Lemming

@Statichead

Cyrano de Bergerac (1950) 

@cristo71

I like the "obtuse" scene,

Always 'seemed to me that the Warden did not know what obtuse meant the first time,and later looked it up in the dictionary by the 2nd scene it was used.

Has a good amount of stories and characters,well defined with many having their own motivations and arcs.

Commentary on prisons and the people in them.

@ebuc

Movie 'did have a lot to consider,

Often the 'purpose of Sci Fi genre I suppose,

Ideas of future might be's, worth considering rammifications before they 'are.

What bothers me about AI, is human will being removed from the equation,

Though I suppose that has always been somewhat iffy,

Humans wills manifestations always limited, whether by nature, storms, beasts,

Or society, large majority forcing ways of life upon one.

I don't like feeling helpless to evolution,

Which is what AI 'could be, forced evolution,

Which could go many ways,

GORT,

Or AI who doesn't let us do anything 'remotly dangerous,

Or AI who destroy or torture us.

@#1138

Still need to find wich's on the beach.

I do think throwback instincts can often be a healthy pastime,

Whether supermarket shelves for bargains, or filling one's stomach after an exertion.

@Mharman #1137

I've heard that as well.

Though I think a lot of people disagreed then, and now, about American offices ability to corrupt,

Not to mention how they, the country, and culture have changed over time.

. . .

One could argue, that even if one wants to support God's chosen people,

One ought want God's chosen people on a good path in life,

That supporting them on a wrong path, would not truly be supporting them.

Though I don't take the view that they are on the wrong path, myself.

Well, discussion depends a bit on the 'type of vampire perhaps,

But you list some animal predetors and some human predetors,

Some fictional vampires end up killing their prey when they feed,

Some fictional vampires only need 'some life force.

I suppose some people could argue that if the killing vampire only ate crimminals, it wouldn't be evil,

But that's debatable.

Crimminal lives matter, some might argue.

I suppose one could compare it to a survival situation, such as murder and cannibalism on a lifeboat,

Though I think people would still generally find it more good to starve to death.

I suppose one could compare it to the choices people/countries make in life,

Often 'eating other people and countries figurativly,

In ways that lead to death, sweatshops, pushing garbage onto others, war, supporting war.

But if one is 'normative about vampires,

Really 'seems like the guy going around killing people is worse (Ack a 'feelings arguement, worthless).

I imagine there are individuals who kill others to take their organs for transplants,

Likely 'countries where crimminals might be selected for such,

Countries where 'crimminal is a loose definition.

And as I say this, it seems more and more selfish, more evil, killing vampires.

Skeksis

While vampires may be compared to sharks, vampires are usually sentient, aware of their own actions,

Though one might still argue sharks a natural evil, though they also might be valuable to food chain, I'm not biologist.

. . .

'Forcefully or using coercion to take blood (Non Life Threateningly),

Still seems wrong to me,

Taxes, or forced blood draws, seem a bit wrong to me,

Though I suppose some might argue them not evil if they serve a supposed higher purpose of saving others,

I'm not so sure that evil for good cause, is not still evil for a good cause.

Eat healthier,

Eat less,

Exercise more,

Count calories.

Don't shop when hungry.

Don't keep junk food in the house.

If your diet saves you money, keep the saved money in mind as an additional reason to follow the diet.

If you manage to get a six pack or strong jawline, keep them in mind as aspects of yourself that you enjoy as reasons to follow the diet.

Keep in mind people 'out of shape, who can't run or cut their own toenails.

Keep future old age in mind, and how good health will make it more enjoyable.

Just keep stacking reasons for why your diet and exercise is better than gluttony and sloth.

And keep them in mind.

I wonder if people would enjoy hunting mechanical animals with food inside them.

My eldest brother says such are called pinata.

I've heard sometimes people say various games would not work with X many players,

RTS MMORPGS for example,

But what does 'Real Time Strategy mean?

That the units move as they would in real time I 'suppose,

But they 'don't really,

Games have various speeds,

Perhaps they mean that movements are continually happening?

But 'again, various speeds in games.

Perhaps they mean you don't have to wait for your opponent to end their turn,

So then if a game only 'moved for ten minutes, once every day, according to player orders,

Would it still be a RTS?

I've never heard of hurricane straps before,

But after Googling them,

They makes sense, of course houses are built of many parts and designs.

I'm sure I remember 'something about some voting guide saying 'something about "extend argument".

Did you ever have alternate plans on how you might be in the eye of a hurricane?

