d'Anconia
-
Posts
93 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by d'Anconia
-
-
Wow, for what it's worth, I ate up that post like it was just one paragraph. A lot of very interesting and helpful information!
Thank you very much!
-
There seems to be a certain language teacher who was associated with Michel Thomas going on "strike".
Two infact!
http://www.learnetarium.com/2011/05/boris-shekhtman-method-continued.html
There also is a matter of sales.
The courses, including mine, are finding a large audience.
However, most of the people comprising this audience do not pay for the courses. They get them off of pirate sites that steal our work and enable anyone to download it gratis. The authors receive nothing in return. This is theft, pure and simple. You may justify it anyway you wish; it remains theft.
I just Googled " Paul Noble+ bit torrent" and was not surprised to get over four million hits. Just imagine how many illegal downloads that represents. No one is immune to this phenomenon. I estimate that over 50% of my courses are illegally downloaded. The number for Michel Thomas's courses is even higher.
Shocking as it may seem to those not active in this work, except for making a name for oneself, the authoring of anything which may be digitally copied is not too lucrative. The good old days when authors lived off of royalties in their dotage is long gone. The internet has changed all of that. I definitely do not recommend anyone else to follow in my footsteps in this matter if you hope to earn a living from such efforts.
My future efforts at teaching will not be vulnerable to online piracy. I suggest others follow suit.
My current teacher, Boris Shekhtman, requested my assistance in sharing his method. His work has demonstrated that students are able, with the correct support, to quickly achieve high level proficiency in foreign language communication. With all due respect to the Michel Thomas approach which I still consider the best way to learn the basics, the foundation, for any language, the method of Boris Shekhtman allows the student to quickly, comfortably and with excellent grammar and pronunciation communicate with native-speakers. Such communication is on a very high level which is rarely, if ever, attained in many years of professional study. This method has now very much influenced the way I teach languages. However, in view of the rampant piracy that has infected the web I told him that I believe that issuing CDs or other courses that may be digitally pirated would be a mistake. He saw the logic of this and decided to continue with in-person teaching and carefully controlled sharing of our work. The work will be only shared with people who will respect the efforts of those who have developed it over the past 40 years. It will not be available for pirating of any sort.
Mr. Thomas told me many times in the 1990's that he was afraid that if he allowed his courses to be openly sold on cassettes ( now CDs and downloads) that his work would be stolen. In my enthusiasm I spent two years planting the seeds that resulted in the present courses. In retrospect, I now realize that his fears have been realized.
I shall not make that mistake again with the work of Boris Shekhtman
There is also a parasite of a public school teacher bullshiting in the comment section.
-
EDIT: Actually never mind... that post made little sense.
-
I'll be the first:
I'll help!
I just find this type of "heavenly" music very beautiful.
-
I take the "we don't matter in the grand scheme of things" to mean looking at something wonderful that happens to be natural, like the cosmos, and not feeling capable of producing something here and now that's even equally as grand. One action you take isn't really going to cause galaxies to shift and mountains to move. The issue I see isn't one of not seeing a purpose, but rather, believing that any personal achievement, even on the level of building a rocket to Mars, is by nature inferior or less meaningful than what goes on in the cosmos. So, why bother if your actions won't amount to much?
But the nihilist assumes here that just because the universe is "super super large" it means that it's more "important", in some vague sense removed from humanity.
I think a single computer chip is grander than the whole universe because it was created by thinking minds and not mere chance. I don't see anything of importance in moving a mountain, even if it might look grand.
-
I don't understand this... why not allow this debate to continue. All you've done is given this guy an excuse not to continue and answer the arguments put forth and an excuse for himself to continue holding false ideas while pretending to himself that he just wasn't allowed to continue. Other liberals&co. viewing this thread also have the same excuse.
-
Is their problem more a sense of life issue, or is there some direct argument that can be used to show that lack of a theistic "purpose" does not imply that existence is a sick joke?
