Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2006 August
2006 May
2006 April
2006 March
2006 February
2006 January
2005 December
2005 November
2005 October
2005 September
2005 July
2005 June
2005 May
2005 April
2005 March
2005 February
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January
My Links
BioInformatics
Artificial Intelligence
3D DNA
Satlites
NASA Satelite
Science News
Computer news
all over the place computer news
Planetary Protection
Alien organisms Protocol
Einstein Gravity Probe
science projects
Phrack
News that matters (believe it)
CDC l33t
Revolutionary learning software for kids :) (From one of the fathers of modern day computers) :)
Classical Conditioning
cool ska music
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
|
| hmm, Sudanese thoughts |
| 05.31.05 (9:38 pm) [edit] |
My thoughts about Sudan is, "why should I be thinking about Sudan?" Can't really answer that so let's send those guys over at the wacky (aka: "We get ambushed all the time") UN to go help. Um, no? We shouldn't? Why not? Oh, they're still bickering about who ordered the turkey sandwhich and didn't add any mayo? Geez, once they figure out that and oh yeah, the fiasqo involving who left the toilet seat up. Geez, that was a major crisis.
That's all I can really think about really. It seems important for some reason; however, um, feed the needy? I mean, embedded journalist being charged with reporting. Answering questions with a question? Denials which for the life of me I really don't think anyone believes. Oh well, I guess it's just one of those things ... but I'm really undecisive what action to take. It's a sovereign country with a full right to commit genocide, right? We call it genocide, where it's probaly just ethnic clensing? And speaking on this I feel that maybe I'm just bored and just trying to earn more tblog points. :) Or, is it a country raveged by war and some how some lucrative contracts can come out of this. I still can't figure out who are the good guys in Sudan and who are the bad guys...
Have a good day :) ... I think.
:)
|
|
|
| |
| consent |
| 05.30.05 (4:04 pm) [edit] |
con·sent Audio pronunciation of "consent" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kn-snt)
intr.v. con·sent·ed, con·sent·ing, con·sents
1. To give assent, as to the proposal of another; agree. See Synonyms at assent.
2. Archaic. To be of the same mind or opinion.
n.
1. Acceptance or approval of what is planned or done by another; acquiescence. See Synonyms at permission.
2. Agreement as to opinion or a course of action: She was chosen by common consent to speak for the group.
|
|
|
| |
| definition control |
| 05.30.05 (4:03 pm) [edit] |
con·trol Audio pronunciation of "control" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kn-trl)
tr.v. con·trolled, con·trol·ling, con·trols
1. To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over; direct. See Synonyms at conduct.
2. To adjust to a requirement; regulate: controlled trading on the stock market; controls the flow of water.
3. To hold in restraint; check: struggled to control my temper.
4. To reduce or prevent the spread of: control insects; controlled the fire by dousing it with water.
5.
1. To verify or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or by comparing with another standard.
2. To verify (an account, for example) by using a duplicate register for comparison.
n.
1. Authority or ability to manage or direct: lost control of the skidding car; the leaders in control of the country.
2.
1. One that controls; a controlling agent, device, or organization.
2. An instrument or set of instruments used to operate, regulate, or guide a machine or vehicle. Often used in the plural.
3. A restraining device, measure, or limit; a curb: a control on prices; price controls.
4.
1. A standard of comparison for checking or verifying the results of an experiment.
2. An individual or group used as a standard of comparison in a control experiment.
5. An intelligence agent who supervises or instructs another agent.
6. A spirit presumed to speak or act through a medium.
|
|
|
| |
| freedom definition |
| 05.29.05 (8:53 am) [edit] |
I know there are a lot of laws to ensure people have freedom, but I want countries to keep their systems in place, no matter how people on the "outside" may view it. I have this moto: "if it doesn't effect the US, leave it alone and let them deal with it.
6 entries found for freedom.
free·dom Audio pronunciation of "freedom" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (frdm)
n.
1. The condition of being free of restraints.
2. Liberty of the person from slavery: (The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household.), detention, or oppression.
3.
1. Political independence.
2. Exemption from the arbitrary exercise of authority in the performance of a specific action; civil liberty: freedom of assembly.
