Re: Bought a new machine lately?

Take a look at this, gauge your behavior accordingly.

> > >
formatting link

They gotcha........

formatting link

Reply to
Tim
Loading thread data ...

Snopes is run by the CIA to make us all think the worlds a safer place.........

Just look on the bright side - if they monitored everything that was posted in usenet then they'd go totally insane......er hang on

Reply to
Tim

"Don" wrote in news:oSIaf.4009$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

As if I wasn't depressed enough already.

The worst part is that this is entirely believable. If it isn't happenign now, I do believe that it will happen, and prob. sooner rather than later.

What get rammed down our throats and up our wazoos next, mini-GPS units imbedded at birth or any time one undergoes anaesthesia, to check up on whether one is attending the "right" church, seeing the "right" people, working at the "right" jobs, having sex with the "right" partners, going to the "right" parts of town, shopping at the "right" stores, and so on and so forth...??

I fthis is the way it's going, then there is no hope and humans ought to be wiped off the face of the planet so that some other species can have a chance at makeing a DECENT go at sentience.

Reply to
Kris Krieger

"Tim" wrote in news:C0Kaf.16583$ snipped-for-privacy@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

The rebuttal article says, and I quote, "Although furtive eavesdropping on computer activity is certainly possible, the specific tale presented above is nothing more than an example of "government conspiracy" type hoaxlore."

Read the first sentence again.

If a malicious thing is possible, then someone WILL do it. That's why it's always said that "the genie can't be put back into the bottle".

Ironically, it deosn't seem to work that way when a good/beneficial thing is possible - too many swine glut themselves at the trough of the status quo.

Is it impossible that "test computers' might be released with keystroke loggers, as an experiment? Think that "they wouldn't do that"? HAH!!

The law itself is decreasingly effective in these days of secret warrants and eroding rights. The modern versions of "Bread and circuses" keep the millions of sheep mesmerized while the few wolves walk among them.

"Communications privacy/security" is a pathetic joke - it's hard enough even if you're a huge entity with massive banks of supercomputers and super-sensitive sharks swimming the seas of the electromagnetic spectrum and sifting through the fish and plankton and general detritus. But for the little planktonic algae and larvae like us, it's at best a delusion.

Reply to
Kris Krieger

"Tim" wrote in news:%RLaf.67301$m% snipped-for-privacy@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

[ ... ]

Maybe that's why there are smart algorithms/AI's and ultra-computers...??

For your consideration - Alta Vista used to let you search for "term one NEAR term two". Multiply that capability many, many times. It's like expert archaeologists sifting soil through a screen, looking for fragments of bone, chip of flint, tiny shards of pottery or worked metal. Then send the sifted artifacts to people who are brilliant analysts who either don't know the source, and/or just want a job that engages their intellect, and/or are sociopolitically naive enough to believe that whatever gov.t is in power in the US is benevolent and anyone who speaks against it is a potential enemy.

Ignorance *is* bliss.

Reply to
Kris Krieger

"Don" wrote in news:jNOaf.4188$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

formatting link

I don't know anything about that so I'd have to see diagrams as well as an explanation of the physics, before I'd accept it as a real potential.

I do know that cell phones are notoriously insecure.

I don't have one. I've considered a GPS-based emergency beacon, such as the ones that some boats carry, if I ever decide to drive across the open desert. A cell phone wouldn't work there, plus if the event of a crash, an activated cell phone still can't pinpoit your location for potential rescuers.

Anyhoo, the blurb goes on to say:

The writer is incorrect - 13 bacame "bad luck" after the advent of Christian sects.

As succinctly described at

formatting link
"thirteen, considered unlucky by most Western cultures, because Judas Iscariot, the disciple and betrayer of Jesus, was the thirteenth man in the room in which Jesus ate his Last Supper. Thirteen is considered lucky in Italy, however. It is considered lucky in China too, because it sounds like "sure life"" And further: "Thirteen is a higher octave of the number four and is one more than twelve, the ancient number of completion. Thirteen is considered to signify the end of a cycle, as evidenced by the fact that there are thirteen lunar months in the year and thirteen signs in the Celtic and Native American systems of astrology. While thirteen foretells new beginnings, it also signifies that outmoded systems must come to an end to make way for much needed transformations. Thirteen may also be interpreted as 12 + 1 and is regarded by many as the number of the initiate. Thirteen's significance cannot really be discussed without reference to sacred geometry, more particularly the Flower of Life. It has huge significance to the creation pattern and the platonic solids."

13 is also considered the number of renewal in the Western zodiac because it is the number of Aries (Spring, the first sign in the zodiac) being revisited follwing the completion ofthe year."

More factoids re: # 13:

formatting link
?tname=13-number&method=6&sbid=lc05a

[ ... ]

Well, firstly, I'm not all that convinced that the end of covilization as we know it is by definition a bad thing.

