Jim Naseum
-
Posts
2026 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Jim Naseum
-
-
I pointed out a dairy CAFO and explained that this is the norm.
This is a level of industrial insanity that it kept well off the radar of the public.
-
No solder required. Interesting.
This must be a new Heath Co.?
I was an AM junkie for 50 years. Until it became 99% pure crap owned by the political propagandist aholes. My AM radios pretty much sit idle.
I wonder if they can attract a new audience with this? I hope they have success.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
So, we must conclude that Coke and Pepsi taste "pretty much the same", people seated in a nice restaurant can't tell if the meal has been microwaved, and a $200 Pioneer receiver sounds the same as a pair of Mark Levinson monoblocks (Stereo Review).
Richard Clark has 10 grand waiting for anybody who can tell the difference between them if you follow his rules.
http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/
It's an old story, and of course no one could tell the difference. It would be impossible under those rules. But watch how easy it is to demonstrate the invalidity of that kind of test. Ready?
Imagine two 8 x 10 photographs of the Brooklyn Bridge and surrounds. Both taken from the same spot, but one is a minute after the other, and therefore captures different people on the bridge. Now, obviously the two pictures are different as anyone can see by laying them on the table and comparing them. But, that's not the test.
The test box is a closed box with a 1/4" narrow slit that runs from side to side. The pictures are placed in the box, behind the slit, and they are "played" by rolling them from bottom to top across the slit, in 15 seconds. You watching what appears in the slit as it rolls by. You see the whole picture, but not the whole picture at once. You run the standard AB/X method. You will never be able to pass this test, even though it is an absolute fact that the two pictures are different.
The reason is obvious -The brain doesn't "capture" a song. You hear only the instantaneous value of sound, and never do you have the whole of A to compare to the whole of B. Just like sliding the picture across the narrow slot.
Our preferences don't work the way AB/X testing works. That's so obvious it is silly.
-
1
-
-
Yet turn against it like any independent thinker and suffer the consequences. It's what makes any revolution so difficult.
My second thought is that at my age I don't care about revolution. If I were 20, or even 25, I'd man the barracades.
-
The best answer is to just reject factory food in favor of whole, fresh, natural food.
Totally agree! The question is where to obtain such food for an entire family at an affordable price. I only eat beef once per week and buy a type imported from Australia with the claim that the cattle is free range/grass fed/never given any antibiotics or hormones from birth until slaughter. Hopefully it's the truth as it's expensive! But, I'll take the gamble rather than buy CAFO beef from here. My eggs come from a local farmer whose chickens are free range. Vegetables are another matter during the winter months. I've read that broccoli grown here, for example, has a concoction of around 80 pesticides/herbicides on it, and that even copious washing won't remove it sufficiently. So, on the one hand broccoli is good for you, but are the pesticides/herbicides negating the benefits? On the occasions I've seen vegetables claiming to be 100% organic, the price is insane. Maybe we should have an ongoing thread about where to buy 100% organic food at affordable prices!
Maynard
You got it!
We also simply "eat less." Then the more expensive items don't seem so bad. We eat beef about 1 every two weeks. We buy one 8oz fillet and share it. That's plenty.My wife knows a place that sells grass fed beef.
-
Yet turn against it like any independent thinker and suffer the consequences. It's what makes any revolution so difficult.
Whereas, I think what makes revolutions too difficult is too much food.
-
The "system" - all those wheels, levers, and machinery of commercialization and hype, and especially "politics," is very dangerous. It will hurt you if you step unwisely and get caught up in it. Stay far away from it as possible, and life dramatically improves.
The frustration most people have is caused by them believing in, and then getting mixed up in, politics and nations and flags and songs and salutes and uniforms, and all that window dressing the establishment uses to turn you into canon fodder to advance their interest. Get off that train to nowhere, and happiness rises accordingly.
-
1
-
-
Jo, I agree that many more folks have become health conscious. Unfortunately, their efforts to do better are being intentionally thwarted by companies like Monsanto which refuses to allow us to know what we are eating. And, those who could stop them in their tracks are doing the exact opposite by allowing them to poison us to an even greater degree than ever before. So, when you go to the market and pick up that nice whole wheat bread (insted of white bread), the chances are it's genetically modified and contains levels of glyphosate (Roundup) which have been shown to be extremely dangerous (check out some of the articles on the constantly increasing amounts of glyphosate being used on crops planted here). Then you have agencies like the EPA, which is supposed to be protecting us, doing the opposite like approving the use of herbicides which are even more dangerous than the glyphosate:
And what about this promise (approx. 29 seconds into video)?
