ALEXANDER BIZARSKI

Cut ACTA

2012-01-30T02:33:00.001-08:00

The entertainment industry is one of the greatest forces that pushes laws like SOPA, PIPA, and ACTA. Even if ACTA is rejected, they'll keep pushing for new laws. It's time to attack the root and boycott them until this madness stops. Let them know why you won't waste any money on their albums, books, games, or movie tickets.

How to Bubble - Photoshop Tutorial

2012-01-27T06:05:00.000-08:00

Bubbling was first invented by some horny Mormon guy - with this technique you can take a picture of a girl in a bathing suit and create the illusion that she is naked.
In this tutorial I will show you how you can achieve this effect:

First off, load the picture in Photoshop and create a new Fill Layer:

Click OK and a Color Picker will appear.
Choose a darker color and click OK.

Now lower the opacity of the newly-created layer to about 70%:

Click inside the layer mask of the layer.
The layer mask is the white square:

Now pick the Brush tool and increase the hardness to 100%:

With the black color, start painting into the mask, and you will notice that this will reveal what's behind the Fill Layer:

After you've made sure this works, go back with Ctrl+Alt+Z so that nothing is revealed.
Now pick an appropriate brush size and start revealing intimate parts of the girl's body, without showing any part of her bathing suit.
Here are the most important parts of the body that should be shown:

Notice that no bubbles collide, and that the distance between close bubbles is very similar.
Do not do the following:

Now that you've revealed the intimate parts of the girl's body, pop some more bubbles to reveal more details of her body where you can get away with it.
And here is the end result:

You can play with the color by double-clicking the Fill Layer.
The Color Picker will appear and you'll be able to change the color of the fill layer to whatever looks best to you.
Sometimes a lighter color works better.

That's it! You now know how to bubble! I hope you found this tutorial helpful!
For a full video tutorial, I suggest watching this:

Here are two more girls that I have nudified using this technique:

Gut Feelings

2011-01-11T02:41:00.000-08:00

Sentimental people say that if you have a gut feeling, you should always follow it. Is this good decision making, though? I've studied tons of books about the flaws of human reasoning, and I would conclude that no, this isn't always the best choice that one could make. The school of cognitive psychology claims that our feelings are preceded by our thoughts. If we define the term "thought" more broadly as an "algorithm", then I would agree. When we feel a certain way, it's because we have a certain thought. An example of that is fear - the intensity of our fear varies depending on how dangerous we believe something to be for us. That belief could be totally wrong, which is the case with many, if not all, phobias.

There are some processes that are hardwired in our brains through evolution, which are called heuristics, also known as information-processing shortcuts. When we process new information, we package it into convenient chunks, that our limited brains can handle. During this process, we have to distort, delete, or generalize some of the information. So taking this in consideration, the beliefs that we form may many times be quite inaccurate. From this, it follows that our intuition may also turn out to be wrong.

I would say that the term "gut feeling" is synonymous to "intuition". I define "intuition" as an automatically-triggered behavior that has been learned through repetition and experience. For example, once learned, riding a bicycle becomes an unconscious process that we never think about. In other words, we develop intuition for riding the bicycle. Similarly, we might develop intuition for moral judgment. Imagine a coincidence where you've met 5 black people and they've all been mean to you. This might generate a subconscious prejudice against black people in you, because your brain might generalize, for your convenience, that all black people are meanies. This prejudice would be another type of intuition.

Another gut feeling you may develop is one for liking people. If you were raised by violent people, you might have formed a belief that "your mom and dad are good people because they have raised you, therefore being violent is also good". Once you leave the family, you end up falling in love with violent people, because that's what your gut feeling is telling you. But here, again, it turns out to be wrong.

I'm not saying you should never listen to your heart. I bet that most of the time, it's actually in your best interest to do so. But before you go with your gut feeling, if you have the time, think about how this decision is going to benefit you in the short term and in the long term. Think about the ways that you could be biased. Like my friend Chris Bradshaw says, "You should always consider your heart but follow nothing blindly".

Appeal to Genetics

2011-01-03T07:37:00.000-08:00

I observe a trend in people who appeal to genetics and reject environmental influence, when talking about personal traits and psychological issues. It seems like they are mostly believers in fate who want to appear as rational skeptics, by replacing the word "fate" with "genes". But genetics and fate are two different things, and I don't want to undermine the importance of the former in no way. The genetic code is, indeed, the foundation of all human behavior, and it would be silly to disregard such a fundamental factor. But, as important as they are, the "instructions" of our genes can be overcome - the obvious example, of course, is birth control - therefore, being predisposed to something does not necessarily mean that we are bound to it. Hence, "it's in my genes" does not equal to "it's my destiny".

Surely, everything I am, everything I think, and everything I do, has been made possible by my genes. From this, many people conclude, that my genes are therefore directly responsible for my personal traits, and environment has nothing to do with my character. By this claim, they commit the fallacy of the single cause, where it is assumed that there is a single, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes. It's like saying that the hardware of a computer, alone, is responsible for what kind of software is installed on it.

Genes, indeed, have "programmed" my brain to process new information using various techniques, called heuristics, along with their many flaws. In other words, my genes are responsible for my brain's "Operating System". But would you say that the OS of a computer determines the software that will be installed on it? That's very similar to saying that my genes determine what's in my mind, e.g. my thoughts. Surely, operating systems, as well as genes, set up limitations to what kind of input can be understood and how it may be interpreted, but they don't create the input themselves. My genes do not create my environment.

Would you say that the Operating System is directly responsible for the viruses that have infected it? Some Mac and Linux fans will surely argue from this point, but wrongly so - having a weak immune system does not cause your illness, viruses do. Even if we accept the wrong premise that having a weak immune system causes sickness, this still isn't a fixed issue, and it can be overcome by strengthening the immune system, either by vaccination, or immunization. Vaccination would be analogous to installing an anti-virus software on your Windows; immunization - to finding a way of preventing future infection of the virus after having been infected with it (e.g. not going on suspicious porn websites).

When one has a psychological issue, appealing to genetics is very often, in my opinion, just another way for him to dissociate from the problem. "Hey, it's in my genes, I can't do nothing about it". An alcoholic might say that he was genetically predisposed to alcoholism, and thus avoid considering, for instance, his history of abuse as a child, which might as well be the cause of his addiction. From a practical point, I think genes ought to be the last place to look for a problem's cause, because it's not helping much to the present patient anyway.

In conclusion, genes have nothing to do with destiny, and have little to do with personal traits.
Prove me wrong, maybe?

He's Still Here

2010-10-28T00:56:00.000-07:00

He's still here and I do care.

Joaquin Phoenix isn't one of my favorite actors, and I don't think I like him as a person, either. But what he did with his latest movie is, in my opinion, truly brilliant. A practical joke goes terribly wrong when the media turns against Joaquin, after finding out that they're being mislead by him. JP does not give up, and throughout the whole film, you don't know what will happen next. Watching the movie, 2 hours passed by like 10 minutes.

I'm Still Here perfectly portrays how damaging Hollywood can be to an actor's personal life. Once you're in, and once you're famous, people won't let you pull out. If you want to do something else with your life, they won't even give you a chance. The ghost of your famous self will always be there, haunting you, and making you feel paralyzed and helpless. No one will ever take you seriously as anything else, but an actor.

Joaquin Phoenix, willingly or unwillingly, brings light to this issue in his documentary. He exposes the dark side of La La Land. He lives through the horrors that Tom Green once went through, causing his career to go down the toilet. You can read more about that in Tom Green's book "Hollywood Causes Cancer", which by the way, is a great read. Anyway, I can't help but spot a lot of similarities between the two actors: both fucked with the media and got their acting careers destroyed, both grew beards, and both became rappers.

And of course, people can't help but compare Joaquin to the notorious Andy Kaufman. But I don't think the latter would have ever dared to do what Joaquin did with I'm Still Here. JP went really far, and did not quit, even when his hoax was exposed and the media declared that "nobody cared". Was that his only choice? I think he could have gone out publicly and apologized. The damage to his career wouldn't have been that severe then. But executing an idea can be a slippery slope, especially when you've invested so much in it already, and Joaquin probably got too carried away with his act to ever consider quitting.

Even if you're at the top of your game, the media can chew you up in a few seconds and spit you out as a nobody. I'm Still Here is like a psychological snuff film that exposes this reality. Great documentary, that I recommend that you see at least once, if you want to support independent cinema and original ideas.

The Room - Lisa's Profile

2010-10-02T01:59:00.001-07:00

The other night I had the urge to watch Tommy Wiseau's The Room again. It's a great movie and I strongly recommend it. This post is for people who have already seen the film. It's my analysis of Lisa's relationship with Johnny. The Room almost depicts Lisa as this evil selfish manipulative bitch, but are we to judge her this way? Is Johnny really this angel that the film so badly makes him out to be?

It seems that Johnny loves Lisa for no apparent reason presented in the film, other than her being beautiful. And she seems to have loved him just because she was supposed to - all her friends and relatives constantly assure her how nice Johnny is and how she should love him -- just because he's financially stable, charitable, and he gives her presents all the time. We see that Lisa did not love Johnny for his charms, and it was neither for his looks; she loved him because she felt she owed him that, in return for his unconditional love and endless gifts. She would have felt guilty if she didn't.

Lisa's love was fake, and she finds that out right before it's too late. But what does she do about it? Instead of ending her relationship with Johnny, she finds an outlet, where she can get rid of her guilt; the guilt of not being able to give back what she's given. The outlet that she finds is Mark. To get rid of the guilt, she passes it on to him, by loving him unconditionally, and forcing favors on him, mostly in the form of sex.

Are we to blame Lisa for not being honest with Johnny? I don't think so. In the scene where he confronts her for being deceiving, we see that he is actually capable of hitting her. He pushes her down at least twice. He looks scary. Is this really the way you encourage someone you love to be honest with you, by yelling at them and physically threatening them? This only shows that Johnny doesn't really care about Lisa's emotions. He shows no curiosity, so Lisa naturally doesn't feel like sharing her feelings with him. Yelling out "Why Lisa, why?" isn't really being curious, it's more like an agonizing self-pitying scream in the form of a rhetoric question.

Lisa is in a very "awkward situation" and it's completely understandable why she fears ending her relationship with Johnny. First of all, her friends and family will ostracize her. Secondly, Johnny might hurt her. And lastly, he might hurt himself. In the film, it becomes apparent that Johnny is psychologically dependent on Lisa. He needs someone who he can take care of, because otherwise he feels worthless. His happiness depends on babysitting Lisa. She is tired of being that baby, and she's tired of being responsible for his emotions. It's only natural that she resents him so much, and it's also natural that she becomes manipulative, because the honest way of dealing with the issue has been made a taboo for her.

Why is Mark Johnny's best friend? Because he is also susceptible to being a baby that needs taking care of, which becomes apparent when Lisa becomes her husband and Mark becomes her. Mark allows Lisa to force favors on him and become his caregiver. What about the situation with Denny? It's just another example of Johnny's narcissism - by helping Denny, Johnny feels good about himself.

In conclusion, Johnny was a bad narcissistic husband. Lisa was in a codependent relationship with him for a couple of years, but then she got smarter and wiser. Unfortunately, her friends and family weren't as smart, so she was forced to become the nasty manipulative "bitch" in order to get what she wants. In the end of the movie, it seems like everyone morally condemns her, and she "gets what she deserves". As if she has made a grave mistake not to obey her husband and relatives, and now she has to suffer for it. To me, she made a great choice, and I believe she is "in a better place" now, unlike dead Johnny, with real friends and a husband that she loves for what he is.

P.S. If you're a fan of The Room and you like adventure videogames, you are totally going to love this flash game dedicated to the movie: Click Here to Play. The game features beautiful 8bit graphics and chiptunes, cutscenes taken from the film, great sound effects, and what I enjoyed the most, secret places and alternative endings.

Mutualism

2010-09-21T19:07:00.000-07:00

Something about capitalism has always bothered me and made me feel like my freedom was restricted in some way. A fellow anarchist once said, "in order for you to survive comfortably in capitalism, you will need to meet whatever sacrifices your neighbors make for themselves, to compete with them. You can make fewer sacrifices than your neighbors to maintain your principles, but you will have more difficulty in competing with your neighbors then, and you will be less comfortable as a result. [...] Whenever a person makes the decision to compete against his neighbors (who are probably strangers to him already), he is not only dooming himself but his neighbors also, since for them to remain in their comfort they will need to make whatever new sacrifices that you find to make for yourself. Capitalism seems like a vicious circle of sacrifice as it is" (tism). In fewer words, in a capitalist society, most people become slaves to their wages.

Well, it shouldn't be like that. Sure, some people would hate to lose their jobs, not because they are dependent, but rather because they love what they do for a living. But what about folks like me? I resent the contemporary employer-employee concept, and I hate having authoritative figures "above" me. I can't survive a day job for more than a month, because the office environment drives me insane. You are all familiar with what I'm talking about - the monotonous, repetitive workflow, the boring tasks that you are expected to be passionate about, and most importantly -- the annoying coworkers that you have to cope with. This isn't always the case, of course; it's rather a stereotype, but one that applies to a large percentage of the population, and can't be ignored. Am I too incompetent to find a job that escapes this stereotype? Yes, I am, although many of you would agree that I am very skilled at many things. Still, though, the competition is too hard for me to be a freelancer. And if it weren't for local solidarity, I'd be on the streets. Which brings me to the point.

Solidarity in the market, a.k.a. mutualism. As Charles T. Sprading describes it, "Mutual service in ethics might be described as an exchange of service between people with equal respect for each other. Real solidarity is established by a common nobility of sentiment. [...] The purpose of mutual ethics is collective human welfare. It is not self-sacrifice, but mutual service. It is a promise for a promise, a receiving and a giving; a mutual interchange of engagements or obligations; mutual assistance that is effective and preservative, wherein the servers are served. [...] The believers in mutual service do not need to convert the whole world, nor even a majority, to their plan, to benefit by it. A small group can apply it to members. The larger, the better, but there is no need to wait for a majority, as political parties must, to enact their plan".

Mutualism in many ways is preferring an inferior product for the sake of supporting your local community, or people who share your principles, etc. Why pay taxes for the welfare of strangers who might be assholes, when you can instead exercise your personal choice and pick the types of people that you want to subsidize? Mutualism is nurturing a friendly environment and eliminating alienation from the market. We don't have to be strangers at work -- we can be friends. If you find value in my skills, you aren't my boss, but rather -- a friend in need that I can help. Intellectuals don't have to be poor and miserable outcasts. They can trade favors and support each other, even without the need of a monetary currency.

So yeah, if you want to support the nice people that you respect and love, be a mutualist.
We are human beings first, and only then we are human doings.

1000 Blank White Cards

2010-06-01T00:27:00.000-07:00

1000 Blank White Cards is a card game where the players basically make up their own cards. There are almost no rules, and the game has the potential of constantly evolving according to the "market". I can't even begin to imagine what sorts of cards will be created. The possibilities are unlimited.

Click here to check it out!

I think the game is fucking amazing, but requires too much effort. So I have an idea that I wanna know if people would be interested in: an online version of 1000 Blank Cards, where instead of drawing each card, you can simply upload a picture (or embed a video). You have fields for the card description, whom it affects, how many points it provides, etc. Once you've made (or picked) a deck of cards, you can play online with your friends or strangers. It's totally possible. I have a very clear vision of how to make this thing work. But I really really wanna make sure enough people would be interested in playing. Let me know.

Sycial.com - A Model of Anarchy

2010-05-29T03:54:00.000-07:00

This is the story of Sycial.com

It all started with free association. I like the concept of choosing who I want to associate with, and ignoring people who make me feel uncomfortable. I like it so much, that I am very passionate about helping others realize their amazing power of simple choice. I want to spread the word and convince people that life can be a non-zero sum game. I want to remind them that they're not forced to accept a cheater's rules, and that they can instead quit playing with him and start looking for fair players.

That being said, I really like having enemies. It makes me feel really good to know that I have the power to completely reject anyone who's being a bully to me, instead of being trapped in a frustrating game of trying to beat the bully at his own game. Many people would accuse me of being a pussy for "chickening out". They would say things like "life is hard, people are shit... deal with it". And they completely ignore the fact that no, nobody has to deal with this. Maybe you had to deal with bullies in your family, because you had no choice to leave your parents, since you were dependent on them. Maybe you had to deal with bullies in school, because you were obligated to attend. But you don't have to deal with any type of that bullshit, now that you are your own, now that you are an independent individual.

So I made a website where you can make that choice and be vocal about it. It's my way of saying "fuck you" to those who shame me for ditching my old friends and family members. It's a provocative way to get my message out that it's okay to have enemies, because that's the best way to find new friends. Once you label someone your enemy, you make a moral judgment, based on your principles. If you don't make that moral judgment, you'll keep hanging out with the same company, and you'll never get a chance at finding new friends that are any different. Once it's clear to you what your principles are, you'll know what sort of people you would like to have as friends. That's why I made a "Principles" field that users can fill out in their profile.

I think most people judge others by superficial standards, so in my website, I have attempted to accentuate on what I think truly matters about an individual's identity. And it's not their birthday, and it's not their sex. It has nothing to do with height, weight, or eye color. It's their personal beliefs, it's their unique models of the world. It's what drives them to behave the way they do. There is no social networking site that focuses on this raw psychological data, because most people feel that this is too personal to share with others. They've been scared away by shaming people in their environment. They've been told that such things you should keep to yourself. But why keep a social idea, if you cannot share it? Doesn't that defeat its purpose? Is that really freedom of speech?

Most social networking sites censor. My site is uncensored. I don't care if you're a racist, a bigot, a pedophile, or a rapist. Who cares, I'll add you as an enemy. You'll be ostracized and you won't be allowed to bother any of my friends. So go ahead and join. That's what I want the site to be - a working model of an anarchistic society. There's no laws, no censorship. It's all in the hands of the individual. I trust his judgment more than I trust the judgment of the majority. So let's see what happens.

I am really excited about this project. So excited, that I have already been working on it for more than 7 months. So far I've seen little success with the site, and a lack of support. But I'll keep working on it, nonetheless, and I won't give up this time. I'm through giving up. I don't care how many times I'll have to fail. I'll keep working, and I'll keep learning new things until I succeed with this. I was discouraged so many times throughout this process, even by people who I value so dearly. I saw little support, and little understanding. Who cares, I've been through this before, and it always turned out that had I been a bit more patient, I would have reaped the fruits of my labor. I won't be impatient this time.

Once again: Sycial.com
In case you want to join the website:
email me and I will send you an invitation code.

Jordaan Mason

2010-05-24T22:23:00.000-07:00

Most people skip introductions, so I'm going to be brief. Jordaan Mason has been my favorite artist for quite a while, so I decided to spread the word and do an interview with him. His band's latest full-length album Divorce Lawyers I Shaved My Head has become a soundtrack of my life, and it's been basically the only thing I've been listening to in the past few months. His past work is also fascinating, and it's available for free at cllct.com. Everything else, you'll find in the interview.

Hello, Jordaan. Thanks again for the opportunity to ask you my humble questions. They might seem trivial to people who already know you, but I hope that this interview introduces you to new fans and listeners of alternative music. So let's get started. I think good music deserves its own name for a genre. What's a made-up genre that you think would best describe your style of music?

i have a really hard time answering questions about what 'kind' of music this band makes. i think it's easy to say it's folk music because we're playing with mostly acoustic instruments, the chord structures of the songs are usually fairly simple, and the songs are based around a story being told through words. all of those things are traditions in folk music.

but really i have no idea because, especially lately, the band is constantly changing. we also all listen to different music, and each have very eclectic tastes, so i have no idea. i bet everyone who's ever played in this band, past or present, would have a different answer.

To me, your lyrics were what initially made me want to check out more of your songs. They seem to be packed with amazingly disturbing metaphors, some of which, I think, people wouldn't even dare attempting to understand and visualize. You paint pictures with your words. If they were to be materialized, where would you hang them?

they have; they are; my bedroom.

Nice. You seem to present types of behavior and events that most people find disturbing or shocking in such a beautiful light. I love that. I love how you take things that people are shamed for, and you turn them into something completely acceptable, even beautiful. Is that really how you see things, or is that how you wish to see them, your art being a self-indulgent utopia?

i write about those things because they are happening to me and to people that i love and i need to talk about it. i need to talk about it without thinking about what's politically correct, or what's going to be seen as beautiful and what's going to be seen as disgusting. it's all kind of the same to me, in the end. or at least, i don't really think about the distinction between the two. things can be violent and loving at the same time.

I agree, in the sense that one person's love can be another person's torture... Anyway, do you have a "higher" purpose of your songs, other than entertainment? Perhaps a message that you want to subtly convey to society through your songs?

there's definitely things i am trying to say that are very important to me, but i don't really know how to sum them up here. the songs are personal and therefore political, but not political necessarily, if that makes sense. i have a lot of grandiose ideas about art and what it can do, for sure, beyond entertainment, and when i'm writing a song, "entertainment" is the last thing on my mind. it does come into play during a performance, though: because to a certain extent, no matter how natural and honest you're being during a performance, it is partially meant to entertain, to be thought-provoking, to be enjoyed for some reason or another.

Right, think I know what you're saying... I have a quote here from one of your songs: "The ghosts all say that God will save you". It seems to me like a cynical portrayal of religion, where people take advice from dead folks about an imaginary thing that would save them. Perhaps I completely misunderstood it... Can you tell me more about that song, and that quote in particular?

the song is pretty literally, actually. i wrote that song when i was seventeen, still living at home with my parents, going to high school. and i was having, whether real or not, a relationship in my bedroom with a ghost for a few years, which was perhaps hallucinatory.

Ouch. Ockham's razor has a sharp edge, indeed. Anyway... When I got used to your lyrics, I started appreciating the music behind them. I think you're a genius, vocal wise. I've never heard anyone else sing the way you do. It's not just your voice that I find unique, but also the melodies that you create with it. I noticed in your older songs, you were a bit shy to show off your skills, perhaps because you hadn't developed your own style yet? Tell us more about your journey of finding your own style. Who's your favorite singer that you think might have influenced you the most?

i started recording and releasing music before i knew what i was doing at all, so there's definitely been a transition. i was also seventeen when i started making records and my voice has just changed naturally since then. playing shows allowed me to have more confidence in my singing, and i hadn't actually played shows almost all when i made my first two records - they were made pretty much exclusively in solitary confinement. they were also recorded with bad equipment that i couldn't sing too loud with, otherwise it just sounded like terrible fuzz, and at night when i had to just be quieter in general.

most of my favourite singers are female. my favourite singer that's alive right now is diane cluck - she has so much control over her voice, it's astounding. there's still a lot of things i can't do with my voice that i wish i could. i really want to learn to yodel, for example.

You show such a wide range of talent. I read somewhere that you learned to play the guitar in just a few weeks. You also know how to play a bunch of other instruments, like the accordion, the piano, the saw, and I wonder what else. Are you a self-taught musician, or have you attended any music schools? How did you get into music?

my mother had a piano and an accordion while i was growing up, and i was given piano lessons on and off throughout my childhood, though i had a lot of trouble sitting still during them. in high school, i played bass clarinet in the high school band briefly. i learned the guitar because the accordion is heavy and the piano isn't really portable unless you have an electric one, which i don't. it took me a while to get the hang of it, but i recorded songs even though i couldn't really play it. i also have taught myself the saw and i'm trying to learn how to play the drums a bit, but i can basically only keep a 4/4 or a 3/4 beat. to be fair, i would say i play a lot of instruments just well enough to get by, but i can't play any very well.

You can't play all of the instruments at once, so obviously you need a band, at least for live performances... How did you guys find each other with the Horse Museum, and how long have you been playing together?

the horse museum formed really organically, in the latter half of 2007. i had written this album - divorce lawyers i shaved my head - and i wanted to start recording it with a band. so a small group of my friends started playing with me - that being sarah ayton, dee addario, jason aviss, and richard laviolette. richard had other things to focus on so we found jason mccrimmon to fill in on drums, and then we started recording the record, and more and more people kept getting added to the recording, and therefore the live band. the group got bigger and bigger for a while, and is now kind of imploding, changing, and getting smaller again.

You run the Oh!Map Records label. Most artists are obsessed with equipment. To me, the music behind the nice sound is what matters the most. The lo-fi sound that you guys have seems to really add to the genuinity of your music. Does equipment matter to you, and is your choice of sound a financial solution, or an aesthetic choice?

it's mostly financial. i really like a good recording, whether it's professional or 'lo-fi,' and there's certain sounds you can only get if you do it in your bedroom on a computer, and certain sounds you can only get it if you do it in a studio to a tapedeck. and i can appreciate both. ideally, i'd like to work with tape and analog equipment, but i can't really afford that right now. that's not going to stop me from making a record anyway, or doing the best i can with what i do have. the funny thing is, when this last album was finished, we all thought of it as being really 'hi-fi' (because, for us, it is/was) and every single article about us seems to mention that it's 'lo-fi.'

I'd call it mid-fi. I have a theory that the music industry is a scheme where people try to sell you shit you don't need. They overhype certain products for their quality of sound, and they keep propagating how anyone could become a rockstar with such and such equipment. I see a lot of bad consequences of that, one of them being that people wish to become rockstars just for the sake of it, and not because they have any good artistic ideas to share. Would you agree with me that there's a thing like that going on?

i definitely think there are artists, in all fields, doing it for reasons i maybe don't personally agree with. but at the same time, it's hard to decide 'why' art should be made; to put a maxim on that. there are some bands i really love that relied entirely on equipment - lots of really warm electronic music and 'shoegaze' (what a weird genre name), etc. but it also depends on what you're listening to music for - what you (this being a general 'you') want to get out of a piece of music. whether that's mood, or story, or whatever - i think it's all valid. that being said, there's a lot of really vapid and uninteresting music being made and that has been made. why anyone likes any music though is entirely personal, i think, and it can be debated, sure, but i don't think anything is necessarily definitive, either.