And movies that if the movie executives asked me if I wanted another, I would say no.

What 'are the alternative parenting arrangements and circumstances?

Do you mean Foster Parents?

Schools, Tutors, Nannies?

Adoptive Parents?

I'd suppose myself the importance is 'blood, a  shared trait between that more closely aligns oneself to one's parent or child.

. . .

Depends what the 'purpose of raising the child is,

Possibly the state found this arrangement ideal, provided they were able to properly indoctrinate, train, and use said children as soldiers.

. .

Though I don't know if such soldiers would tend to be better or worse for various purposes.

Might mess them up in values and social development, that they might not have been suited to all positions of soldiering.

Maybe pissed some of them off against the government that did such to them.

@#1128

Never, I just keep using the last bits of a soap bar until it is gone, even should it get to the size of a dime.

I find this interesting, due to the suggestion that one can stereotype people according to the careers or jobs they pursue in life,

As well as giving me an idea, that perhaps certain jobs might do well to attempt to employ people who do not apply for said job.

Though certain types of people may 'want certain jobs,

Such does not mean they are the best type of person 'for said job.

Rather, people who would 'not want said job, might be better suited.

Then again, jobs probably try to weed out the people unsuited to a job through interviews and training.

Philosophy, History, Math, Art,

Do not have to be created with the purpose of controlling others,

Do not have to be used with that as purpose.

. . .

I don't think politics fits under that definition either, or religious the one below.

Though religion 'can and 'has often had a role in the law, that is because people's laws are often formed by their values, and their beliefs/religions are high values.

If a people believe murder to be wrong according to some Deity/Working of the Afterlife/Or even just in this world,

If they argue such and their argued beliefs become agreed upon,

The beliefs can be seen as a religion perhaps, whether as an individual's view and creed, or a group of people holding and practicing similar tenants.

Such beliefs are often spread and taught to others,

But not always for control, not always forced.

Many times simply offered, or seen in another,

One can 'say control, but if I offer someone else a hand up, is my intention to 'control them into taking my hand?

I don't think of it that way.

Environment can also be effected by humans though,

Or humans being 'aware of how the environment effects them, can steel themselves.

Of course one can argue in either case that the 'environment causes the human to effect it, or steel themselves.

But I find such impractical to focus on, unempowering,

I think it good to be aware of,

But believe that people are best empowered by the knowledge of environment 'and Ego.

. . .

I suppose a lack of Ego, can also get events accomplished, one marches to ends regardless,

Even if as a soldier at a concentration camp or a torturer,

Thinking they have no choice, the pressure too much, or blind to the slow erosion of one's own morals.

Though people can 'still end up on those roads consciously.

. . . Still, I like playing that thought in my head, You have a choice.

What would dwarves in fantasy, call any of their kind born with gigantism?

No, I don't think women are always right, or that a husband should bend over backwards to make her glow all the time.

Then again, such 'can be the expectation in some cultures,

And I don't mean specifically nations, , , The cultures of nations change all the time, or have various regions with different expectations.

. .

Even individual families in a town or individual people might have expectations.

Also depends on the situation.

Personally if I got involved in a relationship, I would think it right for both individuals in a relationship to consider each other's feelings, motivations, situation, stressors, wants, and so on.

And 'each bend a bit perhaps,

But everyone has different ideas of what moments and property should be bent or not.

Some people like privacy and breathing space without the other person 'considering them all the time,

Or dislike having to spend 'too much consideration on another person.

. . .

When I was a kid, living with my Dad was annoying, as he preferred not to have regular chores in the house, and to let dishes and dirt pile up, until at random days he would burst into a cleaning frenzy, and be grumpy and pushy about making everyone engage in a cleaning frenzy with him.

Recently when I visited my Dad, again he had a 'lot of expectations on how everything was to be in his house,

I can stand 'some expectations softly put, but he's very. . . OCD about it, causes friction, and since there's friction and irritating commanding, begins to feel like one is in a power play, and one's will becomes even more misaligned and muleheaded since one is an adult now.

I just did as he wanted, since I was just visiting, but it'd be 'really annoying as a permanent situation, to the point that if I were ever to live with him, I wouldn't, rather rent a separate house.

. . .

In the military when I had barracks roommates,

It was usually both of us keeping to our own spaces, doing equal amounts of work cleaning, keeping room clean, not being too loud.

Except for two roommates I had,

One who complained about my being awake on my computer at night, Which too bad for him, I was working the night shift, and didn't feel like changing my sleep schedule on my days off. Or being exiled from my room for 12 hours on my day off.

