what do you guys think about the Department of Defense [Archive]

IcarusAngel

9th October 2009, 00:28

The DoD heavily invested in many projects. They even helped fund the modern operating system: by funding Multics, they created the group that set the foundations for the Unix operating system. And then other operating systems like Qdos borrowed a lot from multics. Had AT&T never pulled out of the Multics project it's questionable whether Unix would have been invented - perhaps this would have made Operating Systems better, perhaps worse, who knows.

'Planning for Multics began in 1964. Fernando (Corby) Corbató, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), teamed up with computer scientists from General Electric and Bell Laboratories as part of Project MAC, a research program funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) in the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). '

multicians.org/f7y.html

The government, through the DARPA project, funded a lot more than just the internet. Furthermore, many other inventions of the modern computer come from Universities - look at the ENIAC and EDVAC.

Interestingly, one of the first video game systems was actually done by a guy working for the government. He got funds for a little pong-like games with paddles that could be played on a home television set.

All this shows is that "capitalism" and "market forces" are not needed in order to advance technology. If anything capitalism hinders the advancement of technology. Capitalism is good at taking things that are publicly funded and then engaging in protectionism to try and prevent these ideas from having a diverging influence (i.e. stifling competition) and thus they are susceptible to letting monopolies stagnate progress.

Another nice thing about research money is that it gives scientists the leisure time to be able to think up new ideas without being under the constant order of deadlines. The 90s continued to see huge government investments in the computer industry, but it was more in the form of corporate welfare than research projects.

IcarusAngel

9th October 2009, 00:31

but you're using the Internet, do you think a people's militia could build the Internet

Yes. Keep in mind many of the advancements in computers were not just done by the government but by Universities taking money from the government. One of the four insitutions that were the first ones to be connected to the internet was my old University here in Utah.

Since many of these people are just scientists and professors I think they would flourish in a society where people received 'according to their need.'

I guess it's still debatable whether people could put together institutions such as Universities but those of us who are leftists believe this could be done without the help of the government - and certainly without the help of capitalists, who don't do shit.

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 01:41

All this shows is that "capitalism" and "market forces" are not needed in order to advance technology. If anything capitalism hinders the advancement of technology. Capitalism is good at taking things that are publicly funded and then engaging in protectionism to try and prevent these ideas from having a diverging influence (i.e. stifling competition) and thus they are susceptible to letting monopolies stagnate progress.

Market forces can advance technology ... if doing so is economically favorable

And of course I doubt any people who are real innovators in science or technology are the kind of leeches who on the weekends say "that's just my day job, I don't want to hear about it now"

But you're missing the point

I wasn't arguing for or against a pure free market. I am against a pure free market, though not entirely opposed to the idea of setting prices in an emergent fashion through supply and demand

In fact, I'm kind of poking fun at "BAWWWWW THE POOR BAWWWWW THE THIRD WORLD BAWWWWW COLORED PEOPLE BAWWWWW THE US MILITARY DOES NOTHING USEFUL"

I guess it's still debatable whether people could put together institutions such as Universities but those of us who are leftists believe this could be done without the help of the government

I sort of doubt it. It seems like government, particularly military, and universities drive most technological advances, though I can think of counterexamples like the blue laser, which was developed at the Nichia Corporation

Plagueround

9th October 2009, 01:58

In fact, I'm kind of poking fun at "BAWWWWW THE POOR BAWWWWW THE THIRD WORLD BAWWWWW COLORED PEOPLE BAWWWWW THE US MILITARY DOES NOTHING USEFUL"

BAWWWWW COLORED PEOPLE?

Comments like this are not okay here. You've received an infraction for this and will be banned if you continue to employ such remarks.

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 02:12

Hey guys slavery did a lot to build society so really you're a hypocrite if you live in society and rail on slavery for being a shitty thing to do to people. right?

wait what

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 02:16

The Nazis also did tons for research into rocketry and made some good finds for the medical field in their horrendous human experiments. I guess that absolves them too and means we can't call them on their flagrant abuses (which is a pretty light term in this case I think)

Waaaah nazis didn't do anything useful waaah holocaust waaah stupid fucking arguments

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 02:27

BAWWWWW COLORED PEOPLE?

Comments like this are not okay here. You've received an infraction for this and will be banned if you continue to employ such remarks.

what ... there was nothing racist about it

the whole point of that comment was pointing out that jobless 16 year old suburban white kids with iPods pretending to have "workers' solidarity" with members of ethnic groups they never even see in their neighborhoods isn't terribly convincing

the racist interpretation was yours and yours alone ... I'm talking about pseudo-intellectual kids playing the World's Smallest Violin

don't get your panties all in a bunch

Hey guys slavery did a lot to build society so really you're a hypocrite if you live in society and rail on slavery for being a shitty thing to do to people. right?

wait what

The Nazis also did tons for research into rocketry and made some good finds for the medical field in their horrendous human experiments. I guess that absolves them too and means we can't call them on their flagrant abuses (which is a pretty light term in this case I think)

Waaaah nazis didn't do anything useful waaah holocaust waaah you're fucking dumb as shit

the difference is that the disutility of slavery and Nazism vastly outweighed whatever benefits they yielded

by the way you just used weak analogy and argumentum ad Hitlerum in one fell swoop

as if the actions of DARPA are comparable to slavery or genocide, hurr durr

Jesus H. Christ it looks like we have the next George Boole on our hands

(and this is especially funny considering this forum turns a blind eye to Stalin worship)

danyboy27

9th October 2009, 02:36

what ... there was nothing racist about it

the whole point of that comment was pointing out that jobless 16 year old suburban white kids with iPods pretending to have "workers' solidarity" with members of races they never even see in their neighborhoods isn't terribly convincing

the racist interpretation was yours and yours alone ... I'm talking about pseudo-intellectual kids playing the World's Smallest Violin

don't get your panties all in a bunch

stop generalizing, we are not a bunch of withe suburban kid.
who the fuck are you to judge us?

the difference is that the disutility of slavery and Nazism vastly outweighed whatever benefits they yielded

same goes for capitalism, i highly doubt that all the folk who are dying from starvation and AIDS beccause of capitalism is really worth the technological advancement we currently have.

beccause yea, capitalism kill a whole bunch of people, a whole bunch of people we could save without lowering the current living standard of the first world, but eh, i guess its okay to concentrate all the current world ressources around a fews while the majority got problem having a decent housing.