Good point, and I agree. It's all a matter of subjective opinion, when it comes to art. I guess the bigger harm is all these kids getting ripped off. Back to you, though. I've noticed that most of what you do is acoustic. Are you open to recording songs with electronic sounds in future releases, or do you prefer keeping things "unplugged"?

i like the idea of using electronic sounds eventually. i just don't really have any electric instruments, currently. i think the next record will have a bit more of a mixture, though live (for the time being, at least) it'll remain mostly acoustic. i like the idea that you can just play a show anywhere at any time with no set up required, other than being in tune with one another.

Some artists record with high noise levels on purpose, and they aim to make their sound as raw as possible. Hipsters dig it, but oh lookey here, they seem to not take too much fonding of you. What's your opinion on hipster culture and Pitchfork media?

to be honest, i think the definition of a 'hipster' is still kind of a grey area for me. i mean: i get the basics, but also the formula doesn't always equal the end result in my experience. and it sort of sucks that a lot of great things are associated with this culture of people who are regarded as 'apathetic.' because i know a lot of people who care about those things a lot, and who look really good when they go out at night, but they are not apathetic. so what are they then? my friend russ woods (aka 'tinyfolk') once defined the word 'hipster' really well, i think: 'a derogatory term used by fashionable young people to describe other fashionable young people they don't like.' it honestly just makes me feel like we haven't left high school or something.

Haha, nice. I think the dude hit the nail right on the head with that definition.

pitchfork is kind of a strange thing, and i don't really want to comment on it too much further than this: what i find so strange about it is how much their opinion matters to people. what i mean by that is: a good review from pitchfork can basically make or break a band's career right now. and so can a bad one. and when i talk to people about music, even if they hate pitchfork, they usually still read it. and most people can't even list five other music websites off the top of their head. which sort of sucks. they essentially are the controlling force of 'underground music' right now, and lots of people take their opinions way too seriously, for better and for worse.

Some people compare you to Jeff Magnum from Neutral Milk Hotel. Can you spot any similarities? According to Pitchfork Media, "In the Aeroplane Over the Sea" is a "true timeless masterpiece". Hipsters love that shit, and it's getting more the popular. So how come Pitchfork never told hipsters to listen to you?

pitchfork probably never reviewed our record because they recieve thousands of records to review every day. the music market is insanely oversatured right now, and especially in the last ten years or so, because it's so much more accessible to release your own record these days, to go on tour, to promote your band, etc., and so a lot more people are, plain and simple. 'in the aeroplane over the sea' is a great fucking record, that definitely has had an impact on me. and our album may seem similiar because of some of the instrumental influences and the fact that i'm also singing about sex in a very graphic way, but i think overall the records are very, very different. aeroplane is, for one, a million times more hopeful than everything i've ever written and it's also probably why it strikes a chord with so many people.

Is music enough for you to get by? Do live events pay off well?

right now, i work a job in the box office of a theater company in toronto and play shows when i can, and i barely make ends meet. in my free time, i'm trying to get a novel published and thinking about going back to school.

How can fans support you financially?
Is there any merch they can buy, or perhaps a PayPal address they could donate to?

the only merch we have at the moment is the album, basically. everything else is out of print. it can be ordered on our myspace / through our paypal (oh_map@hotmail.com).

What's the weirdest place you've ever played, and what was it like? How did it go?

probably this show i played in peacedale, rhode island. we were booked to play a festival, which ended up being the town festival, which ended up being full of children. i told the promoter that i felt uncomfortable playing for kids, and so we ended up playing in a parking lot nearby for a few teenagers. there's been a bunch of weird ones, though.

Oh man, I'm sure the kids would have loved it!
Speaking of children, what's the weirdest place you've ever had intercourse? (just kidding)

a greyhound bus station public rest room; in an office; a farm field; public parks...

Your song "Your Couch" makes me cry out with sympathy for you. A friend of mine went through a similar hell like that. How much of your material is based on personal experience, and what else inspires you to write new music?

pretty much everything is based on personal experience. if not directly my own, then someone close to me. if it didn't actually happen to me literally, then it happened to me in a dream or a daydream or in that strange waking state in between, which is where i usually am. i'm also inspired a lot by films and books. there's a really long list of things that have influenced / inspired me on our myspace.

Alright. Can you describe the range of reactions you get from the audience when you play live? Have you ever gotten in trouble, and maybe got thrown stuff at you?

audience reactions are definitely different all the time. we have played some very uncomfortable shows, and sometimes i think we just scare people. but usually the response is more positive, especially because at this point we know who to book shows with and who not to more often now. we've definitely been asked to stop mid-performance, and i've never had things thrown at me, but i've had people yell derogatory things at me.

It's nice that you found your own niche. What can your fans expect from you in the future?
Tell us more about your upcoming projects.

the horse museum is working on a 7" of two new(er) songs right now. we're also going to be releasing a digital split single with shelby sifers, where we each cover one of each other's songs. it might actually be a split with her and her partner tyler tadlock's new band, which is called peacock dreams. lots of members of this band are going on to do some really exciting things with their lives in other parts of the country, so this band will soon be a lot smaller. the next record, which we're going to start recording in the fall i think, is tentatively titled 'the decline of stupid fucking western civilization,' which is from a title card in gregg araki's film 'totally fucked up.'

Can't wait for all this! In your blog on myspace you mention releasing a Divorce Lawyers photo book. What's the progress there? I'm really curious what's inside that book.

the title 'divorce lawyers i shaved my head' was originally designated to a body of photography work documenting relationships, identity, illness, and sexuality. essentially: they are the literal version of the hyperbolic story happening on the album. right now i'm still working on pairing down the images (there are about 150) down to a reasonable size for publication, and in some cases, with the more sensitive subjects, trying to figure out if they are too personal to publish or not. some of the photographs are online, though: photos at flickr

Anything else you'd like to share?

i spent the last three hours or so at work filling this out. i hope it's ok.
sometimes i find these things very hard.

That was great, man. Thank you so much for this interview, and I wish you the best!

Moviegoers: Easy to Please

2010-05-16T03:49:00.000-07:00

You compromise good taste if you pay to see a shitty film just because it's a piñata full of eye-candy. Buying the ticket translates to "I want more of the same", which feeds the Hollywood asshole to shit out more of the unoriginal crap movies with offensively gigantic plot holes, and jokes that used to be funny in third grade. If you compromise a good story for beautiful special effects, you are automatically refusing to see a movie that has both a great plot and marvelous special effects. Yes, imagine if you had movies that had both of these elements. Well, you can't, because you are an easy to please faggot.

I can't blame Hollywood; they manufacture what the market wants. You loved Transformers 2 - they made it just for you. Smart things make people feel stupid, unexpected things make people feel scared. That's why people want to see the same thing over and over again. Fuck originality... You waste your money on fecal matter and you've learned to enjoy swallowing it, because they put lots of butter on it. Well okay, even if you didn't enjoy the movie, you'll lie to yourself that you did. You'll justify all the bad parts, just to avoid admitting that you've made a bad choice. Well at least you had a good time with your girlfriend, cuddling together, eating popcorn, and spreading grease all over each other's faces, right? Like my Bub-Bub says, movies used to sell popcorn, and now popcorn sells movies. I prefer watching cartoons.

Dear Haters

2010-04-15T03:52:00.000-07:00

To all the haters who judge me for HAVING A CHOICE:

Fuck your manipulative bullshit, asshole. Fuck your self-righteous crap. I'm not obligated to put up with any of you douchebags. Just because you like to waste your time with me, doesn't mean I like to waste my time with you. Just because you "respect" me, doesn't mean I should respect you back. Respect is something you earn, you are not entitled to it. You like one-way relationships where only your opinion matters, and you should always have the upper hand. Hey fuckface, you demand that people listen to you, but you never listen to them. You're so pathetic in your attempt to "be heard" and "win", that you keep sending me hatemail that I never read.

I have an opinion and I act on it. That must drive you insane, because you're a passive shit and you can't do anything on your own terms. You're a coward conformist bitch. You keep lying to yourself that you're happy in your "prison cell", where you're forced to interact with your inmates, no matter how shitty they are. Whenever you see someone like me get out of "prison", and make real choices on who to interact with, it reminds you of the shit life that you have, and that's why you hate me so much. I'll keep reminding you of your bad choices (to make no choice is also a choice). You "imprison" yourself willingly.

You say I'll run out of friends. The only person running out of friends is you. Nobody likes you because of your shit attitude. You're against me and my writings because I could potentially inspire other people to realize their choice, and stop tolerating manipulative douchebags. That's against your interests, because you like controlling people and forcing them to interact with you. If people stopped complying, you would be left alone with nobody to make you feel less worthless. You hate yourself, that's why you can't understand me. You believe an individual's value is something external, dependent on other individuals' opinion, hence you are grateful to people who find you valuable. I will not be grateful to you for finding me valuable, because I already know that I am valuable, regardless of what you think.

Finding value in someone is not something valuable. Do you expect me to say "Thank you for finding me valuable"? That's bullshit. I don't need, nor expect, your praise. What I expect from you is reciprocity. And if I believe that my interaction with you is a waste of time, then surely, you've brought nothing to the table for me. I no longer have incentive to provide you with my "product" (whatever it is that you find valuable), because you never gave me anything in return, you big altruist! You've always been the altruist, haven't you, you big fat poser.

It's the same shit with families. "My mom loves me, therefore I should love her back". That's flawed logic. It doesn't make sense to value anyone's love. It's their behavior that matters. Love is not a virtue, it's a consequence of perceived virtue. It makes no sense to accept anyone's love as something good, if their behavior often hurts you. Some psychos kill their victims because they strongly believe the latter are better off dead. Love is a very subjective thing, you see. "I do this because I love you" won't convince me to love you back, if you just hit me in the face. Call it love, friendship, respect... it all comes down to subjective values and principles.

For the last time. I'm not obligated to tolerate anyone's bullshit, even if they have strong feelings for me, or whatever. If you're an asshole, I don't want you around. If you want my "product", buy it. I ain't giving it out for free anymore, and I surely won't be missing your praise.

Revenge

2010-04-11T00:56:00.000-07:00

I finally decided to finish my article on revenge. I will define the word "revenge" as the delayed infliction of perceived equivalent damage to an individual for damage received by the latter. I stress the word "delayed", because otherwise you wouldn't call that kind of behavior "revenge", but rather - "retaliation". So if a guy hits you with a baseball bat, and you wait until next week to hit him back, that would be revenge.

Why commit revenge? "To receive justice, and teach the bad guy a lesson".

You feel bad because you "lost" the "game" with the bad guy. He got away with doing harm to you, and you couldn't fight back at that time. This certainly hurts, and you feel like justice should be served, because there is a lack of reciprocity between you and him. The false-self hates "losing". So in order to "win", you think it's a good idea to fight back later. Why is that bad for you? If you fight back later, the bad guy might defend himself, and there's a chance you'll get hurt. Even if you do defeat him, he might later decide to fight back, which can then hurt you, and so on. This is what I call "The Game", where you're trapped in a vicious cycle of battles, and you never give up, because you can't stand the thought of "losing"; you want to dominate your enemy.

What would happen if you "lost"? You'll have to feel the burn. But this is good. The pain might actually motivate you to figure out how to avoid being defeated next time. You can conclude that you want to stay away from situations where you can't immediately retaliate. You'll be pushed to learn how you can prevent such unfortunate events from happening.

The second argument, "teach the bad guy a lesson", is based on the assumption that whoever hurt you lacked sympathy, therefore they should be taught a lesson in Sympathy 101 by you, yourself. "If he knows what it's like to be bullied, he'll probably stop being a bully". That statement could be true in some cases, but we shall see why it's not worth trying to teach the bad guy a lesson. By punishing the Attacker, the Avenger takes responsibility for teaching him a lesson. This may take great effort. Why would you waste resources for teaching someone you hate a lesson? It makes no sense to do him a favor after what he's done to you.

"If a loved one hurt you", then you might say, "it would probably pay off well to teach them some sympathy, so maybe then revenge would be beneficial". No. A reasonable person would be greatly offended if you tried to control their behavior through punishment, for there are better, more effective ways to persuade a person. A reasonable loved one would be greatly saddened if she hurt you, and she'll probably do her best to learn how to be sympathetic in the particular instance, without having to be forced by your revenge.

Even if we assume that your loved one is retarded, revenge still won't do your relationship any good. Urgency is of importance, like in conditioning dogs. If you hit a dog right after it's done some harm, it'll subconsciously register why you've punished it, and it might learn not to do what it did again. If however, you hit it hours after it took a shit on your carpet, you'll only confuse the dog, and it won't learn the intended lesson. I figure, it would be the same with retards.

The alternative to revenge would be ostracism, if the Attacker is someone of no importance to you. Just ignore them, and be prepared to retaliate, next time they attack. If the Attacker is rather valuable to you, and you prefer to keep your friendship, it would be much more productive to talk with him about your feelings, and how his behavior triggered painful emotions in you. It's up to him to decide whether he wants to change, or not. If he has no desire to change, it's up to you to decide whether you want to make a compromise, or end the friendship.

Fuck Animal Rights

2010-04-10T10:34:00.000-07:00

My view on animal rights - they shouldn't have any. I'm against rights overall, because a "right" can only be given by a third party authority with monopoly on violence. I don't like the idea of somebody going to jail for hurting an animal. Overall, I'm against any type of imprisonment, because punishment does not solve cruelty issues, it only causes more cruelty. You wanna make a lunatic less crazy? "Well, put him in a cell with other lunatics! It'll surely straighten him up". "Teach him the Bible". Are you fucking kidding me. By the time they're out, they're not only gonna be raping animals, they'd wanna rape you and your children and your mom. Fuck jail, and fuck rights.

Imagine a fucking zoopolice. Who's running it, animals? No, people are! You'll get cuffed by a police officer for hurting little Fifi. "Surely, little Fifi would contribute to the economy a lot more than you, so hell, let's put you in jail for being a cruel fuck, and send the dog to a spa. Surely it can pay for the service, it's a motherfucking dog! A citizen of this nation". No, the dog won't pay, tax payers will. You fuckheads will pay for both the dog's treatment and the sick fuck's prison cell. You wanna pay, fine, but keep me out of it. Your "animal rights" bullshit laws will have me forced to spend money on something I don't support. Rule of the majority, my ass. I bet most of you fucks would refuse to pay voluntarily, if it weren't made into a law.

I love animals. I treat them with great care, I'm super kind to them. But that doesn't change the fact that they are retards with no ability to cooperate with humans, other than being cute and submissive. I don't need to pet a cat right now, I need money. Surely a cat would give me comfort in the short term, and it would make me feel less sorry for myself, but think of the time I wasted there petting the motherfucker, that I could have spent on making money, or some other shit. It will give me comfort in the short term, but it won't help me with paying the rent. I can't charge the cat for making them a website.

Leave animals deal with their issues and take a look at yourself first. Why do you care about animals so much? What do they bring to the table for you? Do you really care about them? Or are you a self-righteous faggot who just gets pleasure out of morally condemning other faggots? You like to punish, because you were punished. You don't like animals. You like dominance. You like to see other people suffer under your first of "justice". You like revenge. That's alright, I don't care. But I won't let you force your "will" on me.

Snoop Dogg is a Waste

2010-04-07T14:09:00.000-07:00

Fuck Snoop Dogg, I'm sick of seeing his face everywhere. Snoop Dogg is shit. His flow sucks, and his voice is annoying. He was never a good rapper, too. All he does is show up and take a greasy shit on a cheap beat. It's no longer a privilege to do a song with Snoop; in fact, it's equivalent to collaborating with Vanilla Ice. Both fuckers are washed out wannabe gangsters with zero talent. And oh boy, Snoop is such a pimp, married to his high school sweetheart. He's a pussy-whipped shit. When I see his face on TV, I know the program I'm watching is cheap. He's ugly, too. Snoop's the new Mr. T, except he's uglier. He looks like the type of log a Chinese constipated old woman would leave in the toilet. Snoop's the kind of shit that would clog up your toilet and reek for weeks, he just won't flush down.

I feel sorry for Snoop Dogg and his embarrassments.

Mind Reading

2009-11-23T11:00:00.000-08:00

We are predisposed, as pattern-seeking mammals, to find "causes" for things we can't explain. That's why ignorance creates anxiety in human beings. It's this anxiety that drives us to find the answers we need. The human mind prefers a made up answer to no answer, because it's better to assume that something is attacking you, than wait and potentially get killed. Survival is more important than knowledge. Although this trait has been of great evolutionary advantage to us, it can get in the way of long-term relationships and many other aspects of human life where predictability plays a necessary role. Here is the definition of Mind Reading:

You conclude, incorrectly and without considering other alternatives or testing your assumptions, that you understand how another person is thinking and what their reasons and motives are for taking a particular action. This is an example of the Fundamental Attribution Error where you incorrectly attribute an action or intent to an agent. One example of this is drawing a negative conclusion in the absence of supporting information. Focusing only on evidence that supports a negative position, while neglecting to consider alternative positive explanations is the fallacy of not considering representative evidence.

First of all, why would you want to know what someone's reasons are for behaving in a certain way? Ultimately, it's the consequences of their actions that affect you, but predictability is also important, especially if you should interact with this person on a regular basis. And you can't estimate the predictability of their behavior solely based on consequences, because there are external factors that may have been a major influence, as well. In short, we need context in order to more objectively judge a person's behavior and estimate its probable occurrence in the future. Accurate judgment helps us prevent bad consequences and maximize good consequences. Hence, it is in fact very useful, in the long term, to know why people do what they do, in case you plan on interacting with them on a regular basis.

People fear the unknown. If they lack context, they make shit up. Optimists assume you didn't say "Hello", because you didn't see them. Pessimists assume you hate them. Some who try to be objective consider both options and can't decide which one they should go for, which makes them even more anxious. They're like, "It's more probable that he didn't see me, but what if he does hate me"? So clearly popular cognitive psychology fails in their approach of solving the issue of Mind Reading. They suggest that for every negative example that pops up in your head, you should think of a counter example; a "rational response". To me, this is simply a waste of time and energy.

Here is my approach: when in doubt, think about whether it's within your control to find an explanation. You can't know everything, because you are a limited human being. If it's not up to you, don't bother thinking about all the possible options. If you don't know why somebody did something, and you have no evidence to back up any claim, you can simply accept that you don't know, and ask the person why he did it as soon you get a chance. Embrace your ignorance. Let go of religion. What do you want? Made up knowledge, or real knowledge? The fact of the matter is, you don't know. Being aware of the context is useful for maximizing predictability. When the context is false, the whole point is lost. If I want to know how rockets are constructed, I can think of a hundred possibilities, and they'll probably all be wrong, because I'm not a rocket scientist. I'm better off trusting the latter, even though there's a possibility that they could lie to me.

There's this potato chips factory. You felt sick after eating their chips. What happened? You have no access to the product ingredients, and there's no way to know what's inside. If you assume that the ingredients are poisonous and you turn out to be wrong, you might miss out on some great tasting product. On the other hand, if you assume that the product is healthy, you may get sick again. You could assume both are plausible options, and take no action. The owner of the factory claims that there is nothing unhealthy about his product's ingredients. You can't fully trust the owner of the factory, because he has the incentive to sell his product; he wants to advertise it to you. There's good advertising, and there's deceptive advertising.

When you have no evidence against the owner's claims, you have no other choice but to either reject the product, or initially trust the owner. It's more probable that you get the truth from him, than from your blind assumptions. If it turns out that he lied to you, you could simply choose to no longer trust the owner and discontinue consuming his product. Trick me once, shame on you, trick me twice, shame on me. So did the owner lie to you, or was it something else that negatively influenced your health? You initially trust him. Later on, you decide to buy potato chips from his company again. Same thing happens - you catch diarrhea. Well now you really have a reason to doubt the owner's credibility. You buy his product one more time - diarrhea. Now you have enough evidence to make your own judgment about the ingredients, and conclude that there's something in these potato chips that is detrimental to your health.

The factory manufactures a product, the same way a person's brain provokes his actions. When you interact with someone, his behavior is the product that you consume. The ingredients of the product represent the person's thoughts that lead to his actions. And if you want to make sure the product is good, you should know what the ingredients are. Overall, you shouldn't fully trust the owner. Listen to his opinion, but ultimately trust your own judgment, depending on how his product makes you feel, and also considering his previous products. So if someone often hurts you in a certain way, but he claims his intentions are good, he is lying that his product is harmless, because objectively speaking, his product does seem to poison you.

Sometimes a company would produce many products, but only a few would be bad. It's up to you to decide whether you want to boycott the company, or simply choose to avoid those specific harmful items. Sometimes compromise is better than boycott. If the company overall produces superior quality products, it will not be a beneficial decision to refuse their services because of a few bad apples.

Ultimate Success Recipe

2009-11-16T15:52:00.000-08:00

I heard you wanted to lead a successful happy life. Well, I've got some good news and I've got some bad news for you. The good news is that I have the secret right here with me. The bad news is, it burns. Wanna be rich and happy? Well fuck, if you ain't already, the chances are, you won't be. See if you meet the requirements:

1. Have happy parents.
You need to have a pair of well-informed loving parents who would give you the proper upbringing that you need in order to grow up and be a strong confident individual. Hey, if your parents were unhappy, you're pretty much screwed, son. If that's the case, you'll never be happy, unless you have the capacity to change your way of thinking, or in other words, reprogram your brain circuits. Most people are already too brainwashed to be deprogrammed, so they lack that capacity.

2. Have rich parents.
Your parents should be wealthy, period. Otherwise, you're pretty much stuck being a slave to the wage. Most business owners owe it to their parents, who owe it to their parents, who owe it to their parents, etc. Aristocracy has never stopped existing. If you lack the capital, taking advice from successful people like Donald Trump seems rather useless; it would only give you false hopes, because you'll never be Donald Trump. He is the product of generations of success. Education won't get you anywhere, either. If life didn't teach you a lesson, do you expect a goddamn institution to do that for you? That's just naive. And you're willing to pay top dollar to those who exploit your innocent hopes. If you're born poor, the odds are, you'll die poor, unless you get really really lucky.

3. Have good health.
So now you have a pair of rich loving parents. That still doesn't guarantee you a happy life. Excruciating pain and frequent visits to the hospital kind of ruin it. Therefore, you need to have good genes; no predispositions to nasty illnesses! Eating healthily would surely benefit you, and it's totally within your control.

In conclusion, let me paraphrase this for you: no matter what you do, no matter how hard you try, if you lack these three predispositions, you are most likely to fail. But hey, it's not the end of the world. Have fun with your failures. Being a loser can be an art, too. Risk is your best friend. You have nothing to lose anyway, so why not take risks? You might get lucky. Anything out of the ordinary.

Let me finish with a quote from one of my favorite movie characters, Two-Face Harvey Dent: One man is born a hero, his brother a coward. Babies starve, politicians grow fat. Holy men are martyred, and junkies grow legion. Why? Why, why, why, why, why? Luck! Blind, stupid, simple, doo-dah, clueless luck!

Virtue Vs Loneliness

2009-10-09T08:19:00.000-07:00

In this post, I claim that if you are not satisfied with your current friends, you have to ditch them in order to find better ones. Well, I don't think so anymore, and here is why...

Because humans are social animals, it would be irrational for one to choose loneliness over virtue. A rational human being would always seek to satisfy their human needs. When you try to ignore your needs, you are trying to be more than human; you are ignoring your genetic limitations. You become a believer, and you are no better than a religious person. When you begin to value virtue more than you value yourself, you become an idealist. Moral standards are there to help you pick who to associate with. Moral standards are there to help you socialize. If they become a handicap to your social life, they are no longer serving their purpose, but rather working against it. It's like a person whose knowledge of nutrition is making him starve to death.

If you can't get what you want, you can at least settle for what's best on the market. You don't have to lower your moral standards in order to have friends; just keep a clear mind, always be on the lookout for someone better. Don't try to fool yourself that your flawed friends are perfect; be aware of their moral flaws, be honest about your fundamental disagreements with them. That way you won't get trapped in a Master-Slave relationship.

If you state your preferences and you're clear about what you like and dislike about each other, you're going to have a stress-free relationship with that person. Sometimes new friends are not compatible with old friends. If you can't have both at the same time, then prioritize. It doesn't matter how long you've been friends for. You don't say that about your old TV when you buy a new flat-screen HDTV. Keep sentimentality out of the way, look for value. Who is more valuable to you? Whose company do you enjoy more? Who do you feel more comfortable with? Who provides more predictability to you? If you find yourself torn between two (groups of) people, you'd better make that choice and reject one side. The choice should be between your current friends and new people, not between the former and loneliness.

Finally Free

2009-10-01T21:13:00.000-07:00

This is it! I am finally living the dream.
I'm independent, I pay cheap rent, and I eat great food.
How did I achieve this? Integrity.

My mother believes in magic. When two people are related, she believes that they magically love each other, no matter how much they differ. So I used that against her. I said to her, "You're my mom, therefore you should love me". The truth of the matter is, my mother and I disagree on fundamental principles. If anything, we should hate each other. So why the fuck did I want to depend on someone who's supposed to hate me? Remaining in the "son" position meant that I had to be a slave and constantly manipulate her in order to get what I want.

Property is that which is under one's control. When you surrender your responsibilities to somebody else, you become their property, because they have control over your life. Children are property of their parents. I wrote a Family Manifesto long time ago, where I claimed that parents are obligated to take care of and share property with their children. How manipulative of me. Who's to say that one shouldn't abandon their property?

Children remain property until one of the following things occurs:
1. They acquire enough experience and skills to take care of themselves.
2. They choose to abandon their parents.
3. Their parents choose to abandon them.

You'll never guess what I did. It's the best choice I've ever made. I decided to become my mother's employee. My job? I'm a domestic worker. Where do I live now? I am my mother's roommate. I live in the living room, I sleep on the couch. The rent is cheap, it's covered by my wage. And so is the food. I no longer depend on my mother's benevolence, and I don't have to manipulate her anymore. Instead, I just have to complete the tasks in my daily planner. My work schedule? 3 hours a day, at most. I feel so much more confident and independent. No more pressure to find a job. No more feeling like a fuckup. Now I live with integrity. I am finally my own.