Instead, we get the Monsanto Protection Act!!!
I have known some Viet Nam vets who are all too aware of what Agent Orange exposure caused. Do you want that on the food that you eat? It seems that the more other countries ban the use of that kind of poison, the more is being used here solely to protect the financial interests of the chemical producers. And, as Jim pointed out, even eating freshly fallen snow is now considered too dangerous a practice to be allowed. It almost seems like a losing battle to me.
Maynard
Good comments.
My argument is simpler than that, however. It boils down to just a few principles.
The "establishment" by which I mean the ruling class and the owner class, will never, ever, ever have your interest in mind. If they did, they wouldn't be the ruling class and the owner class. So, one has to know that there will always be the Monsantos, and the protectors of Monsanto, and the cheerleaders of Monsanto. Once you accept this, it's no longer much of a problem. You can't trust the materialistic system in any way. And that system includes the corporations and the politicians who pimp for the corporations. By their very design, they are going to try to screw you.
The best answer is to just reject factory food in favor of whole, fresh, natural food. If it has "ingredients" it is not to be trusted without significant scientific effort. Why bother?
-
I drink single malt scotch. They do not all "taste" the same.
Wine testers don't swallow, which to me reveals quite a bit about the scotch I'm drinking. I can't drink 12 year old without a splash of water or with ice.
So, we must conclude that Coke and Pepsi taste "pretty much the same", people seated in a nice restaurant can't tell if the meal has been microwaved, and a $200 Pioneer receiver sounds the same as a pair of Mark Levinson monoblocks (Stereo Review).
What those writers don't understand is that perception is perception NO MATTER THE REASON! It gets back to the idea of objective reality. It doesn't exist. What does exist is the reality we create with perception. If a fancy wine label "enhances our perception" it doesn't matter is the difference is physical or perceptual. What matters is the quality of your experience. I just don't understand why people don't get this?
If a guy has been in a wheel chair for 30 years, goes to a tent healer who lays on hands, gets up and walks, it matters NOT ONE BIT if the healer has no medical powers. What counts is the WALKING, which he previously was not doing! The reality which counts is the post-perception experience.
If paying $100 for a bottle of wine enhances your experience of dinner, then that is a GOOD thing. A think which would not have happened if you ordered the $2 bottle. Reality is experience. Experience is nothing but perception. Furthermore, once you have had the experience and it is a memory, it is permanently good!
-
School Farms seem like a good idea to me.
I've seen that recently, but I forget the exact location. It was a neighborhood school and they had a great garden. Brilliant.
-
Yes. Because the culture is changing steadily toward better health. You can see it everywhere. The popularity of whole fresh food, the awareness of food causing disease. Even the old gross chicken producers have heard loud and clear that people don't want hormones and anti biotics in their chicken, as an example. Slowly for sure, but it's progress.Yes I see what you mean, that is a more precise observation. The educational system wouldn't be the way it is if we hadn't made it that way. I guess the real question is will it ever be reversed?
-Cindy
Twenty years ago I didn't hear people talking about fresh food. Now, everyone is taking about it all the time. Change is slow. It's hard to SEE the grass grow, but we know it does grow!
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Our educational systems have failed us.
That's one POV. I think it is we that failed the education system. After all, you get exactly the society you want. How could it be different, short of aliens taking over.
Deciders? That's us. Preparers? That's us. Funders? That's us. School board members? That's us. Look around, that's no one but us. Look at how the adults are eating. The bread, bakery and sweet department at our grocery store is bigger than the produce department. That's us, too.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
1
-
-
What's interesting to me here is how defensive people are for a person who clearly didn't keep up his end of the bargain, and should we really take it at face value that these people "didn't know" they had a loan?
That's certainly not my position. I have no doubt they know they have loans. They are simply mimicking the ethics that drive the rest of the country from the top down: Loopholes and Larceny. It's the national ethos. When the small guy sees all the guys above making it on graft, corruption, bailouts and fraud, they want in on the action. It's the nature of corrupt societies.
I don't defend them as much as simply understand them. If the government wants to see a change, they need to start prosecuting the mega-criminals who are getting a free ride now.
-
"A hostile business climate sends more companies to friendlier states" http://www.washingto...s-high-taxes-a/
From the article: "But after surviving depressions, recessions, earthquakes and wars, Farmer Brothers is leaving California, finally driven out by high taxes and oppressive regulations."