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 02:37

the whole point of that comment was pointing out that jobless 16 year old suburban white kids with iPods pretending to have "workers' solidarity" with members of races they never even see in their neighborhoods isn't terribly convincing
don't get your panties all in a bunch

You don't know anything about anyone on this forum, apparently.

the difference is that the disutility of slavery and Nazism vastly outweighed whatever benefits they yielded

It's very easy to say that here and now, in a world where slavery and the Nazis have been (rightly) demonized.

But somehow I don't think you'd be saying that the benefits outweigh the cost of the human lives destroyed by the Department of Defense and the military if you were on the receiving end of DoD bombs or bullets.

At what point do we say "these are no longer acceptable losses"? How many lives is having 4chan and SomethingAwful and Google worth? I'm not trying to make appeals to emotion here. If you're going to say the Nazis and slavery are bad because they did more harm than good to people, then we need to seriously look at the harm caused by the DoD (and by extension, American Imperialism in general, perhaps?), and whatever "positive" outcomes might have sprung from it all.

Doing that sort of things for the Nazis is easy. They killed 12 million people and documented it well. But for American imperialism, it's far more difficult. You wouldn't know where to begin, let alone where to end.

(and this is especially funny considering this forum turns a blind eye to Stalin worship)

Some do, some find it revolting. A generalization that is demonstrably false.

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 02:43

stop generalizing, we are not a bunch of withe suburban kid

a lot of you are

seriously have you ever seen a black or Asian kid talking about how great Stalin was?

me neither

they might exist somewhere, but I have my doubts

who the fuck are you to judge us?

I'm Duke Nukem. Hail to king, baby!

same goes for capitalism, i highly doubt that all the folk who are dying from starvation and AIDS beccause of capitalism is really worth the technological advancement we currently have

how is capitalism infecting people with AIDS

also what economic systems are actually more viable

beccause yea, capitalism kill a whole bunch of people, a whole bunch of people we could save without lowering the current living standard of the first world, but eh, i guess its okay to concentrate all the current world ressources around a fews while the majority got problem having a decent housing.

we didn't evolve to care about the welfare of our entire species

the world is cruel

and it will continue to be cruel for the foreseeable future

there is a way out: tranhumanism, but there is a long way to go for it technologically speaking and a further obstacle is how people are pussies about it

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 02:47

a lot of you are

seriously have you ever seen a black or Asian kid talking about how great Stalin was?

me neither

they might exist somewhere, but I have my doubts

I have though. And you're sort of completely wrong on the first point.

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 02:58

You don't know anything about anyone on this forum, apparently.

how many of you are not white kids from relatively affluent backgrounds

But somehow I don't think you'd be saying that the benefits outweigh the cost of the human lives destroyed by the Department of Defense and the military if you were on the receiving end of DoD bombs or bullets.

I hate to pull a tu quoque, but what about all the people oppressed or put to the sword by communist factions

this is what I'm talking about

playing the World's Smallest Violin

BAWWWWW THE US IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TERRIBLE EVIL BUT NOT GROUPS LIKE THE NVA THEY WEREN'T WHITE OR RICH SO THEY DIDN'T MURDER OR BRAINWASH ANYONE

pretty much all civilizations with the wherewithal fight wars and extort weaker nations. look at China now. they are again gaining the wherewithal to exploit their neighbors as they had done in the past (and now even countries in distant Africa), and parade around huge-ass nuclear missiles that cost lots of money that could have fed starving people instead. lo and behold, they are doing it. this is what we do, as a species

in short: don't complain about the US in particular: complain about our biology. people just aren't seeing the forest for the trees

At what point do we say "these are no longer acceptable losses"? How many lives is having 4chan and SomethingAwful and Google worth?

are you suggesting that the Internet consists entirely of trite memes like OVER NINE THOUSAND

I'd say that Project Gutenberg, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and direct public access to (and analysis tools for) literally reams and reams of bioinformatics data from dozens of species are worth the life of this guy, at the very least, at the very least:

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b241/masterfulX/1210396234345.jpg

I'm not trying to make appeals to emotion here. If you're going to say the Nazis and slavery are bad because they did more harm than good to people, then we need to seriously look at the harm caused by the DoD (and by extension, American Imperialism in general, perhaps?), and whatever "positive" outcomes might have sprung from it all.

you'd have to extend this to communism too

the US fights dirty, but not necessarily dirtier than anyone else, other things being equal

if there were a majority non-white, non-Western, Communist country with similar economic and military power to the US I would predict they'd start becoming an abusive world bully, albeit not necessarily in quite the same way as the US

oh yeah

there is one

it's called the "People's Republic" of China (see above)

just because they've opted for a faux friendly iron fist/velvet glove approach to fucking the world over instead of the rootin tootin six-shootin American way of doing things, doesn't mean they haven't become a right bully, and they're going to get worse I think

Some do, some find it revolting. A generalization that is demonstrably false.

but do people get infractions for it

like I did for making an innocuous comment

Hitler and Stalin: they both had millions of people put to death

what would happen if someone said "Hitler wasn't so bad" here? heavy infraction, possibly ban

Stalin worship on revleft ...... maybe a "naughty-naughty-naughty!" from some members

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 02:59

I have though

where

pixorlies

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 03:10

how many of you are not white kids from relatively affluent backgrounds

It isn't as if there's a directory with those numbers. I can't think of anyone that I know on here that is relatively affluent.

