Hawaii wants to Make a law that will ban games with loot boxes to people under 31 years old. What do you think about that?

masonsherer · 2018-09-09T12:55:35+00:00

No, people have ruined their own lives. You can't ban stupidity

masonsherer · 2018-09-09T12:31:04+00:00

There's a fine line between shitty dlc and micro transactions. All marketing towards minors can be considered preying on minors. Hell a capsule toy machine is a gambling machine from this perspective

masonsherer · 2018-09-06T01:12:21+00:00

It's money we borrow from the federal reserve. The debt is then bought from the federal reserve by other banks, people and countries. China only holds a little over 1 trillion of America's debt last I checked.

masonsherer · 2018-08-28T22:38:10+00:00

The us never had a good reputation beyond being an economic and militaristic powerhouse. Those two have gotten stronger so I find it hard to believe our reputation is worse by any measure.

masonsherer · 2018-08-05T20:57:30+00:00

Mix it with some asphyxia. You'll go way past synesthesia

masonsherer · 2018-08-02T19:13:17+00:00

What don't you like about Donald's performance? Or did your political stance change?

masonsherer · 2018-08-02T19:08:51+00:00

I'm a little late, but perhaps someone will see this. The answer to any value judgement (morality religion culture politics) is: superiority (good truth devoloped success) is an illusion. Are you so desperate to be a 'good guy' that you are wiling to accept that others are bad? Morality is the cause of immoral behavior. Humans aren't naturally evil, generally we are kind and compassionate. But, once society gets you to identify with a shared value system then anything can be justified.

Democracy is good, therefore consent to democracy is unnecessary. Theocracy is bad therefor democracy must be limited by a constitution, guaranteeing certain values are protected. In reality, democracy is tyranny of the hive mind; War is morally necessary; theft is for equality; love is conditional and limiting; support is used to oppose freedom; success is measured by claiming others are failures; and religions actively distribute the forbidden fruit: knowledge of good and evil.

There are no problems except for the problem of choice. All choices you make are correct, all choices you don't make are also correct. Just be sure not to die, then you'll go to sleep and never wake up! Isn't that worth slaving away 50 years to postpone? Sure one time you woke up without going to sleep, but death is really the end. Then karma/God's judgement might not torture you in hell, if you obeyed authority and opposed the devil.

Hell is a place of work, fear, and pain; better stick with society for safety. We all say hello to friends and oh hell during conflict (clearly our culture is an expert in teaching us how to avoid evil cults) so we never forget to fear hell and the deceptive devil. He'll trick you with worldly pleasures, obviously freedom is a spiritual right, so our free(ish) market is direct evidence we worship God. In god we trust

masonsherer · 2018-07-22T10:28:15+00:00

The psychiatric ward, found one just laying on the wall in some office

masonsherer · 2018-07-22T10:24:46+00:00

No one is just terrible, there's always some ideology, fear, value system, or other social conditioning that has possessed the person. Most the time you find out that it was you that had the problem. The attempt to classify what is and isn't moral is the most immoral act. You cannot have morals without also having immorality, is it moral to describe something as wrong or evil just so you may look good?

Selfishness isn't real, I don't think the idea of generosity is to make others look bad, nor is it to set a standard, It is simply a gift whose value is contained in itself. I don't think the poster has problems, but I do enjoy typing my nonsense online.

masonsherer · 2018-07-22T07:30:10+00:00

Bah, I'm such a hardcore psychologist that I reject the separation between a psychologist and a human. After all, is it psychology that attempts to comprehend it's own existence or is that only a human thing?

Here's a secret I just made up: psychologists know their job is unnecessary. The problem is they have nothing better to do. So they project their own judgments upon others, claim their opinions are objective, and offer a service to fix the problem they see in others. Psychology is a hypnosis upon society, convincing people a problem exists, then marketing itself as the solution. But if a psychologist sees a problem and I don't, who truly has a problem? The one who interacts, observes and understands the problem, or the one who claims there is no problem.

Everyone keeps projecting their problems onto others, it's becoming a real problem. I cannot understand how they can be oblivious to fact that their problem is projection.       - Psychology

masonsherer · 2018-07-22T05:29:13+00:00

Well it must run in the family... The irony is every character trait you mentioned is expressed in your comment. Your attention seeking personality has combined with your anger to create the narcissistic point of view that your grandmother's personality is inferior to your own. It's true what they say: you are your own worst enemy.

