Your focal point must remain at that within Point wherein you are constantly aware of being as Conscious Being, not as the operator of a business, or the promoter of a service. You must let the business and the service be what they will, as the ever-fluid manifestation of that living Being which You Are. Do not let what “occurs” become the repository of yourself. This is because Your Self, being infinite, cannot be confined to any manifestation or visibility which It evolves for Its identification. Yes, in your terms, it would mean a dispassionate, uninvolved experience of what is appearing. You must learn to get your satisfaction from being What You Are as Conscious Being, rather than what you appear to be by virtue of what is done three-dimensionally.

It is always us that is holding onto some comfortable sense of limitation with which we feel some sense of familiarity. The active agent which holds us back is actually our own refusal to let go of the known for the Unknown. This reluctance is entirely due to an adopted belief that we are what we appear to be—finite, separate, an independent “intelligence” that exists “inside” this finite object called a body, a potential victim of an unpredictable environment. Yet, the finiteness, separateness, independence, and unpredictability are entirely inherent in the partial view of the Actual conscious experience of Being which is going on. If it weren’t going on, there couldn’t be a misinterpretation or misidentification!

RAJ: It is because the time has come to stop manipulating the finite view to improve it according to finite concepts. This does not constitute waking up out of the dream or waking up out of the distortions of the partial view. If you succeed in improving the partial view—in “healing it”—you will find no necessity to involve yourself in the labors necessary to Awaken

I can say, “Be patient, everything will be alright,” but that will not help you unless you believe it. No one can truly convince you of the Reality of Your Being. It’s already the Fact of You, and you are having to live this “time” out from that Fact.

PAUL: Raj, I am failing miserably at demonstrating or seeing the omnipresence of my Being in terms of supply. It’s true that from day to day we have what we need, but it’s far from a comfortable way to live. All we’re getting are basics. The larger debts we owe are not being met. RAJ: Paul, I want you to be aware that you are beginning to give up your faith, trust, and belief in the validity of our conversations. This is indicated by the flip-flopping back and forth between knowing they are real and doubting they are real. I point out also that the doubting comes into play when you are challenged by opinions or circumstances. This certainly is a natural response, but it is not the consistent vantage point which you will find necessary if you’re going to be free from being dangled like a yo-yo or blown to and fro on the breeze of chance. PAUL: Well, if you are wanting me to develop some inner strength which will not yield, no matter what I’m confronted with—and if I’m supposed to do this while it’s my family’s lack that I’m faced with—then I don’t think you should be surprised! Theoretically, intellectually, I can grasp its value. But when it comes down to the nitty-gritty of life, it often seems like nonsense. RAJ: I understand, Paul. I want to refer you to what your Supply told you about how to set the Law in motion. I want you to begin doing this on a regular basis. A word to the wise: Be sure of what you are asking for, because you shall surely get it. PAUL: Alright, Raj. I shall forge forward. I will tell you this: It would be much easier if my family’s needs were being better met.

You are afraid that if you let go and stop “doing,” everything will fall apart. This is because you are still caught in the belief that what you have “done” in the past has succeeded in getting you where you are. This is foolishness, and you are beginning to see this. You haven’t gotten anywhere, because Infinity has no place to go. Nevertheless, Infinity—your Being—has unfolded Itself in spite of what you thought you were “doing,” and where you thought you were getting to.

You have been concerned in the last few days that you are not making the connection between what I have been discussing with you and your daily experience. The simple fact is that you have been trying to relate infinite ideas to finite beliefs. There is no connection. There is no connection between Mind and Its manifestation. They are one. It is only from the standpoint of ego—of finite, three-dimensional misperception—that there can seem to be a “connection.” Since ego separates itself from what it sees, it divides things into subject and object, “in here” and “out there,” me and thee, and all the rest of the dualism. This prompts the attempt to manipulate all of these disconnected aspects, so that they will harmonize in such a way as to not destroy the basic illusion of the existence of “ego.” Thus, from the three-dimensional standpoint, it seems obvious that the misidentification of Identity called “ego” must become, do, initiate, manipulate, and achieve. One cannot bring these endeavors into that Place where Self is properly identified and experienced as Conscious Being or Fourth-dimensional Man, since the basic illusion of separateness has no existence there.

If you try to deal with the way things appear, if you pay attention to what the five physical senses are telling you, you will scare yourself shitless.

And better understanding them means we can skillfully stimulate the neural substrates of those states—which, in turn, means we can strengthen them. Because as the famous saying by the Canadian scientist Donald Hebb goes, “Neurons that fire together, wire together.”

But itis not theproper role ofthe University to attempt to shield individuals from ideasand opinionsthey find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive. Although theUniversity greatly values civility, and althoughall members of the University community share in the responsibilityformaintaininga climate of mutual respect, concerns about civility and mutual respect can never be used as a justification for closing off discussion of ideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to some members of ourcommunity.

t “education should not be intended to make people comfortable, it is meant to make them thin

omething strange is happening at America’s colleges and universities.

But students should also be taught how to live in a world full of potential offenses.

