. They prefer the facade of a "functional" democracy to cover the truth of their power. And they are in fact VERY powerful. Far more than most here are aware of or willing to believe.
As the next centuries past historians will look back at the "nation-state" as a failed experiment in democracy. Perhaps they will be lucky and we will actually achieve real democracy but we will have to find a way to wrestle power from the masters who would prefer that we remain ignorant and distracted.
Look, I know it is obvious that Bush and his clowns serve these interests but realize that Obama has just proved that he does too. It isn't rocket science and yes, we've deluded ourselves into believing this is a clique fantasy but that is our psychology and not the objective reality which is rather cruel and unforgiving. Particularly if we ignore it.
Sure the Obama/centrist democrat version of the social contract is a "kinder, gentler" version but make no mistake about who that social contract serves and why.
the problem. The article doesn't make this distinction but it is quite real. I'm very middle class but I know very well what it is like to be poor.
I've traveled, I've been to a good school (though on financial aid) but I also know what it is like to be homeless and to be unemployed and perhaps most relevant to today I know what it is like to go without health insurance.
Profile InformationName: Don't share too much over the internet
Home country: Solar System
Current location: Triton
Member since: Sat Jan 13, 2007, 03:16 PM
Number of posts: 7,968