Yes, we do not allow companies to use the state as a toxic dumping ground. There are more regulations here, and I think for the most part, they enhance life for the residents, as to clean air, water, and so on. Likewise with taxes. So many states give companies a free ride on taxes just to locate there. I don't want those companies in the state.
We are a huge economy and remain a very desirable location for companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, Intel, Twitter, and countless technology companies.
-
If you can make less but stay in a rural'ish area in the heartland, you can often come out way ahead. That's what people don't get.
Oh, I think they get it all right. Californians WANT to be in a progressive culture. So, you're only kidding yourself with the "commiefornia" comment imagining everyone here is dying for an opportunity to get to the heartland. Not.
I think the majority of people with a tech career tend to follow the money, which typically ends up being in a big city. The most passionate want to be in the middle of Silicon Valley but most are following the money.
As for wanting to get into the heartland, I was talking about companies. Believe it or not, some companies tend to favor freedom and lower taxes / salaries if they can maintain the same quality of workforce.
"A hostile business climate sends more companies to friendlier states"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/17/editorial-businesses-flee-californias-high-taxes-a/
"The Golden State’s hostile business environment continues to drive thousands of companies away"
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426974/businesses-leave-california-texas
"Joseph Vranich, an expert on corporate relocations, has counted more than 200 major companies with tens of thousands of employees that have left the Golden State over the last four years.
http://dailysignal.com/2014/05/08/california-leavin-businesses-politicians-state-denial/
""California's a fantastic place to live. Don't get me wrong. It's just not a great place to do business,""
"A new study from the San Francisco-based Pacific Research Institute has ranked the regulatory climate for small businesses in California the worst out of all 50 states"
"Roughly 9,000 California companies moved their headquarters or diverted projects to out-of-state locations in the last seven years"
California Wins ‘Worst State to do Business’ for 11th Yearyay, progress.
California is the world's 8th Largest Economy.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-california-world-economy-20150702-story.html
-
If you can make less but stay in a rural'ish area in the heartland, you can often come out way ahead. That's what people don't get.
Oh, I think they get it all right. Californians WANT to be in a progressive culture. So, you're only kidding yourself with the "commiefornia" comment imagining everyone here is dying for an opportunity to get to the heartland. Not.
Yes, there are some percentage of people who will move anywhere to make more money. But, most people put culture and lifestyle ahead of income. There's 33 million people here for a reason.
-
1
-
-
I'm talking about actual engineering positions, not glorified McDonald's workers.
I live in California. And, we have a huge tech industry here. So, my experience is relative to here. Perhaps in some parts of the country, things are different.
If you look at the Labor Participation Rate, it's at a low since 1970. Around 62% (approx). This identifies a very large surplus labor pool.
-
We are not creating enough jobs to meet the demand for jobs. It is an absolute advantage to all the business sector to permanently maintain a large surplus labor pool.
It was the reverse when I got our of college in the 60s. There was a labor shortage. We could get a new job every afternoon if we wanted to. And each new job would be a raise in pay. Of course, I am exaggerating for effect, but no one ever worried about getting a job.
Then, things changed. Capital controls were removed and global trade agreements were put in place to drive labor costs down. "Offshoring" suddenly meant the "world was your labor pool" and companies used this to drive wages steadily down in the engineering disciplines.
In 1980/1 for example, SUN was starting a large new project in Silicon Valley and needed around 300 software engineers. A decent engineer then was making around $100k. SUN however, took the project to India, where they could pay 1/10th as much, including subcontracting overheads! Guys in the valley then, making $100K, had to compete with a guy in India making $5k. by all these means, wages were steadily driven down even as productivity rose by 3% or 4% per year.
As this effect took hold, business created a PERMANENT labor surplus in the US. A permanent "buyer's market."
-
If that's the case... why don't they? Why do we have a crisis on our hands in the form of people working stupid almost minimum wage jobs to pay off a mountain of debt? I.T. would pay much better, no? I mean, anybody can do it no?
I think it was previously explained. But, I will do it again, but briefly.
1. There is a massive excess labor pool in the USA. More jobless than jobs.
2. Whenever there is a labor surplus the job market becomes a "buyer's market." The employers can be excessively fussy.
3. Employers, knowing the market is flush with labor, directs HR to select the highest, best scholastic candidates to fill jobs in spite of what the job entails. e.g. If you can get a Ph.D. to do help desk work, it pads the prestige of the firm.