4. Exemption from an unpleasant or onerous condition: freedom from want.
5. The capacity to exercise choice; free will: We have the freedom to do as we please all afternoon.
6. Ease or facility of movement: loose sports clothing, giving the wearer freedom.
7. Frankness or boldness; lack of modesty or reserve: the new freedom in movies and novels.
8.
1. The right to unrestricted use; full access: was given the freedom of their research facilities.
2. The right of enjoying all of the privileges of membership or citizenship: the freedom of the city.
9. A right or the power to engage in certain actions without control or interference: “the seductive freedoms and excesses of the picaresque form” (John W. Aldridge)
|
|
|
| |
| internet 2 |
| 05.28.05 (8:07 pm) [edit] |
|
Another thing I was thinking is ... what's happening with internet 2? I know they're developing it but geez, like, where is it?
|
|
|
| |
| continues stream net for virtual worlds |
| 05.28.05 (10:14 am) [edit] |
The internet must be made into an environment where there are continuse streams flowing all the time through all computers; however, I don't mean forcing people to have their computers being forced to server as hubs. I mean that people could peer with one another and make one "massive" super computer where "all" computers in the peer to peer network share processing power, hard drive space and a host of other computers like one giant GAIA mind set. This will allow for testing of the bandwidth for 3 dimensional virtual worlds. The era where you could literally "jack-in" to a virtual 3D world is fast approaching. VOIP, P2P, or any type of streaming allows for continuse streams.
The first experiments with creating 3D worlds where you could wear a glove and physically touch things began with Cosmo Player and it's use of .wrl files to render 3 dimensional worlds by creating files in 3D Max and having max export the 3D image as a bunch of 3D coordiantes. Once the .wrl file is converted into a 3D web page, you could view that 3D world. Biggest problems associated with this set-up is that "bandwidth" was an issue. The amount of "dual" processing power it would take to continuesly update a screen and render the polygons instead of just pretty much static pixels were daunting to say the least. So an increase of bandwidth and multiple processes processing power is in order just in case you wanted to create a 3 Dimesional page and once you enter the website, have the world look just like your house. You walk into the 3 Dimensional page and it has a radio on a dresser that works, you walk through to another room and it has a working tv and thanks to general things like Everquest and Sim City, have things like AI and fuzzy logic to have things that occur unrelated to a user experiences occur anyway. It will be like a new world to escape to.
The thing is it takes a lot of processing power and bandwidth to simulate a 3 Dimensional image of a leaf fall to the ground. So to get around those limits, things like WI-MAX is a great start. Intels idea of focusing on multiple processors is great because it takes into the fact, that yes, processors generate a lot of heat. You don't want a system that has to be made with materials that are "seriously" heat resistant because you run into a problem of a system melting or the price goes up exponentially as a type of mirror to Moores Law.
That's it for now.
(Yes, I do know what "spell check" is :P )
|
|
|
| |
| charges cleared |
| 05.27.05 (5:41 am) [edit] |
I think 2nd Lt. Ilario Pantano should be allowed to return to Iraq.
:)
|
|
|
| |
| brain implants |
| 05.26.05 (8:17 pm) [edit] |
Just cruising and minus well add some extreme tech ideas.
Can you overide the visual cortex?
Can you have septal implants to stimulate "certain" areas of the brain?
Can all of this be connected to the internet or to a 3D virtual worlds?
Can you connect the implants to legs that walk?
Can you connect it to a robotic arm that moves?
Can you implant smells into the brain?
Can you implant cold or hot into the brain?
Can the area of the brain that stores memory be connected with the neo cortex to instantly connect with the visual cortex to not only download images that are stored there but actually experience the visions as if they are there?
Can you get a perserved body and download what is stored in that brain?
:) Hmmm.
|
|
|
| |
| global warming |
| 05.26.05 (12:44 pm) [edit] |
|
Hey, face it, the earths' snow is melting. Question, though. Now that there will be more water, is there a way to irrigate it towards areas that don't have water or will it allow be deluted with salt from th eceans. Also, making energy from the ocean from the one guys ideas sounds pretty nice.
|
|
|
| |
| create robot walking legs :) |
| 05.26.05 (10:11 am) [edit] |
I good idea now is to connect robotic walking legs to to the interface that translates thoughts to mouse movements.