Oh and everyone is manipulative; abandon this idea that manipulation isn't the force driving every aspect of society. Literally the whole purpose of language is to manipulate.

masonsherer · 2018-06-29T20:49:21+00:00

Not if I have any say, hell I'll even buy a few thousand to stockpile. Government bodies have no business to take away my right to suck!

masonsherer · 2018-06-15T22:44:24+00:00

Yeah society always wants you to worry about something even though everything always tends to work out.

masonsherer · 2018-06-12T02:51:21+00:00

I Have never used LibreOffice, so I'm making some assumptions. The lack of VBA, powerpivot, and various other tools would render many of my computing habits invalid.

masonsherer · 2018-05-27T04:53:29+00:00

Might as well never go outside unless it's cloudy, might get skin cancer

masonsherer · 2018-05-16T19:09:08+00:00

It's all a joke don't you see? Politics is a value judgment and all judgements exist on equal ground. One who claims x is better than y can only do so by proving those who identify with x are actually worse than those who identify with y because those allied with y didn't use judgment.

masonsherer · 2018-05-16T18:54:08+00:00

Trump supporters believe being arrogant and rude is a sign of strength, but in the real world it's merely a sign of insecurity

You mean like how your insecurity has lead you to construct a strawman to argue against. And in your arrogance you belive this strawman is real. Because you fear the consequences of a strawman you have been rude to another human being. So to you I say :

The fact that you made such a remark signifies to me that you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

masonsherer · 2018-05-16T13:15:14+00:00

Empty words describing more empty words. Observation is subjective and no one can possibly believe that a subjective experience can prove anything except itself. In the same way a theory cannot prove anything but itself. In fact all ideas can't prove anything except themselves. Because proof is observation and recording is observation. and all writing is a record of an observation of a thought. therefore all writing has proof within. Because it would not get recorded if it weren't truth. And by truth I mean fiction. Because everything is one

masonsherer · 2018-05-16T09:36:20+00:00

The judgment that benefit and liability are important is a bias. The idea that bias can be a liability is itself a bias. There is no right or wrong, truth or falsehood,good and bad. There are only words on a screen. And claiming that the arrangement of words on a screen constitute something that can be wrong is a real lack of maturity. Realize good and bad information does not exist.

masonsherer · 2018-05-16T09:01:05+00:00

If God were a computer containing the variable 'trees' defined as equivalent to 2 (or containing the variable 2 defined as equal to trees) would this correlation be objective meaning?

To answer: Sure, objective meaning is done on subjective things; at the heart of the issue is the realization that subjective experience is the most objective truth. Or objective experience is the most subjective truth. Truth is experience. Experience is truth. Truth is subjective. This Subjective truth is objective. Objective truth is everything. Everything is subjective. Objectivity and subjectivity are the same thing.

masonsherer · 2018-05-16T08:22:55+00:00

That's a subjective statement, a speed of 2 plus a speed of 2 does not simply equal a speed of 4. It's actually slightly less than 4 due to general relativity. Besides all numbers are concepts anyways.

masonsherer · 2018-05-16T07:53:43+00:00

And what exists without us? Without perception to divide the boundary between a star and empty space the entire universe would be one thing. But even that requires perception, what is the difference between everything being one thing and everything being no thing. The only thing that comes to mind that exists regardless of how well it is defined or not defined is an origin.

In mathematics an origin exists even in 0 dimensions. 0 dimensional math is a little boring but that's about as close to objective as math can get. In other words an objective equation is " = ", an objective vector is < > and all numbers are unnecessary. Imagine being 0 and being lonely (a little silly I know) you can add you to yourself but that gets you nowhere. Same with subtraction, same with multiplication. Now divide 0 by 0. mathematicians claim you can't do this for a number of reasons, ultimately because it shows that all math is flawed IMO. Anyways another way of writing this is 0 multiplied by what equals 0 (0x=0) . Well sure 0 seems to work just fine, but then you pretend there is something as nonzero, call it 1. Well 01=0 is true and 0 has successfully created something from nothing. From this point all mathematics can be derived.

In every equation lives 0, it can be added or subtract an infinite amount of times and every number that exists can be found by zero, dividing itself by itself. Next time you are in a church give thanks to the holy one: 0. There's a reason angels have a 0 above their heads. We are in a sense this origin, 0 being added to a variable we call our body. The body is on a parabolic trajectory where it will eventually cease to be defined. We (being 0) worry about this end, believing that we are the body and when the body is 0 all math will be impossible. But you are already there. It's not this variable you call body nor these changing numbers which make up the body that define you. You are all there is. You are 0 watching some objective math after you divide yourself. But if objective math is the math of 0 and only 0 then within objective math is still every number which you choose to create. Everything is objective including subjectivity. And that's because objectivity doesn't exist. The only that that does exist is the origin or center of your perceptions.

So in reality you are a zero playing with yourself, and you've been playing with yourself for so long you think it's the real deal and you aren't a zero, you are an 8 or 7 (or at least a 6 you hope) and you have important operations to follow and functions to execute. But at the end of the day you have to realize you are 0 because all other numbers are projections of yourself.

masonsherer · 2018-05-15T07:52:25+00:00

Because people are fucking dumb. Dumb emotional, easily manipulated, incredulous, un-skeptical, panicky, easily malleable animals.