Dethalbum II Review

2009-09-29T23:13:00.000-07:00

After a decent second season of Metalocalypse, the notorious DETHKLOK are back with a new eardrum-popping album. Yes, the writer of this article no longer has hearing capabilities, for his ears bled to death. Nathan Explosion's voice has been destroyed from drinking and fatigue, which only increased the impact of brutality that the new songs bring. His voice is now weaker and raspier. Reminds you of something? Yes, this is the sound of death coming closer to you.

D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-DIE!

The [adult swim] network recently aired the TV premiere of DETHKLOK's latest video, "Bloodlines". Babies all around the world woke up weeping, with cockroaches coming out of their orifices (including anus, urethra, and vagina). Old people shat their pants, resulting in deadly colon ruptures. Women gave birth to malformed freaks that bit off their mothers' private parts. The fans who were watching lost their sight. Their imagination started projecting horrific hallucinations of an altered childhood. Dads mutating into demons, while having intercourse with their mothers. Grandmothers cooking their husbands' sex organs. The survivors are few, and they are chosen to help the Antichrist demolish the world in 2012.

LET NO ONE SURVIVE!

What's next after "Bloodlines"? 11 more tracks of rapture. Skwisgaar's strings cut through the speakers as he violently punishes his guitar with an angry fist of death. "Laser Cannon Deth Sentence" is pretty catchy, and it's probably the most memorable song on this album. The chorus of "Dethsupport" is awesome. The whole song is epic. Ever since Deathalbum II got released, the death rate of senior citizens has been steadily and quickly growing. Coincidence?

PULL THE PLUG! PULL THE PLUG!!

Most DETHKLOK fans had to go through an electro-shock training program in order to learn the title of "I Tamper With The Evidence At The Murder Site Of Odin" by heart. Half of them died during the educational process. The other half managed to learn it, but after reciting the title aloud, their hearts exploded. Great song. "Murmaider II: The Water God" is not nearly as awesome as the original. It's rather dull and boring. The rest of the songs are pretty much filler. Dethalbum II is a self-destructive repertoire of sinking talent in the depths of Hell. How does this critic rate the album? Well he's already blind and deaf. The last thing he screamed into the recorder, before cutting off his tongue, was "666 out of 10".

Brain Modification

2009-09-20T15:02:00.000-07:00

To understand this post, you might have to read this first: I Speak, Therefore I Am

This body is seemingly conducting an experiment. He will probably avoid talking and thinking in the first-person for the rest of the week, also keeping in mind the E-Prime model. That would perhaps lead to his better understanding of his inner world. This individual already feels more powerful and independent. His sense of self has been partly under public control, which has prevented him in a way from fully indulging his body. The personal pronouns (I am) had handicapped him to accurately validate and express his internal experiences, because these words have been wired in his brain circuit to require external factors that should allow the internal states to be validated. If those factors (behavioral cues in people) are not recognized, then the internal experience is rendered invalid and thus the individual is prevented from having the thought, for instance, "I am angry", because "I am" is only valid if the external factors are also met.

if (me_anger && !authoritative_figure){i_am_angry = true}else{i_am_angry = false}

Now that Sparx speaks of himself in the third-person, he finds it easier to validate and express his internal experiences, because he's already used to looking for, and recognizing, the tell tale signs of others. So this is a great way for him to get around the old habits and rewire his circuits.

if (sparx_anger) {he_is_angry = true; i_am_angry = he_is_angry}

One does no longer need to mind-read other people, because he's not dependent on their states anymore, hence he becomes less paranoid. Another great advantage of speaking in the third-person is that one gets to see things more objectively, which leads to a greater extent of empirical thinking. One is nothing more than an organism, after all. There is no soul. There is no spiritual "self". The self is the body.

Debunking Perfectionism

2009-09-07T18:08:00.000-07:00

One becomes a perfectionist when one has a wrong idea about control. Perfectionists believe they can be perfect, which is like believing in God: it's a false belief. Perfectionists reject the emotion of shame, because shame reminds them of the truth that they can't be perfect, just like religious people reject scientific facts. When perfectionists experience shame, they become incredibly defensive and agitated. They are terrified. That's why they fear failure so much, and that's why many of them become procrastinators. There are three main beliefs that perfectionists hold: "I procrastinate, because I fear risk. I fear risk, because I fear failure. I fear failure, because I fear shame". Let's destroy the onion of perfectionism, peel by peel.

Belief: I procrastinate, because I fear risk.
Update to: Procrastination is risky.

Procrastination eats up your time and increases the probability of failure. The more time you waste doing nothing, the less time you'll have to complete your tasks. It might become impossible for you to complete a project, if you simply run out of time. But hey, you know what? Risk is good for you.

Belief: I fear risk, because I fear failure.
Update to: Risk provides value and prevents disappointment.

When you fail at something that you believe you can do, or something that you've already done a couple of times before, the disappointment can be painful, because of your positive expectations. When you risk, however, failure becomes a very probable outcome. If you expect to fail, you can't really disappoint yourself. Success becomes a pleasant surprise. As soon as success stops being a surprise, failure becomes less probable, which acts as a reminder that the bar can be further raised, in order to minimize your disappointment.

Taking on a challenging task means that you will do your best to do the job by fully utilizing your existing abilities. Inevitably, you will also learn more and improve your skills, as you fail. The burden of expecting to complete the task successfully, on the other hand, decreases your incentive to try your hardest, and increases the chances of doing a sloppy job. You would be so ashamed, if you failed like that. But guess what, shame is good for you.

Belief: I fear failure, because I fear shame.
Update to: Shame provides satisfaction.

Shame is the emotion which reminds us that we are limited, for we are only human beings, and we can never be perfect. If you ignore shame and forget that you are limited, you're in for an endless frustrating strive for perfection, which will mess up your priorities. You'll be like a bug trying to fly out the window, not realizing that the window is closed. If only the fly could discover that it was limited by a piece of glass, it would prioritize on finding another way out.

Perfectionism requires manipulation. Success is not solely dependent on you; it depends on external factors, as well, no matter how hard you try. That's why the strive for perfection makes you want to manipulate others in order to always succeed. Objectively speaking, you're either gonna do a good job, or you're gonna fail. The best thing you can do is do your best. This is the difference between "I want to succeed" and "I MUST succeed".

Perfectionism sets impossible goals. It's one thing to say "I must do my best", which is within your control. It's an entirely different thing to say "I must make it perfect". "Perfect" here is any standard that you think MUST be satisfied. This would result in a disappointment, no doubt. The fact of the matter is, you have no full control over the outcome, because you are only a limited human being.

Vague goals create unrealistic expectations - When you don't know what you want, but you want it to be awesome, there's a high probability that you'll be disappointed. "Awesome" here is a subjective arbitrary ideal that doesn't have any specific guidelines and requirements.

The Journey

2009-09-02T16:02:00.000-07:00

I've been treating self-help like a subject in school, and happiness like the high grade that I strive to acquire, in order to not get my parents angry at me. I was acting out as my own parent. I've been working through my issues, not because I wanted to, but because I feared getting angry at myself, in case I failed. My journey has been fear-driven. Only recently did I discover the paradox of my attitude. How am I to become happy, if I'm constantly fearing failure? Failure is unpredictable, which means I am in a constant state of expectation and anxiety, because I don't know when and how it's gonna hit me. That, of course, makes me frustrated, and takes me back to managing my anxiety through different forms of dissociation.

I've been treating my goal of becoming psychologically healthy like something that I MUST achieve, before I can do anything else with my life. Happiness as a means to an end. A prerequisite for leading a productive life. This was a rather paralyzing strategy. Happiness is a vague goal, unlike school grades, so it would be pretty hard for me to estimate when it's been achieved. Whenever I was miserable, I perceived it as a "fuck you". "You're so weak, you'll never be able to get over your issues, no matter how hard you try", my inner bully would say.

How am I to become happy, if I'm not already happy with pursuing my happiness? You can't be happy unless you're happy. If my failures make me feel miserable, there's no way to proceed further. It's a Catch-22. So from now on, I go beyond this bullshit. From now on, I look up to failing, and I forget about succeeding, because failure is more probable than success. I want to fail on my journey towards happiness. I want to fail as many times as I have to. Happiness is not a destination, anyway. It's a state of being. I can be happy with having issues, and still work towards solving them. It's a want, not a need. I don't need to be perfect to enjoy life.

This week, I'll do an exercise. I'll teach myself to get used to failure. I'll take on impossible tasks and try to complete them, knowing that I can't. Every day, I'll set a different goal and destroy it. No more safe zones. Only risks and challenges, at least for a week. To be continued.

The False-Self

2009-08-29T04:18:00.000-07:00

I've been wrongly addressing the false-self as "the ego" in a couple of my past publications, which might have confused a lot of readers, so I think I owe you an explanation. Here are a couple of quotes that draw a pretty good picture of what the false-self is like. John Bradshaw:

"Since one's inner self is flawed by shame, the experience of self is painful. To compensate, one develops a FALSE SELF in order to survive. The false self forms a defensive mask which distracts from the pain and the inner loneliness of the true self. After years of acting, performing and pretending - one loses contact with who one really is. One's true self is numbed out."

enotes.com:

"The false self, in Donald Winnicott's developmental schema, refers to certain types of false personalities that develop as the result of early and repeated environmental failure, with the result that the true self-potential is not realized, but hidden."

Donald Winnicott:

"When the person has to comply with external rules, such as being polite or following social codes, then a False self is used. The False self is a mask of the false persona that constantly seeks to anticipate demands of others in order to maintain the relationship. If the mother is "not good-enough," she is unable to sense and respond optimally to her infant's needs and instead, substitutes her own gestures with which the infant complies. This repeated compliance becomes the ground for the earliest mode of the False self existence. The compliant False Self reacts to environmental demands and the infant seems to accept them. Through this False Self the infant builds up a false set of relationships, and by means of introjections even attains a show of being real, so that the child may grow up to be just like mother, nurse, aunt, brother, or whoever at the time dominates the scene. The primary function of the False self is defensive, to protect the True self from threat, wounding, or even destruction. This is an unconscious process: the False self comes to be mistaken for the true self to others, and even to the self. Even with the appearance of success, and of social gains, there will also be unreality feelings, the sense of not really being alive, that happiness doesn't, or can't really exist."

Sam Vaknin:

"The false-self serves as a decoy, it "attracts the fire". It is a proxy for the True Self. It is tough as nails and can absorb any amount of pain, hurt and negative emotions. By inventing it, the child develops immunity to the indifference, manipulation, sadism, smothering, or exploitation - in short: to the abuse - inflicted on him by his parents (or by other Primary Objects in his life). It is a cloak, protecting him, rendering him invisible and omnipotent at the same time.

The false-self causes the narcissist to re-interpret certain emotions and reactions in a flattering, socially acceptable, light. The narcissist may, for instance, interpret fear as compassion. If the narcissist hurts someone he fears (e.g., an authority figure), he may feel bad afterwards and interpret his discomfort as empathy and compassion. To be afraid is humiliating - to be compassionate is commendable and earns the narcissist social commendation and understanding (narcissistic supply)."

echo.me.uk:

"The false Self is a protection mechanism against attack from the outside world. Narcissistic people will do whatever they can to ensure people see them as they see themselves, i.e. special. Some focus on materialistic things ensuring they are seen in the best clothes at the right places and driving new or expensive cars etc. even if they can't afford to live that way. Some Narcissists in particular will focus on the perfection of their bodies.They will want to impress others with stories of their accomplishments; new jobs, wage rises, expensive holidays, their sexual conquests etc.

On a personal interaction level they may offer to put themselves out to help you in your work, treat you like a Princess/Prince, taking you out and buying you gifts, complimenting you, making seemingly creative one off gestures to show they care or have thought about what you would like, treating you as a valued friend, spending lots of time with you etc. They make you feel special and at this point you are special to them, not for who you are but because they see you as an extension of themselves. This view of you is known as "Inflation".

Narcissistic people do not make these gestures selflessly; they behave this way to feel good about themselves which is accomplished through how you feel about them. The positive feelings (and at times negative ones) that they are in essence trying to extract from you are a bid to confirm that they are important or special."

More on Masters & Slaves

2009-07-28T04:03:00.000-07:00

This is a follow-up to Masters are Slaves.

The slave compromises her standards in the face of her master. The slave is easily influenced by her master and becomes a lot like him when she's in his company. The slave compromises her standards in order to feed her false-self. The false-self constantly wants to be in control, and when the slave gets in a role that emulates her master, that's her way of being in control; to be manipulative, to trick her master that she is like him, and then steal his trust and use him for personal gains. But in this way, the slave becomes dependent on her master, because she could not fulfill these personal desires without him.

The master's false-self, on the other hand, wants to believe that the slave is just like him. "We like people who are similar to us" (Byrne, 1971).The master's real self deep down knows that this is not true, and the real self knows that the slave is fake. But the ego's wishful thinking mechanism keeps the illusion alive. When the slave sometimes breaks down out of character, her master wants to "fix her" back to "normal", for fear of losing such a wonderful friend who is just like him (or so he badly wants her to be). The master becomes dependent on his slave because he wants to keep this illusion of true friendship alive, he wants to know somebody like him.

The master is more vulnerable than the slave, because the slave can always leave him for another master. The slave's true feelings are not involved, because she's constantly playing a friend-role, which dissociates her from reality. The slave's burden is keeping the role alive and consistent. The master's feelings, on the other hand, can be badly hurt once the slave leaves him. The master had a hope that was destroyed. The slave is usually very different from her master, and believes she is morally superior, which makes her resent her master and find his company unpleasant. The opposite could also happen - the slave believes that she is morally inferior. She hates herself, and/or she envies her master, strongly wishing to become like him. She irrationally idolizes him and models her behavior after him. More on this here: Our Greedy Director

It's hard for the slave to leave her master, once she doesn't find him profitable anymore. It will be a battle. The slave will have to lead a long war. A single battle won't be enough. The master is used to seeing his slave as a mirror of himself. Once the slave started behaving naturally, the master would try his best to get her back into her slave role, because the master badly needs a friend who understands him. He will speculate that his slave is just having a bad day, or that she is mad at him for some reason. The master will become paranoid and cautious. All of these types of behavior would only handicap the slave from being herself and showing her real skin. She would have to avoid her master and completely ignore him. The master can't even hate his slave, because he will always remember her as the good old friend that suddenly changed into another person.

Neuro-Linguistic Programming, or NLP for short, is the teaching of temporarily becoming someone's "mirror image" in order to get what you want from them. It's great for short-term success if you're a car salesman, manager, supervisor, or whatever... But my advice is, don't ever use NLP on people who you plan on meeting more than once. It will set you up for a Master-Slave Relationship from the very beginning. NLP does not empower you over anyone, it just makes you their slave.

To all the people who I have wrongly manipulated: You don't know me. The Me you know is not the real me. I tell you what you want to hear because I am sick of pointless debating. The more time passes by, the stronger I believe that people don't want to change their habits. Why do I debate when I can simply nod and change the topic instead. Or worse, I can empathize with you and see the world through your eyes, thus, agreeing with what you are saying. You only see what I want you to see. Too many excuses for what is actually pretty simple. The real issue is, and has always been, for me to be able to state my preferences. Instead, I adapt to your preferences and you discover a person with seemingly similar preferences, which is nothing more than a lie. I am sorry, and if I have blocked you for no apparent reason, now you know why.

Love for Favor-Rapists

2009-07-26T04:02:00.000-07:00

If you love someone and you want the best for them, if their happiness is as important to you as your happiness, then you would want to constantly favor-rape them. If your loved one lets you favor-rape her, she would be doing you a favor. In return, if she loves you back, she would want to favor-rape you. You let her do that, because you owe it to her. Basically, you owe her a permission to favor-rape you, because she lets you favor-rape her. And vice versa. This way reciprocity is still being met and a Master-Slave relationship can be avoided.

I really don't understand the concept of long-distance "love", as it doesn't make sense to me how one's happiness can be important to me if we are not together. The lack of physical contact is just killing any kind of sympathy for me. As long as I am with her, I act as one of her most influential external stimuli, to which she responds the strongest. Similarly, she's my strongest stimulus at that time. So whatever she experiences with me, I feel partly responsible for. Her happiness is important to me while both of us spend time together, because I can't be happy around her if she's suffering.

It's something like a mutual symbiosis: A symbiotic relationship between individuals of different species in which both individuals benefit from the association. In this type of symbiosis, both organisms of different species rely on one another for nutrients, protection and other life functions, hence, they are usually found living in close proximity. You become a symbiotic creature. Once you part your ways, you don't depend on that person anymore, and each becomes their own individual once again. Once you are physically not together, you are no longer a symbiotic creature, and the responsibility for your significant other disappears.

Until a consensus has been reached on what the couple should do together, if anything, each individual can go on minding their own business without feeling guilty. You can't just BE together without having anything to DO together - that wouldn't be a mutual symbiosis. So it's not only physical closeness that matters in such a relationship. There also needs to be a transaction, a mutual activity.

Let me know if I'm wrong.

Favor-Raped

2009-07-24T03:45:00.000-07:00

If you give me help that I didn't ask for, I will stay away from you.
If you steal away my problem, I will get mad at you.

You have cooked food for me and I'm not hungry; plus, I don't like this kind of food. You say you'll get mad at me if I reject your favor. I eat your food and then you say that I owe you 5 bucks for the dinner. You are not a friend, you are not a businessman, you are a thug. If you were a friend, you wouldn't expect anything in return for your favor. If you were a businessman, you would make sure that I want your product, and you wouldn't force me to take it. But no, you are what you call "an altruist". You are so "generous".

If you give me help that I didn't ask for, it's me who's doing you a favor. You should be grateful that I accept your territorial invasion, and I don't ask for anything in return. How are you invading my personal space, you ask? Forcing anything on anyone equals violence. A man raped a woman. She was a lonely woman, very shy. She badly wanted the Cock. But when she got violated, she was as dry as Sahara.

to favor-rape: to force an unsolicited favor upon someone.
favor-rapist: a person who favor-rapes people.

He who favor-rapes could also enter a Master-Slave relationship, especially if his favors have actually been helpful. The more I permit you to solve my problems, the more dependent I become on you. I let you make decisions for me. You become my Master, as you personalize my issues.

Was the master provoked to be a master by the slave? Is it that he cares for his slave as much as he cares for himself, because he sees himself in the slave? If I accept unsolicited favors that I can take advantage of, and I know that thus I am doing a favor to the favor-rapist, I have noticed that the latter gets greater pleasure out of giving things to me. If he later attempts to blackmail me, I indicate that I am fine left alone, and that I don't actually NEED his help in the first place. The slippery slope here is becoming dependable on the favor-rapist and forgetting one's own skills.

What if I don't have those skills? A big favor would be for the favor-rapist to TEACH me those skills. But what if I don't want to learn them, because I am too busy studying other skills? One can't possibly know everything about everything at a time. I would ask him to use his skills for my benefit. Then it wouldn't be a favor-rape, because I will have asked for his help. I can ask for help and either receive it for free, or pay a price.

Our Greedy Director

2009-07-24T03:44:00.000-07:00

Many people work full time as actors under the directing of their false egos. The false-self wants the person to be like somebody else whom it irrationally identifies with. So the person would act and convince himself that he enjoys and approves of things that his real self would actually disapprove of. He would get some sort of momentary pleasure out of his play, but would later regret it and experience guilt or some other painful emotion. The false-self wants the person to adapt to the social environments, no matter what, because the person was raised to tolerate and integrate. Or maybe the person idealizes some sort of an irrational philosophy, and in order to act upon his beliefs, he has to overcome his real self and be an actor.

"I like this", someone says. Okay, how do you like it? Is it that it satisfies your aesthetic preferences, or is it that it represents your values and you find it virtuous? I won't stop repeating that art often portrays the opposite of virtue. We find things humorous or entertaining when they are illogical and/or unusual. So which one is it? Do you like the Nazis because of your support for national socialism, or is it because you support war and murder? Or is it because you are entertained by their uniforms, slogans, and loud explosions? Or maybe it's because you identify with your Nazi uncle, because you think he is very virtuous. You want to be like him and you overcome your critical thinking to satisfy the needs of your false-self. You think you like something for A B and C, but the real reasons turn out to be X Y and Z.

You know you're in a character when you say something and you feel smug about saying it. You know you're in a character when you are in rapport with someone else, and you agree with his irrational point of view, just because you can look at the world through his eyes, like that somehow makes false things more true. You know you're in a character when you feel guilty about not being something that your friend wants you to be. You play a role when you troll somebody but you don't know that you're trolling them. When you look around for people's approval. When you convince yourself that the bad thing you did was awesome, just to dissociate from your rational sense of guilt and shame. You want to be this kickass person who has no feelings because you are a perfectionist who despises everything that you perceive as weak. That's why you identify with imaginary heroes who lack these emotions and you pretend that you are them.

You don't need idols to change your behavior. You need convincing truths.

Shooting Blanks

2009-07-05T03:42:00.000-07:00

Talking behind someone's back is like having loaded your gun to kill your enemy, but then shooting at his silhouette target. It's like making a dummy of your evil boss and lashing out your anger at it, just so that you don't lose it tomorrow at work. Your anger is your bullets. Let's say your coworker Dick has a bad habit that really pisses you off, but you're too chicken shit to let him know about it. Instead, you turn to Bob, the colleague who you're better friends with, and you tell him the emotionally-charged story of Dick's disgusting habit and how he should stop doing it. It's like you're a mime fighting the invisible Dick. Could be very entertaining, depending on Bob's taste. And it surely feels great for your false-self, because you get to be a winner in front of an audience, without actually fighting the enemy. You could tell this story to anyone over and over again, and you'll have to keep telling it, unless you got rid of the problem. This is how you become a performer under your false ego's directing. But every time you tell the story, you empty your magazine full of anger, and the next time Dick does that annoying thing, it'll be too late for you to reload and shoot at him, because he'd already be out of range. Best case scenario, you'd have some ammo left, but it won't be enough for the kill. Meaning, you won't be angry enough to take action, because you'll feel like you've already done this before.

That's how you minimize your chances of finding real friends, and instead you surround yourself with enemies. Talking behind a person's back strongly contributes to avoiding the conflict that needs to be resolved. And avoiding the conflict would only lead to a compromise of your personal preferences, and letting the individual invade more of your personal space.

Keep your ammo.

Troll Vs. True Self

2009-07-03T04:04:00.000-07:00

Why act like an asshole and troll strangers when you can be yourself and piss off your enemies? Many of your so-called friends are people who you tolerate only because you can't currently replace them with better alternatives; or at least that's what you think.

In order to find better alternatives, you're gonna have to ditch your old friends. Ultimately, their incentive is to keep their relationship with you because they probably gain a lot from you without giving back things that you want. They'll do anything to stop you from replacing them with better friends. The other option is that they actually change their behavior to keep you as a friend, but that's not very likely to happen, because people hate change when it's expected from them to give more than they have already been giving.

Back to the point, there are many friendships that are based on roles, and you have to be in a character to keep them alive. That is, your friend Peter doesn't like you, he likes what you become when you're around him. And you become something else, because you know deep down that he wouldn't tolerate the real you, and you unconsciously conform to his unwritten social norms for fear of losing the relationship. But why would you value such a relationship? Usually, the false-self would make up all kinds of excuses and justifications - "He's very entertaining", "He lends me money", "He's my hero", "He's a great artist", etc. Forget all that bullshit and accept your feelings, instead. There may have been a time when Peter was very fun to hang out with, but things have changed.

If you compromise a relationship with the thought "I don't like hanging out with Peter but I need him for X Y and Z", you're setting yourself up for a master-slave relationship. If you don't like being around him, it will show in one way or another. Most likely it will be expressed in a passive-aggressive behavior. You will become Peter's slave because you use him as a means to X Y and Z, for the price of putting up with him. When you use people as a means to an end, those people become your masters that you emulate in order to get what you want.

Note: Some of my views on this issue have changed. More on that here: Virtue Vs Loneliness

The Art of Manipulation

2009-06-13T13:33:00.000-07:00

Art can be presented in the form of a product, or it can be used as a tool to sell other products. I see art as a tool for manipulation of the mind, the same way a scalpel is a tool for manipulation of the flesh. It's good or evil depending on the context. Doctors MUST know how to manipulate a person's physiology to successfully treat them. In a similar way, artists should know how to manipulate the human mind, if they want to avoid unethical actions. Doctors have tools of manipulation, like scalpels, retractors, needles, drugs, etc. The same tools can be effectively used for torture and evil deeds. Even the most powerful, most manipulative persuader, cannot make you do things against your will. What they do is convince you that what they want you to do is what you want to do. It's always your final decision that matters. There is no way to persuade somebody without their consent.

One can be exposed to propaganda without their awareness of it, and that's called indoctrination. A child doesn't have a choice to NOT give consent, because they're entirely dependent on their parents. The external threat of the parents abandoning the child forces the child to give consent. I call this type of manipulation irresponsible, when you take advantage of one's weaknesses to brainwash them. It's not manipulation itself that's the issue, but rather that it's forced upon one. In the case where you depend on somebody else, you choose to comply because it's best for your well-being. So practically, you still give consent because it's the best option for you, compared to the alternatives. If your dependency is forced, the persuader is obviously aggressing against you, and his actions are immoral. But it's not persuasion itself that is evil, but rather it was the manipulator's coercion.

Intimidation is a form of manipulation that might force someone into making a choice, whether a good one, or a bad one. But that's an impractical form of persuasion because the intimidated person won't own the decision, and it wouldn't take them long to change their minds later. Intimidation is most commonly used by con-artists, because they benefit from their victim's short-term confusion. Bad tradesmen also use intimidation to pitch their products, and they often end up not being as successful as the honest merchants.

We see art being used in advertising as a way of promoting different products, people, and ideas. Art has always been a very useful tool for religious nuts to promote their delusional beliefs - the hypnotic church liturgies, the repetitive use of symbolism (with certain symbols serving as anchors), sponsorship of events in the name of god, etc. Art is used in advertising to strengthen commercial brands, catch people's attention, and persuade them to buy products. Not to mention ideological political beliefs and new-age philosophies that are constantly being propagandized by confused artists.

Art as a product in and of itself is not that important, to say the least. Pop music performers take advantage of art as a tool to promote their artistic products and get paid. They want to convince you that their compilation of sounds and words are special, which in 99.99% of the time is not true. So still, at the end of the day, it's the application of art as a tool that makes the difference. Are you an artist, or are you an artister?

