the race for geneticly induced identity

Here is another interesting quote from the same source:

If we wanted white people that badly you could change peoples genetics during their birth.
Ignoring the fact that genetics would be changed a long time before birth (this is likely a typo), this presents us with a wonderful question:
How likely it is that genetics would be used to resurrect extinct sub-species of humanity?
The answer is : Not, bloody, likely. The truth is, we already have a branch of humanity to resurrect, it's called the Neanderthal. Neanderthals possessed large brains, could use tools, and best of all, unlike the dinosaurs we actually have a decently sized set of their DNA samples (meaning that we could establish a population that (even if it chose not to breed with us, which the can, an we hope that they will) still wouldn't become inbred within a few generations). They are also probably extinct because of us (or to be precise the cro-magnons - our ancestors), seeing as how they didn't go extinct in any place before we got there (though it could have been a disease we carried and not actual genocide). So it's, kind of, our responsibility to bring them back. Are we? No. Are we planning to? No. Are we talking about it at all? N... well, we could be, but I haven't heard anything as of yet (I only read the popular journals like Scientific American , and not the actual scientific ones).
"Come on"- I hear you cry - "this would require a massive change in the genetic code, we're just talking about very minor changes with making people of one race- another race". You are wrong (imaginary reader, who I made up to ridicule him, because I'm a dick,) the genetic difference between homo sapiens sapiens and homo sapiens neanderthalensis averages to about 0.4% (according to wikipedia), which is (if you believe the same source) about what the average human genetic variability is anyway. That is: it's not any harder to make a, say, Asian baby White (properly white- not just an albino Asian), then it is to make them Neanderthal. But we still won't do it. My guess is we just don't care about people if they don't pay taxes to support the research institute. I might be cynical though.

Racism and Anti-Racism

Several questions have been bough to my attention, by a person whose name I shall not mention to preserve their privacy. I have decided to throw my hat in the ring and explain my poorly-thought-out position on this issue. I would like to further preface this post by saying I live in an ethnically mixed, but racially homogenous (specifically 99.1% were "white" in the 2011 census) enviroment. And that will be using the word "racism" as a catch-all for both biologically and nationally focused biases.

I don't see how i can be being racist against my own kind.
This is actually a misconception one reads a lot on the internet. People will often say racist things about their own people and then claim they're not racist, because, well, how could they be?

To answer this we come to our first stumbling block: Racism is not a Yes/No check-box, it's a scale. One person might want to kill everyone who isn't his exact ethnicity, while another has no black friends (but is otherwise equally courteous to everyone), despite black people representing over 15% of the resident of his neighborhood. Which one is racist? If you answered both, you are correct. If you said guy #1, you are also correct. If you said neither, I really wouldn't want to meet you in a dark alley. And, of course, if you said guy #2, you were guessing at random. The point here is we consider people to be 'racist' if they are more ethnically biased then some set point (usually just above how racist we ourselves are).

Back to the question: they aren't usually very racist, but they are more racist then none- towards their own people. This isn't much of a problem for them, however there have been very serious cases of this in the past, where vast number people would actively hate the fact that they were born into one ethnicity, instead of another ( like wanting to be British instead of Indonesian, or Han instead of Manchu.) The point to take home from this is: ethnic self-hatred is a very real mental disease. Remember: thinking your race/ethnicity/gender/age/sexual preference/hair color/etc. is wose then others is just as racist as thinking it's better. They are all equal in the end.

Erana's peace.

I guess I'm back. I'm probably not though.

I have found a new song for me to like, it's a song version (with lyrics that seem to be widely repeated, I don't know who wrote them, but it could be the person who performs it here) of the Erana's Peace theme from Quest for Glory: So, You Want to Be a Hero?

Link

The song is performed with (understandably) more emotion then the original chip-tune, and I find it just gripping. It didn't occur to me until the 3rd or 4th listen that it's actually a love song. Or what we usually call a love song. You know the usual "I'll do anything, but please, please be with me" song. Erana never actually says she loves the player, but the other tropes are there. Perhaps It's meant to be evocative of motherly love (rather then romantic love), but it's still somewhat odd. which brings to our topic- "love songs".

In truth love songs are great, but I find that something like "Another First Kiss" is a 'love' song, while things like "I Do It For You" are actually 'co-dependence' songs. I mean people killing themselves for you sure boosts your ego and is great for a romance novel plot, but it's not really conducive to a proper relationship. Anyone who ever dated one of those low self-esteem people will tell you that they're not really that fun to be with, despite (and indeed because of) their declarations of how great you are for gracing them with your choice.

The problem, I find, is that we are conditioned to think that love is exactly that- mutual sacrifice. That makes it all the more satisfying when it turns out that yours is a more pleasant experience. It also makes you stay in relationships that aren't doing well, thus (at least before the Age of Enlightenment) boosting the population. The problem is that it's poppycock- love is a pleasant feeling, the opiate, if you pardon the simile, to the pains of your life. It is not some constant uphill battle. As the poet said "Pain is pain, it matters not what name you give, It is fear, where there's fear love just will not live".

Star Trek WTF?

