Philosophy Now Forum

bobevenson wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote: Ponzi schemes are pyramid schemes.

You obviously know nothing about either.

Wilful ignorance and stupidity.

Hobbes' Choice wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote: Ponzi schemes are pyramid schemes.

You obviously know nothing about either.

Wilful ignorance and stupidity.

On whose part, you moron!

.




I think the recent advances in technology moves the socialistic ideology forward by leaps & bounds.


The most disruptive technology in the world now - by far, is the disruptive technology associated with social media; Facebook, twitter, & ALL the other social networks and communities that exist today thanks to advances in social media through advances in technology.









**Just a reminder - this is a Bill Wiltrack thread. Let's try to avoid personal attacks, name-calling, & backbiting. Thanks.




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





.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:. I think the recent advances in technology moves the socialistic ideology forward by leaps & bounds.

If you mean below then they do nothing of the sort.

The most disruptive technology in the world now - by far, is the disruptive technology associated with social media; Facebook, twitter, & ALL the other social networks and communities that exist today thanks to advances in social media through advances in technology.
.

Rather than disruptive it's more likely that they bolster the status quo as people think they have actually done something when in reality its mainly hot air and no action.

.



Recent advances in technology have further eradicated time & space between people throughout the entire world.


That is part of what I mean by disruptive.


I thank you and the entire PhilosophyNow Forum active membership for the respect and admiration that you have afforded to me. I am very thankful & humbled.


...I might also add, that you and I live in different countries yet we are able to come together, intelligently discuss philosophical topics at our leisure & we are still able to afford the widest sense of empathy to throughout all of humanity here at our computer terminal, wherever that may be. THAT is what I specifically mean by disruptive technology, in a positive perspective.

Now if that is - hot air, then I am guilty!






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






.

Bill Wiltrack wrote: I thank you and the entire PhilosophyNow Forum active membership for the respect and admiration that you have afforded to me.

Although I can only speak for myself, Bill, I can honestly say that my admiration and respect for you has remained unchanged since the very first time I read one of your posts.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.Recent advances in technology have further eradicated time & space between people throughout the entire world.

You live in a strange world were 40% is the entire world.

That is part of what I mean by disruptive.

I'n puzzled by this usage as who is it disrupting? As the oppressive nations control the system very closely.

I thank you and the entire PhilosophyNow Forum active membership for the respect and admiration that you have afforded to me. I am very thankful & humbled.

'humbled'. You are a good example of what I talk about.

...I might also add, that you and I live in different countries yet we are able to come together, intelligently discuss philosophical topics at our leisure & we are still able to afford the widest sense of empathy to throughout all of humanity here at our computer terminal, wherever that may be. THAT is what I specifically mean by disruptive technology, in a positive perspective.

And yet what your 40% does in the main is shop, troll, gossip, self-publicise, watch porn and very rarely intelligently discuss philosophy or any subject for that matter.

Now if that is - hot air, then I am guilty!

I take your point tho'

Oh Look! A fat man drowning, what a hoot!

My point entirely encapsulated.

.



Thank you for your response and your relevant question.


This may help you better understand what I mean by Disruptive Technology.







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







.

So nothing to do with Socialism nor social networks but just another example of you seeing a term that tickles your fancy and applying it gnu-like until the next trawl of the weeb and wiki tickles you again.

.




I, I think you are missing the essence of my philosophical position.

That is not a slam on you. This is a very difficult point to fully grasp, especially for most of my philosophical mentees here at the PhilosophyNow Forums.


What I am stating is that the recent technological explosions of disruptive industry framework are moving mankind's' consciousness to more of a Case For Socialism.


The invisible hand of capitalism is being exposed more readily and actually the hand is being eliminated or attenuated to a large extent.






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








.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.I, I think you are missing the essence of my philosophical position.

No I get that you have techno-fantasies that the revolution will be done without boots on the ground.

That is not a slam on you. This is a very difficult point to fully grasp, especially for most of my philosophical mentees here at the PhilosophyNow Forums.

'mentees' - told you he was a gnu.

Don't know about the philosophical but the sci-fi fan has had these issues explored and covered in depth for decades now.

What I am stating is that the recent technological explosions of disruptive industry framework are moving mankind's' consciousness to more of a Case For Socialism.

Personally unless you mean Marx's version I have very little idea what you or others mean by 'Socialism'.

You could just as well say that they are making the case for a wider profit sharing caring Capitalism.

The invisible hand of capitalism is being exposed more readily and actually the hand is being eliminated or attenuated to a large extent. [/size]

Where is your evidence for this? As it looks more likely that the future is Oligarchical, Theocractical and Technocratical. The Caesars, Stalin, Hitler, et al, would have loved your 'disruptive' social 'technologies' for the bread and circuses they largely are and add on that people are actually giving away their information and spying upon themselves they'd have been laughing as well.

The only real case for 'socialism' is utilitarian (providing for 'all').

The only real problem with 'socialism' is the 'one' (who rejects 'all' in favor of him- or her-self).

The only real solution is to shoot the selfish bastids and make Soylent Green out of 'em.

Simply: there can be no peace between the individual and the many.

edit/addition: Or, at best, there can only be an uneasy, temporary peace.

.




................................................Good post.




.

Obvious Leo wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:What, do I make you nervous now,

You don't make me nervous, SOB. I've been around a long time and your type are ten a penny.

Says the boy, so as to bolster his frail ego! I seriously don't know if I'll ever recover now.

Arising_uk wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:...
And so you know that surely you would. Common for one that totes a shotgun; the real reason it's carried.

Me, me, me, cries the guy with a shotgun!

Er! Says the guy with a mini-gun on his quad?

I don't tote a minigun, and I certainly wouldn't represent myself as carrying a spear, and my world certainly doesn't seem to revolve around violence, where I speak of carrying a shotgun every chance I get, though there are plenty around me that certainly fit that bill. You've just got a bug up your arse for me, your right to be ignorant and extremely fearful, if you so choose.

Here's a hint though, we're all going to die, it's just a matter of time. I'm just one that's had enough of being victimized, though I've never been mugged Kim, have you? In order to have been mugged, Kim, you'd had to have looked the part; your psyche beaming! Maybe they could sense that you'd throw your children under the bus, then hide behind them. Not me, I'd be standing between you, your children, as well as anyone innocent, and mow the selfish, would be, murdering bastards down to the ground where they belong, as fertilizer, despite the fact that determinism was the cause of their folly. In that instant one doesn't have time to philosophize, rather simply serve the better good.

So I'm saying yes, no matter how much you bad mouth me, you can quiver behind me as I save your ignorant, forever in denial and contradiction, life, because relatively, in such a case, you'd be an innocent as well! Hey I've sacrificed my life for the USA and all her allies before, that means you, Kim, so why not do it again? I've also saved a woman I didn't really like from drowning via alcohol intoxication. How many innocent lives have you saved, Kim? Huh?? Yeah that's what I thought! All mouth and no action! Let someone else buy your freedom for you! So you can talk, talk, talk, denouncing their means of doing so. Like I've said, you're in denial, and so a walking talking contradiction.