Illusion of Bias

2009-06-05T08:44:00.000-07:00

I finished my new short film, Illusion of Bias.

Link on Vimeo: http://vimeo.com/5145980
Link on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDZBzXa6BUM&fmt=18
You can see some of the work in progress in my deviantart account:
http://sparxdragon.deviantart.com/gallery/#Illustrations

Inducing Dreams

2009-05-22T04:14:00.000-07:00

I can trace back each element of a dream and find out what has influenced me during the day to have that exact element in my dream. Usually it's things that made me wonder or space out; most of all, it's things associated to a dilemma. I'm interested in inducing dreams in others. Why am I interested in this? I simply find it fascinating. To all the ethical faggots who think this is an immoral thing to do: quit reading my blog; I don't care about my reputation, and I don't care about readers. This blog is simply for introspection purposes. I have a curious spirit and I'm not going to allow the social pressure and taboos get in my way of exploring things that capture my interest.

There are three main components that I think are needed for inducing a dream: subject's full attention, their full interest, and an unanswered question. The question itself has to be a thing that the individual can personally relate to. The three elements should be incorporated. In other words, the subject has to be provided with a question, or a dilemma, that is left unresolved. This allocates a small buffer in the subconscious mind, where a search device is on the lookout for anything that might be related to the subject of the question.

The way I explain it is, we've all had this instance of not being able to remember, for example, the title of a movie. Let's say it's a film with Billy Drago and prostitutes. We get in this deep trance state but we simply can't remember the title. Perhaps hours later, we experience this Eureka moment, and we finally recall what it was, because something reminded us of it. The subconscious mind is setting up a search agent with keywords "Billy Drago, Movie, Title, Prostitutes". The search agent constantly compares new input to the keywords and checks if they all have anything in common. The movie title is "Imprint", but you don't remember that yet. You have to print a document for a project, so you click on the "Print" button with your mouse. At the same time, the search device recognizes that the word "print" is related to all of the keywords, and you suddenly remember what the movie title was.

If what we're dealing with is a "Yes/No" dilemma, the unconscious search agent would constantly be on the lookout for more instances that support either of the options, until one of them becomes convincing enough. The Keywords would be "Do X, Yes, No". Each encountered instance supporting the alternative options would be added to a list. If one falls asleep undecided, there's a chance the buffer may still be left open. And we'll tend to see the elements from the listed instances in our dreams.

In order to influence one's dreams, you have to be able to inspire them to open up a buffer in their subconscious mind, and feed them with associations. It would be one or more of these associations that they're gonna see in their dreams. So if Cats and Dogs are related, and you want Chester to dream about Dogs, you have to ask a vague question about Cats; Cats should be important to Chester; and you have to expose Chester to Dogs. Basically it goes like this:

1. SET OBJECTIVE: What do you want the person to see in his dream? Let's say it's Dogs. 2. FIND ASSOCIATIONS: What would the person associate with Dogs? Perhaps Bones, Teeth, and Cats. 3. PICK THE BEST: Pick the association that you think the individual can best relate to, and personalize. Let's say that out of Bones, Teeth, and Cats, you picked Cats. 4. GET FOCUS: Get the person's full attention. 5. PROVIDE THE QUESTION: Ask an ambiguous question, or suggest a dilemma, regarding Cats. This would activate the person's subconscious search agent. Next, change the topic, and leave the question unanswered. 6. SEED: Now, expose the individual to Dogs. This would make the search agent register Dogs as a keyword, right next to Cats, because both things are related.

I'm not sure if this works yet. I'm being merely speculative. In order to test this technique, one must know the dreamer very well. This framework helps for influencing the WHAT, but not the HOW. That is, you can put actors and objects in one's dream, but you can't write the script, itself.

Misunderstood

2009-04-10T02:32:00.000-07:00

I can't handle being misunderstood. If somebody assumes the wrong thing about me, I just can't let it go, and it haunts me for days. I think it's the thought that people hate me for who I'm NOT that bothers me the most. They hate me for what they THINK I am, because they are paranoid and delusional. I think I take it personally because I'm supposed to be a communication expert. Frank Luntz says, it's not what you say, it's what people hear. But it's also true that you can't please all of the people all of the time. There will always be someone who's going to shit on you. Still, I get mad when people misinterpret my intentions. When they morally condemn me for being an evil person, they cross the line. I never shame other people and I hate being shamed. I think this is the most destructive way to tell someone that you think they're doing something wrong:

"HEY YOU'RE EVIL AND YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED. "

Well thanks for letting me know. What am I supposed to do now, punish myself? That was very helpful of you to point out how evil I was. It must feel pretty good that you're not evil like me. It must feel pretty good to point your finger at me and be the morally superior being.

It's absolutely intimidating and bigoted. Why do you have to condemn me if I'm not hurting you in any way? I believe it's hypocritical to claim that you are fighting for other people's rights. What are you, the protector of the Universe? By morally condemning me, you are essentially claiming that I should change. Who are you to tell me how to live my life, if it doesn't affect you in any bad way? Fuck you in the neck, I am not changing for your delusional cause. Helping people... you wanna be like mother Teresa or something? Fuck your hypocrisy, man, I'm sick of moral preaching faggots like you.

You claim that manipulation is evil, and yet you are trying to manipulate me into changing, and manipulate other people's opinions about me. You are like the politician who claims that guns kill people, and threatens people with a gun to prevent them from buying one. What a fucking hypocrite. Fuck you in the neck. You're assuming what is good for other people, instead of focusing on your own preferences. You have no sense of self, because you hate who you are; and you project this by shaming your perceived enemies, who can't live up to your unrealistic irrational standards, that you yourself can't satisfy.

Why is it that I care so much about what strangers think of me? What makes them so important to me? Why do I feel the need to justify myself to such unimportant faggots? This shit makes my life stressful. I can't deal with rejection when I find it to be unjustified. I should be able to accept that people are free to interpret my intentions as they wish, and take responsibility for the consequences of their misinterpretations. I'm open to advice.

Miscommunication

2009-04-09T02:19:00.000-07:00

I'm going to explain my theory of miscommunication in simpler terms, and provide more examples, because I feel like miscommunication is the root of all hostility. I believe that most people have good or neutral intentions. But everyone has their own filters, and interprets things in different ways. And because people have insecurities, they sometimes get paranoid, and interpret things the wrong way. They assume bad intentions from the other side, and they become hostile and defensive, which then reflects back at them. In other words, they enter the Game.

The Game is a social situation where Winning or Losing is assumed to occur, and empathy is blocked away. If you get caught up in the Game, you've already lost. It's a back and forward play with no productive outcome, just like the Master-Slave relationships. The Game is not about coming to terms; it's about proving Them wrong. It's not about you being happy, it's about Them being unhappy. It's not about being honest and vulnerable, it's about being tough and strategic. It's a mechanism that feeds one's false-self but provides no real value in the long run.

People have unwritten rules about communication, mostly based on reciprocity. The perfect communication is the one where the desires of both interlocutors are met. You give me what I want, I give you what you want. Miscommunication occurs when at least one of the conversational partners cease to receive the desired feed. A variety of emotions would indicate that this has happened: anxiety, fear, boredom, frustration, anger, shame, guilt, or sadness.

There is, however, a type of communication that does not require reciprocity: Donation. Favors and gifts are one-sided transactions of preferred content that demand nothing in return. Gifts are material, favors are non-material (free services). To reject a donation, or to refuse donating, are both perfectly acceptable and non-offensive behaviors. In the former case, because you don't find the gesture preferable; hence, it's not really a favor nor a gift. In the second case, because you don't owe anybody a favor. Don't mistake donation for restitution - the latter is a way to make up for a lack of reciprocity. Make sure you clarify whether you are asking or being asked for a favor or restitution.

Individuals prefer different kinds of communication. Depending on their psychological state, people might look for one thing or the other, as the preferred feedback in a conversation. Some people prefer to talk a lot, others prefer to listen. Some prefer to debate, others like to talk about agreeable topics. Some appreciate discussing relevant issues, others prefer talking about irrelevant bullshit. You can never know, everybody's different. I call this factors "feed submodalities". Here is a full list of them:

Logical: feedback/no feedback.
Verbal: agreeable/disagreeable, relevant/irrelevant, acceptable/offensive, valuable/useless.
Physiological: congruent/incongruent, matching/mismatching, close/away, loud/quiet, low/high, fast/slow, intonation. Physiological submodalities are about one's body language. A person's body language is incongruent when it contradicts their verbal message. A matching body language is one that is similar to your interlocutor's body language.

Asking a question automatically presupposes that an honest answer is preferred. Otherwise one wouldn't even want to ask the question in the first place. Therefore, it doesn't matter if the content of the answer is preferable. It's the answer itself that has to be preferable, or in other words, it has to be honest. Basically, you're obliged to say the truth, even if it's horribly painful.

There are three main types of miscommunication that I have discovered: Unwanted Feedback, Vicious Cycle, and Dishonest Feedback. Let's have homosexuals Bob and Alan talking at the coffee table, and give out examples for each type of miscommunication:

Unwanted Feedback: Alan says, "Hey Bob, your hair looks great today". Bob is happy to hear that, and he replies back, "Yours, too, Alan". Needles to say, Alan hates his hair, and he perceives Bob's comment as a sarcastic insult. "Fuck you, Bob! My hair is SHIT", he replies. Bob sent out the wrong signal to Alan, and Bob's message was thus not reciprocal. Bob is responsible for the miscommunication because he was either being disrespectful, or he was unaware of what Alan's preferences were.

Vicious Cycle: Bob takes Alan's anger personally, and he scoffs back: "Way to be nice, asshole". Now, Bob should have interpreted Alan's outburst as an indication of his preferences; instead, he snapped back at him. Alan was sent the wrong type of feed, and reacted accordingly. Bob is responsible for the miscommunication because he gave Alan the wrong material to work with, in the first place. Instead of taking responsibility, he invited Alan to enter the Game.

Dishonest Feedback: Alan hates when Bob snaps back at him. He's now in the Game, though, and he decides to Win by coming off as the morally superior. "I'm really sorry, baby. I'm just having a bad hair day". What happens next is, Bob keeps attacking him: "It was very rude of you". Alan received the wrong type of feed, but he was incapable of indicating his disapproval. Alan is thus responsible for the miscommunication because instead, he sent out positive signals which assured Bob that reciprocity had been met.

Reciprocity wise, one can be a Creditor, or a Debtor. Creditor is the person who currently weighs more on the scale of reciprocity, and Debtor is the interlocutor who was sent a preferred message and is now expected to reciprocate. In the very beginning, when the conversation starts, the initiator is the one who requests attention. In order to give attention, the other side has to change his/her priorities. Because of that, the initiator is essentially a Debtor. During a conversation, it may be hard to trace back who's the Creditor and who's the Debtor, but it doesn't even matter. Because if you're the Debtor and you didn't reciprocate, you will be informed. If not, it's the Creditor's responsibility that he/she didn't let you know. Therefore, you're always in the clear. Assume that you're a Neutral - either wait for input, or send a message.

How do we handle miscommunication? As soon as your emotions hint that something is wrong with the conversation, indicate so, ASAP. What has happened in the past does not matter. Make no compromise, make no excuses that might justify the miscommunication. Instead, indicate as soon as possible, no matter if you're the Debtor or the Creditor. You will learn to enjoy awkward situations and even find them entertaining, when you realize who's responsible for their occurrence, and when you clearly realize what your preferences are.

Be angry! You are entitled to your anger whenever someone's being disrespectful to you. You are being disrespected when you are deliberately given unwanted feed. How do you know if it was intended? If the person is clearly aware of your preferences, but keeps violating them, you know there's something wrong going on. So make sure you let him/her know that you find his/her behavior to be disrespectful and explain why.

If you are a Creditor, and you receive unwanted feedback, you could either ask a question, make a statement, or exit the conversation. The most open-minded thing to do is to ask a question; Share what you observe and ask what to make of it. Alan could have asked Bob, "Do you honestly think my hair looks great, or were you making fun of it?". If you wanna make a statement, share how you feel in the moment, and congruently speak out your opinion. Alan could have said, "I am feeling very upset right now. I think my hair looks horrible".

If you are a Debtor, and you've been signaled that your feedback was perhaps unwanted, you could either ask a question, paraphrase what you've said, or apologize. If you want to go with the question, ask if the Creditor finds your message preferable to accept at this moment. Bob, could have asked Alan, "Did that hurt you, baby?". If you want to paraphrase, find other ways of delivering your message and/or explaining how the Creditor can relate to it. Advertise your feed. Bob could have said, "My perception of your hair is strongly biased by how much I love you".

Human automatic behavior allows for cheating in the process of reciprocation. Emotions that we find positive are prioritized and thus, someone who's influencing us to experience our preferred emotions can be perceived as being reciprocal. Factually, this is true, but if mixed with unwanted feed, preferred emotions can act like a Trojan horse in the long run. When this happens, one would usually feel ambivalent and paralyzed.

There are ways to get around being manipulated in such way. Imagine the Debtor delivering the message in a neutral state. Would you still feel the same way about it? Would you accept the message if it were delivered to you by someone whom you didn't like, or by a robot? Was the emotional rush what you expected to get in return for your input, or did you expect something more than that? Did the Debtor switch your beefsteak for a lollipop?

When you want to end a conversation, it's because you stopped getting what you prefer at this moment - the conversation is no longer your priority. Therefore, you have the perfect right to leave, because the other side can't possibly be reciprocal to you anymore. If you're leaving as a Debtor, apologize or give gratitude before your departure, and do not wait for feedback. Expecting feedback would be disrespectful. If you're leaving as the Creditor, you don't have to announce your departure. The person on the other side shouldn't feel guilty, because it was your preference that you get no more feedback from him/her, and therefore you have "received" the preferred lack of feedback. Respectfully, if someone is ending the conversation with you, the right thing to do is to not respond, unless the person is a Creditor who expects your feedback.

Unsolicited Criticism

2009-04-08T02:30:00.000-07:00

My friend made a new song, and I assumed he would appreciate some criticism, so I critiqued his song. He got offended and complained that he never asked for my advice. John Bradshaw writes in his book "respect for others means letting them live their own lives, suffer their own pains and solve their own problems". When I say to my friend "The guitar levels are too loud", what does that mean? It essentially means I want them fixed, or else why should I bother telling him this? So what I'm really saying then is, "You should turn down the guitar levels". It relates to Bradshaw's statement in a way that if you're telling others what they should be doing, with your criticism, you're not letting them solve their problems, themselves. Music is also a subjective matter, so my assertion then translates to "My subjective opinion is more valid than yours", which is an ignorant and bigoted thing to say. It's like saying that someone is stupid for liking the color red, because you like the color blue.

Let's look at another example: I posted a new topic on a message board: "In this thread, we post pictures of ourselves". This one user, let's call him Fuckface, replied back with a sarcastic comment, expressing his disapproval of people posting their pictures in a forum. So when Fuckface posts his sarcastic comment there, he is suggesting that my subjective preference to make such a thread on the forums is inferior to his subjective preference not to do it. Why do I translate this in such a way: Why would he be posting in a thread that he disapproves of, if he didn't strongly believe that his opinion was superior? Not only that, he's doing it in front of everybody else, thus intimidating me. Did I ask for his opinion? I don't think so. I had clearly stated what the thread was about, and I had also given instructions on how to participate.

Here is an analogy: I rent a room in a hotel and I put a sign on the door saying "in this room we wear pants". Suddenly Fuckface enters the room naked and he starts giving me lectures in front of everybody else on how wearing pants is stupid. He must be really confident in his opinion in order to enter the room naked and assert that they're wrong. If he believed that both his and the pants-wearing people's personal preferences were equally valid, he would never have done that, unless we're talking about an idiot. In a way, he is denying them the right to do whatever the fuck they want with their lives.

Now let's look at an example of unsolicited criticism about an objective issue: John claims that "two plus two equals five". Here comes Hank, who overheard John's obnoxious claim. "You are incorrect, John! Two plus two equals four", says Hank. John's face gets red and he screams back, "SHUT UP, SMARTASS, NOBODY ASKED FOR YOUR STUPID OPINION". Is John right to be angry? Well, in this case, Hank is asserting a fact, and regardless of his opinion, two plus two always equals four. I call this constructive criticism - giving an opportunity to someone to see their mistake. Providing constructive criticism is like doing somebody a favor; it's like a gift.

So the question then becomes: Is it rational to become angry at someone who has bought you a gift that you didn't like? I'd say that it's perfectly moral and acceptable to reject the gift, or throw it in the trash. Surely, you didn't ask for such a gift, so you have no obligation to accept it, or to be grateful. If the gift provider was not aware that you didn't like the thing he bought, he's doing nothing disrespectful; hence, getting angry at him would be irrational and rude. You could instead simply indicate politely that you don't like being given such gifts. If Hank, however, knew that John didn't like being corrected on his Maths, I would conclude that John indeed did have the right to get angry at Hank. Once again, "respect for others means letting them live their own lives, suffer their own pains and solve their own problems". Hank should let John take responsibility for his stupidity and suffer the consequences.

So here's a few tips about providing unsolicited criticism:
If the issue is subjective, don't bother criticizing. It's disrespectful, arrogant, and bigoted. If the issue is objective, give it a try. If you're met with indifference or annoyance, don't provide any more criticism on that same issue. It's going to be unproductive, and disrespectful.

And if you're on the receiving side:
If the issue is subjective, let your anger free! I would suggest rather ignoring that person; but if they're someone important to you, you gotta let them know that you're angry and annoyed at their behavior. If the issue is objective, I suggest that you listen, if you have the time. If you're tired, or you have something better to do, let them know this is the case. Maybe you're right, maybe he's right, but this is not a good time for a debate.

I assume that you coming here reading this means that you care about my opinion and ask for it; hence, my subjective and objective suggestions are not really unsolicited.

Free Will

2009-04-06T02:31:00.000-07:00

I have decided to summarize my views on determinism, compiling various excerpts from message boards. There is no rational reason to believe that free will exists. There is just no evidence for such a thing. I am going to list a few arguments FOR free will and refute them one by one. First of all, let's look at the definition of free will:

"Free will is the ability to choose otherwise than one might have chosen."
Why should this matter, that one could have chosen otherwise? To me, this is completely irrelevant. Fact is, what's done is done. Free Willies claim that without choice, there can be NO moral responsibility. "Moral" is a key term here; so what's the difference between "moral responsibility" and "responsibility"? I have no idea. I can only assume that if one is morally responsible, he can be morally condemned.

What is moral condemnation? The act of shaming someone for something harmful they have done. Once they've been morally condemned, they could also receive punishment. I don't believe moral condemnation is a constructive thing to do. Usually it's people who've been shamed all their lives that become criminals. So further shaming them for their hamrful behavior would be like putting out a fire with more wood. Once a person is given the label "criminal", they start perceiving themselves as such. "I'm a bad person". It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Now that they believe it, they can embrace their evil selves and just go on being mean with even less remorse; because hey, "it's just the way I am".

Free Willies believe in punishment. There can be no punishment without moral condemnation. That's why they need free will to exist in order to justify their irrational beliefs, caused by bad parenting and the like. The deterministic solution to crime is prevention and self-defense. You either prevent things or they happen. Free Willies cannot be content with this because they need Revenge. They are caught up in the Game where you either win or lose; and they can't stand being the losers. Free Willies love to talk about empathy, but when it comes to a criminal, they usually have none for him. That's because they like to assume a role, where they're the good guys, and the criminals are the bad guys. The eternal battle between Good & Evil - it's nothing more than a delusional game.

Under the same circumstances, different individuals make different choices. If Dick acts in a destructive way, compared to Jack, who would have acted differently in the same situation, we can positively claim that Dick's behavior was immoral. The question "Could Dick have chosen otherwise?" is irrelevant to the morality of his actions, and rather they're trying to label Dick "immoral", himself. The question "Compared to what?" is much more practical and constructive. Dick chose this, compared to Jack, who would have chosen that. My point being, free will is not a prerequisite for morality. A rock falls on your head and kills you. It doesn't matter if the rock wanted to do it, it's still responsible for your death.

Here is the quantum mechanics perspective: "Because randomness exists at a quantum level, there's a reason to believe that people make random choices, too." They so badly want to believe that a person could have chosen otherwise, that they come down to quantum mechanics. The problem with this claim is that randomness is the opposite of intentional, willful action. Free Willies are now contradicting themselves. If Dick made a bad choice at random, how can he be held "morally responsible" for it?

The most famous claim against determinism is the fatalistic one: "If the future is determined and won't change, why not just sit back and watch it unfold? Nothing you do can change the future, right?" My answer is: If you're predetermined to decide to sit back and watch the future unfold, that means you've got issues. Nothing's gonna happen unless you act upon it. Determinism is simply the claim that everything happens for a reason. You chose to do this, BECAUSE you were influenced by a variety of events. The latter CAUSED you to make this choice, which makes it predetermined. If you want to fight psychological causation, check out my article: Introducing Chaos.

Stefan Molyneux's argument is similar to the fatalistic one: he says, "In the past, people prayed to Gods to alter the weather - however, these gods do not exist, and the weather is merely the complicated and predetermined movement of atoms and energy. When people gave up the idea that the gods controlled the weather, they stopped "debating" the weather, or attempting to alter its behavior through words, prayers, supplications and arguments." That's an argument from ignorance. It does in no way prove the existence of free will, but rather justifies it as a tool of comfort and convenience. My response: When the tribe finds out there are no Gods, they'll stop praying, but they'll start searching for ways to scientifically influence the weather into changing towards their benefit, after discovering what causes it to change. Once you find all the factors that influence an action, it becomes predictable and susceptible to change.

I'm gonna finish this with a quote from PCRS: Many questions on human behavior have been explained by finding causes in the past of the human being in question. Yet there is still a lot of ignorance about what moves men. Some people have given this ignorance a name (free will), called it an explanation for the remaining unexplained behavior and defined it as virtuous. When confronted with the contradictions in their uncaused cause, they defend it vigorously, bull charging determinists, thinking that disproving determinism gives their named ignorance more credibility as an explanation for yet unexplained human behavior. Science however will keep nibbling away on ignorance, leaving less and less room for their named ignorance (free will). Ignorance is not virtue.

Public Education

2009-03-31T02:29:00.000-07:00

Here's a list of false associations that schools imprint into students' minds about studying:

* SCHOOL: "If I want to learn about something, I should attend to school/college/university."
Wrong. I can easily learn things on my own by reading books, watching video tutorials, modeling, and practicing. Educational institutes create the illusion of a professional environment, but trust me: you can easily learn everything on your own, without being pressured by rules and authority.

* OBLIGATION: "I must study or else I'll be punished."
Not true. Education is a choice. Because schools make it obligatory to attend, one can be left with the impression that education as a whole is a must. You get scolded when you're absent, you get shamed for low grades. It's like a prison you get sent to, but you have to realize that education itself is not imprisonment, but rather liberation.

* CHORES: "Although studying is not a pleasant task, I should get it done for my own good."
Not really. I find it pleasant to learn about things I'm curious about. Schools make it seem like a chore because they make you study shit you don't necessarily care about. They make you compromise for the sake of good grades, or else you get punished.

* OBEYING AUTHORITY: "I should study because that's what teachers and parents tell me to do."
Wrong. Studying is not about following orders, it's about advancing my knowledge. Educational institutes promote ranks and hierarchy. If you refuse to obey, you get scolded and punished. But fuck what your parents and teachers say. They don't care about your intellectual development, all they wanna do is be in control and look important. You're the only one responsible for your education, so forget this bullshit.

* COMPETITION: "I should study because I shouldn't stay behind."
Absolutely not. I'm free to take as much time as I need to fully understand the lessons. Grades create the impression that education is some sort of a game where one wins or loses. Grades pressure students to rush things and compare each other hierarchically. There are no grades in real life.

* RESPECT: "I should study if I respect my teachers/parents."
Not true. Showing respect has nothing to do with advancing my knowledge. To say the least, if you study a subject that you're interested in, you respect yourself, not anybody else. Teachers and parents create the impression that if you don't do well in school, you're being disrespectful. Horseshit.

* BEING MORAL: "I'm a bad person if I don't want to study."
Wrong. Not being motivated means I have no clear interest in the subject. It has nothing to do with morality. Knowledge can make you a better person, but not necessarily. Resisting boring information, resisting to obey authority, and resisting to attend, have NOTHING to do with being a good person.

* SOCIAL STATUS: "I should study or else I'm a loser." or "I'm a loser if I study too much."
No. There are no winners and losers. This is not a game, it's just a process. Students resent good achievers because good achievers at school are often also good slaves and asskissers. In real life, that is not really the case, as intelligent people are not followers, but rather leaders.

They give you high grades in school for obeying the teachers and kissing their asses. Parents give you love for being a good student, and not just for being their child. So education here becomes a manipulative tool for control. It's not the education of the student that matters, but rather how they can be exploited. Most teachers don't really care if their students learn anything - they get paid nonetheless, and their excuse is that the students are lazy. So in this system, everyone is doing something for all the wrong reasons. The incentives are totally twisted and bizarre. Students end up procrastinating, because their motivation has been murdered. School is a form of imprisonment: it limits your freedom and it scars you for life.

Studying is really just the process of learning something new. Nothing more, nothing less. People learn all the time without even realizing it. They think they're having fun when they're playing a new game, and guess what: they have to learn the game. They have to study the whole thing in order to become skillful and beat it. Etc. In order to take advantage of college, have this in mind: you are in this class because you demand guidance and help with the subject that you wish to learn. You are in this class for knowledge, not for grades. You are in this class because you chose to, and you DON'T have to comply with anything that you dislike about it, including the teacher's instructions. This class is NOT a game, and there are no winners and losers - the school grades are fatuous - they are NOT an indicator of your intellect, and they are NOT an indicator of your worthiness.