Maybe some joint collaborative between MIT or some other group and a medical research facility. This should give someone who can't walk, legs. :)
|
|
|
| |
| gm foods and copyrights |
| 05.24.05 (6:17 pm) [edit] |
I wonder how do copyrights apply to foods that are genetically modified?
If I give you a bag of gm seeds, and you grow your own seeds from the plants that are produced and you decide to sell those plants ... are you guilty of copyright infringement?
|
|
|
| |
| web logs |
| 05.24.05 (3:17 pm) [edit] |
The first ideas of web logs, I say, does not come from media. Let's get that straight right now just in case the media thinks they can hi-jack web logs and claim it as their own.
The first ideas of web logs came from hackers and or programmers who wanted to let others know the list of websites they visited and wanted to provide links to other content. Then people started using web cams where some people would record their entire life through web cameras. Afterwards, people started to just want to keep track of things and or server/web site activity so some people created logs. The name web and log sounded good so they came up with blogs. The first time I started using blogs, I felt it was a good way to voice my opinion and keep track of things that occur which I felt were important. A sort of my own voice to the world. So recently, a bunch of news guys started catching on to what "programmers" created and felt it is a good tool.
To the news guys, just like everything you give a bad rep to, don't think blogs belong to the media or that the media is the only one who is capable of knowing what a blog is for. It is so nice when the followers catch on to what the leaders in innovation are doing but just remember, blogs are "good and they belong to the world. Not the media.
|
|
|
| |
| stem cell research |
| 05.24.05 (12:48 pm) [edit] |
I think I'm going to make my "own" stem cell lab and grow body parts in my basement. :)
Okay, the point is that stem cells makes human life, um, not so much more important then a Petri dish. Once stem cell law is passed, then the next law to be passed is direct research on embryos. You know, harvesting.
I have another idea. We could pay some chick to keep pumping out embryos to devote to science. All the research we need. Oh, then we can have her watch the research. :)
I just thought about something, mix abortion with scientific stem cell research and you have something going there.
|
|
|
| |
| fingerprinting minors |
| 05.24.05 (12:29 pm) [edit] |
Minors should not be allowed to be fingerprinted. The only reason they want to fingerprint minors is to ensure they can cross-reference the minors with other databases. Even though you can't directly link a finger print, an algorithm can be generated the can check it against what the fingerprint should look like.
========================= ========================= ========================= ===============
Ill. Library Getting Fingerprint Scanners
Fri May 20, 8:50 PM ET
NAPERVILLE, Ill. - Library officials in this suburb west of Chicago have come up with a high-tech solution for keeping unauthorized visitors from using their computers: fingerprint scans.
ADVERTISEMENT
The scanners — to be installed on 130 library computers this summer — will verify the identity of computer users.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap /20050521/ap_on_hi_te/lib rary_fingerprints_1" title="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap /20050521/ap_on_hi_te/lib rary_fingerprints_1" target="_blank"http://story.news.yahoo.com/n...
========================= ========================= ========================= ===============
|
|
|
| |
| predatory news |
| 05.23.05 (7:34 pm) [edit] |
I'm curious as to if news stories are predatory in nature. I've looked up the meaning of the word predator.
Predator: 1. An organism that lives by preying on other organisms. 2. One that victimizes, plunders, or destroys, especially for one's own gain.
I notice a lot of news stories do not make a situation better. Oh yes, they attempt to inform about the story and tell you the story from "their" point of view. But what exactly is the purpose of news?
I think news is simply defined to inform me on things that occur around me so I can just be aware of my surroundings. But sometimes I begin to wonder that, if, just like a bad movie that influences people to act negative, does the news, itself, play a role in the behavior of people. I begin to wonder that, since the news is pretty much owned by the same several companies, do the news ever play a vindictive "get that guy/girl" type attitude towards the general world and public at large?
I also wonder that, in the relentless pursuit of a "good" story, does the news ever consider, "did we actual make the situation worse?"
The news at times doesn't try to protect the public from negative imagery, they splash it across the screen to seriously "fry" your brain as in relation to things around you.