So he was always grumpy while we were roommates, but bah to him, I think I was 'already nice by using headphones and leaving the lights off.

. . .

I own my own dishes, utensils, few cooking implements.

So I can just store them my way, clean them my way.

I'd agree people often act different in different environments, around different people.

Though, I'd think there could be more than 3 types,

There are different public spaces, different internet spaces, different family members, different family members in different environments.

Though I 'do tend towards the same public behavior overall,

I also include the internet as part of the public, after all I leave enough details about myself in the open, that a family member 'could happen upon me online.

I also behave differently when talking one on one,

Whether I trust a person or not,

Whether I have built up past behaviors that they have an expectation of how I might act.

Was there a rush for dimes and quarters in 1964, when they stopped using silver in them?

True,

But I still have trouble thinking for example, an Atheist Politician as religious.

Hm, reading more,

Well, state government isn't 'Congress.

But 1961 is a long way from 1776,

Thomas Jefferson was not the 'sole definer of what people wanted of their government, or considered the law to be.

There are many other examples on Wikipedia,

But I'm just skimming,

At a skim though, it 'looks to me that a state 'can according to the Constitution, have the 10 Amendments in a school,

Or the Satanist 10 Commandments, if they had enough public and government official support.

I agree the situation is more complicated than just the current last couple years.

I am somewhat to strongly nationalist.

I say somewhat, because I often think America is too much of a mixed bag of groups,

But even with that, we mostly hold similar laws, same government, military, same oaths (Generally speaking).

How do you define religion/religious?

I 'did note in #9, you stated

That I thought we might have different perceptions or definitions of religious.

I think the 10 Commandments would be better off in Religious affiliated schools.

Though I wouldn't be bothered by the history class discussing the 10 Commandments place in American or World history.

. . .

On another hand,

'IF this law came from and was voted in by the voters, I lean a 'bit more towards it,

But Public Schools, isn't there some sort of separation of church and state?

Course despite those ambiguous words, religion 'does course throughout American government anyway.

People swearing on Bible for court or office, or Qurans,

or "Some modern-day political leaders have also declined to use Bibles and have been sworn in on copies of the Constitution, law books or other tomes, both religious and non-religious."

But I'm getting off track.

Separation of Church and State,

I am unsure if this means 'Federal and/or 'State,

Yeah, it 'says Church and 'State, but words can be deceiving in meaning,

Try to convince people that the American States were sovereign nations/states at the time of the Civil War, they'll disagree,

Or claim that their 'current idea of the word makes more sense than people back when the word was first drafted,

Despite State rights being so large, and probably including religion a ton, therefore clearly not having the same view of it as some modern people talking about Church and State,

But eh, I'm rambling.

I think the 10 Commandments would be better off in Private Schools, voted into being there by the local community, paid for by the local community,

I think 'more Private establishments should exist, and that communities enforce their beliefs in their own backyards, rather than being told by the Federal Government what to do,

So long as their beliefs don't stray 'too far from my own.

'Does Democracy bring better rulers to power?

People can be influenced by promises, greed, and lies.

Like the largest army,

One can achieve by the most facile tongue, greatest reward offered to 'part of the whole, or misinformation.

Dictators don't 'have to choose their children to follow them,

. . .

Is popular consensus capable of choosing the 'best candidates?

Is science determined by popular consensus, or any craft such as when a dilapidated building is in need of replacement?

Does a mob choose a better successor for a craftsman, than the craftsman himself, who has worked with, and is trained to recognize ability?

They may choose those who 'promise to work in their interests, but do they know the candidates 'ability to follow through?

Though a population 'may be educated, base presuppositions can conflict groups of even learned men,

Can they then not often ignore better men, for party lines?

And what 'good are these divides among citizens, exacerbated by a political party system, is not rivalry in sports enough?

. . . . . . . . . . . .

'Does dictatorship lead to more unstable regimes?

One might argue that the best political course to take, depends on the 'situation,

Technology advancing throughout time, changing the conditions,

Power of countries changing conditions,

Cultural values changing conditions,

Societal development changing conditions.

Has Democracy been around long enough to 'intuitively think it better?

Does the West winning over the USSR or various Monarchies, mean Democracy better?

Suppose someone with red shoes was a basketball star, 'could mean red shoes make for a better player, but maybe they were just a better player, or more lucky.

Democracy can have an interest in propagating itself, if the USA had been a Dictatorship, perhaps Dictatorships would have swept the Earth.

. . . .