Gaysbook & Privacy

2009-03-21T02:31:00.000-07:00

I did some research on why Gaysbook is so popular. Turns out that one of the gentlemen who created facebook.com, Chris Hughes, now works for Barack Obama, and primarily acts as the coordinator of online organizing at my.BarackObama.com - the campaign's online social networking website. The COO of facebook.com, Sheryl Sandberg, was hired to handle facebook's sales, marketing, business development, human resources, public policy, privacy issues and communications. Before that, she was Google's sales head, and prior to that, she was chief of staff to U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers in the Clinton administration. Why the sudden popularity of facebook.com? You make your own conclusions.

On a sidenote, Gaysbook can get you killed, if you're stupid enough to publicly expose your privacy: In December 2006, campus police at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington were investigating the theft of two PlayStation consoles, which had been stolen by the two perpetrators of a beating and robbery on campus. They planned to raid the rented house of Peyton Strickland, an 18-year-old student at nearby Cape Fear Community College. They discovered that the other alleged robber, Ryan Mills, had posted photographs of himself on Facebook in which he posed with guns. Expecting "heavily armed resistance" at Strickland's house, the officers called in a SWAT team for backup to raid Strickland's house. When they arrived at the residence, which three students rented, they were not immediately let in. As one officer began to break down the door with a battering ram, another officer mistook the sound of the battering ram for gunshots and shot into the door, killing the unarmed Strickland. The officer, Christopher Long, was not charged with second-degree murder by two different grand juries.

So remember kids, by registering an account at Gaysbook, you are feeding the Beast information about you and your friends. Everything that you publish on the internet can and will be used against you.

Big Brother is watching you.

Stephen Colbert Sucks

2009-03-20T02:18:00.000-07:00

Here's a list of 10 unfunny people funnier than Stephen Colbert:

1. Bill O'Reilly
2. Ben Stiller
3. Jacky Chan
4. Dane Cook
5. Jeff Dunham
6. Ray Romano
7. D. L. Hughley
8. David Alan Grier
9. Carlos Mencia
10. Zach Braff

Most of the Colbert Report is just filler, including the cheers and applause. The rest is shit I can't relate to. I mean, sure, it's a lot of fun mocking bigotry, but it's also very hypocritical. I mean, if you really hate the fact that ignorant people can vote and become politicians, the solution is definitely not making them look cute and funny with your comedy. There are already too many real bigots, and acting like one, just for laughs, is just an act of passive aggressiveness. In this case, laughter is just a defensive mechanism; the joy of the slave. People get to feel morally superior, big deal. What's the recipe for NOT FUNNY? Take satire and mix it up with politics. Let's not blame it all on Stephen. His screenwriters are stuck with the same template and nothing new ever comes out of their asses. And now, get ready for... TONIGHT'S WORD: *applause and cheering, vocal chords torn apart*

Here's a list of 10 unfunny things funnier than the Colbert Report:

1. Fart jokes
2. Dirty pun jokes
3. "Your mom" jokes
4. "What's with that?" jokes
5. Slapstick comedy
6. Celebrity anecdotes
7. Played out memes
8. Sitcoms (Friends, That 70's Show)
9. "Here's your sign" jokes
10. Comedic relief in Star Wars

This is what the Colbert Report writers would've come up with if they had to bash their own show. It's always "hilarious" to paste Stephen's face on a picture. Fuck this guy. He should either quit or demand that they hire new writers. I admit the show used to be funny, back when it wasn't just a pleaser for smug socialist snobs. I used to like Stephen's interviews, most of all. If you like shit like that, check out Zach Galifianakis and his show Between Two Ferns; he's the real deal. I hate Stephen Colbert is just a clown that I hate.

Masters are Slaves

2009-02-28T02:28:00.000-08:00

The master depends on his slave.
Without a slave, he will be no master.
He has to keep the slaves motivated.
He has to manage the slaves.
He has to protect his slaves from other masters.
He has to protect himself from other master wannabes.

Masters are slaves to their slaves, like farmers are slaves to their animals.

There are masters and slaves in relationships. If Tom hates Jack's company but keeps communicating with him, he is a masochistic slave. Tom is going to project his healthy pain onto Jack, by passive-aggressively annoying him. So this makes Jack's experience equally unpleasant now. Jack feels either annoyed, guilty, ashamed, or simply paranoid, because Tom is being too friendly, too submissive, or too ambiguous. It never feels like Tom is expressing his honest thoughts. These triggered painful feelings in Jack really provoke him to want to figure out Tom and manage him, being the master that he is. There is this S&M bond between them, but Jack is not only the sadist, but also a masochist, too. Jack needs to fix Tom because he depends on him, in a fucked up way - he likes to be in control. So he personalizes Tom's issues and becomes even less free than his slave. And Tom needs Jack because he has a victim mentality - he must be the morally superior, altruistic victim.

You know who Jack is. That's me. I'm a sadomasochist. My dad was a master, my mom is a slave. I can be Tom, too. Especially around people who I can't relate to. I don't know what that means. I didn't know my father too well, maybe that's why I associate strangers with him? Who knows... but I don't want to be either.

What makes people play such roles? My guess is that it all comes down to personal responsibility. Slaves are too afraid to take personal responsibility, and masters feel responsible for their slaves' behavior. The slave wants to avoid personal responsibility because he fears making a bad choice, because he fears punishment. He would do anything to stay away from being held accountable - submit to master's commands, get in a character (often impersonating his master), engage in a dissociative behavior (take drugs, play videogames, pray to God), engage in a passive-aggressive behavior (look below). The master, on the other hand, wants to avoid his slave's failure, because that would feel like crashing his favorite car in a reckless accident - it would show what a bad driver he is, and it would prevent him from being in control again. Basically, the master takes his slaves' problems personally, for fear of losing them. He personalizes other people's issues, because that's how he was taught to solve problems in the family. His parents would emotionally manipulate him into doing things for them in order to make them feel better. He couldn't have done otherwise, or else he'd lose them.

And losing parents is equal to death in the eyes of a child.

Here is a list of common signs of Passive Aggressive Behavior: Ambiguity or speaking cryptically (They engender a feeling of insecurity in others), Avoiding responsibility by claiming forgetfulness, Avoiding conflict or confrontation, Blaming others (unable to accept blame), Chronic lateness and forgetfulness, Complaining, Compulsiveness (including excessive cleanliness, tidiness and attention to detail), Does not express hostility or anger openly (e.g. expresses it instead by leaving notes), Fear of authority, Fear of competition, Fear of dependency, Fear of intimacy (infidelity as a means to act out anger), Fosters chaos, Intentional inefficiency, Irrational Fears/ Paranoia, Losing things, Lack of Trust, Making excuses (This sort of individual will usually not agree with the particular reason you provide for their mistake but will create their own reason), Manipulative (Similar to being in need of control but more sinister as an offensive mechanism to achieve a self-serving goal. Therefore, the passive aggressive person is often very greedy), Need for Control, Lying, Obstructionism, Prideful, Procrastination, Resentment, Resists suggestions from others, Sarcasm, Stubbornness, Sullenness, Unable to communicate well, Victim Mentality (Example: Being willing to accept someone's apology as a pretense to being right), Willful withholding of understanding.

What's the solution? Respect a person enough to let him deal with his own problems, unless he genuinely asks for advice. I know it's very hard to resist the temptation to be in control, and if you can't, try to stay away from that person. Let me know if there's anything I've missed.

Note: I have expanded on that subject in this post: More on Masters & Slaves

Intimate Relationships

2009-02-23T02:27:00.000-08:00

A bunch of questions from a virgin:

Why do you always have to look at women as potential sexual partners? Let's say you have a girlfriend and you guys decide to break up, but stay friends. How do you stay friends with a chick who you've never been friends with? Why would you wanna stay friends with somebody you've broken up with? Can you break up with a friend? Is sexual intimacy something independent of friendliness? Isn't your girlfriend supposed to be your best friend, too? What if you have a female best friend who you're not intimate with? Would mating with another girl be fair? Is sex a reward? The tip of a good friendship? Or is it something entirely independent of friendly exchanges? I know it comes down to brain chemicals. But what triggers these chemicals, besides physical attractiveness? Isn't hiding your real self from your girlfriend equivalent to being pussy-whipped?

I don't know man, shit is so fucked up and confusing. It starts out with stereotypes and taboos and goes all the way up to this mess. I believe that if we took all these out, sex could be more like playing a game with your best friends, and not the sole purpose of having a good relationship with a member of the opposite gender. I don't know, these are just some ignorant embarrassing speculations. I'd like to be better educated on this topic, but I'm almost sure there are like a thousand different theories.

A friend of mine helped me realize that I have a bit unrealistic standards. That's why I don't understand the friend-to-girlfriend transformation. I was asked about my sexual fantasies so I found out that I would only be comfortable to engage in an intimate relationship with a woman like the fictional character Maude Lebowski: care-free, no issues, no sentimentality, just completely honest and content with her own nature. Women like that don't exist. Some create the impression that they are such, but the more you get to know them, the more you hear about their issues, taboos, and insecurities. So that's why the friendlier a relationship becomes, the less sexually appealing a woman would appear to me. And it's unfair of me to have such standards for females, because I myself have my own issues to deal with.

Nine Inch Nails Sucks

2009-02-18T02:10:00.000-08:00

Google doesn't find even one web page where the main topic is "Nine Inch Nails Sucks". NIN are extremely overrated, and that's the main reason I wanted to express my dislike for this musical project. Reznor's fans claim that his sound is exceptionally good just because he uses expensive equipment and experimental effects. The fact of the matter is, there is evident noise level in his songs, and even some clipping. Some people say that it's a good thing you can hear all of the instruments in a NIN song. This is actually a sign of bad mixing. Most instruments in a mix are supposed to compliment each other, not individually stand out on their own. I don't like NIN's beats, they are badly put together, let's say, compared to Prodigy's beats, which are perfect. I gave Prodigy's beats as an example of well-glued samples in a way that they sound homogeneous, like real drum beats. Update: turns out NIN's drum beats are real, it's just that they're so badly mixed, they sound like bad techno made in Fruity Loops.

If you layer Reznor's vocal tracks one over the other at the same tempo, I wouldn't be surprised if the melodies match. You could call it "style", but most of his songs have the same tune played in different keys, with various alterations. Also, Reznor's singing voice is unoriginal and boring. The songs are too repetitive and they lack dynamics. The lyrics are pretentious and boring. They look like some teenage girl wrote them during her period. Except, teen angst poetry is a tad less tedious and sometimes fun to fap to.

Trent Reznor is an elitist prick who takes himself too seriously. He's a supporter of PETA - a terrorist group. He's a narcissistic asshole who somehow manages to influence others into believing that he's a big deal. I'm willing to bet that most of his fans are teenagers who have received bad parenting but still love their parents. Don't ask me why, psychology. Not that hip to have in such a cutting edge article like this one.

No More Sticky Shit

2009-02-12T02:14:00.000-08:00

Fuck man, is it normal that it usually takes me about 9 long pieces of toilet paper to fully wipe my ass? Quite often my hand gets so tired of wiping, it goes numb. I hate this shit, man, it's depressing. I try not to think about it too much, but every now and then, when I have nothing to overload my mind with, I really lose my temper. If that's an everyday thing for many people, no wonder there is so much anger and suffering throughout the world. It makes me wanna hold it in as long as possible so that I don't have to go through the nightmare of wiping once again. I even tried using wet wipes and it takes me like 20 of these to get rid of the brown.

An average of 9 long pieces of TP used in 3 flushes (last flush may vary)

Some people suggest that I wash without wiping, but I find this to be disgusting, and not secure at all. How do you check if you've washed the shit? At least with toilet paper you can always look at your last piece of art and wipe until you've got a blank canvas. And with water, you're splashing chunks of feces all over the bathtub. You get shit under your fingernails, you get shit on the hairs of your thighs, you get shit on your pubes.

The shitting position that most people acquire turns out to be wrong. Here is the suggested correct one: bend your head forward and down to the position where your head is between your knees. Your back should be as close to parallel to the floor as possible. Your shoulders should touch your knees. Grab your legs between your ankle and knee. Pull your shoulders down against your knees and let it out! This way, they say, the shit goes out easier and it makes less of a mess. Bullshit. It didn't work for me.

Some people suggest removing the hair around the anus. That was the closest to a good solution. Although my feces were still sticky, at least there was less to wipe. The inconvenience of shaving was too much for me, though. I mean, I'm a guy who hates shaving his face, so... Months later, I finally found the real solution to the problem. After hours of research and lurking on internet forums, I discovered Psyllium Husk Powder and Dandelion Tea. Man, oh man. Do I love to take a shit now. It only takes me a couple of minutes and 2-3 pieces of toilet paper to wipe. It's like I'm a new person. I don't know what is it about these herbs, but they're powerful, man. So if you've got sticky feces, give it a shot, it worked for me.

Introducing Chaos

2009-02-09T02:26:00.000-08:00

You've got to be a determinist to understand what I've written below.

People have a choice based on their judgment, which is based on their belief system, which is based on their past and current experience, which is based on the interpretation of external and internal events, which is based on focus, which is based on genetic predispositions. It all comes down to the survival instinct. We choose to focus on whatever's best for our survival. In the big picture, choice is just part of the whole cause-effect chain.

The big issue is that we often construct new beliefs upon our prior beliefs, which many times turn out to be outdated, especially if you've had a violent past. In this fashion, many of our choices are in fact irrational, since we're accessing old shortcuts in our mind to files that no longer run on the new operating system - the current external world. We compare new things to old things, but what makes the old things qualified to set standards?

One doesn't have a choice but to act predictably according to his predetermination, or does he? I've been thinking... if you want some randomness in your decision making, you can always flip a coin. It's risky, but it can also be beneficial, in a way that you might have gotten used to a bad strategy, and trying something new may help you expand your knowledge of alternative strategies. So if you toss a coin, you cheat your own predictability, and you bring some chaos to your choosing. The risk you're taking is, you might make an unpredictably irrational decision. The purpose, of course, is to make an unpredictably rational one.

The coin toss would inevitably become a part of your belief system, and your judgment would then be directly influenced by chance. This is dangerous stuff, and I wouldn't experiment with important dilemmas. This should only be used as a method of seeking alternative beliefs, rather than having chance itself be that alternative criterion of choice. Fictional character Harvey Dent is a perfect example of the latter case.

Thought Patterns

2009-01-30T02:25:00.000-08:00

This is a pragmatic hypothesis I came up with, I have no idea if it's valid or not. Just like in programming, we create algorithms in our minds and sort them in different classes and subclasses. Here's an example:

* Class "Self-Awareness"
o "I am fundamentally wrong"
+ "I should fix myself to be good"
# "I should do good things to prove my worthiness"
# "I should pray to God to forgive my flaws"
# "I need others' approval to feel worthy"

+ "I should be ashamed of myself"
# "I should hide my feelings"
# "I shouldn't make mistakes"
* Class "People"
o "People are evil"
+ "People should be kept under control"
# "God should be the superior moral judge"
# "Slavery is good"
+ "People are no better than animals"
# "Animals should have the same rights as humans"

Each subclass inherits the beliefs of the former class. So if you want to individually change or amend a subclass, like "Slavery is good", the new values still have to comply with the beliefs "People should be kept under control" and "People are evil". You cannot overwrite parent values with their subclasses. So if we want the belief changed to "Slavery is bad", we'd have to work at a deeper level and change "People are evil". But drastically changing low-level classes in your belief system would probably mean that most of their subclasses will be destroyed. Humans have an automatic drive to consistency, and the unconscious mind won't allow the beliefs to be changed, unless they are outdated and overruled by repetition. I think that's what positive affirmations are about. You repeat them so many times that your unconscious mind is now ready to make a new pattern and replace the old one with it. If the old pattern, however, is still in use, then the new pattern won't be allowed to overwrite it because of internal contradiction. It would be like trying to join the same poles of two magnets together. That's why the old pattern should not be referred to. This way, the evidence for the new pattern will prevail and the class can be redefined. Overall, if you want to change someone's belief system, you have to isolate them from their current surroundings. That's what cults do and it works perfectly well. It's kinda like brainwashing - in order to change the core beliefs of a person, you need to have them isolated from their prior environment, because it would keep reminding them of their old way of thinking.

To the Truth Doctors

2009-01-29T22:08:00.000-08:00

It's fascinating to me how you guys keep talking about the Symptoms of the Disease, trying to figure out specifically how they occurred. You keep whining about the injustice of the illness, and spotting out its negative effects, like IT MATTERS. Let me put this in other words: let's say you have a deadly Rash that keeps spreading around on your skin. You find out that what caused and keeps maintaining the Rash is an allergy: you're allergic to Apples. So what you Truth Doctors do is, you keep eating apples, and after that, you keep staring at the mirror, counting all the new Zits that have appeared on your body. You look at the Pimples under a microscope, wondering WHEN and HOW they developed. Yet, the only thing you have to do is STOP EATING APPLES. But it's as if you're an addict! You keep notes of new Apple mutations and their latest effects on your skin, and yet you keep eating them, and it never crosses your mind that focusing on the symptoms will never help you solve the problem. Stop trying to cover your Zits with make up. Stop applying stupid lotion on your Rashes. Stop taking drugs. Fix the core issue. STOP EATING APPLES.

All I'm saying is, it doesn't matter what happened on 9/11. It doesn't matter what the FED is doing. It doesn't matter which law the Cops broke. Those are all Symptoms of the same Disease. It's the Elephant in the room. It's the FNORD in your papers. It's the Government, it's Religion, it's Superstition. It's Bad Parenting.

How many more examples of the same thing does one need to understand the simple fact that Government equals coercion? People are psychologically handicapped to see the FNORD. This is a bad strategy that is obviously failing. I'm not against educating the masses, but this is the wrong way to do it. If you go on doing what you're doing now you are very likely to go on getting the same results as you are getting now. You want real change, educate children, not corrupt grown ups. Grown ups need therapy before understanding such a fundamental truth, contradictory to their deepest values.

Drugs, Bro!

2009-01-28T02:24:00.000-08:00

I've been very fierce in my criticism against mind-altering substances, and I've been wondering why I take it so personally when somebody openly discusses their experience with drugs in front of me. I get offended and I start raging. It's basically the same feeling that I get when some football fan is talking to me about THE GAME and how THEY won. I guess I just find it irrelevant and definitely not worth discussing. It's hard for me to justify my preferences, because my social life depends on that. And I don't wanna lose friends only on the basis of their unhealthy habits, because we all have those. But it's just so alienating to be the only non-smoker in the group... I don't feel that I belong there anyway. They all share their cool stories, bro, and I'm just sitting there trying to make smalltalk, being on the lookout for things I could actually relate to. Of course, I naturally get ignored and secretly resented. So why bother coping with that shit? Stupid potheads talk about weed 50% of the time. I don't care if they smoke, that's personal. Doing drugs is against my values, but I can't impose this belief on others - it's a subjective issue. Keep it to yourself.

I'm raging. I've been a witness to the endless media hype and propaganda (movies, TV shows, music) encouraging marijuana. It's making me so sick. Potheads are brainwashed and it pisses me off because they claim to be freethinkers. Weed conveys a certain lifestyle and social status and they fall for that. They're all fucking smug about smoking it, because everybody wants to be cool guy the world. You're just as bad as the snobs who wear ugly expensive brands. Your brand is the smell of shit, the inadequacy of a retard, and the bullshit of New Age trends. Way to go, fagets. Wake up, you're not cool. You're a subculture of clowns. Being in an altered state of consciousness can only give you subjective creativity, which is worthless in the free market, unless you get lucky. Otherwise, you die in a trashcan. If you wanna come up with some genius shit, better study science. It's amazing! It'll give you much more inspiration than your own fucking internal irrational projections that the substance inspires you to perceive. You're all clowns and you take your philosophy from stand-up comedians and novelists. That's pathetic and it only shows how limited your imagination is, despite the expanded conscious awareness you so claim to acquire.

Wake up, you're not cool. You're the victim of peer pressure. One can no longer actively socialize without getting into drugs. How pathetic is that, American culture? You're all about drugs and football, just like British culture is about alcohol and soccer. It's sad that such interaction doesn't lead to any productive outcome, besides primitive secondary gains. That's my main beef with the subcultures: the self is lost along the lines. It's a high level of smalltalk and nothing more. It's hypocritical to claim to be open-minded and then surround yourself with your aesthetic clones.

Butt hurt? Yes, I am.

Derren Brown Explained

2009-01-25T02:20:00.000-08:00

Raise Your Hand Skit

Malls are designed to confuse people, and confusion puts you in a state of trance, making you much more suggestible than the usual. In this case Derren Brown is using EMBEDDED COMMANDS and ANALOG MARKING to suggest what shoppers should do. He raises his voice to mark the embedded commands. While he's doing that, he's also bypassing people's critical thinking: he's talking about very special offers and exciting opportunities that won't last long - that's the Scarcity Principle. Here is a transcript of the whole speech:

"We hope that your shopping experience is an UPLIFTING ARM, and I'd like to bring to your PAY ATTENTION some very special offers today. Details of our special offers can be found HANDILY by the ELEVATORS, so why not come RIGHT ARM UP and CEASE for yourselves. Our special offers will only be available for a short period of time, so all these customers wishing to REACH UP and GRAB this exciting opportunity should do so NOW."

You can see the embedded commands in CAPS. In the last sentence he's not only telling the shoppers what to do, but he's also telling them how to do it. This is essential for the suggestion to work.

Freezing Somebody Skit

In this video, Derren Brown is using ANCHORING and EMBEDDED COMMANDS. Firstly, he puts the woman in a trance state by doing a handshake induction. Then he brings her upstairs and places her in the spot where the stopping should occur later. Now this is the part where he deepens her trance state while suggesting the hidden STOP commands into her head. Before he does that, though, he frames the experience by saying "I know this is a little bit odd." which bypasses her critical factor. Here's a transcript of what he's saying next:

"It's just interesting, as you just LOOK AT ME NOW, and just thinking about, LOOKING OUT of that window, you see NOW IT STOPS the end of November, there's only 29 STOPPING days left for Christmas, and just LOOKING OUT and just SEEING all those people, and just when you DO THIS, and you're doing the Christmas STOPPING, and you're trying to get all the gifts together, and gifts for kids, and gifts for the stocking fillers, and the STOPPING... what is it... the Christmas tree, and things to put on a tree, all of that... just this sort of trance state that just starts to put you in, and you just start to walk around, and just trying to get all that done, and just how, in the back of your mind, how you just... WANT TO PUT THE BREAKS ON, and that's really interesting thing, how that trance state can just start to set in now, it's a very interesting thing and that's what we gonna look at today."

The Embedded Commands are in CAPS, and the way Derren marks them is by pressing the woman's index finger every time he says a suggestion word. What he's doing here is associating the spot in front of the window with the act of her stopping. The last couple of things he says are setting the framework, again, letting her know that it's going to be her state of trance that is needed. Another thing to remember is the position of his palm, which anchors the whole trance state for later usage. After he finishes the speech, he walks her to the corner, counting the steps in mind. Then it's just a matter of listening and counting her steps to know when she's gonna reach her stopping spot again. Next, he tells the woman: "just TRY walk all the way across the room, so don't STOP THIS TIME JUST RIGHT AWAY ACROSS, you're REALLY GONNA FEEL of the, the space of the room." The word "TRY" presupposes failure. That's a suggestion there that she wouldn't be able to finish the task. Then he's using negation to suggest that she should stop right away across. Remember, the brain doesn't process DONT's before actually examining the DO's consciously. If your critical thinking is bypassed, there's no way to examine that. Finally, he suggests that she's gonna FEEL when to stop, which implies that there's more to her task. What follows is, of course, she starts walking and she stops at the same place where she did before. Now, Derren can't be sure for how long she's going to be still, so he keeps stacking more suggestions while asking her why she stopped: Now I said don't... STOP THIS TIME, so what's happened there? Then he walks in front of the woman with his palm facing towards her. This is the anchor that triggered her trance state, again, to make her even more stuck.

Russian Scam Skit

Derren asks the guy a visual question to bypass his logical thinking. Next he's mirroring his body language and posture to gain rapport. Derren then takes a step away from the subject to test if he could already lead him. The guy follows Derren, which proves that Rapport has been achieved. Derren is now ready to put the Consistency Principle in action by saying "You don't mind me asking you, do you? You're happy to give that to me". Next, Derren does a handshake induction by simply interrupting and altering the handshake. He anchors the state with the word "Cheers". The guy's attention is now fully focused on his hand and he is completely confused and suggestible in this brief period of time. Next, Derren hands him the bottle. This is a perfect application of the Reciprocity Principle: you give me something, I have to give you something back. Handing the bottle is also gonna work as an anchor later. The subject is now completely comfortable giving away his valuable stuff. What happens later when he asks for his stuff back is that Derren gives him the bottle once again and says Cheers. This, of course, works like magic, because now the guy is back to his confused suggestible state. Cheers!

Paper Rock Scissors Skit

Now, in the first part of the video, Derren uses a delay technique and I'm not sure whether he actually tries to influence the subject yet. Here are a few speculative thoughts: when Derren explains how the game works, he goes "One, two, three" and makes the scissors sign with his hand. That perhaps influences the guy to make this choice in the first round. Before the second round, Derren says "my STONE blunts the scissors", perhaps suggesting that the subject picks that next by accentuating on the word "stone". Only later in the video, when Derren turns his back, it becomes apparent that he's leading the guy, by keeping his eyes focused somewhere else, while blatantly letting his peripheral vision see what he has to choose next - watch his hand and you'll see what I mean.

Color Blind Skit

Of course, this could all be scripted and the woman may be a stooge. What's important is that Derren is using essential techniques that are useful to know. The first part of what Derren does is already explained in the video. What happens after he anchors the certain and uncertain state is that he frames what the woman is going to experience next, by giving her the short speech about change and how little things can affect people. Surely we'll find out what these changes are, he says. That suggests that she's going to co-operate, more or less, to make this thing work. Let's not forget that while she's being told all this, she's in a confused suggestible state.

Guessing A Word Skit

When Derren starts talking to Joe, the first thing he does is setting the context by explaining he's gonna try a mind reading experiment. Next Derren's using Analogies and Metaphors as hints as to what the word is gonna be. He also limits Joe's choices by setting the scene in the past when he was 6 year old. Most kids have ridden a tricycle at one point of their childhood. Joe's brain is expected to connect the dots and associate the hints (three, cogs, cycling, round and round, over and over again) with his past.

