The Fed’s decision to flood the system with cheap money will create a textbook case of what’s usually called moral hazard: insulating fund managers from the consequences of their errors will encourage similarly risky bets in the future.
This was wonderfully entertaining simplistic breakdown and yes itunes should totally do this!
I liked these quotes so much I'm taking them but read on its detailed:
"Manias, panics, and crashes are the consequence of an economic environment that cultivates cupidity, chicanery, and rapaciousness rather than a devout belief in the Golden Rule." –
Peter L. Bernstein, Foreword to Manias, Panics, and Crashes (4th ed.) by C. P. Kindleberger
"In a crisis, discount and discount heavily."
Walter Bagehot (1826-1877), British economist
"The job of the Federal Reserve is to take away the punch bowl just when the party starts getting interesting."
William McChesney Martin (1906-1998), Fed Chairman (1951-1970)
Interesting as in total chaos ensues, one an only hope. One can only hope something drastic occurs to limit the population. I read in that book after Everything Is Illuminated, how there are more people alive today than have existed ever in all of history. There aren't enough skulls for everyone to have one, even if we tried. There should at least be that many skulls I would reckon, probably more... to achieve any sort of balance with our environment. Our levels are not sustainable without horrible (and not worth it) consequences, from pollution, to wallmart stampedes that kill people. You know that it gets so much worse, and it will, for its a dangerous path we tread.
Here is the simplified and obvious but why did they do it again? point...
In America, when a business fails, its not the governments concern... ever! Big business deserves death as bad if not worse than any other... Pollute and die auto industry. Loan to fools and perish. Invest poorly and loose. This is the American way. Big daddy government stepping in is overstepping its authority. You want protection from failure, then you should buy insurance. Insurance companies should die too, don't get me wrong, but Jesus Christ they will man, just wait and see what happens next time, we can kill too birds with one stone, just don't bail the fuggas out.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
Time
No matter how much time you have its always too much time to get everything done within and there is always extra time just lying around waiting to be picked up and used for what its worth after being dusted off and isolated from the surrounding environment it has long since become a part of. Don't give up out of lack of time, for time is really only a matter of effort, and directed effort at that. You make time for what you crave, or think you crave, and never have enough time for what you don't want, or do not yet realize you want, or worse yet, need, but still have not done, out of lack of time indeed...
Friday, September 12, 2008
Charging for text messaging (SMS) is BS
Is it even worth mentioning that cell phone companies are charging more than ever for text messages! 10 or 15 cents just to receive an unsolicited message. I mean seriously how many Kilobytes is a text message? A byte or two per character depending on their encoding, but that may even be excessive considering how many characters the typical phone is actually capable of transmitting or receiving. I would guess that text messages are typically 25 Bytes or less. In ASCII mode, the size of basic text unit is one (1) byte, that's 8 bits. Here's the full ASCII character list. The maximum length of an SMS message is 160 characters, at 8 bits (or 1 byte) per character, that's a maximum of 160 Bytes in any given text message! That's practically nothing! Imagine how long broadband takes to load a page with 160 characters on it. Lets look at the Megabytes, a relatively small unit of digital measurement, which consists of 1024 Kilobytes. A Kilobyte is 1024 Bytes. A singe text message is no more than 160 Bytes, but typically much less, more like 75 Bytes. That means you can fit anywhere from 6,554 to 13,981 Text messages in a megabyte. Considering that many text messages are less than 10 characters, you can fit 104,858 text messages in a megabyte (or more). Consider the modern cost of a megabyte, which downloads in under 30 seconds on cable (in some cases much under). We could keep going on and on all day, but is simply unreasonable to be charged for text considering voice data takes up way more space. Text is practically nothing, email is free, why isn't text messaging? To think they don't have a network to support it, or that they can't afford it, is outrageous.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Believe, Buy, Die
Response to If You're Watching, It's For You
