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.
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