I know the world has tragedy, but it seems that stories go like, "the forces are outside the gate." Then the other paper would go, "I think the guys inside the gate might attack the guys outside the gate because they look menacing to the guy inside the gate." The guys inside the gate and the guys outside the gate both read the newspaper while the person who wrote the story pretty much fabricated the whole thing. (You know like the newspaper reporters who were fired for fabricating a story, lying about it, admitting it, then making a book about it?) Based on the newspaper report, they attack one another.
So it makes me wonder, if, just like viruses or vultures or anything that feeds on rampant destruction and carnage; for that one picture or that one quote that can totally twist your opinion about something. A situtation that first starts out modest and can be easily remidied, makes me think in my opinion that, in a way, is the news just a bunch of predators, while the average citizen without the "power" of the media, the prey, who are forced to listen to the "garbage" that is pumped out daily between the actual content which turns something into something it is not and only report stories that, for the most part, result in greater carnage and greater destruction because just like in a the case of a courthouse building that costs a lot to run and a police force that has to justify its existence by showing "hey, there's tons of crime," without bad things occuring, none of them would have a purpose. None of these institution would get funding.
So, I begin to see the the media, as it exists today, is just one big animal. The "online" news has tons of content, and it isn't specifically geared towards getting you to read something entertaining or shocking. You have "tons" of sources for information and it makes me wonder that if the news will begin to get nervous and wonder if their control over your mind and the information you recieve is begining to wane because you are no longer "just" getting news from your local tv station. You are in an era where you, as a consumer, are no longer "forced" to get news from a specific magazine, cable tv show, or newspaper. You can post your opinion and be "totally" opinionated for and against an idea. You can finally begin to "really" ask the "tough" questions that "no one" will ask. You don't have to worry about some "editor" saying, "hey, don't talk." Or, hey, shut-up because you're not with this or that group spending millions and billions of dollars just to get something passed. You are your own person.
One last thing. The new reality of tv shows and newspapers is this. If the news sucked, you don't have to write a letter to the editor who may or may not print it because the news goes pretty much, "if you don't like our stories, tuff! "We've" picked the people we think you want to hear. You don't have a degree so your thoughts mean "jack!" If a tv show is happening, you don't have to just write a letter to a tv show who may or may not care about the letter and could just simply toss it in the waste paper basket. You can now blog it. Blog what you want. It's all virtual. If you don't like the story, go to another page. I mean seriously. If you don't like this page, make a comment or type a search engine url in a look for something else. There's billions of pages out there and this one site won't make you or break you unlike being forced to watch just a few channels of your local tv show.
So have a nice time being predators all of you media guys. :) I'm sure there's some pretty good stories out there you can spin for cash.
(If you ask me, the media had this coming ;)
|
|
|
| |
| violent news |
| 05.20.05 (10:36 am) [edit] |
I suppose that legislation be passed that bans "all" violent news. The news today is too violent and needs to be curbed back a bit.
So, a bill must be passed that bans reporters from reporting all forms of violent or sexually explicit news on tv.
On second thought, maybe we should ban reality.
Okay, there is no more sexually explicit or violent forms of expression allowed in reality.
Okay. There.
|
|
|
| |
| Um, Iraq uprising after Iran visit |
| 05.20.05 (8:09 am) [edit] |
Hmm, is there a connection between the visiting of someone from Iran with this "sudden" uprising of someone the US was hunting all along?
And, who is using the press to cause emotions to stir again, can I say that someone should "please" bar cameras from inside the detention facilities?
Whoever took the pictures of the underware thing, did so with the express intent of negative consequences.
|
|
|
| |
| Patriot Act |
| 05.17.05 (8:35 pm) [edit] |
I'm beginning to think the war on terror, since, well, we are closing bases during the war on terror, should be scaled back slightly, meaning: No more need for the Patriot Act.
Oh my, no more need for free invasion of privacy? Hmm, how will we ever get more information then we need to know then? I don't know. But I do know that absolute power currupts absolutely.
It seems laws are beginning to be passed that, even though the Patriot Act may not be in place later, may be laws that keep the spirit of the Patriot Act alive. I'm all for getting those terroist. I'm not for trying to figure out who to label as terroist if they're American citizens.
