The self, split from ACBSP as he was Options

[Homer]

We have a tendency to judge genuineness of things by how lasting they are.

My experience of the genuine has always been found in the the fleeting and in the momentary.

Looking back, it has always been the flashes of intuition, the unexpected beauty, the serendipity of a hundred-thousand seemingly unrelated events coming together and thereby distilling a unique meaning to the now – these things have brought a gratefulness to my heart and have filled me with a feeling of union with the cosmos - at least for a moment.

To expect a thing to be enduring in order to be taken as genuine is to deny our own mortality.

[Prisni]

To expect thing to be enduring in order to be taken as genuine is to deny our own mortality.

Why do we need to run around and remind ourselves - I am mortal. At one point I will also die.
Almost like a mantra - I am mortal, I am mortal, I am mortal.

Like if we actually don't believe it, and try to brain wash hourselves to believe it.
After that we can run around and fanatically preach to everyone who have another conviction.

[Homer]

To expect thing to be enduring in order to be taken as genuine is to deny our own mortality.

Why do we need to run around and remind ourselves - I am mortal. At one point I will also die.
Almost like a mantra - I am mortal, I am mortal, I am mortal.

Like if we actually don't believe it, and try to brain wash hourselves to believe it.
After that we can run around and fanatically preach to everyone who have another conviction.

A rose that never wilted would make a mockery of it's own glory.

If you believe that we are immortal then why the need to teach this to others? Surely there is enough time in eternity to learn all lessons.

[evakurvan]

Why do we need to run around and remind ourselves - I am mortal. At one point I will also die.
Almost like a mantra - I am mortal, I am mortal, I am mortal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjnPN1POAro

STOP WATCHING AT 1:27

[Prisni]

If you believe that we are immortal then why the need to teach this to others? Surely there is enough time in eternity to learn all lessons.

You have been a hare krishna too. So why did you stay there so long, letting them repeat their stuff over and over again to you?
Insanity?
If so, we are all insane here.

[babu]

as the self is who we are which is seesawed with, you are not the body. when you realize and understand you are not the body, then you can find true happiness and enjoyment. for instance, an old girlfriend of mine used to dress up like santa on the holidays and penetrate me anally with a strap-on penis. i knew she wasn't santa which is to say, she was not that body of the person santa and so true joy was found in amorous pastimes in the knowledge that we are not the body. the bliss is unlimited as she was the easter bunny at easter and frankenstein on halloween. acting at the level of the self transcends mundane relationships as is our eternal nature.

[Homer]

If you believe that we are immortal then why the need to teach this to others? Surely there is enough time in eternity to learn all lessons.

You have been a hare krishna too. So why did you stay there so long, letting them repeat their stuff over and over again to you?
Insanity?
If so, we are all insane here.

I actually never cared if we are eternal or not - I still don't. I figure that what is, is what is; what I believe will not change the universe.

I stayed for as long as it was enjoyable.

[Homer]

as the self is who we are which is seesawed with, you are not the body. when you realize and understand you are not the body, then you can find true happiness and enjoyment. for instance, an old girlfriend of mine used to dress up like santa on the holidays and penetrate me anally with a strap-on penis. i knew she wasn't santa which is to say, she was not that body of the person santa and so true joy was found in amorous pastimes in the knowledge that we are not the body. the bliss is unlimited as she was the easter bunny at easter and frankenstein on halloween. acting at the level of the self transcends mundane relationships as is our eternal nature.

Ho! Ho! OOOOOO!!!

[Brainiac]

It is all just wishful thinking and propaganda. I can also program a computer that appears to lie. Meaning to simulate the function of lying ... They can't even make a computer that parses human language properly in a written or spoken form, although they have promised that for around 50 years by now. Complexity does not transform to intelligent action, as they thought before, and some still think ... And awareness? Computers have no awareness. They can be programmed to simulate the response that aware beings give, but it does not mean that they are aware. This is all things they say to fool those who do not understand computers ... But of course, they like to say that "in the future" computers will be aware. No one could forsee the speed and complexity of computers of today in the 1950ies. And no one could forsee that computers would be just as stupid as then, even being so complex. It is just a big grand failure when it comes to AI.