White, maybe.

BAWWWWW THE US IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TERRIBLE EVIL BUT NOT GROUPS LIKE THE NVA THEY WEREN'T WHITE OR RICH SO THEY DIDN'T MURDER OR BRAINWASH ANYONE

pretty much all civilizations with the wherewithal fight wars and extort weaker nations. look at China now. they are again gaining the wherewithal to exploit their neighbors as they had done in the past (and now even countries in distant Africa), and parade around huge-ass nuclear missiles that cost lots of money that could have fed starving people instead. lo and behold, they are doing it. this is what we do, as a species

in short: don't complain about the US in particular: complain about our biology. people just aren't seeing the forest for the trees

That's all well and good but that doesn't justify your statement that the DoD does more good than it does harm.

you'd have to extend this to communism too

If that's what this discussion was about, then I guess I would.

but do people get infractions for it

like I did for making an innocuous comment

The admins of this site are either A) Anarchists or B) Left-Communists. A lot of Lenin is considered "bourgeois" to them. Stalin-hate is by no means a faux-pas on this site.

I mean, goddamn they weren't even allowed on this site until recently.

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 03:16

where

pixorlies

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Paul_Robeson_1942.jpg/250px-Paul_Robeson_1942.jpg
http://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/c/pics/carmichael-stokely.jpg
http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/Past_Events/images/panther_march1.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Ho_Chi_Minh_1946_cropped.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Mao_Zedong_portrait.jpg/225px-Mao_Zedong_portrait.jpg

I guess these are just more famous examples. I don't think my friends would want me to post their pictures online though, so uh.

Bright Banana Beard

9th October 2009, 03:19

where

pixorlies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Conference_of_Marxist-Leninist_Parties_and_Organizations_%28Internationa l_Newsletter%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICMLPO_%28Hoxhaist%29

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 03:34

It isn't as if there's a directory with those numbers. I can't think of anyone that I know on here that is relatively affluent.

anyone who has access to the Internet is almost certainly "relatively affluent"

White, maybe.

let's make that "probably"

That's all well and good but that doesn't justify your statement that the DoD does more good than it does harm.

well let's see, US soldiers have to fight under the Geneva Convention. abuses, when found, are punished harshly. I question our motives for going into Iraq but we are actually kind of trying to aid them now, legitimately

on top of that, despite the fuckups of the Bush administration and other unfortunate draconian trends we heave headed in, the right to say "I question our motives for going into Iraq" remains unchallenged

the US and the US military are dirty, yes, but probably more ethical than many of the parties widely exalted on this website

and yeah anyway I'd say the good outweighs the harm. especially when a lot of DARPA projects are advancing transhumanism directly or indirectly

If that's what this discussion was about, then I guess I would

well why not think about it for a bit privately

it might be illuminating

The admins of this site are either A) Anarchists or B) Left-Communists. A lot of Lenin is considered "bourgeois" to them. Stalin-hate is by no means a faux-pas on this site.

but, NOW, essentially, you guys let Stalin <3 slide

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/20/Paul_Robeson_1942.jpg/250px-Paul_Robeson_1942.jpg
http://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/c/pics/carmichael-stokely.jpg
http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/Past_Events/images/panther_march1.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Ho_Chi_Minh_1946_cropped.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/Mao_Zedong_portrait.jpg/225px-Mao_Zedong_portrait.jpg

I guess these are just more famous examples. I don't think my friends would want me to post their pictures online though, so uh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Conference_of_Marxist-Leninist_Parties_and_Organizations_%28Internationa l_Newsletter%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICMLPO_%28Hoxhaist%29

hey guys I'm talking about the kind of people who post here

I mean like the high school / university Communists that everyone laughs at

Plagueround

9th October 2009, 06:38

To answer the original and ridiculous question, the department of defense does not somehow get an imaginary pass because their projects happen to coincide with your interests. I don't accept that "human progress" needs to cost so many lives, nor will I accept that the best we can do is play a numbers game and hope we end up on the winning side. I often hear this excuse you've presented, that "the difference is that the disutility of slavery and Nazism vastly outweighed whatever benefits they yielded", yet the millions upon millions of people that America and capitalism have killed (which far outweighs whatever imaginary or inflated numbers can be attributed to anyone claiming to be "communist"...although don't get me wrong, "Communism" has the blood of millions on it's hands that we must now answer for and explain) saw none of the benefits of this so called progress. It is indeed undeniable that human beings have progressed technologically and intellectually, but to remain largely apathetic because you're more concerned about science doesn't do us a whole lot of good. I'd highly recommend you check out "Disturbing the Universe" by Freeman Dyson to see where these kinds of views lead.

I have to agree with Rorschach to a degree, you likely wouldn't share this view if you weren't tucked away safely in the beast's cradle (so to speak). It's ok, I understand. It's nice and warm and safe here. Or at least it gives that illusion enough to keep us around, so long as we keep our heads up. That way we don't see all the poor and miserable people ground under this country's boot, within and outside it's borders.

And yes, I'm well aware that "China does the same thing". You don't really get very far around here with that one, nor will the numerous "Stalin boogeyman accusations" work on a crowd that, for the most part, has more disdain for the man than you do.