Sorry about all the questions without answers, I don't know the answers, 

And since in conversation, not formal judged debate,

Don't feel need to research and develop possible answers immediately.

I consider the innocent civilians unlucky.

Total_war is the path wars seem to take, especially in this modern era.

I'm not 'aware of any wars settled by Champion, ah wait, Flower_war Aztecs might qualify,

But still, I'm doubtful that Israel and Hamas would agree to such a contest,

Additionally what would it solve?

I think Hamas, based upon it's past would simply continue the same terrorism if they lost. maybe even if they won, depending on what were to be the wager of such a contest, though 'maybe if they had some success they would simply keep trying again and again with the champion contest until they had enough leverage to abandon it as a method and return to total war killing all Israelis.

Holmgang was also a bit like champion combat I suppose, but on a smaller scale, though perhaps it still kept families and villages from killing each other.

. . .

I suppose Israel 'could fight with it's hands tied behind it's back, not take the actions that near all countries take in war recently and currently.

Not bomb bomb factories unfortunately located in cities,

Not destroy enemy mortars set up on top of hospitals unfortunately,

Not attack the terrorists in a tunnel, who unfortunately execute their civilian hostages before they can be freed.

Not interrupt supplies sent to Palestine, that the terrorists end up stealing from the civilians in Palestine, along with much of the infrastructure that Hamas rips up so they can use it to kill more Israelis.

Urban war is messy I hear, it's too bad, but that is where the war is.

. . . Given the roof knocking and not intentional murder of civilians, various other conventions, Israel probably 'already fights with a hand behind it's back, unlike Hamas.

I'm sorry this rambles heavily.

I'm unsure whether Dictatorship or Democracy would be a better government,

But I 'think I lean towards Democracy,

It seems better to have safeguards on leaders,

Traditionally such might have been a fear of being assassinated or popular uprisings, (Lot of assassinated Tyrants in history)

But technology keeps going apace, only so much power in a mob of pitchfork wielding farmers.

Well, rifle wielding farmers maybe, unless we allowed people tanks, nukes, and jet fighters.

But point is about centralized government, having more a monopoly on power than ever maybe.

Course power takes many forms, social media might be two edged sword, and more powerful than army in a way.

Leaders can be poorly picked and horrible or crazy, though I don't know if that occurs less than horrible or crazy populaces,

Maybe Plato has a point about Philosopher Kings, but I haven't thought on it too much.

. . . Course the pigs might be more a 'council, than a king.

. . . I don't remember if the French Revolution Council of 12 and whatever other voting apparatus they had of electoral nature (I think) did well or bad.

Reign of Terror gets mentioned somewhere I think,

Not sarcasm, I just haven't read deeply or recently about French Revolution.

. . .

But Napoleon as Dictator seemed to bring peace and security to France, until he was unsuccessful in Russia,

Though I think people in Egypt and Spain could have done without his wars.

. . .

. . .

America had voting requirements even before the literacy tests of Jim Crowe,

Though I don't know much about them, and know 'nothing about other countries historical requirements for voting.

. . .

Knowledge tests at a 'glance don't seem the worst,

One wants a person who votes to have 'some type of understanding of what they are voting for and why,

Whether candidates can actually realize their promises or not,

Does one really want someone mentally retarded to the point they lack significant understanding, to vote?

But perhaps it is situational,

If I am on a ship of mental retards, I likely don't want them voting on our actions, unless I can control them,

Nor might it be in 'their interests to be the voting party,

But people want freedom, 

One additionally worries about government in 'power adjusting the rules to suit themselves, Jim Crowe.

Or why people worried about the number of Supreme Court judges,

Or Biden's Ministry of Truth.

. . .

Still, I don't 'hate voting requirements myself,

Just haven't thought about it to much.

DART for example has voting requirements that I find agreeable.

If I founded a new society in real life, perhaps I would want voting requirements in 'it as well.

Certainly I sometimes think it would be nice if those who ran for president had to pass or at least publicly 'take some test on general understanding and additionally on politics, history, current events.

The debates 'kind of do that I suppose, though some argue the debate holders can be biased in how they ask and what questions they ask.

China had the Imperial Exam for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_examination for officials.

Personally I think societies tend towards leaders,

Often 'needing them.

But power admittedly 'can be corrupting,

If not the to the one who took power, then their successors.

Which is why Social Cycle Theory is talked about as far back as Plato.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_cycle_theory#:~:text=Plato%20describes%20his%20cycle%20of,order%20from%20aristocracy%20into%20tyranny.

