dawei

Well, the White Rabbit has put itself in the Red Crosshairs of TDB staff... the future of the White Rabbit only rests with the White Rabbit... Just advice

I would like to pin these comments for posterity... A request for something unknown... Has a Proust feeling to it. Here go you: http://www.thedaobums.com/forum/487-awaken/

~~~ ADMIN NOTICE ~~~ It is not a public forum. You can registered and join but need to be approved to be a part of this community. And you need to remain within the rules to remain on the forum. As an Admin Warning: Please stop using the Report Button for petty stuff. You are on the verse of abusing the system function with multiple reports; Reports exist for problems and not for just personal complaints. It eats up staff time to read, discuss and decide on action or not. If you don't like the conversation, then I would suggest to just walk away. This is a discussion forum with a focus on personal practices and arts in energy. The rude way in which there appears to be a group of you who show up and gangs up on folks in order to disparage, mock and belittle others is well known and tiring. Please take this as a notice not to threaten anyone but encourage everyone to stick to discussions and not to direct personal jabs at each other. To be honest, fair, and transparent... we do allow that to some degree as it is a part of our nature to both protect ourselves and those things we associate with (ie; a system, school, teaching, etc). I'm not opposed to allowing the flow of folks blowing steam off. But when you start to repeatedly "Report" stuff and at the same time continue to propel the issue within the thread, then one may not receive the attention a report really serves. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thread re-opened with a Split and Pit...

for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Treasures_(Taoism) There are several deep meanings...

To some degree, I would agree with such influences. And there was huge bias and the silliness of the celebrities making outrage claims lends to the bias. What has not really been talked about more is that the celebrity bluff (ie: "I'll leave the country if Trump wins) is a powerful generator for fake news and exposes they will lie as much as politicians. While some are saying the election outcome is a request for change away from politicians, it may equally be a request for celebrities to shut their mouth unless they will stand by their word and stay out of politics. But I think certain issues are still overlooked when looking at polls as numbers are so damn hard to interpret. Pollsters relied on the past and listened too literally to the numbers and didn't pay attention to other issues. For example: Trump's rallies far outnumbered Hillary's but that was ignored. A few AI machines which have predicted almost every presidential outcome they have been used for said Trump would win. This last item is very curious as in this day and age, everyone ignored our technological advancement that we're so proud of for the basic, unreliable opinion of the masses. Now, here is another thing: The argument that Trump has divided the country is nonsense and a biased, fake news worthy topic that fails to admit that the popular vote essentially shows that Hillary would of had an equally divided country had she won. It was divided before and after the election. That is nothing new going on. What is news worthy, IMO, is that the elections show Trump flipped certain areas and that caught the attention of most every news outlet covering the election realized this. What doesn't get enough news is that although we might of had 60% of eligible voters actually vote, that level has not been since 1960s... but we lag most developed countries; one stat I saw the US was 30th out of 35 in voter turnout. So the biased and fake news not only changes votes but suppresses voting. That is a divided country issue we are not hearing about.

I think you mentioned somewhere something along the lines that this is not really something new as much as it is something that has come to fruition; that this was brewing for quite a while in history and the coffee pot has simply not signaled its time to drink... That is where I'm coming from to a degree but likely with less historical understanding... but I would say that we're not seeing anything new among news and journalism; what we're seeing as new is calling out the news as BS. Fake news has always existed, it is only now that the majority have woken up to it due to the bugle call of Trump railing against the news coupled with the election results. I'm seeing folks from Chris Wallace to Anderson Cooper calling BS on their guests. In another clip, I saw a Washington Post reporter get schooled on journalism and it still went completely over her head. It went something like this: News Host: Some european leader made the comment that the problem in american journalism is they take words too literally. You have to realize words carry lots of meaning and uses. WP Reporter: I hear words and read words and write words... I hang on words. What can I do ? Ah... the host just told you want to do... step back and understand the context and words and what is the objective point of view of what is going on here... Let's take for example how the data goes biased: A story breaks about Trump blasting Boeing's costs of the next Air Force One. Then one outlet reports that the Chicago Tribune had just run a story of Boeing talking about the need for global free trade, as a slam on the US getting out of certain trade agreements. Someone like Huff Post will write: "Trump castigates Boeing in revenge for their comments against Trump who is known to seek an 'eye for an eye' , and they then quote some 1980 video show Trump quotes... In the process, the original story of the cost is lost to some vindictive reason. Another more objective news will write that Trump pushed back on the costs and this comes on the heels of the Tribune article... but there is no proof the two are related. Then CNN might quote this objective news but leave out the last part and only report: Trump pushed back on the costs and this comes on the heels of the Tribune article. Everyone is spinning it to a narrative they want. So what has failed here? And is anything really new going on ? I do think there is very little that is new except we're seeing a culmination of bad journalism, bad journalism education, cultural/educational/technological influences on newer generations whereby there is an ingrained ignoring of objectivity. In a sense, the gift package of critical thinking was opened and what was inside the box was simply opinion and bias...

You guys are missing my point which is the challenge with data itself. You can go to a mall and poll 100 folks and say that Hillary has an 80% chance of winning BASED ON THE POLL. There is nothing fake about that nor the data points polled. The problem is this poll is simply not indicative of a real outcome. You could say they polled the wrong people, not enough people, etc.. but I would not call it fake news until it starts to get distorted... when an news outlet starts claiming that "polls show that Hillary has an 80% of winning" and there is no explanation of the data points. And all the bias that follows. But the source of this problem is how they polled. It was done wrong. This is why data is dangerous in the hands of some. And why the saying: "There lies, damn lies, and statistics".