Let's play the name game.
Okay, when I say criminal you say criminal. Ready? Okay criminal
Terroist.
Hmm, no, um, hold it.
When I say criminal, you say criminal. You don't say terroist, okay, ready? Criminal.
Terroist.
Um, I think we're going to have a problem here.
|
|
|
| |
| television interviews |
| 05.17.05 (5:52 am) [edit] |
(hey, I'm almost past my 10,000 view mark :) )
I have an idea, for stars who give interviews and the reporters that screw it up, the end to bad interviews is over.
Next time a reporter wants an interview from you, simultaneously, you record the interview and stream it from your website.
The biggest problem with an interview is that a report gives an interview. They then take that interview to their editors or their pet monkey and then begin to cut out parts that won't make the reporter famous or any money ... or give it to their pet monkey to jump on.
After the interview is processed, it is then given to whatever medium or channel they have to display it to the world; be it print, radio or television.
This is what the person interviewed should do, take the copy that you made while being interviewed and take it to "your" editor (or pet monkey, whichever you prefer) and then "stream" it from your website. I mean "stream" where once it's on your server, and you have something like "Darwin" (a Real Player program for streaming video) that displays it soon as it loads no matter what the speed is, you can have an hour long tv show on your website with you in it.
When someone wants to know anything about you, they no longer turn to the tv, you just say, "Hey you. Wanna know the truth about my latest interview? Go to my website."
There, you now have a voice.
|
|
|
| |
| internet and the undoing of the planet |
| 05.16.05 (9:32 pm) [edit] |
I believe the internet is to be the undoing of humanity. Our devices will allow us to be connected instantly with one another. No correction, our devices allow us to be connected instantly with one another. The mere subututlety of not being able to communicate in real-time meaning instantaneously when the world allows ENUM numbers to be registered free and openly. If you're worried about privacy; you should be able to alter the information as to the "actual" home address of where you live at and just have it point to your phone which would be related to you ip address. You can instantly call anyone anywhere once the PSTN all becomes completely digital.
What does that mean? Imagine phone calls are free. All calls are free and all data is free. You can not only call anyone anywhere but simultaneously listen to an infinite number of people all connected to your computer with the only limit is the bandwidth and pretty soon, maybe even that will be solved.
Imagine having your phone on all the time 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. No break. Imagine in theory, this being a law because the word "privacy" is not in the contitution to the best of my knowledge.
It would be weird, you know, being in a 24-hour chat room and carrying around a cellphone that is always on.
Imagine a babble-fish program that instantly translates to your native language most of a conversation that someone says in "any" language.
It would be weird, it would be a new reality, and no one has seriously given our new inter-connected world some "real" thought.
Maybe your first thought is to cut "all" communication. You can't be serious.
It's trippy. Everyone, no matter the age, race, or gender on the same page at the same time.
6 year-old kids listening to lectures on Quantum physics ...
He may not totally understand, but, part of learning in college is just simply showing up for a class.
|
|
|
| |
| news may be totally controlling us |
| 05.16.05 (7:02 pm) [edit] |
With the stories your local or cable tv show produces, it makes you begin to wonder ... are they trying to control what you do in a way.
Does the news try to "shock" you to action?
Does the news use "anything" to get a story.
It seems every other story is about "sex" now adays. When did this trend suddenly start?
It seems the laws in regards to sex is getting "really, really strong."
Is a way to control people and make them go along with an idea is through something basic like "sex."
Even the prison abuse story was mainly about, you guessed it, sex.
Our great last President, what did they get him on. He's not being known for balancing the budget and being one of the most admired Presidents on records. He's being known for having sex, which I might add, I don't believe a single president before him has their ever been an intense investigation in relation to sex.
The first big push was drugs. Drugs this, drugs that. Let's make a story about marijuana and then push to make it illegal. The story goes on.
Now currently, our sexual habits are under fire. Politics are shifting not to world hunger of the Green House Effect or many of the thousands of things that are far more important, the new story is about sex.
Just today, a student was suspended for 2 days for a hug.