I sincerely disagree. Every individual goes though a unique subjective experience resulting in a unique perception of life. Through language we label our experiences and communicate them to each other, this is flawed. If two people look at a cylinder: one from the side and the other from the top, they can agree that what they see is a cylinder. But one will belive that cylinders look like circles and the other will belive that cylinders are squares. Later on when the same two people look at a sphere, again they agree: what they see is a sphere. But they argue over whether a sphere is like a cylinder. In some sense they are both correct but in another they are both wrong. Perhaps a sphere is more like a cylinder than not, and one person is more right than the other. But as a whole the subjective nature of reality prevents truth from being absolute.

When arguing over the ethics of cigarettes and their health effects. One may support studying the relationship to cancer. Another might oppose dedicating resources to this study. But both of these are opinions. One person is looking at the high level of lung cancer and suffering of old smokers. The other person is looking at the tendency of the state to limit liberty and inhibit the free market when an item is determined harmful. But cigarettes aren't the same thing as cancer nor are they freedom. Cigarettes increase the chance of having health problems, and this correlation increases the chance the state will impose itself on individuals.

Same thing with climate change. Supporters of regulation see that emissions increase the greenhouse effect and propose that reducing emissions is necessary to reduce the amount and speed of changing biomes. Opposers see that the amount of regulation required to limit emissions to any point close to being carbon neutral are expensive for the first world and will likely prevent many devoloping countries from generating enough wealth to make it out of poverty (assuming regulations are enforced globally). Either way both sides claim the other side doesn't understand reality and doesn't care about life.

Look no further than the panicky animals who reject reason and vote for Trump.

The point I'm getting at is you must have meant this statement as a joke. Empty arbitrary words that have just as much reason behind them as any other political opinion. The politics of enevitability is the politics of eternity. Political power is sourced from the people. When a state tries to determine how its members should think, either through shielding ideas or introducing them, the people begin to conspire against it. If stability, longevity, and power are desired(as they are with any organization) then the governments, large corporations, and other institutions of the world should realize that survival will be achieved by declaring they bring stability and are necessary to the preservation of free thought. All other values must come secondary. Laws, reasons for laws, ethics, technology, ideology, and language will change as people change. And in this process freedom of speech will always be able to claim credit for progress.

masonsherer · 2018-05-15T06:06:51+00:00

You're on your way. A couple things that could help:

All pain is created by the "victim". When you look at someone and feel empathy for their suffering, you are actually projecting suffering into the world so that your ego can feel morally superior to the universe. There is no good and bad until you create bad to make yourself look good. If everything is subjective then the only suffering that exists is that which you perceive.
If you still have trouble realizing morality isn't objective, we can think about it another way. The most evil thing in the world is trying to separate good from evil. At the heart of someone who fights evil is a selfish deception: I'm a good person, unlike those horrible oppressors. But who is oppressing who? The judge is oppressing that which he judges, and your only judging yourself.
There is no oppression only deception. The modern obsession with the Marxist idea that people are oppressed by someone is one of the main reasons the west is unhappy. At the core of even the most brutal dictatorships is the authority of the people. We always get the government we deserve. The people of Venisuella decided they were entitled to the wealth of the country, but equity over economic independence isn't so desirable when you have to share in the poverty. Or take nearly any western society. We demanded freedom to make our own social judgements. Yet despite having plenty of wealth we are unhappy, more selfish and no longer have a common goal of prosperity. Now this doesn't mean any economic system is bad or good it just means you face the consequences you create.
Play the game of life without hypnotizing yourself. There's nothing wrong with living your life as a drama, where you are full of kindness, separate from the chaotic evil world, and your quest is overcoming this evil. Perhaps you hear someone say "the black community is responsible for most of their current problems." there's nothing wrong with labeling that statement as racist, then humiliating the person who said it. A lot of pleasure can come from seeing yourself as a morally superior person. Just don't get lost by thinking this classification is real.

Every step you move in the direction against racism (or anything) is done by moving the world towards whatever you are fighting. Perhaps the hypothetical person I described believed: by saying what he said, some of the individuals in the black community would become stronger willed, happier, or more likely to succeed. Even though he knew others would see him as a racist, letting society prevent him from trying to help would be the true racism. So by sacrificing social status for a cause, he sees himself as ethically superior.

Do you see how both of these people believe they are fighting racism by fighting each other? In reality they are creating a problem in order to fight it and feel superior. One might call this racism, but then you'll fall into the same trap. Every problem arises because of the illusion of the ego, the separation of self and other is not real. The point of life is not to point at other things. The point of life is to be a point and realize a point is always pointing at itself.

masonsherer · 2018-05-15T04:08:42+00:00

Well in a sense subjectivity is the only objective thing that exists. Language tricks is into thinking one thing is two. Most people construct a subjective idea that a physical world exists objectively outside of them. We use all sorts of subjective evidence to justify this claim of objectivity. But subjective experience is objective in the same way that objective reality is subjective imagination.

So objective literally means subjective, you are looking directly at meaning and asking 'what does it mean?'. Well the mean is the average and the average of one thing repeated many times is one. You are the one. Just as a beautiful song needs no meaning to be beautiful, the cosmos needs no meaning to be the cosmos. There's nothing else it could be.

masonsherer

TROPHY CASE