Secondly, as above, I'd have to see the technical explanation for this.

Thirdly, most of Yellowstone nat.l park is the caldera of a supervolcano which, if it blows, will wipe out the mid-west and prob. lead to a massive die off opf pretty much everything. Then there are giant asteroides. Let's not forget an increasing number of high-mortality diseases due to human overcrowding (for several known and proven reasons) and human encroachment into wild areas where previously rare or unknown pathogens reside in the environment, not to mention human weirdness (it't been suggested that HIV developed because people cought simian HIV via sex). And so on. IOW multiple threats that we routinely ignore.

So cell phones aren't my primary paranoia ;)

Reply to
Kris Krieger

Saw a cartoon once of two dolphins swimming with humans One says to the other "when they brush up against you, you get a wonderful feeling of stupidity" Or something along those lines

Bill Hicks probably had it right when he called humans "a virus with shoes on"

Reply to
Tim

Er - it's called Menwith Hill

formatting link
The second hit is pure legal genius

Reply to
Tim

how about this : no guy gets the the job til he gets 50+x % of the

*potential* vote ...so if theres too little positive vote, people do without and see how that works...maybe there's a 'do-over', maybe not...
Reply to
zenboom

even a virus is alive, which has little to do with the following evaluation :

Indeed. This may be. The distinction may be no later than conception, tho... The zygote is clearly a seperate organism...with it's own 'experience' of developement, thereafter. When is it a person, tho ? There are many philosophical, cultural and religious views on this, and no accepted answer from science... Perhaps because it could never be a matter of science alone.

alternatives

I suspect it is well beyond us to 'grow' a foetus, given what we don't know about physiology...not to mention the depths of biology and the phenomena of life itself. Yet what would such technology benefit anyway?...would'nt it mostly be for abuse of humanity [eg the Bladerunner scenario of living beings made as tools]?

Scott Peck makes interesting observation on this.

Perhaps in the old-world school, but worse now is woman as sex object.

perhaps a pre-defined "faith" which of course does not allow much 'personal belief'. Unfortunately that 'debate' doesn't seem to develope anyones view much, so that law will be about getting your "faith" imposed on other people.

Reply to
zenboom

remember what the dormouse said :-p

Reply to
Tim

Because they are all pretend. There are an infinite number of things to pretend.

Interesting that you said "accepted."

Why?

_Worse_?!

Which tells us that it isn't rape they care about.

Seems to me that a great number of individuals have gotten on quite well without following that. Perhaps you are using a different idea of "inextricable" or "individual" than I am accustomed to.

Does it really matter who orginates the fiction? Does it matter more than how closely it is held?

The trick is in recognizing that faiths are necessarily Religions and that your truth is probably just a faith.

Reply to
gruhn

_IF_ they "blend back in with the ether" do they retain their organization?

Reply to
gruhn

naah ... you get to brew your own until the day you get to quaff the next round of Guiness.

Reply to
zenboom

experience will tell which pretence is productive. without peretence there is no learning, no adjustment and no transcendance : ones existance then remains a meaningless series of random effects on an arbitrary collection of atoms.

Although I have no idea of the current science, there is clearly no deference to science on this subject, and no consensus. Do you have a compelling definition of "personhood" ?

because Exploitation is Profitable.

producing offspring successfully requires a degree of provision. a sex object is wholly disposable.

depends on what you believe "getting on well" is.

the difference is integrity and responsibility... is that significant ?

No. I don't recognise that, since to me it's false. Religions are crib sheets. Faith is thinking for yourself, and admitting it when you don't 'know the answer.'

Reply to
zenboom

"Don" wrote in news:FJ1bf.5669$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

Actually, they're not considered to be "alive". They're merely DNA or RNA bits that use living cells to replicate.

Yes, the point being what?

Reply to
Kris Krieger

"Don" wrote in news:NEabf.5368$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:

Just off the top of my head (rushing because I have work to do so writing a bit sloppily, sorry):

Space/the universe/the background radiation is "granular" or "lumpy". So the "ether" ("spirit-world") might also be granular. Maybe, as with electrons, the "ether" is subject to Probability, and perhaps the "spark" influences Probability so as to be simultaneously a "self", an part of the "ether".

Why couldn't it be, if one is positing a spiritual plane? If all things are created by GOd and therefore have some part of the spark of God within them, then why cannot one posit a spirit influencing various natural phenomenon in certain cases, for some reason?

No science, mostly questions of things that can be drawn from a premise.

Reply to
Kris Krieger

Not going to argue about what's alive and what ain't :-)

But here's a link to an interesting (ish!) page on virus construction

formatting link
I tend to lean towards ideas of the unbearable lightness of being - can't speak for the viruses though!

Reply to
Tim

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.