DBoy wrote:If you think significant sociological change or a real shift in behaviour away from the trend is going to occur without a critical event then you are mistaken. Humans, by nature, do not change behaviour without cause. This theory, which I appear to developing as I type, can be understood at both micro and macro levels. An addictive gambler rarely quits before his/her addiction has a significant effect on his/her life. A marriage does not break up until it is beyond reasonable social comfort. We will not change our patterns of behaviors unless nature shoves us (and not just write us a kind note) – or when something like the economy or political system reaches that tipping point.
I highly doubt the next revolution of thought is going to benefit those in the first world. I highly doubt it is going to come without bloodshed. I highly doubt it will be televised (although it may appear on ipads).
For much of my life I believed the next point we would reach would be a metaphysical shift in consciousness. I genuinely thought that people would follow the line of wanting to help others and that globalization would present the opportunities for us to assist our fellow man in pulling themselves out of the shit. It ain’t gonna happen. The American dream has lead to a increased attention to the individual and focus on self preservation signaling the death of utilitarianism. How we gonna survive when we don’t act based on outcomes for all (and nature), only on outcomes for individuals.
My beliefs have changed. I think our ability to shift is non-existant. There is not enough weight in the believers and good to overcome the strength of current trend. The sooner the break the better in my opinion. But knowing the power of nature and the balance of the universe it will happen just when it needs to – that is the way. We just gotta hope we are spared.
/end Sid flash back rant.
I never said that such a shift would occur without a major event.
It'll take a food crisis, people starving etc to be the catalyst for change.
It won't be pretty either.
But you know my feelings on this (hate people etc)....
I wanted to be a hero. I wanted to be the center of attention. I wanted the glory, I wanted the fame. I wanted the pretty girls to come up and say, "Hi, I see that you're good at Centipede."
they focus 192 lasers onto a small area the size of a pen lid and the temperature reaches over 100,000,000 degrees which they postulate will create a controlled nuclear fusion reaction and generate much more power than is used to run the lasers.
Last edited by almax on Thu May 06, 2010 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DBoy wrote:If you think significant sociological change or a real shift in behaviour away from the trend is going to occur without a critical event then you are mistaken. Humans, by nature, do not change behaviour without cause. This theory, which I appear to developing as I type, can be understood at both micro and macro levels. An addictive gambler rarely quits before his/her addiction has a significant effect on his/her life. A marriage does not break up until it is beyond reasonable social comfort. We will not change our patterns of behaviors unless nature shoves us (and not just write us a kind note) – or when something like the economy or political system reaches that tipping point.
I highly doubt the next revolution of thought is going to benefit those in the first world. I highly doubt it is going to come without bloodshed. I highly doubt it will be televised (although it may appear on ipads).
For much of my life I believed the next point we would reach would be a metaphysical shift in consciousness. I genuinely thought that people would follow the line of wanting to help others and that globalization would present the opportunities for us to assist our fellow man in pulling themselves out of the shit. It ain’t gonna happen. The American dream has lead to a increased attention to the individual and focus on self preservation signaling the death of utilitarianism. How we gonna survive when we don’t act based on outcomes for all (and nature), only on outcomes for individuals.
My beliefs have changed. I think our ability to shift is non-existant. There is not enough weight in the believers and good to overcome the strength of current trend. The sooner the break the better in my opinion. But knowing the power of nature and the balance of the universe it will happen just when it needs to – that is the way. We just gotta hope we are spared.
/end Sid flash back rant.
I never said that such a shift would occur without a major event.
It'll take a food crisis, people starving etc to be the catalyst for change.
It won't be pretty either.
But you know my feelings on this (hate people etc)....
I dont think its particularly healthy to be wanting one either though. Saying its gonna take a disaster to sort us out is a pretty fatalistic attitude.
In the absence of a world-changing event which could never happen, its probably more important to work towards a future without one.
I know that you are CIA but this chat about crisis being a positive catalyst before its even happened seems pretty radical!
Last edited by youthful_implants on Thu May 06, 2010 4:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.
witty_pseudonym wrote:The disappearance of Aaron Carter from our screens, hearts and minds ought to be the world changing event and catalyst we need for change.
The point is not always the point Bo. While the point may seem to be scarves – it is not. The point is more about the possibility of scarves by wind. What I am getting at it that the point is actually that things can be done by wind. Always think behind the point, cause often the point is disguised. This can also be known as reading between the lines. It is quite common in design shows. What is? Apparently pointless exercises that seem to have taken great feats and amounts of energy, that are in fact incredibly poignant exercises in exemplifying potential uses and features of future design. That’s what. What?
DBoy wrote:The point is not always the point Bo. While the point may seem to be scarves – it is not. The point is more about the possibility of scarves by wind. What I am getting at it that the point is actually that things can be done by wind. Always think behind the point, cause often the point is disguised. This can also be known as reading between the lines. It is quite common in design shows. What is? Apparently pointless exercises that seem to have taken great feats and amounts of energy, that are in fact incredibly poignant exercises in exemplifying potential uses and features of future design. That’s what. What?
almax wrote:
laser powered fusion, if they get this up and running, say goodbye the fossil fuels and say hello to next level amounts of energy with no pollution.
Not only is is clean but it neutralises radioactive waste. It is a bit of a miracle energy source really.
BUT...
At the current cost though it is unsustainable/too expensive
Scientists estimate that if they can get to the point where they can burn about five fuel pellets a second, a power plant could continuously generate up to a gigawatt of energy—about what the city of San Francisco is consuming at any given moment.
"Each one of these pellets costs between ten [thousand] and a hundred thousand dollars," Mauel said. To use the pellet method to generate nuclear fusion power, "they'll have to cost less than ten cents a piece."
I wanted to be a hero. I wanted to be the center of attention. I wanted the glory, I wanted the fame. I wanted the pretty girls to come up and say, "Hi, I see that you're good at Centipede."
16 mins to next train. And it's not late, that's just when it's coming. Where the fuk I the world do u have to wait 20 minutes between trains on major lines In a city of millions.
almax wrote:
laser powered fusion, if they get this up and running, say goodbye the fossil fuels and say hello to next level amounts of energy with no pollution.
Not only is is clean but it neutralises radioactive waste. It is a bit of a miracle energy source really.
BUT...
At the current cost though it is unsustainable/too expensive
Scientists estimate that if they can get to the point where they can burn about five fuel pellets a second, a power plant could continuously generate up to a gigawatt of energy—about what the city of San Francisco is consuming at any given moment.
"Each one of these pellets costs between ten [thousand] and a hundred thousand dollars," Mauel said. To use the pellet method to generate nuclear fusion power, "they'll have to cost less than ten cents a piece."
TESLA TESLA TESLA
that is all
DRS wrote:It’s uplifting while we drift through time,
‘cause we keep pushing the vibe.
DBoy wrote:16 mins to next train. And it's not late, that's just when it's coming. Where the fuk I the world do u have to wait 20 minutes between trains on major lines In a city of millions.
Upfield line all day everyday...
the peak timetable is EXACTLEY the same as the Sunday timetable on my train line...
20mins between each service regardless of time or day.... And people wonder why i walk home to Coburg....
Lizkins wrote:is that why i see you walking around North Melbs still. I is on the tram checking out ya walking i thought you were still in Coburg, makes sense now.
LOL yeah sure is.....
I work on Abbotsford St..... so not a bad walk home.....