Sadly it seems to me that many of them actually relish in this belief, but you are right, some of them are definitely genuinely depressed. But I don't really see how they come from a lack of a given purpose to "meaninglessness". I don't see why a self invented purpose would be inferior to one given by a deity.
-
I hope this is the right section of the forum to post this.
I keep running in to people saying that human life doesn't matter in the so called "grand scheme o things". I never really got where this argument came from. It presupposes that there is an actual attribute of "mattering" that exists like mass does.
But as I see it, mattering is an evaluation and not an attribute, i.e. it has to matter to someone, otherwise it's a floating abstraction. So denying the mattering of the only entity with the concept of mattering is faulty since one must deny the source of the concept.
As an aside: one person used this false logic to say that since our lives are meaningless we should be utilitarian and help the most people possible... but I don't see how this follows since 1000*0=1*0.
You might as what is the point of this thread. I'm looking for corrections and additional arguments for this point - or against as I think it's an important issue.
-
Well... whoever says that Ayn Rand was heartless and cruel should be shown this article.
-
DonAthos:
Totally that! I agree with your post completely. That's the exact compliment policy I was thinking about and I agree that love interests should not be treated as some sort of archetype that you need some sort of strategy for.
-
Even if you object to it, there's a value to be had in studying it to help with understanding the way many people act.
But I wouldn't want someone like that... It would be too bad if I liked the person and they turned out that way, but alas. If I am wrong and there is no malevolence of cowardice in it I'm sorry if I have offended anyone, but I think that in a lot of cases there is at least one of the two present.
How many times did Roark compliment Dominique before they had sex? How many times did Galt or Rearden compliment Dagny before they had sex? I may be wrong, but I think the answer to all of these is zero.It was obvious to both of them and they knew it. I'm not saying you should constantly be complimenting someone. Just that the reason for not complimenting shouldn't be fear.
How many times did Roark compliment Dominique before they had sex? How many times did Galt or Rearden compliment Dagny before they had sex? I may be wrong, but I think the answer to all of these is zero.It was obvious to both of them and they knew it. I'm not saying you should constantly be complimenting someone; just that the reason for not complimenting shouldn't be fear.
If you are confident and have stuff going on in your life, you are not going to be showing those looser tendencies that women hate. That is why confident dudes don't need to read those pick-up-artist guides. Because the people who read those things are attempting to fake that sort of behavior.
A bit coarse, but I think I agree, at least if we agree on the meaning of "looser tendencies”. What do you think constitutes them?
-
Personally, I think that if someone is confessing "deep", "serious" feelings for you on the third date, you should probably drop them for being too crazy to fuck.
I have a feeling you people have misunderstood me a little. I'm not saying one has to pour out ones soul to a person on the third date, leave flowers at their doorsteps every night and sing baladas under their window with a French accent. I think that's not needed anyway, since, if the love is mutual, it will become self-evident over time.
And I have nothing against playful "coquetry", I think it's very sweet actually since there's nothing dishonest about it. What I'm against are the games that are motive by fear of the other person losing interest in you just because you don't "keep them guessing".
I'd actually find it quite creepy if a guy I'd been seeing for a short time returned all my phone calls/emails instantly and went on and on about how "seriously" he takes the relationship.Going on about taking a relationship seriously is a bit redundant anyway... it doesn't really need to be said I don't think.
Let alone the fact that there are guys who think that complimenting a woman is a valid tactic for getting her to like them more. It's not expressly thought in these guys' minds, but this is in lieu of demonstrating virtue or value on his part. It's basically like saying "I have nothing to offer you, except the fact that I like you." Even an Objectivist woman would reject a man in this situation.
Complimenting with the intention of getting someone to like you more is dishonest, and I'm not defending that at all. But if one has a genuine compliment to give that's not just out of the blue in the situation shouldn't be held back because you think that the other person might get to confterable with you. The part about constantly keeping the other person on the edge and purpesfully making them unsure is what I detest.