4. These masses of "tech jobs" don't pay that well except at the top of the pyramid. Offshoring is driving prices down too.
That's it in a nutshell.
-
Is this program needed to fill the 300,000 tech jobs you referred to earlier?
Needed and required are strong words. Yes such programs help immensely especially in lieu of experience when you are young. No there is not a governing board that requires them for employment. Yes a highly motivated individual can make it big without such programs, but it is very hard.
For example, the MIS director for the Kentucky state government is actually my best friend from childhood, grew up across the road from him and he is who got me into audio. Dude has a degree in psychology/counseling or some crap, he was a case worker for child abuse situations, basically was the guy who took kids away from bad families. After one too many very disturbing situations he had enough, studied his butt off on his own and got a job as a help desk guy. Kept studying, kept climbing. Finally made director a few years ago. Only took him 20 years. Just a very exceptional case to do this, not normal whatsoever.
Yet, there's guys doing this in no time coming out of the TSM program. A good software or network engineering position is almost guaranteed coming out of programs like this, this one in particular.
The BLS, a reasonable authority, is not that excited about the growth in tech jobs. http://www.computerworld.com/article/2502348/it-management/it-jobs-will-grow-22--through-2020--says-u-s-.html
Most of what is lumped into 'tech jobs' are things like 'Help Desk' and "IT Support," and even just data analysts. These are largely jobs one learns from the specific institution, and their unique requirements of that institution. Sharp people can easily do these jobs.
YES! We need engineering degrees, and all kinds of science degrees. But we need broadly educated people to direct the future of society.
-
I think Apple will lose this battle.
All the major networks are lining up the usual neocon-security-state-spokemen to pitch the public on why they don't need privacy and must do anything ordered to combat the massive fear of terrorism. CBS in particular, might as well be called the Pentagon Channel. But all those same, tired faces of the terrorism propaganda are making the rounds. John Miller, Chief Bratten, James Comey, et al. Not once yet, have I seen a privacy advocate appear on the same segment with the scare advocate - - not once!
-
Apology accepted, of course .Your rebuttal here is not up to standard for a lawyer.
I apparently misunderstood your position. Shame on me. I'm sorry. Hehe.
I had just read your totally excellent post about for profit schools, which fjd reposted last night, and was very impressed. Then i get two potshots.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
However, you make coding sound like any flunky can do it.
You are taking a page from twistedhammer dude who can't read threads and created idiotic interpretations of what I wrote.
For a lawyer, you aren't very careful about parsing arguments.
Never, ever did I imply any "flunky" can do it. Ever. I said any liberal arts GRADUATE could do it, except for the very highest levels. I said very bright kids do it. And they do.
The point remains that there are a few very high skill jobs at the top of tech, and then for each of those, there are hundreds of mundane tech jobs that any intelligent person can learn to do. "Coding" is just one task on the general tech field. I agreed that the highest jobs need well trained specialists with specific degrees.
Your rebuttal here is not up to standard for a lawyer.
C'mon guys, you can do better than making crap up can't you?
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
-
Is this program needed to fill the 300,000 tech jobs you referred to earlier?Colleges simply need to adapt to be more in line with the work force. I was actually a part of forming such a degree and have seen it work. I was the first graduate of Murray State's telecommunication systems management program. On multiple occasions I have met with several CEO's and faculty in providing direct feedback as to what is happening in the workforce and what skills are needed that aren't being taught, as well as what is a waste of time. We have managed to morph a mediocre electrical engineering program into a top notch telecommunication program where students learn actual usable skills that are immediately usable. The labs are outfitted with current equipment, so graduates going into the workforce are already intimately familiar with most everything from day one. Classes that for most people are useless in this field, such as calculus, were dropped.
The result of all this effort over the past 15 years is that today, it is hard to go to this school and not have a good engineering job waiting for you when you get out. That is a huge success story in my opinion, and seems to be the opposite of what we are seeing elsewhere.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
Pay Those Student Loans or Else....
in Lounge
Posted
Barbara Sher!
I first heard Barbara on the radio in the early 90s. I bought her extensive taped program and listened to it several times, along with loaning it to many friends. It was a superb affirmation and confirmation that "doing what you love" is the most important path you can choose in life. Live the Life You Love.
I haven't kept up with her new materials, but it sure was great stuff a couple decades ago.
Website: http://www.barbarasher.com/index.htm