Red Bike Skit

This is most probably scripted, as you can tell from the different camera angles, and the sole fact that the subject is a professional actor, and also a friend of Derren. Nevertheless, the techniques he uses are legit. The atmosphere in the room is obviously set to red colors and round cycling objects. That's a huge influence on itself. The first thing Derren does (not seen in this clip) is to induce a state of strong desire in his subject. He does that by questioning Simon about the feeling he gets when this desire is triggered in him. People can't describe feelings unless they experience them. Derren then asks Simon to amplify this feeling and once he's done that, Derren anchors the state by tapping Simon's shoulder.

What follows is a handshake induction. Next, Derren uses Analog Marking to further create an image of a bike - the key words are pointed out in the video. Every time Derren talks about feelings of excitement, and every time he hints to a red bike, he fires the anchor again by tapping Simon's shoulder. That way both things are associated to each other. The good thing about Derren's anecdote here is that what he's saying is also a great analogy of what he wants Simon to do. When people hear anecdotes about things happening, they can't help themselves but experience the same things in order to relate to the story. So when Derren is talking about a feeling so strong that it can replace the actual memory, Simon is subconsciously responding to that. Note that he's in trance and he has no idea what Derren wants to do with him so he's not suspicious and can't really understand that he's being had. In the end of the bit (not seen in this clip) it turns out that what Simon originally wanted was a leather jacket. He had written his wish on a note a week before this was shot. Simon couldn't believe he ever wrote that, as he was fully convinced that what he had always wanted was a red BMX.

Trains... of Thought Skit

Derren is using EMBEDDED Commands to suggest that they stop thinking about their stop. It's a witty wordplay: What STOP. THINKING ABOUT IT NOW. While he's saying that, he waves his hand over subject's face to anchor their state. As soon as he notices a change of state, he fires off the anchor which leaves them confused again. Here's a way to make your friends forget their phone number. Just ask them what it is and say you will dial it to verify. Then enter a fake number and say: "your phone doesn't ring, you forget your own number" and anchor it with a finger snap. And say again: "you forget your own number", anchoring again. Then ask for their phone number again, firing the anchor again. You will have guaranteed laugh.

Dog Track Skit

This has a lot to do with PERSONAL POWER, confusion, and EMBEDDED COMMANDS. Derren chose a guy who's confident. He's calm and steady, and he's not afraid to maintain eye contact for more than a few seconds. So when the man tells the cashier he's holding the winning ticket, she is automatically confused. Cashiers are usually passive types, so when a more powerful individual confronts them confidently, they are going to question their own credibility. The woman is now in a trance - she's not sure who's right for a second. Just as she made up her mind and decided to confront the man, Derren interrupted her thinking pattern by slapping the window. That's called a PATTERN INTERRUPT. Now she's even more confused and her critical factor is temporarily bypassed. Derren then says "This is the dog YOU'RE LOOKING 4" and confirms her "mistake" by saying "You may have misread it". Since dog number 4 was the real winner, the first sentence implies that the ticket has a bet on it. Similar techniques are applied to the second case. In the end Derren assures the woman with a commanding tone of voice that the ticket is in fact the winning one: That's why we came to this WINdow. When confused, a person would be so willing to get out of that state, that she would take anything for an answer.

I Hate Star Wars

2009-01-14T02:08:00.000-08:00

From George Lucas's personally illustrated autobiography:

Long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, my dick exploded while I was having fantasies about raping the movie industry in the anus. I came so hard, Steven Spielberg almost choked on my ejaculate. We then switched turns and he fucked me so bad I had a vision. So vivid, so phallic, was the picture, that I could almost feel all the ideas coming out of my ass. Turned out I shat myself on his cock. Coincidence? I don't think so, as his cock smeared in shit inspired me to come up with my greatest idea of all - the central antagonist of my soon-to-be-made movie, Darth Vader: The Shit Lord. Of course! I should base the whole saga on dicks and fecal matter. Genius! Hmm, I need a protagonist now. "How about Jesus", Steven suggested while wiping his dick in my pubic hair, "People love Jesus! You can't go wrong with that". And the old Jew had a darn good point. So I started thinking about it, as Steven began urinating on me - Jesus walked on water, I thought. "Fuck that", Spielberg said, "Your hero should walk on air". Indeed I named him Skywalker, the Chosen One, born with no father, and his mother - a slave. "Just like your mom, Steven", I joked. I'm not sure if his mother was a whore, but it sounded very funny. That brought up the question about humor. There should be some comic relief in my serious action drama movie! I didn't want to keep the audience tensed for more than a minute. Just as this thought hit me, Steven slapped my ass with a bamboo stick. "Eurika", I exclaimed. Slapstick comedy is what I needed, because most people find it hilarious! There I was, hours later, saying goodbye to Steven Spielberg. I was so sad he had to leave, but he left me a present - a blow up doll. Every day I relieved myself on the doll's face, as I was imagining it talk to me dirty, just like Steven. I wondered if a robot could be made, just like him, to please me, for the times he's missing. An important part of my movie was also missing: the physical comedy. Maybe a robot could replace that there? How about a hilarious android who looks like a blow up doll? Great!

As time went by, I got more frustrated with my movie project. I knew the crap would sell, but nobody was there to encourage me and assure me that it can and should go further. I just wanted to throw the damn thing in the Recycle Bin. I kept creating new ridiculous characters, and they all ended up in the trash. One day I just gave up, smoked a few joints, and decided to revive the scrapped characters. I really had fun with this shit, and it really grew on me, to the point where I thought to myself: "What would happen if I bring into life the Recycle Bin itself". That's how R2-D2 was born.

It was time that I think about the plot. What would Jesus do in another Galaxy? He would fight the forces of evil, of course. How would he fight them... with a sword! He should be a ninja! Or even better, a samurai! Yes, because he's ready to sacrifice himself in the name of good! And his sword should glow in the dark because he is Jesus and he fights the darkness! Yeah! He and his gang of holy samurai will fuck shit up using the power of prayer! Nah, that sounds too lame... Let's call it the force. Ah, sounds much better. And the bad guys, the Shits, they will possess the power of the dark side, which of course, will be quicker, easier, and more seductive, because it comes from no other than the Devil. Holy war. Good versus evil.

George Lucas is retarded. His movie is a success only because it has nice visual effects, character designs, and an infantile fairy tale as the plot. People love the movie only because they saw it in the past, back when their intelligence level was even lower than the writer's. The Star Wars fans are strongly biased and sentimental about the movie, because it reminds them of their childhood. If your first time seeing the film was as an adult, and you instantly became a fan, I am here to inform you that you probably have developmental disabilities and I feel sorry for you. You might also be a homosexual with scatological sexual fantasies. Not that there's ANYTHING WRONG with that.

I'm putting this out to let people like me know there is hope. I google'd the phrase "I Hate Star Wars" and I didn't find the results satisfying - the first result was "[n] Reasons to Hate Star Wars" - it's too detailed and I think the author is essentially a Star Wars fan who wrote the articles as satire. The second result was the "I Hate Star Wars Club" which seems to be run, ironically, by Star Trek fans. I love Star Trek, but that's not why I hate Star Wars. I hate Star Wars because it's an overrated b-movie that many people take seriously and quote as if it were a credible source of wisdom. I hate it because the plot sucks, the characters are flawed and inconsistent, the mythology is weak and unbelievable, beyond the usual suspension of disbelief.

This shit right pokes you in the eye with how bad it is.

Some fans of this horrible movie are victims of their own projections who have been exploited into finding faith and comfort in the Star Wars religion. Hopeless dreamers with Utopian ideals. Deluded concepts of good and evil, influenced by parents who shame their children for being angry or scared. Star Wars condemns fear, anger, and hatred as evil emotions, while labeling submissiveness, patience, and superstition as virtue. Be passive. Take it in the ass! It seems like the Holy Samurai valued intuition more than rational thinking. Making choices without thinking about the consequences is the essence of the force, and that's why fear is not encouraged. It leads them to anger because they can't put their irrational plans into action. Anger leads them to hate because they envy the ones who make rational choices. Hate leads them to suffering because they fall into a self-pity hole where they can't do anything constructive or destructive against their enemies. If they weren't so stupid, fear would lead them to change, anger would lead them to relief, and hatred would lead them to peace (staying away from your enemy).

So in Star Wars they have all kinds of high-speed technology and yet, the weapons are slow and inaccurate. Now I understand why light sabers are better weapons than laser guns; the latter are apparently equivalent to slingshots. And what's with the 4-legged Walkers?! That has to be the worst battle vehicle in the Universe. I mean, it's so slow, clumsy and weak. Walkers. All they need is a hit and they explode. What about the robots? They are more humane and emotional than people. It's weird that Recycle Bin spoke in bleeps to his friends, instead of using human voice, which is seen to be possible in a couple of scenes where it gets in trouble: "WOOAAAAHHHHHHH". And then here comes the Yeti. Everybody loves a furry sasquatch pet. But a story is not good enough without Casper, the friendly ghost! Here comes Ben! It must've been an every day thing in this galaxy to talk to ghosts.

LONG TIME AGO. FUCK YOU!

The characters were not true to their own standards. Chewbacca had already embraced the power of the dark side: he was fearful and angry: remember the scene where he choked the black guy? Shit, the Princess was even worse: there was so much passive aggression in her. She was constantly angry and scared to admit her love for that other guy. What about Darth Vader? He appeared to be very calm, brave, and nihilistic. None of the Shits were angry, and most of them were certainly not cowards. Another thing that looked pretty silly to me was how easily the Underwater King was convinced to send his people on a war for no profit what so ever. This sends the wrong impression about wars, as if they were virtuous. But even so, sending citizens on a deadly mission simply because someone asked you to, is still a monstrous thing to do. Signing the peace contract would've been the better choice, but the queen wouldn't want to lose her power now, would she. And how did the "good" guy got voted for as a chancellor, even though it was known that most members of the senate were corrupt and didn't care for the people? So naive, this whole movie is. A bad influence on children, it can be.

Fiction Bullshit

2008-12-28T02:21:00.000-08:00

It's time the truth be told. Zombies suck. Vampires suck. Robots suck. Ninja suck. Pirates suck. You're not cool if you think any of this stuff rules. Zombies and vampires suck because they don't exist. Metaphorically speaking, sure they do, but that's irrelevant.

Robots suck because they are machines - slaves to humanity.
They can't do shit unless they are programmed to.

Ninja suck because they are obsolete - the guy with the finger on the trigger is not afraid of your skills in martial arts. The Japan Self-Defense Forces consist of the following military units: armies, maritime districts, and air defense forces. I don't see Ninja in the list. Check out the weapons of JSDF. Do you see swords? Do you see shuriken? Shobo? Suntetsu?

Pirates suck because in reality they're nothing more than criminals. And I'm pretty much sure most of them speak and dress normally - sorry to ruin your homosexual fantasies. Parrots and hooks? Seriously, get a life.

You don't have to worship idealized versions of stuff that sucks in order to gain new friends on the internet. Unless you want to befriend losers. And don't even start with with that Batman-Superman bullshit. I don't care which fictional character you find best, because I can always have him beat by my imaginary legendary hero. All I need to say is that my character is just like yours, except he's immortal, invisible, nothing can take away his super powers, and he controls all matter.

I hate geeks and their stupid bullshit. It's not that it's their fault, but talking passionately about fictional issues just pisses me off. I can't help but feel contempt for them. I don't fucking care if Microsoft is an "evil" company. I'm still gonna buy an Xbox360 because it's a cheap platform, and the game coverage is decent. Also, I can hack the console, download games from the internet, burn them on DVD's, and play them for free. I bet you can't do that on your PlayStation 3, smug motherfucker. Enjoy your exclusive shitty games. You're a supporter of a fictional cause that has no realistic basis. I'm tired of bullshit.

Merry Fucking Christmas

2008-12-25T02:18:00.000-08:00

Saying "Fucking" between "Merry" and "Christmas" doesn't make you less gay. That's like fucking a dude and pretending he's a chick. You either say "Marry Christmas" and admit that you're gay, or you don't say anything. I can't believe that people who claim to be atheists still follow the tradition and take part in this mass hypnosis. I mean yeah, it's a good holiday, people get to spend more money and stimulate the economy. I'm alright with that, but keep Jesus out of it. It's Satan's party, he's the one fucking shit up. Satan Lucas and his demons, working hard in the Temptation Workshop. Parents annually lend their children's souls in return for Satan's presents - weapons of mass psychological control. OBEY, be a "good" child! Satan's watching. You don't get a present if you misbehave. Satan SEES. Parents are happy with a soulless infant who blindly follows their commands, without ever questioning them, and that's why we don't see any rebels.

Fuck holidays, man... My present to you wouldn't really do much if I've been continuously working on your indoctrination and decay. It's all hypocrisy. You only call me on my Birthday, and I'm supposed to thank you for your kind wishes. Kind wishes mean nothing, plus, I didn't ask for your annoyance. A great tip from my brother: here's a thing you can do with every Greeting Card that you receive - scratch Sender's name and write yours instead, then send it back to them. If you received an e-card, go to the website where the link came from, choose the same card, copy-paste Sender's text, then put your name and email under it.

Holidays are the perfect time for nuisances to show up and ruin your good mood. They don't care about you, but they are afraid about their social status. Everything has to be perfect within the family around the holidays. You have to show how much you care, you have to show what a good and generous person you are. It doesn't really matter if you are any of these things. And I know most of you reading this would agree with me, and I know you're thinking this is old stuff and we all know this is so, but then the next time we meet you're giving me the same holiday bullshit. I'm so tired of arguing about traditions that this entry probably turned out boring and lifeless. I'm sure other people have written about this, so I don't really bother trying to be original. You get my point, I hate fakes, and all holidays do is promote hypocrisy.

Product Placement

2008-12-22T02:16:00.000-08:00

How come critics always use product placement as an argument against the quality of a movie? If I were producing an independent movie, I would overload it with as much covert advertising as I can. I would rely on smaller companies that have proven their worth, like Shasta Beverages, Sam's Choice, Frito-Lay, Jack Link's, ConAgra Foods, and many others. I'd get a whole bunch of them advertise in my awesome movie. Nobody has done smaller companies so far. It's great fun.

Nowadays, it's popular to purchase cheap unpopular products, especially if they are badly advertised and look like shit. There is some sentimental value in getting crap like that. It's also a bit extreme. You never know what's gonna make you beg to vomit before you kill yourself. I would plug these kinds of products for free, I don't care. People will have fun spotting them in the store after watching my film. It will be like finding Waldo. Some might even need to travel to California in order to enjoy the wonderful taste of the local beverages. Reminds me of White Castle: a fast food chain based on the illusion of scarcity. People travel hundreds of miles just to stuff themselves with a bunch of turds that taste good only because they're small-sized and rare. And if you ever watched "Faggot & Faggot Go to White Castle", and you happen to be a homosexual, you might get even more hyped about tasting a shit sandwich yourself. I fall victim to the pop culture, guilty as charged. What I say about others applies to me as well, in this case. Except I go for some faggotry other than White Castle. It's all for a good cause: Capitalism. Help small business develop, I am always glad to. And what better way to do that, than to advertise them in my super smash hit movies!

I'm really sleepy, last night I slept for 17 fucking hours. I feel like this blog entry is silly and it doesn't have a good point, nor do I have the experience with movies to really claim that product placement is a good thing for their independence. I guess I'm putting this out for the movie directors reading, because I'm curious if that really is the case. I know a lot of celebrities read my blog for a fact. Don't be shy about leaving me a comment, nobody would believe it was the real you anyway, you've got nothing to lose. Give it a shot, dummy!

Intellectual Property: Take 2

2008-12-21T02:15:00.000-08:00

This is a follow-up to Intellectual Property.

I've come up with the following axioms:

1. LABOR + REQUEST + PROPERTY = MONEY
2. LABOR + REQUEST = MONEY
3. REQUEST + PROPERTY = MONEY
4. REQUEST = NO FINANCIAL VALUE
5. LABOR = NO FINANCIAL VALUE

Here is an example: It took 2 years for John to make a sculpture of his mother made out of shit. If the feces were in fact produced by John, the sculpture is in fact his property. If the turds were however collected from a public or a private toilet, he has no right to sell it! In the latter case, the shitters have the right to request their feces back. Let's say the fecal matter was his own, but nobody else finds value in it. That would inevitably lead to the fact that his labor would indeed have no financial value itself.

Here's another example: paintings. What's so expensive about paintings? Is it the image captured on the canvas, or is it actually the canvas itself, along with the frames and the paint? You'd be surprised, but the latter is the truth. Here is the proof: replicas of the same paintings are much cheaper. Why?? What's different about a copy? You've got the same image, the exact same idea, captured on the canvas. Nothing else is different, except for the materials and their age. It's the scarcity of the painting's materials that makes it so expensive. That, combined with its popularity, of course. The price has nothing to do with neither the idea nor the labor related to the painting. In fact, I'm quite sure that the copyist took much more time and effort to replicate the exact same authentic look.

What is the value of artistic ideas? Because of art's subjective nature, the price of the ideas should be determined individually, from every person who has been exposed to them. To me, ideas cost nothing, and I am in my right to pay nothing for them, because in subjectivity, opinion equals truth. The seller of ideas has no right to prevent me from paying. However, the author always has the right to keep their idea a secret and not share it with others. This would be especially useful for inventors. This is where patents get mistaken for a tool of justice. On the opposite, patents are totally unjust, because they are weapons of monopoly. Once an idea has been exposed, there should be no laws preventing it from foreign application. That would be immoral and derogatory to the free market. Imagine what would happen if Bill Gates weren't allowed to base Windows on the MAC OS template? Your operating system would probably suck much more than it does today, because with no competition comes no desire to improve things. Plus, you'd be gay, because everyone knows MAC's turn people gay.

No plagiarism means no anthropomorphic evolution. New ideas are modeled after old ideas. Creativity is the ability to deform templates, or combine 2 or more templates into one. Creativity is to take a few old ideas and re-arrange them in your own way into something new. The more you know, the greater the potential for you is to be creative. Plagiarism causes the evolution of intellectuality. Best example: the Bible, greatest book of all. It has been rewritten so many times by so many people before it reached its current form. And who's the author? God. Because we are all God. The ideas of humanity are one whole, which is constantly growing and developing by itself, like a cell in a constant state of mitosis.

Busy Having Fun

2008-12-18T02:14:00.000-08:00

I've been thinking about excuses. Excuses for leaving conversations, not attending to meetings, not answering the phone, etc. I realized that I only conclude my excuse is legit when it's related to mandatory and not essentially pleasant tasks. Like fixing my car, studying for the exam, helping relatives, attending to funerals... it's never about playing videogames, surfing the internet, meditating, fucking the dog, writing my blog, updating my page, etc. It's basically never about fun activities. Why is it that I have this wrong impression that only shitty obligations can get me out of a shitty situation. Why is it that I can't just say "Your party totally sounds like fun, but I'm too busy staying at home today". Not to offend them, I guess. I would be rightfully stating my priorities, but that would expose the fact that I'd rather do nothing than be with them. Why rob them of the truth? Being around people like that and compromising my precious time just for the sake of reciprocity. Am I out of my mind to think like that? Life is short and time is everything I've got and the meaning of life is to spend it as joyfully as one can, hence everyone's first priority should be doing pleasant things, and NOT DOING FUCKING CHORES. You're damn right I'm busy. I was planning on jacking off and you just called. I'm not gonna bullshit you with lies, I really can't engage in this conversation right now because all I'm thinking about is why the hell did I pick up the phone and why am I still holding my dick when you're on the phone and you're a guy.

See, one should take their priorities more seriously. The REAL priorities: fucking shit up, having a blast. I'm taking fun seriously this time. It's my life, it's my time, nobody can give me shit about it. Ever get in a discussion that started out great but it just kept dragging and you've got this awkward STUPID smile on your face and you're like CHAINED to the conversation and you just CAN'T leave it. It just keeps going on and on, and you're enjoying the company but at the same time you realize that nothing of importance is being said and time is just being wasted. And you wanna do other stuff like watching a movie or playing tennis. But the discussion is serious! It's about work! Can you really be productive with that petty smile, being stuck in the corner? It's a given you're gonna get ripped off. Another type of awkward conversations that's even worse is when you become afraid that the other person is going to leave!! They inform you that they have no time, they're in a HURRY! So you try to give them more attention because they're leaving anyway so maximum information can be exchanged. And then THEY JUST KEEP TALKING. And you can't ask them "Weren't you leaving"... it's rude! So you keep giving them what they want and you're once again in the corner. And it seems important but is it really, or is it just plain trivial crap?

This is so, YES IT IS. That's not so. I AGREE. I think this should be that. OF COURSE.

And then your whole day is gone. Why didn't I leave? Because I didn't have anything MANDATORY to do. It's my day off, every day, I've got no shit to do, I'm just fucking the dog. So that's why it's been awkward for me to exit any kind of friendly invitations, because I don't take my fun seriously. From now on I'll be completely honest and tell it like it is.

This smile, I'm not sure if anyone else experiences it. A nervous smile, muscles are strained, you can't really relax them. It occurs when you talk too much to a friend to the point where you have no idea what's going on and why you're still talking. It's ridiculous. Whenever I notice that smile on my face, I'll know that it's time to do something else. It's a desperate defense mechanism that covers up my anger and frustration which should be otherwise freely expressed, so that I exit the conversation and cause the other person to not call me for a while. But no, daddy's boy is here, he's afraid of punishment and condescension. Most people would probably empathize with my natural frustration but I mindread their reactions and fear from rejection arises that forbids me to express my true emotions. BLarerg. I think the realization that free time has its priorities and they are to be taken entirely seriously will somehow help me cope with this. Being busy having fun is more important than being busy doing chores, and that's what matters.

NLP in Practice

2008-12-08T02:17:00.000-08:00

Learning how to put NLP into practice is easier than I ever thought. And for so many days, I was incredibly frustrated that I'll never learn how to use my skills in every day conversations. The formula that I'm about to give you here is incredibly simple and very powerful.

There are four levels of learning:

* Unawareness: You don't know about the skill yet.
* Conscious Incompetence: You've discovered a skill. This is the process where you learn the theory and model other people who have mastered the skill.
* Conscious Competence: You have learned how to replicate the skill, but it takes conscious effort to use it. You don't have enough experience to really relax and let it happen yet.
* Unconscious Competence: This is the final level where you can use the skill with no effort what so ever. The right patterns have been programmed into your brain and the skill has become an automatic behavior which you can turn on whenever you want to.

While your knowledge is probably at Level 3 right now, your self-awareness of the skills you've learned is probably at Level 1. What you need to realize is that every person is a master hypnotist at one time or another. You don't have to do anything. You don't have to try. It's already in you.

Recognition Strategy:
In simple terms, be aware of how much you already do in your life. The simple recognition of the skills you have randomly put into action is enough to encourage your brain to learn them.

Real Time Strategy:

1. Watch: Every time you're having a conversation with somebody, open a slot in your consciousness that's going to act as a spectator. Calibrate. You're gonna need a 5 seconds buffer.
2. Notice: Every time you get a change of state in the other person, notice your verbal and body language that preceded the change. Also, notice the changes in you. That's what you need the 5 seconds buffer for. You are now at level 2. You know you have unconsciously put a skill into action.
3. Recognize: You are going to recognize different patterns, that you've already learned in theory. The more often you recognize the patterns, the easier it will be for you to know how to replicate them. That would be level 3 for your self-awareness.
4. Reward: Every time you recognize you've unconsciously used an NLP technique, reward yourself with something. I usually say in my mind "Thank you, neurotransmitters! You did a great job". Rewards increase the speed of unconscious learning, because the wanted behavior becomes an anchor for them.

Memory Strategy:

1. Remember: Remember a situation where you handled something really great, became really close with a perfect stranger, convinced someone of something radical, etc. Anything that you vividly remember where you have influenced a person into changing their state.
2. Recognize: Recognize the skills you had used that you are now aware of. You'll be surprised at how good you've always been at NLP.
3. Reward: Give yourself a treat for being great.

Obama's Victory Speech

2008-12-04T02:00:00.000-08:00

It has been discussed before that Obama uses hypnotic language patterns in his speeches to influence the masses. Just to name a few: Pacing and Leading, Causal Modeling, and ambiguity... Here I have tried to translate his victory speech so that it's more transparent to the average person. I have also added a few tips that point out where Obama is pacing with a "yes set" and then leading.

"If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer. [...] It's the answer spoken by [many different people]. Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states. We are, and always will be, the United States of America. [...] It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this date in this election at this defining moment change has come to America."

Translation: Voting for me sent a message to the World that you are not individuals. You are, and always will be, sheep. Now you will believe that change has come to America just because you voted for me.

"But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to. It belongs to you. It belongs to you. [...] This is your victory. And I know you didn't do this just to win an election. And I know you didn't do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead."

Translation: I don't want to hold responsibility over the presidency. This is your responsibility. Now you will believe that you voted for me because you understand that you must work hard.

"For even as we celebrate tonight [P], we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars [P], a planet in peril [P], the worst financial crisis in a century [P]. Even as we stand here tonight [P], we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq [P] and the mountains of Afghanistan [P] to risk their lives for us [L]."

Translation: I'm making sure you will still believe that murderers, whom we pay with your stolen money, risk their lives for you.

"There's new energy to harness [P], new jobs to be created [P], new schools to build [P], and threats to meet [P], alliances to repair [P]. The road ahead will be long [P]. Our climb will be steep [P]. We may not get there in one year or even in one term [L]. But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there [L]. I promise you, we as a people will get there."

Translation: Don't expect anything from me in one term, but keep your belief anyway. Keep blindly following as the herd that you are.

"I will ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation, the only way it's been done in America for 221 years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand."

Translation: Work hard for your nation!

"This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. [...] It can't happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice. So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves but each other."

Translation: Don't expect anything from me at all. Instead, start believing that your being a slave will bring whatever the fuck change you're hoping for. You're responsible for making my term successful, not me. Keep working hard and don't let your fellow sheep stay behind. Be a slave to your new religion. Stay committed.

"To those - to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope."