Additionally if one leads by tyranny, how dare they ever relinquish control, lest their successor turn that power unto them?

. . .

Not that Dictators could never give up power,

https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/cincinnatus#:~:text=When%20he%20learned%20of%20the,and%20returned%20to%20his%20plow.

But such requires a degree of civility perhaps, or stability, 'something that if one lead by Dictatorship, they could trust society to carry on, or their successor not to turn on them.

I don't know if Stalin feared for his own safety, thought so high of himself, hated Snowbal- er Trotsky, or what,

But it certainly progressed to a point he would have had to fear for himself and family, if it wasn't there already.

The pigs in Animal Farm though,

I think it was just a case of one of those times where power corrupts, and the replacements prove little better than their predecessors.

. . .

Side thought on ruling ideals,

I have difficulty seeing how it could 'not be, myself.

While one could argue that certain family members can abuse relationships to the point that they are disavowed,

I would argue that such is not the 'norm.

The reason that Christianity or Confucianism encourages valuing family, is because normally people desire symbiosis in it, rather than predation or parasitism.

At least I 'hope they desire symbiosis, and that symbiosis is more common. (Depends on situation I suppose)

But it is common sense for many, such symbiosis, even if coerced,

Humans tend to value family, as it is what they are brought up with, they value immediate to extended family members.

Should we not value strongly our blood?

Even when families grow large, huge, the nation tends to similar customs, culture, and values,

Underlying sameness, underlying 'contract, of ape shall not kill ape,

Though kindness and honor ought still extend to the 'Others, outside one's tribe, tribes tending to be circles within circles, in my view.

I see the 'logic in it myself,

One ideally strengthens one's tribe/nation/culture, does not allow it's territory, military, economy to be overrun.

Though I don't care for having kids myself, or treating them as a means to an end.

It 'is true that if one doesn't have kids, other's will,

Can one believe humanity to be better off 'without one's values?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Course, maybe my perception of family in history is flawed,

I'm know there's families where child sacrifice existed, or would sell their children.

I just don't see Hamas the same as Israel,

It's not a double standard.

Doesn't mean I see Palestinians the same as Hamas,

But where are the hostages?

Where does Hamas set up with impunity?

Who supports Hamas and cheers their actions?

Civilians die in war, it 'can't be avoided most the time.

I. . . I think it is acceptable to sacrifice a thousand, even more, of one's own nation in war, not to mention the enemies,

To make it clear they can not harm one's tribe,

To rescue back one's people, and not leave them in torture and degradation.

.  . .

Of course, the other side may feel similar,

But such is why I do not look towards cooperation, or cohabitation, in 'this scenario.

Even in other scenarios,

I think people ought to keep to their people,

Many Native American tribes and Americans could have gotten along better, if American hadn't done what they had, could have had cohabitation or America respectful of Native land ownership, though complicated history.

. . . But my point is even if they had coinhabited, I think people ought stick to their 'people, their cultures, their values, beliefs, religions.

Giving in, allowing one's children to be influenced and changed, is death of one's people come different and slower.

Eh, my Mom reads the Bible and talks of it often in life difficulties and choices, pretty Christian.

Extreme (Anything) can be bad,

Extreme Atheists, Extreme Americans, Extreme Gardeners. . .

Well, maybe some are just fun dipped heavy into,

But a double standard is often not unexpected in an extreme X,

Doesn't mean all Christians have double standards,

Or that extreme Atheists might not applaud the war and wish for more, all while mocking religion and claiming it's the reason of all human misery.

One could even have an extreme Christian who deplores the war,

Yet is extreme in their faith, talking about it all the time, incorporating it in their life,

Though, what is 'extreme is subjective maybe,

Like spicy food.

I don't think I agree with your perspective on the Israel Palestine situation, but as you said, another topic.

. . .

I'd imagine some people were pissed off at the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re%27im_music_festival_massacre and other killings by Hamas,

Civilians die in war,

But maybe many people did not view the Hamas attack as 'war,

The videos of Hamas parading victims bodies stripped of clothes, of raping and holding hostages,

The 'unverified (Last I heard) claims of baby decapitations (Still, many believed that such occurred.)

War though, is war, even if civilians die,

Can Israel 'accept a life of being terrorized and rocketed, turn the cheek again and again unto death?

. . .

I've read that,

https://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/anthropology/coptic/Copthist.htm#:~:text=The%20Byzantine%20patriarchs%20in%20Egypt,their%20art%20became%20more%20unified.