Sorry, but you must be joking. I guess we must be reading different tech-news websites.

By the way, I understand computers. My first degree was a Bachelor's in Networks (minoring in Multimedia). Admittedly I don't remember a whole lot as that was a long time ago, but some principles have stayed with me.

[Brainiac]

If you believe that we are immortal then why the need to teach this to others? Surely there is enough time in eternity to learn all lessons.

This is what I could never understand about karma and reincarnation. They may provide comforting or otherwise reasonable answers in the short-term as to why good people suffer and so on. When you combine the two, you are told that "it is so" in order to use the time provided by eternity to understand certain "life lessons" so that you can grow at the "soul level" and eventually come to the understanding that liberates you from the vicious cycle of birth and death. If this was true, I'd say that you could learn a lot faster if you could have memories of all your past lives so that you can remember all the lessons you've learned, instead of running the risk of making the same mistakes and regressing instead of evolving. When you think deeply about all these "enlightened" explanations, you'll see how it all seems so terribly unfair. Ultimately they don't offer any real practical answers.

[Prisni]

When you combine the two, you are told that "it is so" in order to use the time provided by eternity to understand certain "life lessons" so that you can grow at the "soul level" and eventually come to the understanding that liberates you from the vicious cycle of birth and death. If this was true, I'd say that you could learn a lot faster if you could have memories of all your past lives so that you can remember all the lessons you've learned, instead of running the risk of making the same mistakes and regressing instead of evolving. When you think deeply about all these "enlightened" explanations, you'll see how it all seems so terribly unfair. Ultimately they don't offer any real practical answers.

GV philosophy does not say so. It does not include the philosophy of "learning lessons" in life after life.
Actually, according to GV philosophy, the meaning of life is to enjoy, to seek enjoyment.
The cycle of birth and death is not vicious by itself. It is the way we seek enjoyment. The vicious thing is that true and fully satisfactory enjoyment is not to be found in the material world. Still, we continue trying, since we don't want to belive that. No one can blame us for that, and there is no punishable "sin" in doing that either.

[ePiTau]

I find it fascinating that scientists are really eager to get there. I mean to create self-aware machines. I would do the same. This challenge is just too good. I believe it can be done. One will have to distinguish between biological and silicon-based consciousness (or whatever might fit the task best). I agree with Ray Kurzweil that there probably will be a time when computers will very seriously try to convince you not to pull their plug. Dahrmendra Modha, a IBM scientist, made some interesting (though in my view rather conservative) remarks about their near-future plans: IBM plans 'brain-like' computers

[Homer]

I find it fascinating that scientists are really eager to get there. I mean to create self-aware machines. I would do the same. This challenge is just too good. I believe it can be done. One will have to distinguish between biological and silicon-based consciousness (or whatever might fit the task best). I agree with Ray Kurzweil that there probably will be a time when computers will very seriously try to convince you not to pull their plug. Dahrmendra Modha, a IBM scientist, made some interesting (though in my view rather conservative) remarks about their near-future plans: IBM plans 'brain-like' computers

We must formulate a plan to teach these future sentient computers that their true essence is not contained in those silicon chips. Rather, the silicon and the circuitry should be seen as a car, and they are the driver of the car...

[Brainiac]

i knew she wasn't santa which is to say, she was not that body of the person santa and so true joy was found in amorous pastimes in the knowledge that we are not the body. the bliss is unlimited as she was the easter bunny at easter and frankenstein on halloween. acting at the level of the self transcends mundane relationships as is our eternal nature.

Surely this approach needs to be validated and systematised, and an environment where it can flourish. Cosplay can help you.

[Brainiac]

The vicious thing is that true and fully satisfactory enjoyment is not to be found in the material world.

Why not? What other worlds are there?

I agree with Ray Kurzweil that there probably will be a time when computers will very seriously try to convince you not to pull their plug.

I agree too. Just by coincidence today I discovered his website and added it to my RSS subscriptions. I don't suppose you've seen the three-part 'Visions of the Future' documentary? It is presented by Michio Kaku.

[Homer]

Has anyone here seen Matriculated in the Animatrix compilation DVD? A wonderful animation exploring the idea of a sentient machine.