------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- ---------------
Published Monday
May 16, 2005
Girl gets detention for too-long hug
BEND, Ore. (AP) - A 14-year-old girl received detention over a lingering hug she gave her boyfriend at school.
Sky View Middle School in Bend permits "quick hello and goodbye hugs," but administrators said some students have been bending the rule.
School officials said they had warned Cazz Altomare that lingering hugging was unacceptable, but she continued to disobey the rule.
------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- ---------------
Lingering hug ban causes controversy
5/16/2005 3:53 PM
By: Capital News 9 web staff
Giving a quick hug is okay at an Oregon middle school. But hanging on longer than that can get a student detention.
A controversy has erupted at Sky View Middle School in Bend, after a 14-year-old girl was disciplined for giving her boyfriend a lingering hug. Officials said Cazz Altomare had ignored earlier warnings about long hugs.
A school district spokeswoman said it's not like they're "the hug Nazis." But another middle school principal in town said officials are focused on creating an environment focused on learning -- and he said learning proper manners is part of that.
The girl's mother is furious, telling the local newspaper she's trying to understand "what's wrong with a hug." She gave her daughter a long one when she picked her up after detention
------------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- ---------------
Are we seeing the begginings of society of no contact or a society where we think in our minds that "we know what you're up to" like some kind of secret police? Is it a push to figure out some way to force into your mind that "human contact" means "sex" and "sex" is "evil?"
The news does not report a story on sex unless it has something to do with something bad occuring. So, in your mind, maybe sex "is" bad.
I don't know, I'm just getting tired of stories about sex being splashed repeatedly across the screen. I mean like geez, has anyone ever went "outside" the US before? There's people who aren't sexually repressed and actually enjoy open displays of affection. I bet you guys want to change all that, don't cha?
|
|
|
| |
| retractable story |
| 05.16.05 (6:19 pm) [edit] |
I was begining to wonder when the press would interfere with Afganistan the way they interfere in Iraq ...
Afganistan is a good example of a country, if left to it's own devices and a little help, could support itself.
Iraq is an example of a press, eager for a story to make money, pushes "dramatic" episodes for more viewers, more advertising, and more cash.
I guess in the age of "made-up", dramatic, press, they're all looking for their "Watergate" or their one story to put them on top of everyone else.
I can understand reporting stories but blatantly reporting a story on the desecration of the Holy Quran is like reporting the story of, hey, we just flushed a baby seal down the toilet. Or hey, someone is selling the sacred "watever" as soap-on-a-rope.
I mean like jeez, show a bit of respect for peoples beliefs and don't yell fire in a crowded building.
|
|
|
| |
| on a lighter note ... |
| 05.15.05 (6:48 am) [edit] |
The internet holds the promise of uniting the world and ensuring those who, did not have a voice, could finally speak. Coporations who once held a strangle hold on all you see and here would be hard pressed to find a way to put advertisement in all of your data. Coroporations would like you to be forced to give your idenitity when you register a domain name so they can then begin to do filters.
First, they could filter you by country of origin which would allow ISP to block traffic from entire country blocks. They would also like to have a way (I'm not going ot mention that way because "like hey! that's a great!" would come to someones mind) to figure out the content of the site before hand so they can serve you a browser the appeals only to the corporate needs. Right now, the only way to see what's on the net is pretty much through Yahoo and Google and it seems they are trying to filter their content to only let you see certain things. The internet should be a place where you can "see" anything you want. It should be up to the individual computer as to what they downloaded is okay or not. Because the problem lies in whether or not the internet will be a way to speak freely or whether it will be a tool for control.
Let me explain a bit further.
You see, all services are being directed to the internet. Your phone, your faxes, your television, your radio, your banks, your shopping, your dating, your just about anything you do in the real world that you can do virtually is being directed that way. The only cables that will be left on the land is internet and "maybe" power (if a final push towards autonomous forms of energy is heavly pushed). So, who ever controls the net, would basically control everything you do. They would have the ability to tap your phone, not from the actual wire but from the computer directing your data. ISP have been compelled by some law or another to monitor all of your internet traffic and they are now deciding "for you" what you should and should not see.
Okay enough complaining. Solution.
