grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jun 7, 2013 9:52:23 GMT -5
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,487
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 7, 2013 10:44:22 GMT -5
The seed bank project is super cool and also extremely wise and necessary. I used to occasionally get sent into the field to collect wild seed types for celery for the seed bank projects. One of the primary reasons for the project is to provide seed for alternate genetic types for various crops. There is a tendency in these modern times, for monoculture, where certain gene types of veggies, grains and fruits become very popular and widespread in their usage. For example, most all the celery grown in the US when I was working at the AG Dept, was of one single strain, as were many grain types. Because of this trend, a single new disease outbreak can affect most of a type of crop and cause very destructive effects and famine. Therefore, it's necessary to bank various old strains or wild types of those crops so genetic material is available for development of new gene types that might grow better, produce better, be of better quality or be more disease resistant. As I've said, a very cool and important project......Mel
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jun 7, 2013 10:57:22 GMT -5
Mel, at face value, I would agree. However, consider the possibility of someday all seed sold to the common folk may be hybrids. Lets just say that someone like Monsanto includes the terminator gene. Potential total dependance. This means the possibility exists to eradicate all open-pollinated seeds privately held. It is indeed important to protect the seed stocks, but the question will be who has access to them.
I am not saying we are there yet, but right or wrong I am a bit suspicious of of that which is done quietly and opaquely.
IMO, The moral of the story is:
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."
Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Jun 7, 2013 11:42:26 GMT -5
SCOTUS ≈ Monsanto’s terminator gene.
“A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not.”
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 11:45:43 GMT -5
Uh... ok, superficially, your articles sound sort of sinister. However start by considering... HOW did you get the link to any of the above 3 sites? Oh, you googled it. If google would be part of the conspiracy, googling would not ever get you to those sites. Articles from the top: 1. Sustainable development- the article pulls together a bunch of unrelated organizations and articles to support their premise that sustainable development leads to COMMUNISM and the taking away of ownership of all personal property worldwide. Bill... just think for 2 minutes. THINK THINK. Theoretically, it sounds sort of reasonable. Practically? Every single Communist nation worldwide, with the last holdout of North Korea and sort of Cuba (who's opening up NOW) are GONE. DEAD. KAPUT. Communism, the movement begun this century and tested by 1/2 the world DOES NOT WORK. It's failures were so spectacular, that no nation would bother trying again. It does NOT WORK. PROVEN. Yet the article says that every nation on earth now wants to become Communist basically. Is the author retarded? The MAIN reason it won't work isn't even that it's not doable. Every single Communist revolution, at the start, during and then after, involved killing rich people and seizing their land and assets for redistribution. Rich people own the world and every single government in it today. This article tells you that rich people are colluding to have themselves and their friends and family killed or dispossessed of everything they themselves own to build communes with their former assets. REALLY? REALLY? LMAO! 2. Billionaire conference security - yet the article was about them dodging the press... say what? A few years ago, I was lucky enough to attend an entertainment industry function. They not only booked the entire hotel for a month (Ritz Carleton in Cancun), they had the entire Mexican police in the region playing behind the scenes bodyguards. NO WORD got out. Just for a little convention for actors, directors, just entertainment people. BILLIONAIRES getting together...So secret that everyone in the Press knew about it already to write that article. HAAA!!! Do you know to this day, there is no mention anywhere at all about that convention I attended? If that were real, that reporter would be out of a job in that business. Blackballing in certain industries is absolute, he/she wouldn't work again. No press would risk that, and I saw it for myself in awe. For a whole month, we had famous people running around in Cancun, and not one reporter pulled out a camera or even cell phone. They would never be invited to attend again... so they didn't do it. Not a word leaked. Yet billionaires getting together would be leaked. Use some common sense. And THEN consider where this article was from... the tab on the right tells you... top headline next to the article: Lady Gaga shows off her newly toned body on a vacation in Mexico..." . Seriously? 3. Seed bank... Mel already answered this... but you can start your own seed bank anytime you want, and lots of farmers do. But what an odd concern. They can breed a strain of nearly anything right now, plants are very easy to genetically engineer, so strong that it would KILL any plant of its type not of that genetics, sort of like African killer bees take over regular honey bees by breeding with them and then displacing them. Why would they bother having seed banks if the objective was to force hybrids on us all? That makes no sense at all. All 3 examples you give are of blatant things that are far from opaque, because YOU KNOW ABOUT THEM. Because you can search for them in a search engine! How can you know about them if they are quietly done and opaque? The second a writer knows about something, it's neither quiet nor opaque anymore! And here you are posting about them... and ANYONE can look them up too. The irony is just huge that you quote articles at all as examples of quiet and opaque:). There may be a conspiracy, but if there is, it's a conspiracy because you WON"T know about it. Once you do, the entire premise is shot.
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jun 7, 2013 12:02:06 GMT -5
Ridicule all you wish Helen, it's your loss. The tap is neither all on or all off, freedoms are taken incrementally. I can see that you are not one who will accept possible scenarios as credible things to watch. If you have not gotten a clue that all is not what it seems to be by now. . . I am not going to try to make you drink the water.
As in "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink"
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 12:15:07 GMT -5
Now there you are mistaken. There is not only a possibility, but a probability that there ARE conspiracies. Their nature and purpose are unknown, because again, if they are known, if the truly powerful are involved, the knowing would be strangled.
