Group items tagged

Man and computer evolution  http://imfunny.net/man-and-computer-evolution/

A former Army Specialist in Baghdad explains why the leaker of the WikiLeaks documents is a hero

Stay ahead of fashion and create a lasting impression with your cool looks. Add full t-shirt for man in your wardrobe and be fashion ready for any event or occasion in a matter of time. Choose from a wide variety here at Crazybeta and update your wardrobe with a dash of chicness. You can find polo and crew neck full t-shirts with unique prints and quotes. We also have basic whites and blacks in same sleeve pattern to help you look dashing and dynamic. Available in many other hues as well, these tees ensure you get comfort and style together. From bright colored prints to multicolored graphics, you will come across an amazing collection. Also, you can grab these tees at most affordable prices so as to stick to your budget.

This paper was presented at the Alfred Hitchcock conference For the Love of Fear convened by the Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney, held from 31 March to 2 April 2000. * * * Hermia: Methinks I see these things with parted eye, When everything seems double… Demetrius: Are you sure That we are awake? It seems to me That yet we sleep, we dream. A Midsummer Night's Dream, IV, ii, 192-197. Just about everything about Hitchcock's Spellbound (1945) seems double, not least the film's critical reputation. On the one hand, Andrew Britton, not a man to equivocate, declares that "one can make no claim forSpellbound as an achieved work of art," citing, among its shortcomings, "the discrepancy between surface and implication, the grotesque uncertainty of tone (especially noticeable in the wildly clashing conventions of the acting) and the frequent banality of the script" (83). Many, even among Hitchcock's admirers, would agree.Spellbound is, in fact, not spellbinding, not one of Hitchcock's masterworks, not a Rear Window (1954) nor aVertigo (1958). On the other hand, though, it is, as Marshall Deutelbaum and Leland Poague point out, the first of Hitchcock's films in which "questions of visualization and displacement, of guilt conjured up and denied - questions which will eventually inform such films as Rear Window and Vertigo - become overt subject matter"

"human exceptionalism"

Psychoanalysts since Freud thought they passed psychoanalysis alone, and then only in the context of the analytic cure: set of mirrors where the "shrink" was even here the "knowing" possession of knowledge and discourse the man, his mental and psychic life? OR, the analyst, in principle ... is at the heart of the cure being "psychoanalysis" as an issue of transmission. He puts this object, emphasizing this no word could contain the whole truth. "There is no metalanguage". No words can all say anything. Word and things, words and ideas are lame to conjoin. Tinker, tinker, and see: the small screws never find their right ankles ... Why prohibit psychoanalysis, often when we saw outside the inner circle of Schools, to be also affected by this impossible? There had he not, in everyday life as an object of knowledge that few could pass, but contain them all?

Elerick attempts to interpret what it means to be a Christian in light of Lacan's famous, but asinine, proposition: "I think where I am not, therefore I am where I do not think." What should be immediately present to everyone who reads the proposition is that it is self-contradictory, for it at once denies the possibility of the individual subject to think itself (or re-present itself to itself) by affirming an inexorable fact about the Self, thereby speaking in absolute and universal terms and negating itself. In other words, if Lacan is right about the nature of the individual self/ego, then he is simultaneously wrong. And if he is wrong, which he is, then why bother with the man anymore?

If "death of God" or "the output of religion", these emblems of modern disenchantment, require thinking in terms radically new man in a world robbed of all transcendence, that he must go TODAY ' Today the central question of the subject?

Ce document a été rédigé pour l' Beckett et à Londres la conférence qui a eu lieu au Goldsmiths College, Londres en 1998. The ascertainable facts about Beckett's period of psychoanalysis with Wilfred Bion are, like the prayers of the lukewarm soul, faint and few. Beckett was a young man of 27 who had taken the first steps in his literary career, with the publication of `Whoroscope', Proust, Echo's Bones and, shortly after beginning analysis, More Pricks Than Kicks. After his years of promise and freedom at the Ecole Normale, during which time he came to know Joyce and begun to make out a reputation and literary career for himself, Beckett had suffered a series of reverses.

