Dr. Radiaki

No part of the topic title sounds appealing.

No such thing, I'm afraid.

Attacks on the man's appearance have no bearing on the discussion his philosophy. Comments like this remind of a time I heard Ayn Rand described as, "that haggard, shriveled [REDACTED]". I'm sure most here would agree that her appearance has had no impact on your understanding of Objectivism, or your willingness to accept that A is A.

The enthusiastic explorer has existed for a long time. People who go places others have not simply to observe them, because they value the discovery itself. I assume at some point a fervent exploratory mind would decide to see what could be found, and would reap his just reward. EDIT: Wording unclear.

I was expecting an open letter to the band Rush, and now I'm very disappointed. Trouble with the trees, indeed!

It's strange that they don't make any attempt to explain why this 'disease' was completely unknown outside of the very wealthy until recently. Quite a conundrum, that.

Hey, me too...

Can we even consider a child of that age rational, much less capable of understanding what he has done?

Board game wise, I would recommend Power Grid.

Paul, you have an epic beard. Magnificent.

One thing I like about this forum is how much I learn about my own thought process. I'll admit that I was(initially) pleased to hear about this injury, but this thread made me think about what exactly I was happy about: Another human being suffering an accidental injury... Yeah. Well, let's just say I've re-thought that position. Also, I've learned that this board really needs a good exterminator. Those damn crickets are everywhere!

Given the relative ease with which e-voting can be tampered with(Google Diebold and see what turns up), I'd say your country is better off with paper slips. As for me, I will not be voting because I am Canadian, and for that reason am not legally entitled to do so. I will continue to look across the border in horror at two candidates who view my country's lumber industry as a personal affront.

Earlier in the topic some online book lending services were mentioned in passing; anyone care to to provide links?

I just moved it up to 1337 diggs. That makes me smile.

Ooh, oooh, I've got another one! We could build a new geothermal plant on a vent that's too small for commerical applications and use it to run an ice maker. Then we can put the ice cubes into the ocean and cool it down.

I would equate it to the idea of gift giving. Releasing code to the open source community is not to make others happy(though this may be a byproduct), but rather to make the giver happy. There is a justifiable sense of pride in saying, "Look what I have created. The project now functions better, and more efficiently because of me." The product of the mind can be given away in a voluntary exchange if the giver so wishes. Open source is about as far from coercive altruism as you can get.

Most license agreements regarding IP specifically forbid the creation of archival or back-up copies, making your DVD copy of the VHS illegal. Immoral? I'm not really sure.

I'd also like to link the Skeptoid essay on the subject of The Secret. Brian does a pretty good job demolishing it on scientific grounds.

I'll try to address the idea of monopoly being "bad". First of all, how does one create a monopoly in truly free market? By out competing and acquiring the opponents in your chosen field. You do not achieve these goals by selling an inferior product, or paying an inferior wage. Expansion requires labour, which can only be attracted by offering better pay or benefits than a competitor. Expansion requires a decent product, too. Do not expect to make enough profit to buy a lemonade stand if you sell duds. Once a monopoly has been established, radically driving up prices or lowering wages(The only way a monopoly could "harm" anyone) will achieve little benefit for any company so doing. Prices high enough will result in the development of alternatives by any means necessary, as methods previously untenable become affordable in the wake of skyrocketing costs. Lowering wages can be combated by unionization, and where this fails, leaving the job. Skills do not disappear, and by driving off its best workers a company is, in effect, creating its own competition. After all, who better to break Company X's hold on the market than its disgruntled(and highly skilled) former employees?

I think this is another subject that can't be judged expect in specific cases. Remember that Roark broke rocks rather than compromising in his chosen profession. I can imagine a female particle physicist driven to stripping over the stranglet/black hole nonsense surrounding the Large Hadron Collider.

Can't say that I'm fond of his work. A little too doe-eyed and precious for my liking.

I found this wonderful picture through reddit.com Ain't free enterprise grand?

Reading Objectivist writing on emotion, it's nature, and the ideal role it serves in a Man's life has been incredibly comforting for me. Before I had simply never thought of emotions in that way. That is, as immediate evaluator based on values, values which in turn depend upon the mind. I believe this to be true, but I have great difficulty actually finding the source of my own emotions. I find it's like trying to hold a low amperage live wire, it is mentally but also physically difficult. Has anyone else encountered this? What are some steps I might take?

Bill's gonna get a fatwa at this rate, if he doesn't already have one.