Translation: Never doubt the ideal of democracy. Never doubt your hope. Keep on living in a dream.

"That's the true genius of America: that America can change. Our union can be perfected. What we've already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow."

Translation: Be proud of your history and don't leave the dream. Just make sure you work on that change thing and pay your taxes.

"Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old. She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when [...] someone like her couldn't vote for two reasons - because she was a woman and because of the color of her skin. And tonight, I think about all that she's seen throughout her century in America - the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: YES WE CAN. At a time when women's voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. YES WE CAN. When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs, a new sense of common purpose. YES WE CAN. When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. YES WE CAN. She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "We Shall Overcome." YES WE CAN."

Translation: You, just like Ann Nixon Cooper, have been through a lot of shit lately. Be prepared for more, and believe that you can cope with shit much worse than that.

"And this year [P], in this election [P], she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote [P], because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours [P], she knows how America can change [L]. YES WE CAN."

Translation: You don't know why, but now you know that America can change.

"America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves - if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made? This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment."

Translation: Think of the meaning you want to apply to this "Change" thing so that you get in a trance state right before I give you my final instructions.

"This is our time, to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids [P]; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace [P]; to reclaim the American dream [P] and reaffirm that fundamental truth, that, out of many, we are one [L]; that while we breathe, we hope [L]. And where we are met with cynicism and doubts and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: YES WE CAN [L]."

Translation: Remember that you are all sheep. Remember to keep your hopes until you're dead. Remember that no reason can distract you from these blind beliefs. You don't need to listen to the critics, because you don't want to let go of predictability. Remember that you can cope with anything we do to you.

What a Dream!

2008-12-02T02:09:00.000-08:00

I had a nightmare that was FUCKING AWESOME.

I was in a small room, perhaps a basement. A lot of young people stuffed inside. There's a 14 years old long-haired blond boy with fair skin complexion. He's lying in a drawer and a plastic tube is sticking out of his mouth. He seems either dead or in a deep coma. In the other room, there's a twin of the child, perhaps younger, who's in a similar state, except he's in a sitting position, under something like a desk. They're almost there like a decoration and nobody seems to be concerned with their well-being. Everybody else is talking and pretending there's nothing creepy about the situation.

As I enter the first room I start feeling despair. It's dark, almost no light. I jump in one of the beds angry and frustrated, as suddenly I want to cry. I begin crying and gasping for air but suddenly some guy grabs my head and starts slamming it down. I have no idea what's going on. The shock stops my crying. Soon enough more people jump me and I feel helpless; I can't even resist. One of the guys is pinching my dick and I can't make him stop, and it's fucking painful. LET GO OF MY DICK. Finally, after minutes of torture, they get tired and they let me go. I try to fall asleep again but the feeling of despair comes back to me. My brother appears. He and a few others had planned a revenge on me. It was something like throwing a bunch of clothes at me. He's waiting for my reaction now but I'm no way affected by his pathetic revenge. He's disappointed.

I stand up and start walking towards the other room. I ask the rest what's wrong with the blond child. They explain that he's dead, but still alive. How the fuck can he still be alive. The boy opens his eyes and stands up moving patiently, almost in slow motion. They pass me the end of the plastic tube sticking out of the boy's mouth. I'm expected to talk to him. It seems like he's otherwise deaf. I grab the tube and I look him in the eyes. He looks back at me; there's no flame of hope in his eyes. He's the most desparate child I've ever seen. As I try to talk into the tube, my voice becomes weaker and I can't help but lose it. I can't even break eye contact, his virtual grasp on me is so great. I don't even know what to say, but the intimidation is so strong. The child is just standing there half-dead and I'm supposed to talk to him through a fucking tube. I feel like I'm gonna start weeping any moment now. My breathing becomes rapid, my chest is tight, and my chin starts shaking from anger and sadness. I break down in tears, and this is when I woke up.

I drew that:

Turns out my mom had turned off the lights. I usually sleep with the lights on. I remember that my dad would always turn them off to force me to go to sleep when I was a child. I would cry and feel abandoned. Perhaps I'll have to finally overcome the fear and try sleeping in the dark. The pinching dick part was probably influenced by me lying in an uncomfortable position. But my mind connected the abuse with my crying because my dad used to give me "real things" to cry about, and that's one of the reasons why I can't fully associate into this emotion anymore.

The brother revenge part is influenced by him recently making a decision to stop talking to me. In my opinion he expected that I would apologize to him. Instead, I'm really happy with the way things are right now, and I think this is the best decision he has ever made so far - not to talk to me. Because he's sick in the head, and I'm one of his abusers. As such, I can't really help him nor sympathize with him. That would be like a rapist helping his victim to get over it.

The child character is a metaphor of everybody else who's like my brother. Abused people who are now living in altered states of consciousness because they are dead on the inside. Kinda like in the Matrix, of course. There's no way for one to reason with such people, unless they've been given sympathy. You've got to speak through the tube, help them understand things with their limited resources. You can't just scream into their ears if they're deaf to your words.

I might delete this entry because it's too personal, but I'll leave it as of now.

Intimidation Factors

2008-11-25T02:12:00.000-08:00

I came up with a list of factors to help one determine whether they're being manipulated.

1. Guilt:
The Manipulator covertly makes you feel guilty and makes you question your own credibility. He can do so by ignoring certain aspects of what you're saying, or giving you a condescending look whenever you ask him a critical question about an ambiguous thing he's told you. Another way to elicit guilt is to use a condemning voice tonality and dramatic pauses. Response: State your observations and how you feel. Don't mind read. Question Manipulator's ambiguous behavior. Don't ask "Why" questions because they can provoke defensive reactions. Instead, ask META Model questions: "What/How specifically?", "Says who?", etc.

2. Instant Discomfort:
When you feel discomfort for a fraction of the second but then you discredit it and try to justify your reaction, you are most likely being manipulated. Response: Stop for a second and think about your initial reaction. Share what you felt with whomever caused it. Don't mind read, be curious. If you still feel this discomfort, be assertive until closure.

3. Nervous Grin:
When you have a frozen nervous smile on your face and you feel paralyzed in some way, this means that emotionally you agree with what's being said, but cognitively, you disagree. You are probably being manipulated. Response: Stop for a second and really think about what you're observing. Imagine the message delivered to you without the emotional attachment to it, and try to delete the loaded language.

4. Liking:
When you want to be liked by someone for no apparent reason, even if you don't like them back, you are being manipulated. You might try to fool yourself that you actually like the Manipulator and you might experience guilt for "unconditionally" disliking him. Response: Ask yourself what's in it for you in this relationship. Objectively evaluate the person's attitude specifically towards you. Don't be biased by the way he treats others.

5. Awkward Silence:
When you feel like you're not supposed to say anything but it's expected from you to say something. The Manipulator says nothing and perhaps looks at you with expectation, after you've already finished talking. Questions where you have to "fill in the blank" are being asked often. Response: Tell him you're finished talking when you don't know what else to say. Another response is to stare back at him without saying nothing. Use the moment to break state, excuse yourself and leave the conversation instead of complying. Think about what happened and objectively evaluate the situation.

6. Gibberish:
When someone's talking to you in a non-distinguishable way without letting you question what they mean. They might prevent you from asking for the meaning by making it appear as self-evident. You feel stupid to ask. Response: Ask in an offended way, as in, HOW DARE YOU not tell me what this means. This would not make you look stupid, but instead would pass the ball back to the Manipulator.

7. Confusion:
When a person's prevalent attitude is confusing to you. You might begin to hyperventilate or find yourself in loss of words. If that's the case, you're likely to be manipulated. Response: As soon as you start feeling confused, don't let the momentum get you. It's critical that you catch yourself being confused. Once you realize that, begin pretending you are still confused without actually listening to what the Manipulator is saying, and wait for their move.

8. Fear:
Talking about general negative consequences in a way that implies they're gonna happen to you. Response: Ask the Manipulator to be more specific, as to how the issues he's presenting concern him personally, and how are they relevant to the conversation. Don't let him get ambiguous, keep things chunked down, or else he's gonna get you.

9. Unfounded Hierarchy:
When a rank is based on something which is not related to the specific field. This creates false incentives for group members. If you enter such group, you are to be manipulated. Response: Be independent of any ranks, take an observer role. If you feel peer pressure being applied to you, leave the group.

Manipulation in Therapy

2008-11-25T02:07:00.000-08:00

When you're helping someone solve an issue...

1. Contrast principle

* Easy Solution: First suggest a solution A that you know the patient is incapable of completing. Then give them the real solution B and now it's gonna seem much more achievable to them.

* High Expectations: Warn patient that the solution is going to be extremely difficult for them. Next, give them a task that's actually achievable. Be careful not to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, though.

* The Bait: Suggest 3 possible choices to patient: first one (8) is that they solve the problem by doing something unacceptable. The second one (A) is that they cope with the problem and face the negative consequences. The third choice (B) is that they solve the problem by doing something acceptable.

2. Consistency Principle

* Public Commitment: Make patient promise in front of a group of people that they're gonna complete the steps to solve their problem. It's important that the steps are within their range of comfort.

* Written Commitment: Make patient write the things they can do to improve their situation, and what they want their behavior to be, on pieces of paper and stick them to the wall. Before that, do an ecology check.

* Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Congruently state repeatedly that your patient's behavior is already what they want it to be and their problem is already solved. Another way to use this technique is to state that the solution to the problem is going to be very easy.

* Leading: Congruently state that you have the answer to patient's problem. Each time you meet the patient, give them a small task to do. That's gonna make them come back for more and commit to solving their problem step by step.

* Priming: Ask patient if they are willing to do anything you ask them to in order to solve their problems. That's gonna remove some of their boundaries later when you suggest they do something that they might perceive as embarrassing or silly.

* Pygmalion Effect: Find out what patient likes (X). Find a way to relate X to the solution of their problem. Label the patient as the highest ranked individual in the context of X. Reframe the solution in that context and give the patient a Cause to follow, within this frame.

* Low Balling: Suggest that the solution is going to take the patient very little effort. Next, go on talking about the small details. Finally, drop the bomb and suggest the difficult task to solving their problem. They would be willing to try it out, no matter how hard it is.

3. Reciprocity

* The Gift: Before you suggest a solution to the problem, give the patient a small gift that looks expensive. If they resist, tell them you already have one yourself, you don't wanna throw it out, you've already spent the money, etc. Tell them you want them to follow your instructions in return and that's all you want. Emphasize on that, and warn them you'll be mad if they buy you something in return. Now they'll be more than willing to commit to the solution, because they owe you something in return.

* Stacking Favors: Every time your patient visits, give them seemingly expensive drinks, cookies, snacks, etc. Do it in such a way that consciously they won't feel like they owe you something back. The trick is to be subtle with this technique.

* The Concession: Make your patient do a difficult task that you know is impossible for them to complete. When they come back disappointed, give them the real task to complete as a concession. That's also gonna make the real task seem a lot easier to do.

4. Scarcity

* Deadline: Tell patient that now is the perfect time for them to solve their problem and not to waste away the awesome opportunity. That would motivate them to manage their time better in favor of the solution.

* The Secret: Tell patient that the solution is exclusive and you're working outside of the box. Tell them your techniques are often avoided by therapists because the patients get well too soon and usually don't come back.

* Price: Charge a lot of money for your services. Great motivation for both you and the patient to perform at each one's best.

5. Social Proof

* Uncertainty: Confuse subject about their problem until they're overwhelmed. Then congruently suggest the solution, or even better, suggest that the problem has disappeared.

* Similarity: Tell a story about a fictional character (X) who is similar to the patient, without being too blatant. Describe how X used to have the same problem and give them the solution that X has found. If you have a really good rapport with the patient, you can talk about yourself instead of X.

* Credibility: Talk about many specialists who have found your solution to be the most effective. Even better, bring a friend who would act as an authority figure to approve of your suggestions. Show written testimonials from other people who have already solved a problem similar to that of the patient.

Intellectual Property

2008-11-24T02:06:00.000-08:00

There's no such thing as "Intellectual Property" and I am not ashamed to download shit for free. Knowledge is like a candle, when one candle lights another it does not diminish from the light of the first. In the same way, copying someone's ideas doesn't mean you're taking them away from the original author. Nobody owns ideas, the same way we don't own words. Thus, an idea can't be stolen.

One would argue that time is money and ideas take time to come up with. I would like to correct you, sir. Time is money only when it has been spent in order to provide an exclusive valuable service that the client voluntarily requested. Let's say you walk to a place in the public mountain every day, and you've naturally made a pathway by walking on the same ground so many times. Then a tourist discovers your pathway and finds it to be useful. He takes advantage of it to conveniently go to that same place you've been going to.

1. Just because he's using your pathway doesn't mean he had demanded it from you.
2. You hadn't spent your time making the pathway exclusively for the tourist.
3. If more tourists find your pathway useful, that wouldn't mean you've wasted more time on it.

If you still demand a tax from everyone who's walking on this pathway, you're just being a total dick. Here's a parallel scenario: The weather is cold. You get on a bus. The bus is loaded, there are no seats available. A person stands up because it's time for him to leave. You take his seat and suddenly he's demanding money from you, just because the seat is warm from his ass and farts.

I hope you can see now how ridiculous the concept of Intellectual Property really is. It makes no fucking sense. So if one claims that ideas can be owned, that would mean that they are either an artist or an inventor. We all know that artists cling to socialism because there's too much competition in their field, and without support from a socialistic government, they won't be able to earn enough money. Inventors make a big deal out of patents to claim monopoly over their products. If you wanna earn money, quit your whining and get real. Non-existing things cost non-existing money.

Stop buying unicorns! When you pirate MP3's, you're downloading CAPITALISM. Because inevitably the delusional douchebags will become extinct. The young demographic will no longer dream about becoming unicorn riders or dragon slayers. Instead, they will be focusing on real things that would help the economy grow.

Therapeutic Art

2008-11-18T02:04:00.000-08:00

After studying hypnosis, I learned to appreciate the therapeutic potential of art. This made me reconsider the claim I made about art being essentially destructive just because of it distractive nature. Art has a hypnotic effect on people, but I came to realize that being in a trance can be a very useful state depending on the context. So I made a false distinction in the past claiming that art is evil, when it's clear to me now that art on itself isn't bad. It's the way people abuse its power that's destructive. Art is a dangerous psychotronic tool that can be used both for healing and killing - just like a scalpel.

How can art be helpful?

Analogies and metaphors in art can help people get rid of unhealthy beliefs. A person who's affected by a metaphor comes to a conclusion himself, thus owning his choice. People hate being blatantly told what to do and how to do it, even if it's beneficial to them. You want them to understand things from their own model of the world by giving them the freedom of connecting the dots. Let me explain the difference between blatant commands and metaphors with an example. Let's say you wanna help someone in need of shoes. In the first case, you're giving the guy your own shoes - they may not fit him well. In the second case, you're giving the guy a gift card for the shoe store, where he can get the shoes that fit him best.

Ambiguity in song lyrics, or movie plots, can also be a great tool for the observer to insert their own context and come to their own conclusions. It's very dangerous, though, considering that some people might have a destructive imagination. Hence, the authors should be careful in how they set the checkpoints and who they are presenting their work to. Embedded commands can be another powerful way to implant positive thoughts into someone's mind. They might be helpful for creating a better chance of response towards a suggestion.

Finally, let's talk about NLP and how naturally one can create anchors in a movie and influence the audience in a totally unconscious way. This can be such an effective way to completely change one's perception of things in a matter of minutes. You can't even imagine the countless possibilities there are for setting anchors in a movie and associating them with different states and beliefs. You can associate colors and sounds with emotions, positions and size with intensity, the list goes on and on.

So go ahead and start experimenting.

Trolling

2008-11-17T02:03:00.000-08:00

This is a follow-up to "I am not my Taste".

I just came to a new conclusion. It's a lot more plausible than my previous justification of my temporary irrational behavior. What I was essentially doing was what psychotherapists call "projection". When a person's defensive mechanisms don't let him genuinely feel a certain emotion at a certain occasion, he would provoke others to experience that feeling instead, and only this way would he feel relieved. It's kinda like when you watch your friend play videogames because you can't afford buying a console. It's still better than nothing, and you are temporary distracted from the real problem - earning cash. It's easier to choose the temporary comfort of watching someone else play in the short run.

Being provocative is really about the troll reacting to his own forbidden emotions that he will have evoked in others. That's the whole point of acting like a jerk - to get angry response from people. Because you can't allow yourself to be angry but you need to react to that emotion. Finally, you've had your short-term relief, but you didn't own the anger, so you're still left with a general sense of distaste. That's just one example out of many. I'll never forget the first time I made a person cry on live cam. Seeing that girl weep for me was something so amazing and stimulating. I haven't cried since I was 14. I have forgotten what it feels like.

Here comes the question, though. Many times people over-react to something just because they are hypocritical and they don't want to appear, let's say, cruel, even though their actions prove that they are. Could the act of trolling be both a cry for justice and projection at the same time? Even if the victim is hypocritical or brainwashed, I think their emotions are still genuine. It doesn't matter if they act upon their standards. It's their beliefs that cause their feelings; they certainly believe that they are moral and the troll is evil, so they honestly react to that.

Surely, the act of trolling fits right into the sado-masochistic scenario, and each side gets something out of the relationship. What the masochist gets is to experience the sense of being the witness or the victim of an unjust act. They always feel the need to prove how horrible their life is, so they keep getting themselves into situations that inevitably lead them into harm.

So is it really bad to act like a prick? I would say it's destructive to both parties. It feels really good in the short run, but it leaves the wounds open. I wanna quit that habit and help people realize the harm they're doing to others and mostly to themselves. For a start, I guess it would be a good idea for the trolls like me, to try and associate with their victims' feelings. Try to get under their skin, imagine you are who they are. Fully sympathize. Mirror their body language, match their breathing, try to be like them on a physiological level as much as possible. FEEL what they feel. I'm almost positive that once you really learn how to do that, you'll no longer have the need to provoke tantrum. Well, I'll be the first one to tell you if it worked.

To be continued... inb4 cool story bro.

Fuck Diplomas

2008-11-16T02:02:00.000-08:00

What do you wanna go to college for?

a) get a degree
b) get knowledge
c) score with hot sluts

If you answered (a) then GTFO. YOUR DOIN IT WRONG. I can't believe how many people blindly conform to these standards. The whole educational system is asshole-backwards. Education is now about getting a piece of paper, and if you want to acquire certain skills, you're supposed to do this on your own, as a side project, or during the course of work. People pay mad money for a fucking degree without realizing the fact that good employers DO NOT GIVE A FUCK about your education. You can claim you finished Batman School in Ponyland. They won't even ask you for the papers.

Manager: Can you do the job? Are you the kind of person we're looking for?
Retard: WELL, DUH, I GRADUATED FROM HARVARD!
Manager: Let me see those papers...
Manager: hmmm.... not too soft... I'm sorry, sir, I'm afraid I can't wipe my ass with that!

In case they do hire you based on your certificate, enjoy your shitty job, fag. The rest of your life is gonna suck. I keep getting advice from motherfuckers with a high degree. Ain't none of them is ever happy with their occupation. They keep saying "NO THIS IS NOT TRUE, I LOVE MY JOB!" and you can tell it's a lie from their painful grimace. If you really loved your job, you wouldn't be complaining about how tired you always are, douche bag. In the end of the day, it's all about justifying your bad choices so that you don't feel like you've wasted your life. Fucking bitch, you can't fool me, I ain't blind. Your degree ain't worth shit.

I've been thinking about my life and what I wanna do with it. I'm taking a bunch of interesting classes in college because I enjoy learning new things. I'm not on a certificate program because I don't wanna study shit I'm not comfortable with. Meanwhile, I've been trying to get closer to myself by studying philosophy and psychology on my own. No one gives me credit for that. Why is it that only when shit is on schedule people take it seriously. Only when authoritative figures are present. Shit is ridiculous. My relatives claim they care about me and yet they are against me taking the time to focus on my spirituality. A psychologically healthy individual can achieve everything he wants. Faggots wanna bring me down, threatening me with failure because I ain't working and I ain't getting a degree. They keep repeating it's a waste of time. All they care about is their pathetic beliefs that help them cope with years of bad choices.

Jackie Chan

2008-11-15T02:01:00.000-08:00

1. Jackie Chan is very popular.
2. Jackie Chan is a great actor.
3. Jackie Chan has a great agent.
4. Jackie Chan can do cool tricks.
5. Jackie Chan is different than the average hero.

6. Jackie Chan is funnier than Ben Stiller.
7. Jackie Chan respects black people.
8. Ben Stiller is old news. Jackie Chan is forever.
9. Jackie Chan's best friend is Anthony Hopkins.
10. Jackie Chan.

Jackie Chan we can believe in. Anthony Hopkins.

No doubt that Ben Stiller is a professional rapper, but people believe that Jackie Chan can fight hip-hop by becoming a rapper himself. Isn't that ridiculous? Anthony Hopkins sent Jackie Chan to Compton with the idea that he would persuade other rappers into quitting music. People need the real Jackie Chan - Bruce Lee. He would never even think about becoming one of the rappers. Instead, he would just ignore them and let hip-hop die out on itself because new generations will come to exist. People will no longer listen.

4 years from now, let's really make this country the land of Bruce Lee.

The Real Exorcist

2008-11-04T01:59:00.000-08:00

There's a show on the SciFi channel, it's called "The Real Exorcist" with Bob Larson. Bob is a hypnotist that acts like a priest. I'm not sure if he's aware of that, though, because he has stated that hypnosis is an evil sinful science. Anyways, I wanted to explain the act of exorcism to the people who think it's supernatural. To me, it's one of the most destructive rituals and it makes people sicker rather than healing them.

Let's examine a potential client. Of course it must be a religious individual because nobody else would hire an exorcist in the first place. Why would they believe that they have been possessed by a demon? Well, usually these are people who have gone through a lot of pain in their lives, despite how faithful they were to their God. They had committed themselves to a Higher Being that was supposed to protect them. So now instead of doubting their religion, they begin to doubt their own minds. Why? Because rejecting their God would be an extremely painful and life-changing experience for them. They would be exposed to the ugly truth of false commitments and worthless existence. So instead of taking the red pill, they want to make their faith even stronger. There must be something wrong with them, why are they on the verge of rejecting God? It's the Devil! He's controlling their mind!

So here comes the exorcist. His job is already half-way done. He's more like a bridge for his clients. Their false selves just need his approval, so to speak. And Bob is well-aware of that. He starts out with a session of cold reading - a technique used by psychics to tell people what they already know about themselves in a mystic context. Bob "discovers" the patient's problems and insecurities, and he then pokes into these wounds, triggering pain and shame. This is a technique used by car salesmen. They find a hurt and then they suggest that their product can heal it. That's what Bob does next - he assures the client that it's really a demon who's causing the problems and he then suggest that only exorcism would make things better. Before the exorcism begins, Bob explicitly requires that the patient fully cooperates because it's really up to them for the demon to exit their body. He then gets into an "Exorcist" character, projecting incredible confidence and power. Bob suggests that the patient might experience emotional outbursts or even something more. He suggests that without ever breaking eye contact. It feels like an order for them, because they are in an incredibly susceptible state. After all, he made them believe that he's the only one who could help them, and they're strongly willing to believe they are possessed because they don't want to feel more shame.

The act of exorcism is all about pacing and leading now - a basic hypnosis technique. By stating the obvious and telling the client what they're gonna experience next, he's building up momentum which influences them into believing that he is the one who is no control of them now. Now he starts using leading statements that are designed to strengthen their faith in God. This is really powerful when he makes them repeat what he's saying. This way they are making a public commitment and it's impossible not to be consistent with what they've said, at least for a while. At this time some clients become very emotional, and some even resist, which is perfectly normal a reaction. After all, this guy is raping their brains and suffocating their only gasp for truth. Despite the defense, Bob can still very powerfully influence the patients, because he made them expect their resistance and he helped them externalize these feelings in the form of a demon. To be exorcised is the ultimate self-defeat...

Memory

2008-11-03T01:58:00.000-08:00

I was playing BeatMania and suddenly an idea came to me. I made an analogy between physical exercise and mental exercise. When you work out to gain muscle, you lift weights until you burn out and your body gets sore. After you're done, you rest until the pain is gone, letting your cells do the work of healing and expanding the muscle tissue. The pain here is an indicator suggesting that you stop training. Well, the same is perhaps true for the learning process. You gather information until you become so frustrated that you want to pound your head into the table. That's a sign from the subconsciousness that it has gathered the optimal amount of information and now it's time to assess it. Time for some rest. You will have learned more than you ever expected. As long as you have a basic understanding of what you had been studying, your subconsciousness will do the work of connecting the dots and associating the new information with the old one. In fact, to think of it now, that's how I learned PHP. I remember I rent a book from the local library and I read everything in one week. I didn't even practice that much, I just gave the whole book a quick glance. Weeks later did I start putting the theory into practice and I was surprised by the things I remembered. I didn't even know I knew that, it just came into me intuitively.

Again, this is just a theory. I think it's valid, though. Have you ever tried really hard doing something? Hours of frustration without any success. You thought you'd never be able to learn how to do it right and you stopped trying. But then, a week later, you gave it a second chance, and you turned out a lot better than the first time. That's what I'm talking about. Frustration is a bliss.

Family Manifesto

2008-11-01T01:57:00.000-07:00

Let me formulate something about family values and summarize a couple of points here. This could be especially useful to anyone having pressure issues at home.

1. You didn't choose to have any of your relatives, hence you are free of any responsibility regarding their lives. You are only responsible for your own life and your own problems. If your parents or siblings require help and respect from you and you don't feel like they deserve it, don't feel guilty. It's their fault that you are left with such impression. You have no obligations to your family what so ever.

2. Your parents chose to have you, hence they are responsible for your well-being. Here's an analogy that might help - choosing to have a pet and taking care of it doesn't require any care on the part of the animal. Hence, whenever you need help, your parents are obliged to please you, no matter how old you are.

3. Your parents' property is also your property. Your own property is exclusively yours. Family members cannot take credit for providing you with food and shelter. That's already yours - you earned it by being their child. Parents, on the other hand, can't pressure you to share your property with them. If you don't feel like doing that, it means they haven't earned your respect and it's their fault.