I find it funny that when presented with a species that is capable of both immense cruelty and astonishing acts of selflessness and kindness, that somehow people tend to see the cruel side dominating and never to be overcome or at least marginalized. Never is the immense good humans are capable of given the same consideration, which to me is odd because if we were in nothing but a state of perpetual cruelty, I don't know that we would have lasted this long. The very fact that you're motivated, even in your terribly misanthropic and misguided view, to improve our species reflects this.

I don't expect you to actually get much out of this, I'm sure I'll be attacked mercilessly, and that's fine.
We have a fair number of transhumanists here, but I shudder to think of what bizarre and distorted things you would do if allowed to progress in your field. It is my sincere hope this attitude, if this is how you actually behave, impedes your career and you learn a bit of humility. The world doesn't need another selfish, amorally motivated scientist.

By the way, I'm "half-white" and come from a working class background, although in recent years I suppose you could call my parents "middle class". If you would like, you can take these into consideration when mounting your next strawman attack.

Plagueround

9th October 2009, 06:51

Also, I'm sure you'll whine about it, but:

don't get your panties all in a bunch

there is a way out: tranhumanism, but there is a long way to go for it technologically speaking and a further obstacle is how people are pussies about it

Using phrases like this to suggest that people are inferior or oversensitive by equating them with women or "women's clothing" is sexism. Surely someone so heavily invested in science could appreciate the massive amount of linguistic research that has been done to support why this is so. You're really not doing too well tonight, but since you likely didn't know this, consider this merely a verbal warning.

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 07:56

To answer the original and ridiculous question, the department of defense does not somehow get an imaginary pass because their projects happen to coincide with your interests

sez who? you can come back to me when more than half of the members of this board no longer have cracked voices

I don't accept that "human progress" needs to cost so many lives, nor will I accept that the best we can do is play a numbers game and hope we end up on the winning side

this is done all the time though. and not just in the military, or by private corporations. everything you could hope to benefit from has costs. sometimes the costs are lives

I often hear this excuse you've presented, that "the difference is that the disutility of slavery and Nazism vastly outweighed whatever benefits they yielded", yet the millions upon millions of people that America and capitalism have killed

how do you know this isn't an optimum for our species at the present time

in case you haven't noticed attempts to provide the entire exploding, vermin-like human population with even bare necessities have all fallen flat

and capitalism exists partly because it just kind of lets rationing emerge, and in many ways this kind of swarm intelligence does a better job than state planners, and partly because we're greedy 'n shit

It is indeed undeniable that human beings have progressed technologically and intellectually, but to remain largely apathetic because you're more concerned about science doesn't do us a whole lot of good. I'd highly recommend you check out "Disturbing the Universe" by Freeman Dyson to see where these kinds of views lead

I just called the Pentagon

nobody who matters cares

keep on stroking that sausage

I have to agree with Rorschach to a degree, you likely wouldn't share this view if you weren't tucked away safely in the beast's cradle (so to speak)

I wonder what I'd feel like if I were growing up in Vietnam during the war

"well fuck I live in an oppressive paternalistic society where homophobia runs rampant. and no matter what happens after this the government is probably going to be corrupt and brutal"

to be honest, I would have probably tried to get gunned down

And yes, I'm well aware that "China does the same thing". You don't really get very far around here with that one, nor will the numerous "Stalin boogeyman accusations" work on a crowd that, for the most part, has more disdain for the man than you do

except for the part about how you let Stalin <3 slide constantly

We have a fair number of transhumanists here, but I shudder to think of what bizarre and distorted things you would do if allowed to progress in your field. It is my sincere hope this attitude, if this is how you actually behave, impedes your career and you learn a bit of humility. The world doesn't need another selfish, amorally motivated scientist

no. there's plenty of room for people like me (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=4539dc1cc3aa10b46cbf655811648137&tab=core&_cview=0&cck=1&au=&ck=), and there's going to be even more as time marches on. personally, I can't do shit. but fortunately, there are thousands of scientists in the NBIC area who agree with me at least to some degree (including a number of vocal misanthropes), and together we will all make a difference. and me personally, I don't have to change a bit in this system. keep pretending that taking lots of bong hits and complaining about "crapitalism" is going to do anything

http://www.who-sucks.com/wp-content/uploads/icons/2007/07/muscled_mighty_mouse.jpg

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/images/200805/schartz_monkey_arm_marshmal_500.jpg

http://neurophilosophy.files.wordpress.com/2006/08/animat.JPG

the more we reckon about how genetics and the brain work, and change them, and build on them, the more the current situation becomes untenable. past some point, the world of shittiness that is now just won't be able to function anymore. it's ... obvious! if you keep with current research and the way things are going now

besides, why should we want crappy people when we can have great people instead?

seriously ... one of these days I'm going to be standing around in the smoldering ruins of a city, all my shitty carbon-based body parts replaced with synthetics, and I'm going to start pitching drugs and call out "y'all want summa dis junk dat I got?" and then all these really skinny humans covered in scabs with baggy eyes are going to crawl out of the rubble and pawn their nasty-looking, pitted hand-me-down weapons for ca$h and crowd around me and spend every cent on my wares and clamor for more and then OD and choke on vomit and then eventually we'll win the war

or something like that

By the way, I'm "half-white"

I'll bet most of the kids on this forum would piss their pants if they ever saw a person darker than themselves (besides that Mexican who does landscaping at their house, or perhaps dad's second wife after the divorce, 19 year old Deng Yan)

like they'd probably think "oh shit I'm gonna get ROBBED"

Using phrases like this to suggest that people are inferior or oversensitive by equating them with women or "women's clothing" is sexism. Surely someone so heavily invested in science could appreciate the massive amount of linguistic research that has been done to support why this is so.

what linguistic research? I am currently a linguistics major, preparing for neuro. this science is about description, not prescription; what you are talking about is pomo crap. politics fuck off

next thing you know you're going to tell me a phrase like "nitty gritty" is racist

mel

9th October 2009, 15:47

rubbish

You don't know the board demographics. I can assure you that most of the established membership are older, working people, while most of the newer people who post in learning and OI are young high schoolers trying to learn something.