-
Oh, I wasn't sure if you were addressing me with the you's, It seemed unlikely, but I wasn't sure.
Yes, identifying the games to the other person is probably the best thing to do; it either saves you from a person that wasn't worth your while anyway, or reassures them that they don't have to play such games if they were perchance convinced by other people that it's necessary for keeping someone’s interest. I think that a lot of the times it might be that they were misguided by the overwhelming hordes of people telling them they will lose the other person if they show their affection too honestly.
This article is an example of a “love game advocate”: http://www.sunday-guardian.com/young-restless/games-people-play-cruel-but-what-is-love-without-them
She asserts that “deep inside” we all like these games and proceeds to give horrid advice on that basis.
-
A woman doesn't have to know you inside out - and early on, why should she? -
for you still to be honest about yourself with her - within appropriate boundaries.
Genuine honesty is your own selfish virtue, not to be switched on and off for the sake
of power, pretence, or to manipulate her. A woman - a worthwhile one - will ALWAYS pick
up on the difference between counterfeit and genuine strength of character, and respect it.
Well I'm not really saying people should know you inside out from the beginning, and I'm not suggesting using honesty as some kind of a manipulative tool, if that's even possible. I'm not sure if you very implying that that's what I was saying.
I'm just bothered by people who are interested in someone seriously and feel the need to play "hard to get" to show their supposed strength. I don't see anything strong about suppressing your feeling for someone and putting them, whom you supposedly value, through cruel games. It just seems extremely monstrous to me.
-
Well I wasn't really looking for help from any of the forums I googled, I was just interested to know what people had to say about it. It's not really a corner of the internet, It's pretty much any thread you can google on the topic and it's not just about people looking for quick one-night stands. It's people giving genuine advice to people who say they're looking for a serious relationship.
-
I've been coming across various threads on forums (not completely by chance, I’ll admit) about people asking “what to do when she contacts me and says that she misses me?” which I’m not really bothered by, what I find revolting are the responses in the vein of “What I always do is –insert some cocky/asshole/joking response- but NEVER say what you really feel because that shows weakness, and don’t show excitement even if you are excited, because that supposedly takes the thrill of the “hunt” away and opens you up to much, and makes her not interested anymore”
I just find all that kind of talk very off-putting. I mean, do you really want to build a relationship with someone on foundations of dishonesty, stupid games and testing the water with cruel tricks?
So, why do you think people do this and what do you think about it?
Is it insecurity? Cynicism? Just not taking things seriously? What? I simply can’t understand how someone can stomach going through life and relationships not being honest and playing stupid mind games with people?
-
Thanks everyone for the information thus far!
After reading the comments and doing some googling I understand the issue a lot better.
Regards!
-
I have been having an argument with someone who claims that all basics in technology was created by the state and by public funding. As examples he gives the internet, computer and telecomunication (I don't know if this is true so if someone has any counter facts please let me know.) From that he infers that since the capitalists that now run companies such as microsoft could not have existed without public funding and therefore they owe the public.
How would you respond to this? I am mainly asking to learn about the subject and not so I can win an argument.
Thank you in advance!
-
Pretty great
-
While his views on war and economics were not to my liking, there is no doubt he was his own man in his political opinions.
I don't see how that's a virtue by itself... if his views were rotten (i.e. views on economics) it really makes no difference if he came to them on his own. It could be argued that its even worse.
-
Hm... can someone tell me why Hitchens is getting so much praise around here? I thought he was just another stale atheist beating a dead horse...
-
If anyone has the time I would like some suggestions about important or otherwise interesting exerpts from AS. I need it for a book report of sorts. Thank you!
-
Thank you so much!
-
Is this video still online somewhere?
Keeping Romance Simple
in Relationships, Love, Sex, Romance
Posted
But if you don't understand the damn question, how the hell can you know that it doesn't interest you?