Are there sexual species that aren't youth obsessed? The option of trading in your old tired self for a more youthful replacement with some additional (real or imaginary) advantages sounds appealing. The media severs and divides culture into distinct segments sharing common brand ideologies. Mannerisms to personalities are applied to distinct age ranges where they are deemed fit, and then accepted by the viewers to be appropriate. Connections are made, imaginary perfect relationships. False Love. Anything too good to be true, which is what people want to believe the most, even if the bright white light is simply an oncoming train, they find something they think is good, it doesn't matter if it is or not (in any realistic long run). Same goes for selling pharmaceuticals, or OTCs. A field is developed where what is "real" is defined by what is said on TV. Brand used vaguely, in the way that Hilton talks is a brand identity, so is Janet Rhino 911. To watch a show, to be influenced, is to be categorized for having watched it, is as if they know something about you for having seen it, without hearing so much as a single thought. The media discards the notion of individuality, and promotes the notion of a simple one size fits all solution to any entertainment neee.., no... all of reality. All is subsumed by entertainment. The issue being the entertainment falls short. Highly unlike the nurturing stasis fluid in the matrix, television falls short of providing anything valuable in and of itself, and requires you take some action and make something out of what you are presented with. You do not automatically become a better person for watching TV, hence it can be easily discarded. Not to say there is no means to benefit, but the average viewer is a looser in the end, likely buying something they don't need, worst of all to seem younger, as if they can actually win a loosing battle with a strategy like consumerism. It will never really work though, the only way to actually get any younger is procreation. Unfortunately, if everyone knew this, then we would have overpopulation, which we already do. Life is about creation, yet it is not so limited to creating youth. To think the main mission of life is procreation is a little weak, I think its more along the lines of cultural development, or sustained CD, yet a problem such as this is too self aware for the media to consider it existing. Why promote self awareness when your trying to sell a sponsors product? How does self awareness sell anything? It doesn't. Awareness itself can prevent the sale of anything, costs nothing, is effectively evil (the starving business m/fm will say). Why snap the zombies out of it? The best consumer is a mindless consumer. Trick them to think? no, wait, not to think. Is the popularization of homosexuality an effective trap to trick people into thinking they are doing something new, while at the same time sabotaging their chances of actually being young again? That's not how they popularize it, so it can't possibly be true... right? I would assume any biblical argument grounded in any sort of reality would make the connection between not reproducing and suicide. People take life far too personally, and think that life is something that happens in <100 years, and are fine with that being the extent of their existence. It's not, and they suck for living their lives short and pointless, but with luxuries, which like padded walls, protect you from the truth. Live is a multi-billion year process, and we still have to pop the universe and find a larger one, regardless of level or stage of advancement. We're not so different from anything imaginable. People can be just about anything they choose to be, but when the only choices they think there are happen to be limited by what they see on TV they will fall for one trap or the other, and rarely if ever come up with a creative solution of their own. Even coming up with some unique creative solution, you still have to shatter the powers that be and define what is and what isn't on TV, you have to discredit and destroy them before they try to do the same to you. Can one control anything without presence on TV? I'd like to think its possible, through the tunnels of the internet, but even then, what age group are you reaching? Those who fancy themselves technologically youthful... Myself likely included. Youth is OK, but its for novices, experience is comforting, so are padded coffins. Pain stops people dead in their tracks, and to most, thought itself is akin to pain, when thought is the only way to be free from it. A pain in the head, a sensation that there is something that is not me floating, avoiding being embraced as real, and the only solution is to become one with it, and it dissipates. People hold on to their trauma as if its part of themselves. They hold onto their imaginations for fear they won't seem "real" to someone else, they starve themselves. They are discouraged actively, and it becomes easily. They've seen the bad example of how to act so many times they don't see any other way, and somewhere, far in the executive suite of your local media outlet, someone is laughing. There is no easy way to rationalize them deserving anything. They earn it all through cheap tricks that work, and the only thing to learn is how sad it is that it works, when they are selling delusions.