Your accusations that those who post here are predominantly people living in suburbs have no basis in reality. If you don't believe me, start a poll asking about people's backgrounds, word it however you like, and see what kinds of results you get.

For somebody studying linguistics, you are a really shitty writer.

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 16:12

seriously ... one of these days I'm going to be standing around in the smoldering ruins of a city, all my shitty carbon-based body parts replaced with synthetics, and I'm going to start pitching drugs and call out "y'all want summa dis junk dat I got?" and then all these really skinny humans covered in scabs with baggy eyes are going to crawl out of the rubble and pawn their nasty-looking, pitted hand-me-down weapons for ca$h and crowd around me and spend every cent on my wares and clamor for more and then OD and choke on vomit and then eventually we'll win the war

Or you'll spend the rest of your life doing Babylon 5 cosplay.

I'll bet most of the kids on this forum would piss their pants if they ever saw a person darker than themselves (besides that Mexican who does landscaping at their house, or perhaps dad's second wife after the divorce, 19 year old Deng Yan)

like they'd probably think "oh shit I'm gonna get ROBBED"

This is actually patently false, at least of the people I know in the CC.

I mean that's just really, really, really false. Absurdly false.

But hey if you want to provide evidence that'd be nice. Otherwise you'd just be making baseless claims, which is generally a big no-no.

For somebody studying linguistics, you are a really shitty writer.

And for someone who will call someone else out on argumentum ad _____um he's a pretty shitty debater too.

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 20:42

Your accusations that those who post here are predominantly people living in suburbs have no basis in reality. If you don't believe me, start a poll asking about people's backgrounds, word it however you like, and see what kinds of results you get.

well, maybe not ... but they are relatively affluent by world standards judging from the fact that they are using the Internet

and probably majority white ... and skewed towards the high school demo

I could make a poll but it would probably get shut down or something eventually

and besides I can only post in OI anyway

HOW MANY OF YOUSE GUYS IS WHITE

right

For somebody studying linguistics, you are a really shitty writer.

what does understanding of the objective facts of language have to do with subjective evaluations of my writing

I mean I basically never study and I'm set to graduate cum laude, possibly magna cum laude, so I think I'm doing a pretty good job

also why would I expend my best writing on you people?

you must think linguistics is about how to speak and write "correctly" ... Jesus Fucking Fuck I am lmao

Or you'll spend the rest of your life doing Babylon 5 cosplay.

can you fucking read
The Physical Intelligence program aspires to understand intelligence as a physical phenomenon and to make the first demonstration of the principle in electronic and chemical systems. A central tenet is that intelligence spontaneously evolves as a consequence of thermodynamics in open systems. The program plan is organized around three interrelated task areas: (1) creating a theory (a mathematical formalism) and validating it in natural and engineered systems; (2) building the first human-engineered systems that display physical intelligence in the form of abiotic, self-organizing electronic and chemical systems; and (3) developing analytical tools to support the design and understanding of physically intelligent systems. If successful, the program would launch a revolution of understanding across many fields of human endeavor, demonstrate the first intelligence engineered from first principles, create new classes of electronic, computational, and chemical systems, and create tools to engineer intelligent systems that match the problem/environment in which they will exist.I'm not making shit up. I don't have to make shit up. you saw those pictures, you know a real technological revolution is underway. don't pretend the world isn't going to be a hugely different place in the next fifty years

there you go again with that ingrained Cartesian assumption that humans are imbued with the power of pink unicorn farts and elven lollipops and can't be improved upon. stop that. de la Mettrie was so right when he wrote L'homme machine, like prophetic almost

http://i37.tinypic.com/ossr9k.jpg
the effects of operant conditioning on the man-machine

also I'm not sure what Babylon 5 is about, that's a television series right? I really don't watch television. but I get what you're saying: "LA LA LA LA THIS IS SCIENCE FICTION LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA LA I'VE GOT A BATTERED COPY OF THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO IN EITHER EAR LA LA LA LA SWEET JESUS THIS ISN'T HAPPENING LA LA LA LA"

hahaha, good defense mechanism, buddy boy

This is actually patently false, at least of the people I know in the CC.

I mean that's just really, really, really false. Absurdly false.

But hey if you want to provide evidence that'd be nice. Otherwise you'd just be making baseless claims, which is generally a big no-no.

your anecdotes against mine

I don't give a fuck whatchu think beeeeyooooooooooootch

mel

9th October 2009, 21:22

well, maybe not ... but they are relatively affluent by world standards judging from the fact that they are using the Internet

and probably majority white ... and skewed towards the high school demo

I could make a poll but it would probably get shut down or something eventually

and besides I can only post in OI anyway

HOW MANY OF YOUSE GUYS IS WHITE

right

Well then don't make the poll, and sure, by world standards anybody with internet access is "relatively" affluent, even if they post from public libraries. I know at least several members are homeless, but for the most part they do ok for themselves.

The "high school" skew is most likely only true if you look at the newer posters, and the ones who post predominantly in learning and chit-chat. I'd venture a guess that most of the people in the CC, and the senior membership (local mods, global mods, and admins) do not fit into that category.

what does understanding of the objective facts of language have to do with subjective evaluations of my writing

If you are studying the structure and features of language, you should be able to use it effectively to make a point, even without considerable effort on your part. Your spelling is atrocious, your grammar isn't great, and you can't seem to form a coherent argument. Sure the degree to which this is the case is subjective, but those things don't reflect well on your linguistics education.