Encrypt all traffic on the net. Encrypt all emails, encrypt all data. If federal agencies "really" need to know what's going on, they already have the power within the Patriot Act to do whatever they want anyway. Even if that includes reading your traffic without you knowing it. The internet should be a place where, when I walk down the street to a building with my data, I should be able to bring my data back to my computer without anyone snooping in on it whether is is passive or active. I amount looking at my data not on the actual place I want it displayed as equivalent to unlawful search and seizure in the virtual world. Yes, virtual world.
(Definition of the virtual world is part of the 7 OSI layers)
The new world that is being defined, from telephone conversations to just about everything being mentioned, begins in the real world when you type from your mind to the keyboard and hit 'Enter'. After that, the data becomes part of the virtual world and arrives at another location where it is then once again becomes redifined as part of the "real" world. People along the way look at your traffic and look for bits and pieces they can use to their advantage, not to yours. The only time they should really worry about information if it "only" effects "their own systems. So, the virtual world should be by all accounts become encrypted. No one should be able to look at the traffic unless the have the keys to the data and they are the intended recipients of the data.
Well, that's it for now.
|
|
|
| |
| polygamy and religion |
| 05.14.05 (5:17 pm) [edit] |
I know as the world changes, laws change. I for one don't want to exactly "force my views down the throats of heathens" just because I believe that new experimental laws "seem" to be working.
The funny thing about laws and lawyers is that, in order for lawyers to exist, there must be crime. On a side note is that in order for drugs to exist there must be a disease. Following that logic is that without crime, there would be no need for lawyers.
Let's suppose that as it stands right now, there are enough lawyers to handle just about all the laws that exist today. Let's say that just about every crime that can be thought of have been covered. I haven't completed my "history of law research" but I'm willing to believe that societies existed that weren't just over-ran with lawyers. So as schools pump out more-and-more lawyers, there "must" be laws that come into existence, there must be a reason to justify their existence. Shucks, I haven't even heard of a need to cut back on lawyers yet. So, in theory, we must keep creating more-and-more laws to satisfy, not the needs of the people, but the needs of the lawyers.
I just begin to wonder that the laws that we pass today, no matter how slight they may be, and no matter how many people may feel that, hey, maybe this law may need to be simply taken off the books in the future, create a law that becomes so "entrenched" in society because many laws that exist there after that depend on that law, that we'll reach a point of no return that there is literally "no escape."
Before if you committed a crime, you could just go to another country and start a new life. You may not have paid your debt to society in which the country you were in would have wanted it, but maybe you decided to become a priest or something and you paid your debt in that sense (Because laws are generally originally based on religion and your needs to make things right with your higher power). Today, we are becoming a "inter-networked" society where what happens in one part of the world is "instantly" known in another part of the world. Before, laws were stored on paper records. Now, everything is stored on a computer where anyone can access it at anytime and anywhere. Geez, there's barely any "stand-alone" "closed-system" software being created.
I just simply envision a world where cultures can work together to become a global society, but at the same time, preserves those differences that make those societies, unique. It's nice to leave your country and go to a "different" place with "different" cutoms and "get away from it all." A place where all the repressive laws of the country you live in that "prohibit this" and "prohibits that" don't exist and you're free to explore and do what you like. Not totally anarchy but a "free zone." But, that isn't looking like what's happening. Already, we're beginning to fear the lawyers and the power they have over our society. We're already beginning to see that the countries where we thought, "Wow, those are such intolerable regimes!", we're becoming them. As we move closer to globilization and the new world economy, the countries we believe we are making safe are slowly changing our society. It's like you think you have dominated a thing but you don't realize that it's slowly changing you from the inside out.
This article is about best intentions. They can be well meant, but can slowly become twisted and warped till you have no choices left.
Oh yeah, one last thing. I lot of laws I was against, it seems, that the laws that passed because I was against at the time, are simply steps towards more draconian laws. So, I'm re-examing the law of polygamy in support of it because it is in the bible (I'm not a religious nut nor do I have an exact religion, but I do believe in things superior to man). And, hmm, if I don't support it, I'm wondering, does it set a precedent where more laws are passed in the future that are against things in the bible paving the way for "really" distorted laws ...
