geordief

Did someone mention busking and begging ? Looking for invisible change?

I don't notice too much begging,although it is there in town (people in doorways and down side lanes with duvets and,I presume people who go around checking they are OK if they sleep out at night) I think the Council recommends not giving money as the services are adequate When ,I busked the trick used to be to get a good, enthusiastic and persistant hat carrier to rake in the cash. It would far more than double your take in. A famous busker died the other day, Glen Hansard -who I was actually almost totally unaware of as an artist.Died in a crash.

I think it says that the water is also needed for the increased 24/7 energy required to operate the data centres (not sure if the energy power stations also need drinking quality water...)

Numbers aren't physical objects ,are they?(metaphysical?) We can all be 100% certain in our own minds. But ,if all knowledge of physical things is relative,then that knowledge is not absolute. I wondered if we ever created a scenario where we knew a physical quantity for certain that we would destroy the universe.(like the nuclear bomb but with information)

It happened to me once. Although I did busk ,which with my skills was tantamount to begging I once ran out of money on my person and had to ask passers by for a bit of loose change for the bus. Of course they all thought it was just a story and that I was just begging. After 10 minutes or so someone was good enough to help me out ,but it was a very unpleasant experience. I have also been on my own in town sitting on the side of the road eating food and a passer by has given me money thinking mistakenly that I was begging or busking.

Yes,it is a long road.I think US needs to reform its democracy but I don't necessarily see that happening.

Boringly vote for political parties who recognise the problem(I think the problem is well understood) and see how they get on. At school I learned that laisser faire capitalism was largely discredited and that regulation was desirable to a degree. I never imagined it would come back in force but I lazily assumed the US would remain a force for good and not some kind of a retirement home for corrupt and corrupting felons, conmen and election riggers in positions of overreaching power.

I say your hand got stuck to your chin and you are choking .Prove me wrong I say truth is relative. We amass a set of data ,set it against another set of data ,draw the set of relationships between the two sets against more such sets that we have stored or are creating in our minds and produce a finding which we feed back into the ongoing process. As with any "recording" process there are errors and that is why the "truth" is only approximate -but we can improve on the accuracy using any means at our disposal. But "absolute truth ",I doubt it exists but I am doubtless wrong as that is my normal trajectory 😐 In dementia veritas?

There might be no problem if hoarding was all they were allowed to do. So long as they invest their money so that it is available to the general public (and for the government to allocate according to the general consensus) that might be acceptable. What is definitely not acceptable imo is for that money to be used for political influence or for greater wealth to be used as a means of bypassing the legal structures that are supposed to apply to everyone equally. Nor should the uber wealthy have a greater say in the direction society takes when they are free to direct huge amounts of money in particular directions without public approval.

Just my perception based on an outsider's view who did admittedly visit the US a long time ago. I have heard recently that the "American Dream" is in its death throes because the expectation that an average person could ,by means of hard work reasonably expect to become wealthy or well off eventually is no longer feasible for a (very?) large proportion of the population. If I have that right the population as a whole classes may get to learn a bit of solidarity for those less well off than themselves and to fawn a little less over those who have been able to accumulate wealth more than them. I read quite recently that ,in USA the disapproval towards what are perveived as Socialist policies ,whilst still strong has been overtaken by the disapproval towards what are seen as MAGA policies. A long time coming.

When I worked in Norway ,some 40 or 50 years ago we came across an old Norwegian on the state pension. He told us he used it to travel around the world and that the pension "followed" him. Travel was more expensive back then ..... So Norway was exporting its surplus to requirements if they felt the urge. I remember in the Lofoten Islands they used to open the windows in winter (it would go down to -40) because the electricity was so cheap (so much hydro) They also used to hang out their fresh fish outside the window because it needed firming up as it was "too fresh" for their taste.

Sounds interesting.Does it sound like I might now be able to train the blackbirds to stay the fuc out of my berry bushes just using a penny whistle or a tape recorder?

Will he tarrif the Vatican now?

They are coming back now.(I am watching with an hour's delay and it is 4-2 .No 4-3 now)

Do some people use them in ways such that they are equivalent? When they say "that is a fact" ,they intend it to mean "that is incontravertibly true" Sloppy english but it permeates the mind of the person who they happen to be communicating with at the time. Lots of language is figurative and far from literal or logical(85% perhaps, off the top of my head) You have to read between the lines to devine what they are really saying. Edit:just look at the title of a thread I participated in over at another forum https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058440184/human-caused-global-warming-is-a-fact-not-a-theory

Is that a tiger pelt? (and a wind up gramophone player?) Plus ,"Tom"? Edit: Oh it is you😺

Do we know for sure that Mr Schrödinger owned a cat? Or is this a solution without a problem ? Surreal,quoi ?

Yes,when we accept the limits of our ability to know things and that we are also aware that we can be "economical" (or fraudulent) with the truth then objections as to whether simple statements can be called truthful seem unnecessarily picky. I am very happy with the understanding that all knowledge is like a stand in for later understandings as more evidence and context becomes available (as it surely does with the passage of time) In fact I am much more comfortable with the "withheld judgement" position than a wished for certainty about absolutely (ironically) anything. Almost like an epiphany with me.I don't really care if God plays dice with the universe but am quite happy if God does (or doesn't) (Are apparent certainties a statistical feature of the macro world ?)

I know you are not bring entirely serious,but I found that learning things by rote tended to destroy what seemed to me like a good understanding of what I was trying to understand. The "truth", maybe lies "behind" the words and the words are a crutch (or a tool) for one to gain an internal understanding of what the words are about.. When I was able to read books competently** it often used to be the case that I would read a page or two only to realise I had taken practically nothing in. Edit:re-reading your post I think you agree and are suggesting that the words I don't know" woll eventually sink in. Socrates,btw seems to have been one of the first proponents of leveraging his own ignorance to gain a better understanding,as evidenced in these quotes from Plato's Apologia https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1692879 ** I no longer have the ability to concentrate as much.

Are Argentina any great shakes?Thought Switzerland were maybe better. I doubt they (England) would have much of a chance of beating France even if they are at their best.Runners up would be no shame. It is the World Cup after all. . No team is enttled to win it (Gremlins in the formatting?)

No, they can't be faulted.Thought Gordon was good...and Bellingham of course. Pickford too but the standard of goalkeeping is very high (and very entertaining ) all round.

They did have Maradona and Pele (plus an amazing cast) play for them Football aristocracy. England ploughs its field as best it can.

@John Cuthber "Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha And I was never interested in sport. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha" You are lucky .No AI was detected in Gptzero on this occasion. Wait, I have not put it through the Schadenfreude machine yet.

I was just going to also say that he is a very well known quantity in the English league. I was watching the Mexico match and just had to switch off on the second half to retain my composure.(I fancied Mexico to knock England out after seeing their last match versus Ecuador in that stadium- puts the Colliseum to shame) Viva Jude Bellingham (you know he has a younger brother,too?) England can be beaten too by any of those (the US would be a surprise -mind you they should be disqualified now imo unless they accept the red card suspension in full), although that was some test and it will surely stand them in good stead.

Fifa is corrupt .Everything Trump touches turns to shit(Fifa already was,of course)