I mean I basically never study and I'm set to graduate cum laude, possibly magna cum laude, so I think I'm doing a pretty good job

From my perspective, that speaks more about the quality of your education than to your intelligence. You must not be learning very much.

Grade inflation is a big problem these days, don't be a statistic.

also why would I expend my best writing on you people?

you must think linguistics is about how to speak and write "correctly" ... Jesus Fucking Fuck I am lmao

Nope, I know what linguistics is. Somebody proficient in linguistics, who understands both the semantic features and syntactic structure of language, should be able to use it properly. Even without putting forth considerable effort. That you can't seem to do that speaks to the quality of your education.

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 21:32

Well then don't make the poll, and sure, by world standards anybody with internet access is "relatively" affluent, even if they post from public libraries

that was the point

The "high school" skew is most likely only true if you look at the newer posters, and the ones who post predominantly in learning and chit-chat. I'd venture a guess that most of the people in the CC, and the senior membership (local mods, global mods, and admins) do not fit into that category.

your anecdotes against mine

If you are studying the structure and features of language, you should be able to use it effectively to make a point

oops, that's rhetoric and logic, ding-dong

Your spelling is atrocious, your grammar isn't great

explain. how is my spelling "atrocious"? the Firefox spellchecker certainly disagrees with you. and why would I be using "perfect" (of course "perfect" implies that standard English grammar, spelling rules and lexicon are "superior" to what people actually use, which is an utter bogus unscientific idea) English on an Internet forum?

apparently you still think linguistics is all about "ah ah! don't terminate a clause with a preposition!"

do you have sawdust or just plain shit for brains?

what's next? are you going to tell me that African American Vernacular English is inferior to the standard variation now because it's not "proper"?? ahahaha I need an LMAO inhibitor

but those things don't reflect well on your linguistics education

you still don't know what linguistics is really about. even to a sophomore this would be blindingly obvious. just stop already

From my perspective, that speaks more about the quality of your education than to your intelligence. You must not be learning very much.

Grade inflation is a big problem these days, don't be a statistic.

I'm in exactly one class that's curved, biopsychology, but it's considered very difficult

I talked about methods of postsynaptic specification of synaptic strength in Aplysia with the professor personally though, so yeah it's cool for me

Nope, I know what linguistics is

no, you know what rhetoric is, you know what high school English teacher grammar Nazism is, and you have fused the two in your little pea brain and called the resulting concept "linguistics"

you show clear ignorance of even the most fundamental concepts of this science, which leads me to believe the Dunning-Kruger effect is at work

Somebody proficient in linguistics, who understands both the semantic features and syntactic structure of language, should be able to use it properly

Linguistics is descriptive, NOT prescriptive. From a scientific perspective, ideas of "proper" use of language are BOOO-GUUUUS.

mel

9th October 2009, 21:54

your anecdotes against mine

My anecdotes are based on two years as a member of the forum, talking to its members and having knowledge of a good chunk of their backgrounds. Yours is based on a surface-level knowledge after 5 days of posting. Suffice it to say, your anecdotes are worth a whole lot less than mine in this scenario. You simply aren't in a position to judge.

oops, that's rhetoric and logic, ding-dong

lol

explain. how is my spelling "atrocious"? why would I be using "perfect" (of course "perfect" implies that standard English grammar, spelling rules and lexicon are "superior" to what people actually use, which is an utter bogus unscientific idea) English on an Internet forum?

Possibly because you want to be well understood and not look like you posted hastily, without any thought or effort.

apparently you still think linguistics is all about "ah ah! don't terminate a clause with a preposition!"

do you have sawdust or just plain shit for brains?

No, linguistics is the scientific study of natural language, especially concerning questions of syntactic structure (grammar and syntax) and meaning (semantics). However, if you're capable of understanding the descriptive features of language (grammar, syntax, and semantics) you should also be able to understand how to properly utilize language by taking advantage of those features. Science might be purely descriptive (but I'm not going to get into a debate with you about the nature of science right now) but the understanding that comes from descriptive exploration often have practical utility once they are understood.

you still don't know what linguistics is really about

Why don't you enlighten me then.

I'm in exactly one class that's curved, biopsychology, but it's considered very difficult

Grade inflation has little to do with curves (usually) and more to do with colleges making their courses easier and professors grading less rigorously to make themselves look like better schools.

no, you know what rhetoric is, you know what high school English teacher grammar Nazism is, and you have fused the two in your little pea brain and called the resulting concept "linguistics"

My linguistics background is largely from the field of computational linguistics, so while there are important differences between the context-free grammars used in computer languages and the grammar natural languages, I do understand enough linguistic concepts to write a lexical analyzer, scanner, and parser for a compiler. I certainly don't think of linguistics as "grammar Nazism" but far be it from me to bust the illusion in your head that I'm an idiot with no exposure to the field.

you show clear ignorance of even the most fundamental concepts of this science, which leads me to believe the Dunning-Kruger effect is at work

Victory is yours?

Linguistics is descriptive, NOT prescriptive. From a scientific perspective, ideas of "proper" use of language are BOOO-GUUUUS.

Linguistics doesn't need to be prescriptive in order for knowledge of it to aid you when attempting to write. Understanding the features of language should, if you are being properly taught, make you better able to utilize those features of language. In any case, even if you maintain the claim that a linguistics education should not make you better able to understand and use language, and I concede that point to you, you've only proved that you have a slightly better excuse for your shitty writing and backwards logic. It's a kind of a Pyrrhic victory.