I would like to suggest that within chinese poetry, it is very common element to read of the loneliness of the poet, particularly in older age. One has to remember that the chinese have told thousands of stories of home-sickness and it has become a bit of pressure to the one-child generation(s) as they seek to migrate towards opportunity. But from a poetic device, you can find it among most all the chinese poets... And I have never seen it employed with such pathos.

Isn't this kind of a gray area of fake news... as it is more like bad polling techniques resulting in data that did not reflect the states.

Yen Ho is a traveling philosopher and from Lu, where Confucius basically grew up. He seems to show up in another section of ZZ as one who 'attained Dao'... wonder if that is considered to have been the result of this section we read now which seems a primer on harmony, not just caution. I prefer other translations to this section as they talk about harmonizing the inner and outer and it makes a lot more sense to me than Mair's. Giles - outwardly adapt, inwardly hold your standard (sounds like LZ, holding the center). Burton - in actions, follow him; in mind, harmonize with him. Talks of not being pulled in nor drawn out. This might be a little bit of a stretch but to me it is a valid depiction of chinese mannerism; What you see outwardly is not what you can know inwardly [about them or their thinking]. In a way, the emphasis on harmonizing and caution could be an acknowledgement that chinese way is "two approaches" but the key is to harmonize them.

As you likely know, foreigners are supposed to register... that being said, of my 15 or so trips, I likely only registered about 2-3 times. One time I registered later than they wanted and then fined me 500 RMB more... so I never registered again The bigger challenge may simply be the reason for the visa... a school is an obvious reason but just to visit usually requires on US visa forms, where you'll go, where you'll stay, itinerary, and who is inviting you to come... not sure how other countries have their forms but assume as the form goes to the Chinese consulate it would be similar. Maybe that request is just a formality that is not strictly used to deny a visa.

Interesting that Kissinger visited China and Huntsman is now in the hunt for Secretary of State. I told my wife Trump should consider the latter but never mentioned it here as at the time it seemed so out of range... not so surprised to see Trump has now expanded consideration to include him. I think an SoS with Asian understanding would actually be quite a good road.

But our very system to vote every four years is a kind of built-in destroyer of whatever was done in the previous 4-8 on some level. Now, I will toss a bone that you're talking more international relationships and that likely will tend to be more delicate and more stable in most cases but it doesn't mean it is going in the best direction either. We may see lots of shake-up over the next several years but I'm not convinced it is wrong till I see what actually occurs and in some cases, we can't really state the benefits for a decade or so.

My wife can't wiggle her nose... and she is quite annoyed at her inability... I suspect, 'pulling up the perineum' has a similar annoyance for some Wiggle your nose... or your perineum... at will.. at any time. It is not just a practice concept

I start most of conversations with my step-daughter with, "what is the problem?" Most of the time, there is no real problem except in thinking. I just want real examples. Show me the problem. Change? Is that a problem? Let's just wait and see and then debate it all in a year or four...

I hear you but really understand your point. Once sworn in, he is just the president. Until then, just the president-elect. Is there something we're really debating here? Maybe you're not fond of feeling he represents something about this country. I've never thought this about any president elected and sworn in... but maybe you have this mindset. That is fine.

I'm not sure your meaning about January except maybe the recount stuff.. and that leads into the latter reference. I don't know J. Sessions and don't know his past... I'm not going to look it up... and I only care what they do once in their position. That is why I don't judge picks yet. But I respect that some have reservations and are outspoken about such people's past. But I'll just reserve some comments till they actually do something in their appointment.

Do we really need to add it up an call it "unofficial"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan Politics and documents are one thing... but not the whole picture....

Original mix: My son turned me on to this remix:

Yes.... so pick up the phone

great topic We're all different when it comes to public speaking... and they say it is a fear among most. So why? Because they are told it is a fear among most I have presented to groups ranging from hospitals to state and federal agencies... number 5 to 500. Here is what you have to first think: Who is in the audience? What do they really want to hear? Your job as the presenter is to give them what they expect... but as a presenter, you need to have a teaser in it... something that casts a hook with bait. If you're not at that point, then forget it but realize the presentation is about a relationship...

The first chapter seems a kind of litmus test... why not share your translation and then we can comment

I often speak at conferences and at one a few years ago, I saw a chinese lady sitting in the front row... and my first words suddenly come forth: Dajia Hao... and I looked at her... and continued with my presentation... You've come into good hands... and the first welcome was from our maestro, Marblehead... how fitting, yes

Even if you memorize parts, or the whole of chapters, what do you really understand or know ? I do think there is some value in letting the words sink into memorization. When I was in china a month ago, my wife mentioned to a cousin my interest in Laozi... he walked away and produced several daoist items as gifts... one was a version of the DDJ, only in chinese. I quickly scanned the first chapter to see how the punctuation was set as that is telling for the rest of the book. my wife asked me to read the first few lines. I closed my eyes and then recited several lines. I thought back to the several daoist monasteries or even Tibetan ones. There seemed to be a moment where I was passing through a timeless gate... and then opened my eyes to see them again. Read; Recite; Memorize; Dream...