“The presumption that students need to be protected rather than challenged in a classroom is at once infantilizing and anti-intellectual.”

vindictive protectiveness

Even compassion, the concern we feel for another being’s welfare, has been treated with downright derision. Kant saw it as a weak and misguided sentiment: “Such benevolence is called soft-heartedness and should not occur at all among human beings,” he said of compassion. Many question whether true compassion exists at all—or whether it is inherently motivated by self-interest.

a simpletraining exercise where you practice loving kindness, where you’re just thinking compassionatethoughts towards others and towards yourself over time, actually pretty dramatically increasesyour own personal happiness, suggesting that the Dalai Lama was on to something when hesaidthat compassion is the pathway to happiness.

Darwin made the case that sympathy, or compassion, is our strongest instinct. And I’ll quote,because “sympathy will have been increased through natural selection for those communitieswhich included the greatest number of the most sympathetic members would flourish thebest and raise the greatest number of offspring.”

The act of perspective-taking is summed up by one of the most enduring definitions of empathy that we have, formulated by Adam Smith as “changing places in fancy with the sufferer.”

Percy Shelley says is“the great secret of morals is love; or a going out of your own nature and anidentification of ourselves with the beautiful which exists in thought, action,or person, not our own. A man, to be greatly good, must imagine intensely andcomprehensively; he must put himself in the place of another and of many others;the pains and pleasures of his species must become his own. The great instrument ofmoral good is the imagination.”

Despite data heterogeneity, the large size and detailed nature of the dataset enabled data-driven detection of recovery as a graded, emergent pattern defined within the full multivariate syndromic space

Two centuries ago Leibnitz invented a calculating machine which embodied most of the essential features of recent keyboard devices, but it could not then come into use. The economics of the situation were against it: the labor involved in constructing it, before the days of mass production, exceeded the labor to be saved by its use, since all it could accomplish could be duplicated by sufficient use of pencil and paper. Moreover, it would have been subject to frequent breakdown, so that it could not have been depended upon; for at that time and long after, complexity and unreliability were synonymous.

For the biologists, and particularly for the medical scientists, there can be little indecision, for their war has hardly required them to leave the old paths

“The cat is out of the bag. The content people have no clue. I mean, no clue.” - Bram Cohen

As I did 20 years ago, I still fervently believe that the only way to make software secure, reliable, and fast is to make it small. Fight Features.

Civic education cannot be just a matter of teaching and persuading young people to participate in the existing system; it must acknowledge deep-seated and understandable critiques of politics.

Much like a Unix power user will compose multiple single-purpose tools into a complex piped command, a functional programmer will combine single-purpose function invocations into chains of operations (think Map/Reduce).

But this is the one that I want to get you: If you can bear to hear the truth you ’ve spoken Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools, What it’s saying is: you say something that you think it’s true, and somebody out there takes what you’ve said and then twists it to trap somebody else who either admires you or doesn’t like you. What is said in the poem I didn’t understand, but being in the software free community I’ve really seen that. We work really hard to find the truth: what’s important, what will work, how can we move forward.

As Park says, "We need both kinds: people who can hack the technology, as well as people who can hack the bureaucracy."

the code is a black box, and what they enjoy is the program

Code is the tool. The program is the product.

The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next. It was the deep knowledge -- and pray God we have not lost it -- that there is a profound, moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.

Research publication can both communicate and miscommunicate

Consequently, we are reaching out broadly to the research community, scientific publishers, universities, industry, professional organizations, patient-advocacy groups and other stakeholders to take the steps necessary to reset the self-corrective process of scientific inquiry. Journals should be encouraged to devote more space to research conducted in an exemplary manner that reports negative findings, and should make room for papers that correct earlier work.

Science has long been regarded as 'self-correcting', given that it is founded on the replication of earlier work. Over the long term, that principle remains true. In the shorter term, however, the checks and balances that once ensured scientific fidelity have been hobbled. This has compromised the ability of today's researchers to reproduce others' findings.

“Getting the data is much easier than making it useful,” said Deborah Estrin, a professor of computer science and public health at Cornell University.

Good people are leaving academic science, forced out by a lack of money, inequity in decision making, and hypocrisy in career recognition and advancement. Many are tired of playing a game whose rules change before you even know what the rules are.

by a seriously flawed reviewing system

"The margins of manuscripts often contain medieval and early modern reactions to the text, and these can cast light on what our ancestors thought about what they were reading," Williams explained. "The 'Black Book' was particularly heavily annotated before the end of the 16th century."

Today it’s a famous course, but in those days it was a laughable idea, alarmingly American.

…empowerment of individuals is a key part of what makes open source work, since in the end, innovations tend to come from small groups, not from large, structured efforts.

“Great things are not done by impulse, but by a series of small things brought together.” —Vincent van Gogh

some researchers feel that a dangerous precedent is being set. They argue that publishers wrongly characterize text-mining as an activity that requires extra rights to be granted by licence from a copyright holder, and they feel that computational reading should require no more permission than human reading. “The right to read is the right to mine,” says Ross Mounce of the University of Bath, UK, who is using content-mining to construct maps of species’ evolutionary relationships.

”