Are there sexual species that aren't youth obsessed? The option of trading in your old tired self for a more youthful replacement with some additional (real or imaginary) advantages sounds appealing. The media severs and divides culture into distinct segments sharing common brand ideologies. Mannerisms to personalities are applied to distinct age ranges where they are deemed fit, and then accepted by the viewers to be appropriate. Connections are made, imaginary perfect relationships. False Love. Anything too good to be true, which is what people want to believe the most, even if the bright white light is simply an oncoming train, they find something they think is good, it doesn't matter if it is or not (in any realistic long run). Same goes for selling pharmaceuticals, or OTCs. A field is developed where what is "real" is defined by what is said on TV. Brand used vaguely, in the way that Hilton talks is a brand identity, so is Janet Rhino 911. To watch a show, to be influenced, is to be categorized for having watched it, is as if they know something about you for having seen it, without hearing so much as a single thought. The media discards the notion of individuality, and promotes the notion of a simple one size fits all solution to any entertainment neee.., no... all of reality. All is subsumed by entertainment. The issue being the entertainment falls short. Highly unlike the nurturing stasis fluid in the matrix, television falls short of providing anything valuable in and of itself, and requires you take some action and make something out of what you are presented with. You do not automatically become a better person for watching TV, hence it can be easily discarded. Not to say there is no means to benefit, but the average viewer is a looser in the end, likely buying something they don't need, worst of all to seem younger, as if they can actually win a loosing battle with a strategy like consumerism. It will never really work though, the only way to actually get any younger is procreation. Unfortunately, if everyone knew this, then we would have overpopulation, which we already do. Life is about creation, yet it is not so limited to creating youth. To think the main mission of life is procreation is a little weak, I think its more along the lines of cultural development, or sustained CD, yet a problem such as this is too self aware for the media to consider it existing. Why promote self awareness when your trying to sell a sponsors product? How does self awareness sell anything? It doesn't. Awareness itself can prevent the sale of anything, costs nothing, is effectively evil (the starving business m/fm will say). Why snap the zombies out of it? The best consumer is a mindless consumer. Trick them to think? no, wait, not to think. Is the popularization of homosexuality an effective trap to trick people into thinking they are doing something new, while at the same time sabotaging their chances of actually being young again? That's not how they popularize it, so it can't possibly be true... right? I would assume any biblical argument grounded in any sort of reality would make the connection between not reproducing and suicide. People take life far too personally, and think that life is something that happens in <100 years, and are fine with that being the extent of their existence. It's not, and they suck for living their lives short and pointless, but with luxuries, which like padded walls, protect you from the truth. Live is a multi-billion year process, and we still have to pop the universe and find a larger one, regardless of level or stage of advancement. We're not so different from anything imaginable. People can be just about anything they choose to be, but when the only choices they think there are happen to be limited by what they see on TV they will fall for one trap or the other, and rarely if ever come up with a creative solution of their own. Even coming up with some unique creative solution, you still have to shatter the powers that be and define what is and what isn't on TV, you have to discredit and destroy them before they try to do the same to you. Can one control anything without presence on TV? I'd like to think its possible, through the tunnels of the internet, but even then, what age group are you reaching? Those who fancy themselves technologically youthful... Myself likely included. Youth is OK, but its for novices, experience is comforting, so are padded coffins. Pain stops people dead in their tracks, and to most, thought itself is akin to pain, when thought is the only way to be free from it. A pain in the head, a sensation that there is something that is not me floating, avoiding being embraced as real, and the only solution is to become one with it, and it dissipates. People hold on to their trauma as if its part of themselves. They hold onto their imaginations for fear they won't seem "real" to someone else, they starve themselves. They are discouraged actively, and it becomes easily. They've seen the bad example of how to act so many times they don't see any other way, and somewhere, far in the executive suite of your local media outlet, someone is laughing. There is no easy way to rationalize them deserving anything. They earn it all through cheap tricks that work, and the only thing to learn is how sad it is that it works, when they are selling delusions.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
love not who, or what, but _that_you_are
love not who, or what, but _that_you_are. who or what, are nothing compared with that. easier to see who, easier to see what, both finite, both developing, both within, but _that_you_are is infinitely larger than yourself, you can never encompass or fully appreciate _that_you_are, how many hours of work went into making you are innumerable, therefore, it has value beyond your comprehension. The level of detail that went into the choices that created you took infinite lifetimes of work. To appreciate this, is to exist, is to live up to your own expectations for yourself. the rest, the daunting who or what obsession is merely distraction from the only thing that matters, which is who you will become...