Skooma Addict

9th October 2009, 22:49

no. there's plenty of room for people like me (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=4539dc1cc3aa10b46cbf655811648137&tab=core&_cview=0&cck=1&au=&ck=), and there's going to be even more as time marches on. personally, I can't do shit. but fortunately, there are thousands of scientists in the NBIC area who agree with me at least to some degree (including a number of vocal misanthropes), and together we will all make a difference. and me personally, I don't have to change a bit in this system. keep pretending that taking lots of bong hits and complaining about "crapitalism" is going to do anything

Another transhumanist drone...how suprising. Luckily, given the current culture and the values of the individuals comprising our society, most people would simply find your dream world unacceptable. There is a reason why the government is required to subsidize many scientists. It is because nobody wants to pay for their worthless services. Sorry.

the more we reckon about how genetics and the brain work, and change them, and build on them, the more the current situation becomes untenable. past some point, the world of shittiness that is now just won't be able to function anymore. it's ... obvious! if you keep with current research and the way things are going now

What do you mean the current system won't be able to function anymore? If you think it will collapse, explain why. By the way, the current system is what allows for half of your research to occur in the first place.

besides, why should we want crappy people when we can have great people instead?

What is your definition of a "crappy person" and a "great person"?

#FF0000

9th October 2009, 22:50

This is sort of a childish discussion since instead of actually defending his points OP just sort of says "B-B-BUT YOU!".

Let's look at this example:

Point: "The DoD is bad because it kills tons of people for the American bourgeois class"
Counter-point: "BUT STALIN KILLED PEOPLE TOO!"

Notice that this doesn't actually go anywhere, because all OP is basically saying is "the DoD and Stalin are the same" before going on with how cool the DoD and how awful Stalin is, or something.

TheCultofAbeLincoln

9th October 2009, 23:01

The DoD has come up with a lot of new technology that would never have been developed elsewhere, from jets to radar to rockets and nuclear reactors. But these could be done by any government agancy that was given the amount of money they get to do these things without the bloodshed.

And I get my pay from the DoD so don't accuse me of being some suburban kid, please.

RoyBatty

9th October 2009, 23:59

My anecdotes are based on two years as a member of the forum, talking to its members and having knowledge of a good chunk of their backgrounds. Yours is based on a surface-level knowledge after 5 days of posting. Suffice it to say, your anecdotes are worth a whole lot less than mine in this scenario. You simply aren't in a position to judge.

let's do a poll

I'll give odds that most of the users here, indeed the overwhelming majority, are whiteys

lol

yeah, lol, you're a dumbass

Possibly because you want to be well understood and not look like you posted hastily, without any thought or effort.

I write on fora more or less like I talk. writing essay-style on a forum is pretentious

No, linguistics is the scientific study of natural language, especially concerning questions of syntactic structure (grammar and syntax) and meaning (semantics). However, if you're capable of understanding the descriptive features of language (grammar, syntax, and semantics) you should also be able to understand how to properly utilize language by taking advantage of those features.

what does "properly" mean here?

Why don't you enlighten me then.

scientific study of natural language

from my textbook from last year:

Some Common Misconceptions about Language

...

(1) People who say [things like] Nobody ain't done nothin' aren't thinking logically.
...
(7) The rules in grammar textbooks are guidelines for correct language use and should be followed whenever possible.

right there in the very beginning

two popular misconceptions you swallowed whole

yeah you don't know too much about linguistics

Grade inflation has little to do with curves (usually) and more to do with colleges making their courses easier and professors grading less rigorously to make themselves look like better schools.

well, like I already pointed out very directly, you don't actually know even the fundamentals of linguistics, so you're really not in any position to judge my competency there

My linguistics background is largely from the field of computational linguistics, so while there are important differences between the context-free grammars used in computer languages and the grammar natural languages, I do understand enough linguistic concepts to write a lexical analyzer, scanner, and parser for a compiler

translation: "I browsed the lex and yacc manuals once. they were pretty cool"

nigga please, the subset of linguistics applied in some areas of computer science is minuscule compared to the whole, and furthermore writing a parser for something like C++ or Python doesn't really fall under the heading of "computational linguistics", which is more geared towards computational explanations and analysis of natural language

psh, you're a bozo, I know "Google expertise" when I see it

Linguistics doesn't need to be prescriptive in order for knowledge of it to aid you when attempting to write. Understanding the features of language should, if you are being properly taught, make you better able to utilize those features of language.

this is all subjective

Another transhumanist drone...how suprising. Luckily, given the current culture and the values of the individuals comprising our society, most people would simply find your dream world unacceptable

most people are dumb, apathetic and unable to do anything. I'm not really worried about them

There is a reason why the government is required to subsidize many scientists. It is because nobody wants to pay for their worthless services. Sorry.

yeah lasers, rocketry, game theory, the Internet, cognitive psychology, operations research bla bla bla are all "worthless"

right

you'd shit bricks if you knew just how much gummt/military technology and know how you were surrounded by

What do you mean the current system won't be able to function anymore?

I just don't see how humans can live alongside superhumans in the long run

What is your definition of a "crappy person" and a "great person"?

better capable of propagating more successful memes

this entails not being really dumb like most people are

Point: "The DoD is bad because it kills tons of people for the American bourgeois class"

this is itself dubious

The DoD has come up with a lot of new technology that would never have been developed elsewhere, from jets to radar to rockets and nuclear reactors. But these could be done by any government agancy that was given the amount of money they get to do these things without the bloodshed.

how do you know

And I get my pay from the DoD so don't accuse me of being some suburban kid, please.

this seems extremely fishy. prove it

Skooma Addict

10th October 2009, 01:29

most people are dumb, apathetic and unable to do anything. I'm not really worried about them

Or maybe most people aren't dumb, and you just want to feel superior to others?

yeah lasers, rocketry, game theory, the Internet, cognitive psychology, operations research bla bla bla are all "worthless"

right

you'd shit bricks if you knew just how much gummt/military technology and know how you were surrounded by

Everything which was funded publicly was not in line with the preferences of consumers, and the resources were allocated irrationally. All of the billions of dollars that went into everything you listed would have gone to better projects.