(Iw would have posted this under the "Law" topic, but this blog doesn't have one :) )
|
|
|
| |
| but on a trippy note in regards to Dave Chapelle |
| 05.14.05 (5:38 am) [edit] |
|
I think every newspaper in the world reported the story ...
|
|
|
| |
| dave chapelle is totally cool |
| 05.14.05 (5:27 am) [edit] |
Hey, you know what I think is going on with Dave Chapelle.
I think that Dave Chapelle made soo many "knock knock" jokes and it got him into trouble. I mean, with all of the jokes he made, why would he check himself into a "South African" (of all places) institution? I mean, like, are you serious? Dave Chapelle, ... in South Africa? And he checked himself in, just like that hugh?
I mean I heard of strange combinations before, um like bannana-strawberry and um, how about chicken and waffles? (funny, heh) Okay, but Dave Chapelle and South Africa.
I mean, serious. Like are you serious. Geez, Laweez. :)
|
|
|
| |
| It's "your" resume: protect it |
| 05.14.05 (3:30 am) [edit] |
I'm beginning to believe that people don't ask for your resume just to see if you can do the job. I believe people ask for your resume to know that newest technologies out there so they can learn them and say that it is part of "their" skill set.
I propose, stop sending your resume to recruiters and start trying to find out who the recruiters are forcing them to pay them your salary plus extra from. Maybe some "personal" recruitment process can be undertaken where the recruiters don't have a database of resumes with information that they can put on someone else's resume somewhere else.
(Hey, it's "my" blog. :P)
|
|
|
| |
| the news and stuff |
| 05.14.05 (2:48 am) [edit] |
In watching the news, you have to know the difference between news that is important to you and news that is splashed across all of the tv/internet screens, radio and newspaper just to get you to believe you should believe it is important.
Say something often enough and people start to believe it no matter how much they were originally opposed to it.
|
|
|
| |
| um, working |
| 05.13.05 (8:49 am) [edit] |
"We must recognize reality and implement a tightly structured guest worker program to securely, and legally, fill jobs that no American is available [for] or wants to do."
Okay. Could somebody supply the "List of Jobs Americans are 'Unwilling' to do." ?
The list should really be "List of Jobs We Are Not Willing to Pay People To Do."
|
|
|
| |
| sucks list |
| 05.13.05 (4:05 am) [edit] |
I'm taking a break for a while from discussing advanced technology to talking about things that are anti-technology.
RIAA - sucks
MPAA - sucks
That is all for now. :0 :)
|
|
|
| |
| um ... a little off track but ... |
| 05.11.05 (4:38 pm) [edit] |
|
Could someone please check on Dave Chappelle. Why is he in a "South African" hospital?
|
|
|
| |
| health care |
| 05.03.05 (7:46 am) [edit] |
I have a big question as to the cost of health care.
Average Expenditure:
Health Care.
Energy created from gas.
Maybe health care can be better automated.
Maybe energy could be preserved better by making light bulb makers use lights that last more then a few seconds and consume less energy.
Besides that, there's the hospital. There has to some way that patients could self-diagnose to an extent with the aid of an automated system.
I mean, they check your blood pressure. (That could be some machine at the grocery store.
They examine your blood. That could be some machine designed to run just a lot of tests.
I don't know. I know it's more complicated then that but there has to be some way to trim the costs of everything.
|
|
|
| |
| runaway bride |
| 05.02.05 (6:14 am) [edit] |
I never knew a bride "has" to tell "anyone" where they are.
I guess the new rule is "always tell us where you are, or else."
|
|
|
| |
| cause and effect of self |
| 05.01.05 (1:41 pm) [edit] |
I believe that many of the things that go wrong with a person, includeing health and daily life, isn't caused by someone else. I believe it's true roots are within one-self.
Life is 30% of what happens to you ... and 70% of what you do about it.
Why can't you find the cure? It exists, you're just not smart enough to figure it out. Keep looking.
or
You ARE smart enough... but you must be eager to think outside the box and begin to think for yourself. Keep looking. :)
(thanks! spiritcircle)
|
|
|
| |
|
 Talk in my flooble chatterbox!
|