I also read a book recently that argued the Coptic did more than not aid the Byzantines, but actively aided and supported the Muslims, thinking the Muslims to be a temporary problem (They were not).

The Great Arab Conquests by Hugh Kennedy,

Though I'm also glancing about and seeing some website that vehemently claim the Coptics did not help the Muslims at all, so I don't know.

As Savant says of your post, "Hard to quantify something like that"

My mother decries the war, and wishes it would end,

My father crudely mocks Hamas, and claims what did they expect, claims they get what they deserve,

My mother I'd consider far more a Christian than my Father, not because of their opinions on the situation, but in their daily lives and actions, she is more a Christian I'd say.

Depends what Christians you're talking about maybe.

Depending on how one thinks about it,

Are there only evil choices in life?

Always sacrificing 'something, in others or oneself,

Lesser evil perhaps, but always sacrificing 'something.

Though perhaps some sacrifices are so minor, they are not considered sacrifices by some.

Moon knight had something about a villain who killed people before they would commit their crime I think,

Though he relied on some staff to predict a person's far flung future.

Couldn't I just steal Hitler as a baby and give him to an orphanage or something?

Do I have to 'kill him?

Different living environment, different person perhaps.

Additionally, maybe removing Hitler is just a bad idea anyway,

Maybe 'situation in Germany, was more the cause for Nazi Germany, than Hitler himself.

Maybe person who replaces Hitler in situation, is more capable leader.

Japan and war with already there,

Saves soldiers and civilian lives 'maybe, to drop nuke,

I don't remember what I've read about the situation before the dropping of the bomb.

The human body.

Though one might argue the human body is not a tool. . .

Is it not material, material sculpted constructed, cared for?

Reading requires additional education of having learned the written word, rather than only having learned the spoken word.

So reading would have more of an 'appearance/reputation belonging to scholars, even if so many people can read nowadays.

Reading requires more attention usually perhaps,

A scene read from a book often requires visualization, comic books aside,

Thus reading might take additional effort, more weight lifted and exercised by the brain.

'Does sound uncomfortable, to have what one considers an overabundance of empathy.

Can't change 'all the world perhaps,

But perhaps can change yourself.

I suppose one could view helping other's as a bad, if it harms one's own health, wealth, or happiness.

But one 'ideally could help others 'some, without going to extremes.

I don't much care for the recent MS Paint update that adds layers, 

And apparently some AI image creator that I can't even use without a Microsoft account, but the blasted downgrade is forced on me anyhow.

I can't seem to get the layers to work right,

Somehow all the colors to images keep getting messed up, that I can't use fill, without a ton of pixels not filling.

True,

Fiction often involves theories and hypothesis,

Not always rigorously tested, or with all parts in place,

But initial ideas and broad strokes in fiction, have often been forerunners before realized invention or discovery.

Physicist might say a metal ball when released from the hand will fall to the ground,

But there 'could be a magnetic wall that one does not know of.

Psychologist might say that a person who grew up with abusive parents, poverty, and peers who commit crimes,

To be more likely to grow up to reiterate such actions themself.

But there's a lot of metaphorical magnetic walls in an individuals life.

Chemistry has roots in alchemy.

Lot of flaws in alchemy I hear, but it paved the way,

And even modern chemistry isn't 'complete I think.

What makes something science for you?

Visiting my Dad again, back in October maybe.

Interesting.

I doubt the internet would go 'dead, except in the most totalitarian states,

But with all the advertising and propaganda throughout history,

I'm expecting a 'lot more bots on the internet as they improve.

'Ideally, but,

Just because people 'can use something carefully, just because people can be 'encouraged to use something carefully, just because something is set up carefully,

Doesn't mean everything goes as planned.

I think a blending of socialism and capitalism is already fairly common.

. . .

Let's say there is a tribe of hunter gatherers, the tribe is periodically forced to hunt elks and pick corn,

One guy thinks fish might be tasty,

But the tribe does not want to direct it's periodic efforts to fish, as they don't know how they would do it,

But they tell the guy if he wants to fish in his free time, that's fine.

Guy fishes, gets extra fish,

Sells it in exchange of services, such as someone mending a blanket or something.

What's wrong with that?

@Mall

It 'can suck, doesn't 'always suck.

People who don't want a degree of individual liberty can always choose a government 'without said liberty.

Meritocracy, cannot merit 'everyone,

Though it is true in various meritocracies they can become twisted, or cracked.

@Best.Korea

As much as I'm aware of Socialism stealing people's rights, acting inefficiently, stagnating societies, and sacrificing portions of the population.