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Two Worlds - An Asside
After reading worlds 1 and 2, we shall see what happens next, yet I am already intrigued and full of rudimentary commentary:
though I'm sure some would foolishly dismiss, your are in fact quite clever, and its unfortunate people adopt impatience as their identities, though for anything I can accuse I am not completely immune, especially with traffic and or excessively law abiding drivers, people who slow down for me, ect, ect, i become impatient for them, the road is like a river to me, not some rigid system, the only rule is to not crash, or avoid the crash police who think you will crash when your not, but my theory is they just want to make money anyway, and that crashes keep them in business. Your concepts are intriguing, world 1 is fascinating in and of itself, and I expected more harsh of a contrast in world 2 (yet I have more to read). I feel as if I begin life in world 2 but somehow became slowly convinced world 1 was all that is real, though world 2 is still always there on command, its like a personal world with nobody else in it, its excellent, or at least peaceful and serene... but I am wondering if you mean for world 1 and world 2 to subsume all categories of light-workers and dark workers (i expected some more drastically alternate world), and if there is a preference or distinction for them between worlds or if there is a relatively even distribution between each. I like the idea that the borderlines blur in any case since if greater knowledge really leads to improved results in the 'real' world (or i suppose 'seemingly shared' is more accurate than real) then knowing each world would in fact help one succeed in world 1, bringing peace to those 'blindly trapped' or 'blissfully stuck' in world 2. Its too bad there are so many limitations I get so caught up in the fact that world 2 does not entirely appreciate world 1 and vice versa becomes quite disgusting to me the lapses that occur in communication but your certainly correct in that it doesn't trap itself between borders between cultures, no matter what group one might try to accuse, its always easy to find some world within their foreign world that seems utterly backwards to oneself unless truly experienced in the nature of existence, in which any and all worlds are equal and valid possessing truths of their own whether conscious or not realized, everything becomes useful in determining truth of existence, even terrorists hold some truth, or at least they are convinced of it is my opinion, and there must be some fragment of truth to what they believe, even if they were mislead. I'm sure this is all old news, and I've only began reading your material, but keep up the good work, it seems habit forming.
Wow now finally to the original intention, negative words having a negative impact and instilling fear, I think depends on ones ability to reshape and re-cast and or re-mold words as other things (yet you probably have more articles about this I haven't read which may or may not address this). I think society is too quick to dismiss words as "bad" or "politically incorrect" and that in fact there is much usefulness trapped behind the facade of maliciousness, all that is fought against in outlawing negative words to me is connotation, a 'war on poverty', a double negative, becomes a positive, in a sense, or at least logically ought to be positive, just like a 'victory of wealth' negates itself (at least eventually, through complacency, or by simply adding a 'y' to the end of wealth). Resources are forever finite (words may be finite resources for expressing reality to people living within that universe of words), and I think that avoiding negative explicitly, or based on because it 'feels' bad, separates oneself from truth (all good things come to an end, and that end must be mitigated or accounted for preemptively, but cannot be described without having a negative connotation, how can we have a concept of danger or warning without negatives?), but then again that may be in a more world1 oriented objective sense of a shared reality truth, as opposed to a personalized truth of oneness with world2, which to me is the only source of any real and lasting peace, even if its a personalized dream based fabrication, any one can only do so much in world1, and we all eventually go back to whence we came, to the warming or paralyzing abyss of world 2, the heavens or hells we imagine infinity to be, all of which are in some ways true, but luckily I believe not everlasting, though my physical body seems to like it here. There are infinities everywhere, and between these we are pulled, as if to settle on one for good would form a solution is an illusion of a short lifetime, while I know we live forever, through more than just our own experience. Between the infinitely short sighted, and the infinitely far sighted, must lie some optimal balance, but to be in an active state of balance seems necessary to distinguish from stagnation, though it may appear to the manic as if stationary, focus seems to me the unit of measurement.
