Does True Randomness Actually Exist? ( ^&*#^%$&#% )

Prove that scientifically!

i wonder how The King is gonna do Q ?

🤣

....... lol what letter did you come to when that idea ‘first’ popped up for you to drop after P? 

A few days ago back on July 1st our Governor made mask wearing mandatory state wide, whereas before it was just in several counties. Meaning basically all places of business, enforced by OSHA

I believe it's a thousand dollar fine if caught without. Heard all this second hand at the shooting range a few days back, but I believe it to be credible. Got myself a heavy duty soft cloth mask, e-z  p-z.

Depending on how you travel though, you should be just fine.

                      Q

Is to question; to question dogma, question ideology, question outside authority. It is only by questioning what people take for granted, what people hold to be true, that we can break through the hypnosis of social conditioning

Lol is that a question? 

Boom!

The truth about "helping others"

Heavily redacted.. 

A few months ago we ran a survey in one of the businesses I consult for, trying to find out what their customers and prospects (who were interested in making money) wanted most. The results were rather remarkable.

A large number of the people who responded said they just wanted to "help people." The interesting thing was, most of them had indicated in a previous question that the were dead-butt broke, and had no resources and little knowledge. Yet, they wanted to help people.

I hear the same thing on this list--a guy (who's unemployed, broke and going nowhere in life) meets a woman (usually a stripper or an escort) and wants to "help her" because she really is a "good person."

On the surface, the desire to "help" sounds noble, but when you dig a little deeper, you find that it can be a very dangerous concept. Why?

First off, to be in the position to truly help somebody you must be able to help yourself first. Most people I know who babble about wanting to help people have serious issues they need to overcome, and use their "wanting to help" as a reason to avoid dealing with these issues. The desire to "help" can actually be personally harmful if it is used to avoid self improvement.

The second reason is this: most people have no clue what it takes to truly help someone. Their idea of "help" is to give them something, whether it is money, time, or advice. Giving someone something without compensation on their part is a complete waste of time, and is an extremely selfish thing to do.

Selfish? Yes, selfish. Here's why: if you simply give someone something without asking for some form of compensation in return, it makes you feel good, makes you feel... superior. People love to talk about how many people they "helped" yet all they did was give away something to make themselves feel good.

See, when you give someone something without return compensation, there's no "commitment and consistency present." Because they didn't compensate you, there's no commitment on there part, and no reason for them to engage in new behavior. Commitment and consistency is a huge psychological lever (see Cialdini, "Influence: The Pyschology of Persuasion"), and it is the way you change beliefs. If you don't change someone's beliefs you can't truly help them because they'll keep doing the same old things and getting the same old results. Behavior is a result of beliefs.

That's why giving someone something uncompensated is so deadly--instead of changing old beliefs, it reinforces them, diminishing their self image because they took an unearned hand out. When you require compensation, they're requesting, they're earning the help, and when someone earns something it elevates their self image, and changes beliefs.

Here's an interesting thing: when you start telling people who want to "help" the truth about what it really takes to help people, they don't like it at all. They resist it. Why? One, because requesting compensation (and enforcing it) is hard work, even stressful work. Two, because it takes away their feeling of superiority--now their "help" has been reduced to an even exchange of value, and that's something that feels good... but not superior.

Starting a business and requiring compensation for your products and services is one of the best ways to truly help people, and the more you charge, the more you help them. Most of my success stories come from guys who have invested in several of my products and taken action, few come from guys who just get the free newsletter. Why? Commitment and consistency, coupled with a healthy self image on the part of the action takers.

The truth is, I didn't really "help" my most successful students--I just provided them good information in return for compensation, and their mindsets and self images did the rest. But, that's what "true help" is... creating the conditions to allow others to help themselves.

So, next time you feel the urge to "help" someone, stop and ask yourself if you're willing to do what it takes to truly help them, or are you just looking to feel good. When you master the art of truly helping others, based on their outcomes and results of what they compensated you for, that's when you know you've become a success.

'Depending on how you travel though, you should be just fine.'

thats cool. i need to be in brookings. and afterwards am thinking to take a nice drive to florens or yachats.

your Q quote is right on the money for TR. its funny how many people believe in it just because they been told so, and without ever questioning it for themselves. its even funnier when they claim that the belief in TR is based on science.

my 2c on #22.. there's some truth in it, but the bottom line is that its just wrong. i hope this wont rub you the wrong way. especially if youre into AR's.. lol. not sure if i should ask

@Sillver1, ok I accept it: you are 100% deterministic. Not a single bit of true randomness.

