Loading user information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading user information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements


bryanedds bryanedds An ​individuali​st is he who is saving himself from all those who are saving the world.
  • Slip Sliding Away--The Joys of Global Cooling

    Four facts and a few questions -

    1) The basis of good science is skepticism and dissent.

    2) The AGW community systematically disallows for skepticism and dissent.

    3) Pretty much only the AGW view is supported with government funding.

    4) There is no freedom that AGW cannot be used to repress.

    In light of this, I wonder how I can consider current AGW claims as 'scientific'. Skeptical views are either barely funded in comparison or otherwise repressed. What would Galileo think of this?

    Since AGW could be (and is being) weaponized against individual freedom, I would not surprised that it's why governments are so anxious to promote it exclusively. Nor would I be surprised that it's why they are financially starving out skeptical and dissenting scientists. What would Jefferson think of this?

    It doesn't seem like real science to me. When science gets politicized, it goes back to the Dark Ages. People with sufficient objectivity can't ignore when that happens. I would not be surprised if the AGW community's current tactics backfire against the people who remain objective. Would they?

  • I'd rather just pay more taxes

    And I will close with this -


    Judge us however you want, demonize us if you like, but we no longer consent to be part of this twisted, violent, stupid system... no matter how many crumbs it promises to hand out to us once it steals the rest of our bread.

  • I'd rather just pay more taxes

    Of course we're pissed at our fellow countrymen - look at what they've brought us to! And it doesn't mean we hate them; dogs are absolute dolts, but I personally am a huge humanitarian. Face the fact that the only reason your side gets to be all lovey-dovey with the masses is because you've managed to capture them with your ideology and made them your puppets. That is a sick form of compassion, my friend.

    And remember when Bush was president - the left was the most hateful group of people when it came to the rural majority! It was a nation-wide hate campaign. So your accusations are just a bunch of chicanery.

    Unlike the demogogues who are running the world into the ground, I don't claim to be an angel. My compassion can only extend so far. Why would I help someone who has actively undermined my freedom, and would continue to do so? You have to someday start living in the real world. There is a difference between real compassion and a master / servant relationship. However, I realize that a statist is fundamentally unable to make this distinction.

    Sadly, all normal avenues to freedom have been barricaded or are proving illusory. It is time to take up courage, accept the truth, and peacefully withdraw consent. This is the precise act of courage which is the only real backstop to tyranny. No, I don't deserve a sonnet, but I sure as **** don't deserve your ridicule either. Conversely, is there anything more cowardly than anonymously throwing stones at those who do stand up and speak out?

    When I speak I put my reputation on the line. Because things are going to hell so fast, I now consider it imperative. And I couldn't give a damn about your petty insults; it just gives me another chance to clarify

  • I'd rather just pay more taxes

    , W3bbo wrote


    Is that a threat?

    Will you follow the right-wing dream of taking your gun into congress?


    It is the typical statist mindset to think aggressive violence is the only way to solve problems (voting merely being an indirect form). No, I don't plan on attacking Washington, if that's what you mean. Quite the contrary, I'm waiting for her to destroy herself. As Rome, the USSR, and all empires went, so will she. History has predicted every crisis this country has gone through, so a little knowledge goes a long way here.

    However, life will be particularly difficult for those who refused to acknowledge this likelihood and would not prepare for life without a 'social safety net'. They will finally know what it is like to be powerless. And since they did it to themselves, I think I will be disinclined to help them out.

    (Well, in truth, I'm soft-hearted and compassionate, so I probably will help anyone I see suffering, but damn, they better finally show a little respect for the people who were courageous enough to acknowledge reality.)

    But anyway, feel free to misconstrue everything I say and consider me a right-wing terrorist or some self-serving bullocks.

    Cowardice flees the light of truth. Courage often stands alone.

  • I'd rather just pay more taxes

    @W3bbo: That is such a

    , W3bbo wrote


    Well then, go use the democratic process to fix things.

    I still think you worry unnecessarily.

    Vive la Yurop!

    That is such a cop-out. If voting could change anything for the better, it would be illegal. No people I've voted for (or would vote for) ever wins enough seats to provide any counter-balance to the avalanche of assholes. I am effectively disenfranchised. People like me have no real voice in a democracy. The only hope for us is secession (at least, on a personal level), but since that WOULD actually change things for the better, it IS illegal. Nowadays people who have more than, what, 14 days of food?, is considered a terrorist suspect.


    Now, it is hard to explain to your typical democracy ideologue what it is like to be disenfranchised. Democracy ideologues, being the morons they are, are always in numerous company. They decide the elections typically, and can't see why anyone would object to a system that works so much in their perceived favor. They don't understand that democracy does not work for people other than themselves. Definitionally, the smarter people are always in the smaller minority. Smarter people refuse to live under perceptions of reality that have been warped into absurdity.

    Non-idealogues know that freedom is more important than democracy, and that democracy tends to erode freedom more than protect it. But again, the people who know this are those who buck the prevailing mass culture and instead embrace the honest, if unpleasant, truth. They don't live in a simplistic fairy tale where the voting machine has a magical lever that will balance the world. These people, unfortunately, will always be in the minority. Which is why your pat answer is total bullshit. So maybe you can understand why such a statement is so fundamentally insulting.