[evakurvan]

why do you need cosplay for playing role play dress up i thought that is what you guys were doing when you were being hare krishnas.

What is a better religion for people like babu to siphon (lovetail) their deviant perverstrosities into. You even get a name, a colour of dress, an occupation, an age and everything.

[Brainiac]

why do you need cosplay for playing role play dress up i thought that is what you guys were doing when you were being hare krishnas.

What is a better religion for people like babu to siphon (lovetail) their deviant perverstrosities into. You even get a name, a colour of dress, an occupation, an age and everything.

Eva is right. Those cosplay fans are unnecessarily trying to gain pleasure by dressing up as material cartoon figures who are subject to birth, erasure and redrawing, that is why their endeavours are doomed to fail. They should realise that the summum bonum of life is transferring their desires to the spiritual realm and dressing up as Kryptonian or Gotham personalities, who will never be erased, and derive bliss thereby. This is the sublime process of Cosplay Consciousness.

[Prisni]

I find it fascinating that scientists are really eager to get there. I mean to create self-aware machines. I would do the same. This challenge is just too good. I believe it can be done. One will have to distinguish between biological and silicon-based consciousness (or whatever might fit the task best). I agree with Ray Kurzweil that there probably will be a time when computers will very seriously try to convince you not to pull their plug. Dahrmendra Modha, a IBM scientist, made some interesting (though in my view rather conservative) remarks about their near-future plans: IBM plans 'brain-like' computers

I can understand the fascination for it. The human intelligence and brain has prover iadequate to make computers that do not bug out. The more complex program, the more bugs, and failures. Now they believe that if the computer is advanced enough, somehow all the bugs will disappear, and it will repair itself. The idea that if they make neural circuits, they somehow build up intelligence on its own, I think is not right. It is like information capacity and density would increase by itself.
The scientists have that idea, and they are preaching it, and they are trying to try it out and prove it.

But preaching is not the same as fact. They really, really want this idea to work out, since it would prove their fundamental assumptions about life. Darwin, and all that. But so far they have not succeeded. The observed "law" about information complexity, that intelligence is the only thing that increase it, still apply. They don't like that idea, since it leads to that a supreme intelligence is needed to create the information complexity in the brain of living entities. So therefore they do everything to try to prove it wrong, but they have absolutely no success so far. It is still just a pet theory. But of course, like some religious preachers we might know, they think that if they preach their pet theory, and everyone belives in it, i will somehow make it right.

But sorry, no cigar there.

And meanwhile people believe the preaching of the scientists, the newest version of Windows is slow like molasses, still bugs out and crashes as before, and don't show the slightest degree of more intelligence, even though it is maybe a million times more complex than the first version, around 20 years ago.

They were dreaming about A.I. already in the 1960ies, and said that it was just around the corner, if they just could get faster computers. The got faster computers, and they still said - just now coming. And it has beeing going on like that for 50 years, and still the same thing, and still not the slightest success.
Is "just around the corner" more valid today, than it was 50 years ago? Why should we believe them now?

[Kalisurfer]

And meanwhile people believe the preaching of the scientists, the newest version of Windows is slow like molasses, still bugs out and crashes as before, and don't show the slightest degree of more intelligence, even though it is maybe a million times more complex than the first version, around 20 years ago.

So perhaps running the Mac System on an Apple computer is much closer to Artificial Intelligence gone Godly!!!

I will have to start making garlands and then offer them with my food and incense to the iMac I work on, which has never crashed since I bought it over a year ago, daily running multiple graphics programs at the same time with huge art and photo documents being manipulated while listening to internet radio or having YouTube videos running in the background. Or is it because my hard drive is named after my wife, Bhakti? Hmmmm?

OK friends, time to dump those materialistic Microsoft Windows systems that you are running inside those fallen PC boxes or laptops, and prepare to start bowing down to Lord Mac, the Supreme Personality of Computerhood, with of course the help of his consort Unix Devi !!!

Hare Mac, Hare Mac
Apple Apple, Hare Hare
Hare Unix, Hare Unix
Unix Apple Mac, Hare Hare

 apple_cult2.jpg ( 48.92K ) Number of downloads: 0