First off, to be in the position to truly help somebody you must be able to help yourself first.

Reminds me of the movie Leaving Las Vegas (I think Nicolas Coppola and Elizabeth Shue).

and Cialdinis book is a wonderful one for blossoming rhetoricians  . tho have read only pieces.

Hmm, don't remember that one. I vaguely remember 'Fear and loathing in Las Vegas' though.

its about a young extreme SA (alc*h*l) and a pr*st*t*te. if ur gonna watch it make sure ur in the mood for a seedy downer. the ending wuz kinda disappointing for me. in that it felt not quite convincing.

Reposting nonsense to make a point it’s nonsense 📬

the general intelligence seen here in weeks gone by can’t hold a candle up to mayonnaise 🍯

Global fame and a permanent place in the history books awaits you if you can really prove it scientifically to convince demanding people.

Of course there is also huge potential benefit to the world (although this might be more limited if you were the only one with this superpower).

Clairvoyance - described “as one who sees clearly”

Is real alright. Is happening every moment. Nothing extraordinary about extra sensory perception. The real question becomes one of tuning. Is the rare event to be in the right key. Get lucky one time, right place right time, and suddenly people become soothsayers. Problem becomes the difference between what’s in the mind vs reality.

Perhaps the most famous modern-day psi-friendly psychologist is Daryl Bem, whose 2011 experiments inspired a crisis in his field. Some of his peers thought his paper was a hoax. Others took issue with his methods, which they admitted were technically correct — but if Bem could “prove” something so outlandish as psychic ability with accepted social-science methodology, they said, there had to be something wrong with accepted social-science methodology.

In his new paper, parapsychology researcher Etzel Cardeña analyzed psi-related research and came to the conclusion that Bem’s results might not have been so crazy after all. Cardeña writes that the strongest support for psi can be found in research which utilizes the “Ganzfeld procedure,” in which blindfolded subjects in a soundproofed room are asked to describe a film clip they have not seen, which they’re either shown after the fact, or which is played simultaneously in another room. If experimental judges can use these descriptions to choose the specified clip from other “distractor” clips, this is considered positive evidence for psi. Startlingly, meta-analyses of Ganzfeld procedure studies show statistically significant support for this psychic effect. (!!)

What happened? Opti made good sense. I actually completely read the last three posts! (except the copied part)
I’d even consider an “experiment” here at the CC forums! 📡

Since we are all chess players... a ready made control in place.

lol, go ahead and ask..  

Really not sure what an 'AR' is, but did you know that 'AR' is a valid Scrabble word?

1) Augmented Realitys?

2) Alternative Realities?

3) Assault Rifles?

4) Actionable Resources?       

5) Asocial Remembrance?

#22 hit close to home, I dig it. King has a tangent, oh no.. Time to break out Shakespeare. 

                       R

Stands for the fact that receiving is as necessary as giving. To graciously receive is an expression of the dignity of giving. Those who are unable to receive are actually incapable of giving. Giving and receiving are different aspects of the flow of energy in the universe.

Giving and receiving do not have to be in the form of material things. To graciously receive a compliment or admiration or respect also implies the ability to be able to give these to others. And absence of respect, courtesy, manners, or admiration creates a state of poverty irrespective of the amount of money you have in the bank.

@Optimissed, some relevant observations to your belief in your supernatural powers are:

1. I would love such powers to be real
2. I have seriously hypothesised such powers in myself in the (now quite distant past)
3. I have even claimed such powers on one occasion in a bar (although I was representing a false degree of confidence - in truth I was merely open to the possibility - because I was addressing a homeopathist who had previously been an actor, and have no doubt that homeopathy is pure snake oil with no value beyond placebo, and I thought back at you. He was actually another player at a chess club I attended at that time, so maybe there was an element of competing claims as well.
4. It because very clear to me over time that any evidence I believed I had for such powers was ephemeral, and the openness to conclude they existed was wishful thinking - the selection of conclusions based on their desirability. While I would still love it if such things were true, I am rather sure they are not, as this is far more consistent with the evidence