Jon Ronson is the author of The Psychopath Test: A Journey Through the Madness Industry, an exploration of what defines a psychopath. At TED2012, he told a part of that story on stage - how he met a man named Tony who was held for years in a psychiatric prison because he faked mental illness too well, and about how Ronson himself became trained (perhaps too well also) to spot psychopaths for himself.

"Hayworth has spent much of the past few years in a windowless room carving brains into very thin slices. He is by all accounts a curious man, known for casually saying things like, "The human race is on a beeline to mind uploading: We will preserve a brain, slice it up, simulate it on a computer, and hook it up to a robot body." He wants that brain to be his brain. He wants his 100 billion neurons and more than 100 trillion synapses to be encased in a block of transparent, amber-colored resin-before he dies of natural causes."

"Those who make peaceful evolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable."- John F. KennedyThere's one thing for sure: 2008 isn't anything like politics as usual.The corporate media (with their unerring eye for the obvious point) is fixated on the narrative that, for the first time ever, Americans will likely end this year with either a woman or a black man headed for the White House. Bloggers are telling stories from the front lines of primaries and caucuses that look like something from the early 60s - people lining up before dawn to vote in Manoa, Hawaii yesterday; a thousand black college students in Prairie View, Texas marching 10 miles to cast their early votes in the face of a county that tried to disenfranchise them. In recent months, we've also been gobstopped by the sheer passion of the insurgent campaigns of both Barack Obama and Ron Paul, both of whom brought millions of new voters into the conversation - and with them, a sharp critique of the status quo and a new energy that's agitating toward deep structural change.There's something implacable, earnest, and righteously angry in the air. And it raises all kinds of questions for burned-out Boomers and jaded Gen Xers who've been ground down to the stump by the mostly losing battles of the past 30 years. Can it be - at long last - that Americans have, simply, had enough? Are we, finally, stepping out to take back our government - and with it, control of our own future? Is this simply a shifting political season - the kind we get every 20 to 30 years - or is there something deeper going on here? Do we dare to raise our hopes that this time, we're going to finally win a few? Just how ready is this country for big, serious, forward-looking change?Recently, I came across a pocket of sociological research that suggested a tantalizing answer to these questions - and also that America may be far more ready for far more change than anyone really believes is possible at this moment. In fac

It is said in the 18th century the American general Israel Putnam once invited a British general to a novel test of nerves. Both were to sit on barrels of gunpowder, and the fuses were to bit lit. The last man to run away would be the winner. The unnamed British general accepted Putman's challenge. But as the fuses burned, he became increasingly fidgety while Putnam sat calmly, smoking his pipe. At the last moment the British general fled. Putnam stayed seated; he knew that both barrels were filled with onions. For several hundred years the Tower of London was home to a menagerie of wild animals, including a number of lions that later became the basis of a hoax. Dawk's News-Letter for April 2, 1698, announced: "Yesterday being the one April several persons were sent to the Tower of London to watch the annual lion-washing ceremony." This fictitious event continued to attract gullible visitors. Indeed, 158 years later, in 1856, many bought tickets to attend the ceremony. They were unaware of the significance of the date, April 1, or that the lions had been moved to the London Zoo 21 years before.

Description of Paul Ekman's work on universal human expressions and microexpressions.

The time: the early years of the 19th century. The setting an ancient manor house in an isolated valley in the west of England. A scientist is engaged in a very elaborate series of experiments with electricity. Outside the laboratory, copper wires suspended on poles run for more than a mile into the countryside. Inside, mysterious equipment - coils of wire, weirdly shaped jars, strange crystals, saucers of murky liquid - glows and pulsates. The few local people who dare to approach the mansion tell of explosions, of bolts of lightning that strike when no storms are near, and of the reclusive, secretive nature of the scientist himself.