I just don't see how humans can live alongside superhumans in the long run

Then why would we create "superhumans" if we cant live alongside them? Who is going to pay for all this anyways?

better capable of propagating more successful memes

this entails not being really dumb like most people are

I disagree with your definition.

In fact, there is no reason to suppose that most people agree with your idea of a superior human, so we should not expect to see people embrace your ideas. As I said before, most people just don't value or care about the specific sciences you wish to advance. That is why the government is required to fund most of the experiments. There is no escaping this fact.

RoyBatty

10th October 2009, 01:48

Or maybe most people aren't dumb, and you just want to feel superior to others?

no most people are pretty dumb

if psychometric tests are accurate (and they probably aren't, but close enough), then half of the people are below average, and average isn't even all too bright

Everything which was funded publicly was not in line with the preferences of consumers, and the resources were allocated irrationally. All of the billions of dollars that went into everything you listed would have gone to better projects

like what

Then why would we create "superhumans" if we cant live alongside them?

duh so they can take over

nature isn't very caring

Who is going to pay for all this anyways?

http://www.darpa.mil/testimony/hasc_3_27_03final.pdf

"...exploiting the life sciences to make the individual warfighter stronger, more alert, more endurant, and better able to heal."

who do you think is going to pay for it?

hurr durr

I disagree with your definition

tough titties

your opinion doesn't matter

In fact, there is no reason to suppose that most people agree with your idea of a superior human, so we should not expect to see people embrace your ideas. As I said before, most people just don't value or care about the specific sciences you wish to advance. That is why the government is required to fund most of the experiments. There is no escaping this fact.

http://cdn2.knowyourmeme.com/i/3375/original/cool-story-bro.jpg

mel

10th October 2009, 01:50

your opinion doesn't matter

Neither does yours. Stop trolling.

Plagueround

10th October 2009, 01:52

It's often been discussed that OI is not a chance to turn the forum into a personal playground for non-leftist members. RoyBatty has little to contribute and continues to make bigoted comments in just about every post and has been banned. Anyone who would like to appeal his ban feel free to PM me if you feel I'm overstepping my authority.

Skooma Addict

10th October 2009, 02:06

no most people are pretty dumb

if psychometric tests are accurate (and they probably aren't, but close enough), then half of the people are below average, and average isn't even all too bright

Well yea, that makes sense. I would expect to see about half below average and around half above average. But you even admitted the tests weren't accurate. We also cant be 100% certain until we test every last person. This also assumes the criteria of the test accurately measures smartness, which I doubt is the case. Also, I do not think below average is the same thing as dumb.

like what

I don't know. It is impossible to know. But it does not change the fact that what I said was correct. Read some economics and you will learn something.

duh so they can take over

So by this point I assume you realize you can only dream of your ideal society, because it won't happen. Thank God.

"...exploiting the life sciences to make the individual warfighter stronger, more alert, more endurant, and better able to heal."

who do you think is going to pay for it?

hurr durr

How about you actually answer my question? Who in their right mind would pay for this besides a few thousands scientists. Are you going to fund it through taxation?

tough titties

your opinion doesn't matter

Why not just admit that I am right and your wrong? Oh yea I forgot, you have a desperate need to feel superior to everyone.....my guess is low self esteem.

Skooma Addict

10th October 2009, 02:07

Leon Kowalski

10th October 2009, 03:32

We also cant be 100% certain until we test every last person.

of course not. that's what statistical sampling is for. are you going to tell me sampling is useless now, too, O Wise One?

This also assumes the criteria of the test accurately measures smartness, which I doubt is the case.

psychometric tests have gotten a lot better over the years

I don't know. It is impossible to know. But it does not change the fact that what I said was correct. Read some economics and you will learn something.

well, it depends on your utility function, doesn't it?

So by this point I assume you realize you can only dream of your ideal society, because it won't happen. Thank God.

no, it'll happen, just like how we succeeded a vast line of long dead hominid ancestors ourselves. genetic material is nowhere near as flexible as its memetic counterpart and eventually it will be possible to propagate memes more effectively without humans

evolution is an uncompromisingly brutal mechanism, and it's going to march on with or without us

no political ideology will change this

How about you actually answer my question? Who in their right mind would pay for this besides a few thousands scientists. Are you going to fund it through taxation?

of course

just like every other unpopular thing that got pushed through and developed to completion

like I said, most people are stupid, they can be herded so that they don't cause us any trouble

Why not just admit that I am right and your wrong? Oh yea I forgot, you have a desperate need to feel superior to everyone.....my guess is low self esteem.

cool story, Freud

Skooma Addict

10th October 2009, 04:19

well, it depends on your utility function, doesn't it?

Huh? I am saying that all the money that goes to the public sector could have been better spend in the private sector. I believe Hayek and Mises proved this to be true. Now, most people on this site disagree with me, but I don't know if you do or not.

no, it'll happen, just like how we succeeded a vast line of long dead hominid ancestors ourselves. genetic material is nowhere near as flexible as its memetic counterpart and eventually it will be possible to propagate memes more effectively without humans

evolution is an uncompromisingly brutal mechanism, and it's going to march on with or without us

no political ideology will change this

Well it will be a very long time before we naturally evolve into a "superhuman".

of course

just like every other unpopular thing that got pushed through and developed to completion

like I said, most people are stupid, they can be herded so that they don't cause us any trouble

So this depends entirely on whether or not the government decides to fund your program. It is just another special interest group that wants to pursue its own goals at societies expense.