    The bottom line is that the problems caused by ideologies such as democracy cannot be fixed by piling more of it on. The answer is freedom, and that takes real individual action rather than what amounts to a political form of masturbation.

    As to worry, I am not worried. I am pissed. I am outraged. And I am waiting and slowly preparing for the day I won't have to take this bullshit from Washington any more. And so is much of the rest of the country and likely the rest of the world. So pardon me for not sedating myself with fairy tales; I'm through.

  • I'd rather just pay more taxes

    , W3bbo wrote



    You worry too much.

    How many knives need to be at your throat before you pull your head out of your *?


    The founders created a minimal government as it was the ONLY way to restrain it from becoming a criminal enterprise. They wisely realized that making the government responsible for only a select few things was the ONLY way to keep it properly constrained. Sure, that means that the welfare and aggressive warfare functions of the government were to be non-existent, but that independence is the real price of freedom.

    But over time, the country filled up with dumbfounded dipshits who couldn't absorb or remember that one principle lesson.

    In closing, if America goes to hell, at least we will know why. It will have been the combination of political avarice and incorrigible stupidity.

  • I'd rather just pay more taxes

    I'd rather just have freedom and general prosperity.

    @CreamFilling512: Cheers. It's really sad how the left and right would trade away lawful government for their ideological crusades. It's as if they've never heard of what happened to the people underneath criminal governments throughout the 20th century. Rather than learning good economics and humbling themselves to dynamics of voluntary human action, they want to create a society built on their prejudices and hatred... enforced by thugs, jailors, executioners, and (now thanks to Bush il Deuce) torturers.

    It is set up to become a war of all groups against all others where at least one group has a target on its back. What was once a society will become a prison to the prevailing hysteria of the moment. We'll reinvent the same old totalitarianism under a new guise, all because too few are willing to humbly educate themselves on limited, decentralized, republican government and real economics (EG - not Keynesianism).

    I believe in America's core tradition of equal protection for everyone under the law. I don't care if you really ARE the 99%, the 1% has the same God-given rights as everyone else; the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness via the just acquisition of private property.

    It is time to say 'NO' to criminal government, your welfare checks and bloated warfare budgets be damned! Neither of those will save you when your own government's got a boot on your neck. And if you have your eyes open, you'll see said boot is getting closer everyday - http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-set-to-become-law-the-terror-is-nearer-than-ever-2011-12#ixzz1gYi1BuI7

    Ultimately, the argument isn't about whether you should help people out with your neighbor's money. The argument is about freedom - that is, the freedom to help yourself provided that you allow others to do the same for themselves and each other. Under an unrestrained criminal government, everyone is doomed. Mao, Hitler, and Stalin all provided gigantic welfare systems. In the end, their massive social safety nets only worked to ensnare and suffocate the people.

    So don't give us that agitprop about people having the freedom to starve under laissez-faire. What people really need, and what criminal government utterly destroys, is the freedom to survive, and the ability to flourish. That's what made America prosperous, and can again. So let's stop playing around with grand utopian ideals, and get America back to the business of liberty.

    Because it's either that, or http://jim.com/hayek.htm

  • A Modular Language Built with F#

    I found a more relevant place to have this discussion - http://hubfs.fpish.net/topic/Some/0/74051. Sorry for the OT thread.

  • A Modular Language Built with F#

    Sorry guys, I tried to post the spec, but this forum just won't display it properly. I uploaded it to a file sharing site here - http://www.4shared.com/document/KL82kgvv/AML.html

  • A Modular Language Built with F#

    Hi C9 friends!

    I've designed a language that I plan to implement soon in F#. It is not your ordinary language, but a modular language that is usefully-defined only once a user-defined 'language module' is plugged in. It is in the vein of the modern 'language workbench' tools, but far more lightweight. SICP readers will know it as the metalinguistic abstraction. I will explain the motiviation for this language, and will then paste the current spec for discussion.

    After many years of typical programming, I've concluded that imperative approaches to programming generally lead to monolothic code bases. This is regardless of the mercilessness with which refactoring is applied. I have concluded that any time one wishes to solve a non-trivial problem in programming, one should find a declarative way to solve that problem. The language I provide gives a foundation upon which declarative languages can be built to solve these problems, thus removing the main impediment to using declarative techniques to solve normal problems.

    By customizing the language with an appropriately-defined module, one can express the declarative languages needed to solve programming problems normally implemented in the imperative style. Even high-grade functional programmers will concede that imperative programming has a place in simulation and UI development. With the modular language and one of the languages implemented with it below (DOL), I will try revoke that concession. I will show that simulations and UIs, the typical bread and butter of high-level imperative programming (OOP), are better implemented with a declarative language.

    Below is the spec as it is. Please note some formatting was lost. Also note that the syntax is a bit ugly due to the use of s-expressions. I am using a very simple syntax solution to make the language as implementable for myself as possible. I would hope to improve the syntax in a fork later.

    If anyone has any questions in person or would like a copy of the more readable original spec, please mail to bryanedds@yahoo.com . Thanks all for reading!