though I'm sure some would foolishly dismiss, your are in fact quite clever, and its unfortunate people adopt impatience as their identities, though for anything I can accuse I am not completely immune, especially with traffic and or excessively law abiding drivers, people who slow down for me, ect, ect, i become impatient for them, the road is like a river to me, not some rigid system, the only rule is to not crash, or avoid the crash police who think you will crash when your not, but my theory is they just want to make money anyway, and that crashes keep them in business. Your concepts are intriguing, world 1 is fascinating in and of itself, and I expected more harsh of a contrast in world 2 (yet I have more to read). I feel as if I begin life in world 2 but somehow became slowly convinced world 1 was all that is real, though world 2 is still always there on command, its like a personal world with nobody else in it, its excellent, or at least peaceful and serene... but I am wondering if you mean for world 1 and world 2 to subsume all categories of light-workers and dark workers (i expected some more drastically alternate world), and if there is a preference or distinction for them between worlds or if there is a relatively even distribution between each. I like the idea that the borderlines blur in any case since if greater knowledge really leads to improved results in the 'real' world (or i suppose 'seemingly shared' is more accurate than real) then knowing each world would in fact help one succeed in world 1, bringing peace to those 'blindly trapped' or 'blissfully stuck' in world 2. Its too bad there are so many limitations I get so caught up in the fact that world 2 does not entirely appreciate world 1 and vice versa becomes quite disgusting to me the lapses that occur in communication but your certainly correct in that it doesn't trap itself between borders between cultures, no matter what group one might try to accuse, its always easy to find some world within their foreign world that seems utterly backwards to oneself unless truly experienced in the nature of existence, in which any and all worlds are equal and valid possessing truths of their own whether conscious or not realized, everything becomes useful in determining truth of existence, even terrorists hold some truth, or at least they are convinced of it is my opinion, and there must be some fragment of truth to what they believe, even if they were mislead. I'm sure this is all old news, and I've only began reading your material, but keep up the good work, it seems habit forming.
Wow now finally to the original intention, negative words having a negative impact and instilling fear, I think depends on ones ability to reshape and re-cast and or re-mold words as other things (yet you probably have more articles about this I haven't read which may or may not address this). I think society is too quick to dismiss words as "bad" or "politically incorrect" and that in fact there is much usefulness trapped behind the facade of maliciousness, all that is fought against in outlawing negative words to me is connotation, a 'war on poverty', a double negative, becomes a positive, in a sense, or at least logically ought to be positive, just like a 'victory of wealth' negates itself (at least eventually, through complacency, or by simply adding a 'y' to the end of wealth). Resources are forever finite (words may be finite resources for expressing reality to people living within that universe of words), and I think that avoiding negative explicitly, or based on because it 'feels' bad, separates oneself from truth (all good things come to an end, and that end must be mitigated or accounted for preemptively, but cannot be described without having a negative connotation, how can we have a concept of danger or warning without negatives?), but then again that may be in a more world1 oriented objective sense of a shared reality truth, as opposed to a personalized truth of oneness with world2, which to me is the only source of any real and lasting peace, even if its a personalized dream based fabrication, any one can only do so much in world1, and we all eventually go back to whence we came, to the warming or paralyzing abyss of world 2, the heavens or hells we imagine infinity to be, all of which are in some ways true, but luckily I believe not everlasting, though my physical body seems to like it here. There are infinities everywhere, and between these we are pulled, as if to settle on one for good would form a solution is an illusion of a short lifetime, while I know we live forever, through more than just our own experience. Between the infinitely short sighted, and the infinitely far sighted, must lie some optimal balance, but to be in an active state of balance seems necessary to distinguish from stagnation, though it may appear to the manic as if stationary, focus seems to me the unit of measurement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