I started watching TNG again (I last became bored around the begging of season 2). Was this show always like this? or am I just having a lucky streak? (no pun intended).
First of all, counselor troy is a man! In season premiere "The child" (which I've seen before but missed this) she is said to be impregnated by a child made entirely out of her own DNA, but the child turns out to be a boy! (women lack the Y chromosome* and no combination of their DNA can produce a male. Ever.) In "Where Silence has Lease" the omniscient reptile thing looks over the bridge (which has the regular compliment of Crusher, Data, Worf, etc... as well as Troy and Doctor Pulaski) and looking over Pulaski (who is a woman) says "what are you? the construction differs!", it is presumed (out loud, by Data) that he refers to gender. Finally in "The outrageous Okona" Troy is right there on the bridge, Picard consults her while Okona watches, yet when a female officer communicates to the bridge, Okona is surprised: "is that a woman I hear?". I'm telling you he's a drag queen (played by a female actress to confuse us!)
Today I'm watching "Royale", by the time I got to minute 6, Giordy detected a temperature some 18 degrees below absolute zero (-291 Celsius) and Picard sent "a small away team", which contained almost every senior officer on the ship, (except Himself and Giordy) into a potentially extremely deadly environment (the extreme danger is stated in no uncertain terms). When (by minute 8) the away team loses contact with the Enterprise, instead of trying to backtrack Riker just says "were here already, so let's look around", what's up with that?! I've seen porn with better driven plot! And as Data gets new and interesting readings, Riker just walks around and grins, like it's a gosh darned amusement park. (is he high?). Then, when Riker suddenly (!) decides they should go back, the away team fails to operate a revolving door. No, they are not teleported back, they just FAIL. The rest of the comedy is more or less business as usual.


_______________________________________
* it's replaced by a second X chromosome, which is more efficient and protects them form a range of exclusively male genetic diseases.

freedom at last

Some time ago I was with people who taught me a game. The Game. It's incredibly simple: whenever you think of The Game, you've lost. At first it's fun. A shared activity of sorts, but then you realize with horror that you are stuck. you can not win, you can not draw, and trying to lose less actually makes you more aware of the game and you start losing more often. The only thing you can do is entice people into playing too, so they'd lose and you wouldn't be a loser alone.

That has gone on for a while a constant stream of losses, not that I lost and sleep over it (no pun intended). However several days ago I came across this, a simple sign it would seem. But when my brain said "the game- you lose!", my eyes said "you won the game!", and then nothing. I didn't notice it's effects until recently I came across an Internet post that told me I lost the game. I thought to myself: "oh yeah, I'm supposed to have lost", and then it came to me- I didn't lose. It was freedom. Mind you that this is not something you can do just by saying "there is no game", that just makes you lose, because you're used to it. So I just saved thousands of dollars on therapy. than you, Randall, you are my hero!

How to become a terrorist for less

I know most of you are opposed to terrorism as a practice, because some of you genuinely know that it is bad (and why), and most of you are brainwashed in thinking it is bad (with little justification of the fact, besides „it’s them Vs. US”). However, if you don’t have billions of dollars, (or just millions, and an election coming up) terrorism might be an easy way of influence. What is that catch, you ask? In other words,: why are we all still working 9 to 5 instead of being terrorists? Well first of all, it costs money. It also requires that you kill people and put yourself at risk of arrest or death, but mostly it’s the money. So how do you solve 2 of the 3 problems (you still might get arrested)?

Here is what I propose:

1. You pick some ultra-green agenda (you can also pick up a „secondary” political agenda, but it will have to be someone at least mildly green).
2. You announce that you have close ties with the nature spirit itself (Gaia is a popular name, but feel free to come up with one of your own)
3. Whenever there’s a natural disaster- claim credit! Use any rationale why you (and the NS) were pissed at that particular country. Lie if you have to, but try to keep it real.
4. Profit*!

One final word of advice though- don’t try to steal members form green terrorists already in place (such as Green Peace), they will eat you alive and make a show of it on national television.

*) sorry, it was either this, or „there’s no number 7” joke.

Soy-based discoveries.

I hope you've all seen the 1973 movie called "Soylent Green". If you haven't I suggest you stop reading, because apparently it's a classic (judging by the amount of spoofs of that motion picture), so you will want to watch it, and I will ruin the ending for you.
Seriously: Go Away!
If you're still here I can only assume, you either saw the movie or don't care much for it. However to give you one last chance to run, I will quickly recap the movie (for those of you, who like me, forget the names of movies they watch). It's loosely based on H. Harrison's Novel "make room, make room!" and depicts an overpopulated future, where soviet style communal flats are almost ubiquitous, and African style water riots are not unheard of either. The main character is a detective looking into the murder of a politician. And there's this new cool produce (food) called Soylent green (made by Soylent corporation, not out of lent soy). And the incredible shocking truth is that... Soylent green is people! Well, duh.
I don't mean by name, it could be "McAntropos", or Pizza "koolizza", but eating processed people is completely natural in the circumstances depicted, and has been practiced for centuries in protein low corners of our earth. In fact I have to admit that when instead of saying "we'll take him to the morgue", or "tell the daughter to pick the body up, or we'll charge for storage", the guys who took the body at the beginning of the movie said "we'll send him to processing", I had little doubt about what "processing" meant. Did you? Maybe not, but did you really find that to be a shocking discovery?
Hey, I can understand the cultural barrier, "a more civilized time" and all that jazz. But, I swear, every few months someone says it, like it was the biggest revelation of their life- "OMFG! S0yl3nt gr33n = ppl!". Well here's another spoiler for you- in Planet of the apes, THEY ARE ON EARTH!

P.S. Before you accuse me of hindsight effect, I'd like to tell you that at the moment of watching, I only knew there was supposed to be a twist at the end, and not what it was.

P.P.S. upon giving it more thought, I have found that the moment I was sure they were making people steaks must have been after the scene where Sol is watching a nature show in that euthanasia place. Which is very similar (for obvious reasons) to the scene of humane turkey killing in SouthPark episode "Helen Keller, the musical", which I did see before SG. the mind works in mysterious ways, doesn't it?