Here's a great example of this, headlines today say that Putin is divorcing his wife of 30 years. So out of curiosity, I did some searching for Putin... and if you piece a few interesting facts together, he's got a son with Olympic gymnast Alina Kabayeva. Gee, his ONLY son, so gee, might he want to marry his 26 year old mother to give his SON a name? Why is this believable? Because the one and only source, a small Russian paper that originally reported in 2008 that he was going to divorce his wife and marry his mistress was shut down immediately after issuing a complete retraction of the article, with groveling retraction from the original author. Then the newspaper ceased to exist. It's still floating around the internet, other papers picked up on the story and won't let it die, but how interesting.
I'm very interested in credible things. Just that the things you cited are not only incredible, they are ridiculous. Would a billionaire support a movement that would result in killing himself and his entire family for the common good? HAAAA!!!
That doesn't mean there are no conspiracies or credibly interesting theories. Those credible theories would most likely involve the precise OPPOSITE of the writer's premise... such absolute control and knowledge of the populace that we descend into feudal times again, complete with serfs and slaves. And they will get us to vote Republican through propaganda to bring it about again, one step at a time. I have no doubt that the wealthy worldwide would collude to enforce their continued well being dynastically.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2013 13:03:43 GMT -5
Wouldn't do what? I do believe they would require the government to provide warrant before they surrender user information. Make no mistake. We agree on this. What I said was google was supplying tech for the government to do their own snooping. Google is a tech company and could make bazillions for selling the tech and hardware expertise . That is a contractor relationship, not an information provider. I believe google would do that, and still claim to hide behind the "do no evil" company mission statement. Besides imagine the brownie points google gets for doing this. Being the biggest anything always makes you a target for government. Supplying tech puts that target on someone else's back.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 13:13:23 GMT -5
Google doesn't make equipment of that type. That would be Oracle, Cisco, IBM or even a setbox top technology like Entropic. There are a ton of equipment manufacturers that could do it, and absolutely would do it.
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jun 7, 2013 13:30:08 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2013 13:38:18 GMT -5
Helen, you are so busy looking at details and trying to prove me wrong you don't realize we're saying the same thing.
Forget the stuff in the boxes.
Google builds HUUUUGE and EFFICIENT data centers from scratch. Better than anyone. They do not farm it out, they build their own. Who is the obvious company to hire when you need a huge and efficient data center?
Amazon.com is another player in this workspace.
Google "google data center" for more details.
They did an amazing white paper on HDD life expectancy. Being the largest buyer/user of HDD and other electronic equipment has it's benefits.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 13:43:45 GMT -5
No one said google was good either. It's just inconceivable that they'd help the gov't snoop on people. Now keeping info for THEIR OWN ads and profit is another matter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2013 13:44:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 13:46:41 GMT -5
Geez Bill, if google had the dominance of the space Microsoft did for decades, that might be more believable. Google is a search engine and starting to spread into hardware. They not only do not come close to dominating the space, they aren't close to the most valuable company either. Do a simple search for market caps (their full corporate value) on google, then do Microsoft, then do IBM. Then realize you are wrong. They are simply more visible, but that's all. Even Apple outstrips google's market value.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 13:51:04 GMT -5
I don't disagree with the premise for this article's potential. That'd be right up Kurzweil's alley. Everyone who works at Google are sci-fi star trek tech nerds... probably trying to make Issac Asimov's Foundation series come to pass. That wouldn't surprise me one bit. But google is nowhere near a monopoly or have the capability you are assuming.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2013 13:54:39 GMT -5
Geez Bill, if google had the dominance of the space Microsoft did for decades, that might be more believable. Google is a search engine and starting to spread into hardware. They not only do not come close to dominating the space, they aren't close to the most valuable company either. Do a simple search for market caps (their full corporate value) on google, then do Microsoft, then do IBM. Then realize you are wrong. They are simply more visible, but that's all. Even Apple outstrips google's market value. Whois Bill? If you think Google is only a search engine then you have much to learn. They are a software company. Their software does sh\tloads of things. Search got them started. As for dominating the space of data center development, there is nobody bigger or better. Microsoft's, IBM's, Apple's market caps are straw men. That was a waste of bits typing that.
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jun 7, 2013 13:57:05 GMT -5
Scott, Bill I am.
|
|
robsrockshop
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2012
Posts: 715
|
Post by robsrockshop on Jun 7, 2013 13:57:24 GMT -5
"I don't disagree with the premise for this article's potential. That'd be right up Kurzweil's alley. Everyone who works at Google are sci-fi star trek tech nerds... probably trying to make Issac Asimov's Foundation series come to pass. That wouldn't surprise me one bit. But google is nowhere near a monopoly or have the capability you are assuming."
Haha...........the laws of robotics. Looks like all 3 laws can be thrown out with todays standards.
I am fascinated with robotics btw and am currently considering building a drone, before that's outlawed also lol.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Jun 7, 2013 13:58:21 GMT -5
I know exactly what google does. They've been trying to recruit my 17 year old genius son for 2 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2013 14:03:41 GMT -5
I know exactly what google does. They've been trying to recruit my 17 year old genius son for 2 years. If you know exactly what google does, how can you say they are only a search company. How can you not know they are the largest player in datacenter design and build?
|
|