4. Having a sibling is a relationship equal to having a roommate. You are to share only what's given to you by the family. Outside of this boundary, each person has their own property and is not required to share it with their siblings. Help and respect should also be individually earned. Nobody chose to have a sibling, unless of course, you like incest. Hence, no responsibility should be taken upon each other.

Note: I have changed some of my views on that subject. More on that here: Finally Free

I am Not my Taste

2008-10-23T01:56:00.000-07:00

I like to think that I'm a logical human being and I strongly value rationality. Judging from some of my actions, though, you would never believe this to be true, especially if you don't know me well enough. And I can totally understand that now. It all comes from my appreciation of the artistic value of irrational behaviors. One might think that I value irrationality itself. I don't. When I am me, when I'm out of character, I would always try my best to think objectively and logically. So why is it that I do these weird things then?

What's so artistic about being crazy? It simply is. Art is all about subjective experience, and crazy people have the most original and colorful stories to tell. Art is artificial, and so are these people. They have lost touch with their true selves, and that loss makes them actors for life. Yes, I was one of those people once, when "everything was just a movie". That's when I started attracting parasites to me. Maybe they mistaken me for one of them, or maybe they just saw me as a host. My role-models were in fact antagonistic to my true values. Because I wanted to amuse myself the same way they amused me. I wanted to become the circus freaks that made me laugh so hard. I hadn't yet realized that laughter is often the product of condescension. It's the good feeling you get when you know you're not like them. I was contradicting my true emotions. And having become a laughing stock, it didn't feel that funny. I was wondering why people didn't give me the respect that I deserve. Well, it's because they didn't have respect for themselves. While I was trying to be one of them, I was still aware of what's going on, and most of them were completely lost.

Back to the antagonistic role-models. My so-called "heroes". The artists that I like to emulate. I don't really wanna be like them, and my dignity would never allow me to do the dirty things they did. Emulation is temporary and not fundamental. I'm just playing. I'm testing people's responses. I'm testing my own boundaries. I'm being genuinely curious, exploring the different aspects of one's behavior. It makes me happy when people respond to my irrational character in a shocking manner. That's the best part of it. Getting a response from the audience. I guess seeing an angry person who freely expresses their feelings of disgust make me feel better about society. Not because what provoked their shock deserved such a reaction, but mostly because I can see the audience becoming emotional. Remember the movie Equilibrium? I believe we are already living in such a world.

In conclusion, there are people who actually value irrational behavior, not its artistic content. It seems like I share their taste in music and their sense of humor. That's why I was always surrounded by such horrible misfortunes. And that's why rational people mistaken me for such a failure and distance themselves from me. I am not my taste and my taste is what I'm not.

Having Sex is Lame

2008-10-20T01:55:00.000-07:00

According to a recent scientific study at a Harvard institute, "having sex" is the lamest term for intercourse. followed by "sleep with" and "get laid". People even prefer "making love" compared to the latter. "Seriously dude, that shit makes me cringe", says Professor Cheese from Harvard University, "We see so many commercials on TV that mention these words and get away with it, leaving our kids mentally distressed and cringed. This is an equivalent of emotional sexual abuse". Studies do show that children question the terms in their heads and are left generally confused as to "what is sex" and "how is it had". Can you imagine what is going on in their minds? "Is sex like a cake? Is it tasty? Why do people want it so much? Why do especially couples want it? How come I don't know about something that everybody else wants and obviously enjoys immensely? I may be a bad boy because mom and dad never give me sex." Another example of such confusion: "What's the big deal if a man and a woman sleep together in one bed? Why is this so important to adults? Why do they fight over it?" Imagine children's frustration, for crying out loud! What's so bad about using "fuck"? At least kids would know it's an adult thing separate from a cake or sleeping in one bed with another person.

And this shit is not only happening on TV, and it's not only a cheap trick to get away with talking about fucking on air. Shit goes on in our personal lives, too. I see adults talking about "having sex" or "getting laid". What the fuck are you talking about, man? Did you bang her? Did you bone her? Did you do her? Did you hit it? "No man, we had sex! You've gotta be politically correct! Such language is disrespectful to women!" Come on, we all know women are dirtier than men. But they refer to it as "sleeping" and they'd go crazy with "insomnia". Go get some sleeping pills, girl, cuz I can see your twat speaking. Why would one use a much longer and less efficient synonym when you have a verb specifically engineered to represent the act of intercourse. It drives me out of my skin and it always makes me cringe to see people try to make sex conversations appear less explicit. Like in that show Scrubs. Ugh, it makes me feel so icky. Fucking hospital shows, always based on sexual relationships.

I think I might have been sexually abused as a child because I'm having a hunch that what I'm saying is not at all an objective statement and these things perhaps shouldn't make me feel that angry. But I think it's mainly because casual sex is against my values, although I tried to make it appear is if it weren't, in the past. It infuriates me how most relationships are not based on virtue, but rather on lust and the desire to be in control. I'm curious of what you might be thinking on that issue.

Suze Orman Can Eat Shit

2008-10-18T01:53:00.000-07:00

Don't you point your finger at me, Suze Orman. Don't you point that poopy finger from the TV screen telling me what I should be doing, shit for brains. You arrogant twat, who do you think you are? I was so glad that the bailout plan got rejected and look at all the media going crazy over it. Guess what, I don't give a shit about the credit debt. I've never used a credit card and I never will. I have integrity, unlike other people. Americans can learn to live without credit, they're good people for the most part. What the media suggests is that we take more credit and pile it up in a shit mountain where Suze Orman can take her daily baths. Not to mention that out of those billion dollars, much will end up in the politicians' pockets, because money will have to be spent on bureaucracy and other made-up services. And where do they get that money from - the taxpayer. Would you rather pay more taxes or live with what you got and refuse to use credit services? The bailout plan would raise your taxes, you're gonna end up with less money, and then you're gonna need more credit if you want to keep living the same standards. So what's the point?

The media is so aggressively advocating the bailout plan that I'm almost sure it'll pass next time they're voting. I urge you to spread awareness. This is ridiculous. Instead of talking about the real problems, they're connecting the financial crisis to McCain's leadership issues. They're implying that whatever a person with an authoritative rank says must be true. "THE REPUBLICANS ARE IMMORAL. THEY DISAGREED WITH WHAT THEIR MASTER SAID". And that's coming from the liberals. It's clear that both wings support fascism, and they're gonna keep fighting for nationalizing industries.

What's the worst that can happen if the bailout plan took action? You'll see in 10 years. Suze Orman will be throwing her poo at you from the top of the Shit Mountain.

Ultimate Workout

2008-10-15T01:52:00.000-07:00

I came up with the concept of a perfect workout regime that works both for strength and bulking up.

First day: power lifting. Choose 2 muscle groups to train, and start lifting some serious weights at low reps - 4 to 5 per set. Start out with lower weight, and increase per each out of 4 sets. It's essential that you do not burnout. If you feel that you can't do more reps, do NOT force them, because you don't want to have lactic acid in your muscles on the next day.

Second day: burnout. Work same 2 muscle groups from the previous day. This time use less weight, such that you're comfortable lifting. Do as many reps in a set as you can, until you can't do more than 1 rep in a set. Do the exercises slowly and hold at point of resistance.

Third day: you're gonna be sore as shit. Consume protein as much as your livers can allow, and rest as much as you can. It can take you from 3 to 5 days to recover. After you no longer feel pain, do a cardio day, and after that, repeat the cycle for the next muscle group you wanna train.

Hire Your Kid

2008-10-12T01:51:00.000-07:00

Being a son could often be a pretty tough full-time job, don't you all agree?
Most parents don't love their children unconditionally. Instead they only show affection when something has been achieved, thus making a "human-doing" out of their kids. You wanna get some cash, you gotta beg mommy and daddy. But "money has to be earned". One way or another they'll make you work for that shit. When not achieving things, you get labeled a bad boy, and they deprive you from goods. You might get the impression that you're a fundamentally flawed person who can only prove his worth by contributing to society. Yeah, I was one of those people, because I happen to have been raised as a slave, like many other kids, for sure. When a day passed without a finished task, I always felt like shit. I'm still working on fixing that problem, because it's not an easy task. The strict self-discipline and perfectionism, the fear of failure, the uneasiness around people who know more than me in a particular field... being in control is addictive to human-doings, because they always have to avoid the constant shame, based on the deep notion that they're worthless. They strongly believe this, subconsciously, and that's why they fear making mistakes. Any mistake would blow their cover and they would feel naked and ashamed. The perfectionist's deepest secret: he's "evil" and he has to constantly hide it by being great at everything. That was me, but it's time to move on, right? If you are not being in control physically, that doesn't mean you lack psychological control. People who enjoy being physically abused are addicted to being in control of their "negative" emotions by suppressing their sadness and hurt.

Rapist Alert

2008-10-10T01:50:00.000-07:00

A serial stuffed animal rapist is on the loose. He is known for kidnapping children's toys against their will, and brutally sodomizing them on tape. But that's not all. John Tanner, also known as Free Willy, works as a child entertainer and visits kindergartens on the Weekends. On August 27th, teacher Lissa Randell witnessed something godawfully shocking.

"We often have Mr. Tanner come over, mostly for birthday parties. Kids always had a great time with him. One day I had an important appointment with my dentist, so I left early, leaving John responsible for the children. Turned out my dentist was sick, so I came back to work. I entered the building, and I heard a loud noise coming from the playroom. I tiptoed to the door and I barely opened it. What I saw was appalling." - says Miss Randell. Free Willy was caught showing one of his twisted videos to the innocent prepubescent viewers. The sinful images were projected on the wall. In the film, Tanner was sodomizing a stuffed replica of the infamous TV character, ALF.

"John was naked, and he was penetrating the doll. It had an attached artificial anus and lipstick smeared around its lips." - explains the shocked witness - "At the time being, the children were laughing and having fun. They thought it was part of Willy's clown schtick. But imagine the impact on their tender little brains! This is all gonna affect their adulthood in a terrible way! May God help them..."

When Lissa witnessed the abominable abuse, she quickly ran to her office and called 911. Soon enough, the cops came and arrested the pervert. In his home, they found dozens of mutilated stuffed animals and videotapes. Some toys had their pubic areas shaved, others had strap-on penis extensions. On one of the videos, Tanner documented himself defecating on a puppy doll. After that, he used his own feces as lubrication. Finally, after his climax, the clown ate his own products.

The case is still open.

I'm Not a Coward

2008-09-25T02:11:00.000-07:00

Let me get this straight. I am a proud virgin. Ever since I pimped my looks and I knew that I could have all the single bitches in the world, I realized that I have always had this opportunity, because I am truly awesome. And I remember all the instances when I could totally score but I just didn't feel like it. And douchebags have called me a coward for that. Because I didn't take advantage of a helpless insecure misfortune. Because I didn't risk getting emotionally attached to a female who cannot reciprocate. Because I didn't risk to be exploited. Maybe I was scared. And hell, I had my reasons. I'm not willing to pay the price for casual sex. I'm not willing to pay the price for a virtual relationship. It costs much more than having blue balls. Plus, I'm happy to have both of my hands not amputated.

Jock Wannabe: You can't possibly live without sex! It's not healthy! We all have a sex drive and running away from it is like running away from yourself. You've got issues, man, build some self-esteem!

Most people have a libido, true. It's there to help us multiply. That's what sex is for. You can't possibly claim that being healthy depends on making babies. That's ridiculous. And I'm not running away from my sex drive. It's there, and I acknowledge it. Attractive women make my dick hard.

Jock Wannabe: Then just go for it, dude! *metal horns*

I don't feel like it. It's kinda like, when you're really angry at someone, and you swear that you're gonna kill them. You meet them in person and suddenly you don't actually feel like killing them, because it's irrational. Same goes for casual sex. I'm intelligent enough to estimate what's in it for me, and it's not enough, compared to how much it would cost me. Of course I'd be scared. And I respect that fear because it tells me all the facts I need to know in one hunch. But how does that make me a coward most of all? I'm brave enough to admit I'm a virgin. I'm brave enough to reject attractive women. I'm brave enough to poke a jock in the eye with my penis. Would a guy with no self-esteem do this shit? I'm awesome. Sure, sometimes I get self-conscious about specific things, but overall, I know I'm potentially a great mate, compared to all the other motherfuckers with no brains. Not to mention that I've got a cock and two balls. Beat that, bitch. I rule that motherfucker. And you ain't getting any of that.

This has nothing to do with Christianity or any religion. I'm the living proof of a moral atheist. Because it's rational to be moral. I don't need no God to tell me what's good for me. I'm smart enough to evaluate my choices. Fuck you, kinky grandma who preaches abstinence. I don't care about abstinence. I just wanna stay out of trouble and pee in your soup only when you aren't watching. I don't care if other people choose to fuck whomever their dick gets hard to. Just don't push your beliefs on me. Don't tell me what I should be doing. Just keep filming home-made pornos so that I can jack off to your girlfriend.

inb4 trolls mocking me

The Curse of Beauty

2008-09-10T01:48:00.000-07:00

The problem with beautiful women is that they have power over something they didn't achieve. Try to see the world through their eyes. At first, you're gonna be surprised why they're praising you for something you didn't earn (your beauty). It's rather awkward in the beginning, but as it keeps going on and on, you start to convince yourself that maybe you are virtuous for your beauty. You realize that:

1. this gives you power
2. you have monopoly over less attractive girls, no matter how smart or virtuous they are.

That aspect essentially corrupts you because you realize that there's no need to be virtuous. You already have tons of guys competing for you. You can be a total bitch and still get away with it. And this is your revenge. Men who discriminate on looks do deserve to be treated badly because they are in a way what causes this vicious circle of corruption. But now it's too late for you to develop a personality, because you're too caught up in a slave scenario, where you love being the victim and proving guys to be pigs.

Better appearance doesn't necessarily mean greater confidence. Because, as I mentioned above, most pretty chicks feel depressed because they're not loved for who they are. And what's frustrating is that they have been too crippled to really expand. They don't have any self-confidence left: they only create the illusion of one. But of course, that does in no way mean that less attractive girls are automatically virtuous, especially if they believe that being pretty is a virtue and try hard to be sexy.

When you're not loved for who you are, and rather for your looks, you subconsciously might start to believe that there's something fundamentally wrong about yourself. And with that in mind, there's no possibility you could ever have self-confidence. Beauty is irrelevant in the cases where one does not present themselves in such way. For example, if a woman claims that a man shouldn't love a less-attractive than her woman, then obviously she's putting herself in "court" where she, too, should be judged by her looks. A confident woman is only intimidating to a weak man. Some women mistake confidence with aggressiveness, and later they wonder why no man wants them.

There's no need to try and fool yourself that a certain part of your body is prettier than you think. The simple act of accepting your own body for what it is will make you more confident and calm.

Head Album Review

2008-09-08T01:47:00.000-07:00

I recently got ahold of Head's debut album - Save Me From Myself. For those of you who don't know, this is Brian Welch: ex-member of KoRn who left the band after finding Christ. Ever since his departure, their music turned to shit. Obviously he was the essential element that contributed to the overall original sound they used to have. And I gotta tell you, Jesus saved neo-metal.

Save Me From Myself is a surprisingly good record. What does it sound like? KoRn from the 90's. Even the vocals somehow remind me of Jon Davis. There's a thin line, though, that Welch didn't cross. He added some other spices in the mix, like synths and a collaboration with Stephen Hawking. I also noticed some Deftones influence, which made me think about their upcoming album...

Music wise, Head's songs are strongly built on trivial tunes that never get old. Nothing genius about them, they're just well-arranged. The best tracks in my opinion are "Save Me From Myself" and "Die Religion Die". I have yet to read the lyrics, but from what I hear, they're hilarious. I wonder if he really buys into Christianity... I really hope it's a subtle joke, Andy Kaufman style. It's hard to believe, though, knowing that Welch is a recovering junkie, and many such take a religious approach to solve their problem.

I wonder how he got these gurus of alternative music to play for him, like JOSH FREESE, Tony Levin, Trevor Dunn... Trevor Dunn, for crying out loud! I bet he got paid for his name to be on the list and never actually recorded bass for the album. I mean, come on, a 5 year old could play Head's riffs! You don't need a legend to do that for you! Same goes for Nine Inch Nails. Trent Reznor always hires some great musicians, which is totally a P.R. action to get more publicity. It's all bullshit, I tell ya. While we're at it, if you're a NiN fan, I don't wanna know you.

In conclusion, if you need some background music for your fap/rape/scat sessions, Save Me From Myself is the best choice for you! Embrace Christ in your holy deeds! Give it a try.

Comedians

2008-08-30T01:46:00.000-07:00

Most of the stand-up comedians on TV piss me off...
Here's a simple self-explanatory synopsis:

Hello, I'm a Comedian. I hate my life and I suck at relationships. *laughter* I love women but they are evil. *laughter* I hate sharing but I'm married. *laughter* I should be telling a story now, where I mention an inside joke. Then, I'll talk about a few other things, and after a certain time, I'll refer to the inside joke again. This always gets me the biggest laughs and applause, cuz people get to show they were paying attention, proving how good a children they are. *laughter* I'm not a father figure. My dad used to beat me up, but he was a good parent. *laughter* Almost as good as embedding the previous inside joke again. *laughter and applause* Now let's talk about politics... John Mccain. *laughter* Barack Obama. *laughter* Alright, that brought a few laughs. Let's move on... Nine Eleven. *laughter* Now that was funny because you thought I was gonna change the topic. Seriously, though, as much as I hate the government, I love that country, man, and I think we should all support our troops in Iraq. God bless America! *cheers and applause* Well, that's my time, everybody! I hate myself! You're all a bunch of niggers. Fuck you! *cheers and applause*

Positive Thinking

2008-07-25T01:43:00.000-07:00

There's nothing wrong with being positive, and I completely support that attitude. The problem is that some people mistake delusion for positivity. When the glass of water is 3/4 empty and you call it half-full, you're not an optimistic person, but rather a liar (calling it 1/4 full would be the right choice). That's just a brief example of how people wanna fool themselves just for the sake of staying positive and avoiding anxiety. But hey, there's a way to face the facts and still be optimistic! And compromise is out of the question. The only requirement is curiousity. "Why" is the best thing in the world. I've been trying to accept my ignorance and explore the reason for the painful emotions I get to experience. Once I've accepted them, the pain gets decreased. Once I find what has truly caused them, they no longer hurt me.

Here's a metaphor that might explain what I mean: You fall down, you break your leg. You try to walk, but it hurts even more. You acknowledge the pain and you decide to sit down and see what's wrong. You look at your leg and your bone is sticking out - now you know the cause. You are shocked when you see the ugly truth, it might even paralyse you for a few minutes. But the adrenaline is pumping, which significantly decreases the pain. Once you get used to the objective fact, it's time for healing. Put yourself back together, avoid the actions that cause you discomfort, and you are back to being healthy. If you were a pessimist, the healing might have never started. But still, it's important that you saw what the problem was. In the case of irrational optimism, you'd be walking with a broken leg, destroying and deforming the bone with each step further, until it's too late and it needs to be amputated.

I lost contact with a lot of friends in the process of healing. I can't run with a cast on, you know. I might seem a bit dark and depressed lately, but owls ain't what they seem. Most of the time I feel pretty great, even though I'm all serious and shit. Recognizing the truth would be hard without skepticism. And long-term happiness requires a strong foundation of facts. You might think I'm crazy now, but when the Big Bad Wolf tries to blow my house down, his huffing and puffing would only make my dick hard.

There's difference between staying positive and acting like you're staying positive.

Music Sucks

2008-07-04T01:40:00.000-07:00

Man, I hate the music industry. It's like a huge drug company... first they lure you into their evil world with their catchy tunes and what not. Then they put a demon in your head by brainwashing you with their "public relations". They make you believe that being a musician can be a successful career. How do they do that: by exposing all these faggot shits on TV and convincing you how rich they are and how much fun they're having. While this can be somewhat true about these exact "artists", it has nothing to do with reality. Them motherfuckers got all lucky and that's that. There is no music market. Nobody tells you that. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT WITH MUSIC, IF YOU WANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, BUY OUR QUALITY EQIUPMENT! It's all about people buying shitty over-priced products. The more fans believing they can become successful artists, the more customers you got. And man, I just can't stand watching these brainwashed victims obsessed with buying new equipment and talking about that shit all the time. How is that contributing to music if they ain't got no talent in the first place? Fucking $4000 guitars and all that bullcrap. I've had the opportunity to record with an expensive guitar and I did compare it to a cheap one - there was almost no difference. Faggots overhype that shit and play with your mind all the time. Manufacturers rip you off and you're the happy retard. What are you so happy about, you just wasted all your cash on a placebo! It's not even an investment cuz you'll never make it with music. You are nobody and you suck, although that doesn't even matter. And no, being a rockstar doesn't get you chicks - being an arrogant jerk does.

Some people, like me, fuck with music as a hobby. That could be fun sometimes. But most of the time it's just a time-consuming frustrating process. And when I finally complete a song, I'm thinking, "Why the fuck did I just do this!? It's not like I'M gonna listen to it". It's like defecating - you need to do it, many times it takes effort, but after you're done, you just flush it down the toilet cuz you hate that shit. I see no point in recording material anymore, unless it's provocative or offensive. Why would I care to contribute to a society of sick people who wouldn't appreciate my true work of art? And seriously, what is art? It's horse shit, that's what it is. Cheap faggotry that gives you a psychological trip. Why would anyone need that, if their life didn't already suck? Artfags are no better than junkies.

Fake and real artists contribute to the same pile of shit. Doesn't matter if you do it for the money. You're still producing "drugs" that make people believe their own fallacies, instead of acknowledging and understanding their emotions. I've always been a truth seeker. Talking to artists only made me feel confused and frustrated, since most of them are delusional and arrogant - their views about the world are awfully subjective.

Music. It's the fruit of resentful people with shit lives. It always comes down to that conclusion, no matter how you look at it. Tribal music is used for religious rites, and it's supposed to give you a psychedelic experience. You're religious? You want to escape reality? You've got a shit life. Classical music was the work of poor perverted sociopaths. Shit life. Rock and rap music are invented by black Americans - they were oppressed and confused. Shit life. Techno music was invented by faggots, I believe. Same shit. Oppression and unhappiness made all these people express their feelings through art. How great is that for those in charge? They don't have to deal with the crowd's anger and resentment anymore, cuz it's being buffered by creative activities and feasts. That's how masters preserve their power.

Bread and circus games.

After having been focused on music for the last 10 years, I finally say fuck it: it's in no way constructive nor efficient. My purpose of life is to be happy, that's what I live for. No empty cause can replace that. You can't be happy if you distort reality, and that's what artists do.
Music is artificial. I quit that shit.

Ego Problems

2008-06-19T01:39:00.000-07:00

I'll probably stop blogging for a while. I've got some issues that need to be taken care of. Like, I'd always put myself in a situation where people would annoy me. I let them fuck with me and then I blame them. It's fucked up, I'm losing my mind. It's like running on the streets screaming "PUNCH ME IN THE FACE" and then wondering why they punched you. Fucked up shit, I tell you. Thanks to my false-self, I've burnt bridges with people who actually cared about me and respected me for who I am. I needed that punch, and I asked for it. Made me realize how stupid I've become.

I always try to force my creativity because I want every day to be productive. I don't have a "real" job, so I try to make a career out of my art. If a day goes by without me having done anything creative, I feel like a worthless consumer. I just hate being passive cuz it hurts my ego. That ain't right. I mean, who am I proving myself to? Society? Why do I care about contributing to society? I think I've been brainwashed by my parents and relatives. It's time that I take procrastination to a higher level. From now on, I'll stop caring about being productive. Creativity should NOT be forced. It should be the IDEA ITSELF that forces artists to produce shit.

Oh man, my ego is so hard to please. I wish I had the sizzle points to be attractive. I just wanna know that hot preppy girls want me. They're not even my type: meanwhile, I'll be fucking a bunch of bizarre skanks. Hell, just making the hip cunts jealous would make me so happy. That'd be like a "Fuck you" to the motherfucking mainstream. The guys would wanna look like me, and I'd always think of the wackest shit to wear, just to fuck with them (not literally). I'm competitive like that, I wanna be the hottest dude. My PR agent, Vans Vega, made a fitness program for me, and I'm gonna be doing that shit for a while: hardcore physical exercise on a strict diet. Actually, it's not as hard as I thought... it only takes me 3 hours a day.

So yeah, I'll be back, niggas. Citius, Altius, Fortius.

Creepy Foreign Guy

2008-06-18T01:37:00.000-07:00

"Eh, don't mind Spratz, he's just that creepy foreign guy on the internet".

Oh yeah? I bet I'm more American than you, motherfucker. But that's not even the point. Why would you even consider my nationality over my intellect? Just because I have a fucking accent you gotta discredit all I have to say. You fucking retard face, I hate you. And what's so creepy about me? I'm a tall European guy, handsome for a man. Shut up, I look NOTHING like an Arab! And if you say big noses ain't sexy, you're a fucking liar. My lips are juicier than those of Angelina Jolie, so don't act like you ain't gay for me, bitch. It's okay, I understand. My eyes are brown, big deal. Blue eyes came about because of random changes in the genes that affect eye color. Hence, blue-eyed people are mutants, and they're actually less healthy than awesome people like me. Who's the weirdo now?

I'm so perfect... I don't get it! I enter the store and everybody's giving me the "you don't belong here" look. Even the fucking Indians. Am I really that different? I can't see it, man... all that negative attention, what causes it? I'm getting too self-conscious about that shit, and I'm no longer confident talking to people. I always use the self-checkout lane to avoid small talk. Sometimes I'm even nervous about talking to my friends on the phone. Cuz once you've been labeled, it's hard to get out of that curse. It's not me who's speaking, it's the foreign dude. It's the weird guy with the bird. You like him but not in THAT way, no way. That would be gross! He's goofy! Well so are Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp, and all these others gay guys you're so crazy about. All men are goofy, it's not just me, but the fact that I'm also foreign makes you think otherwise.

"If you don't like it here, quit bitching and go back to Shitland, Spratzaman!"

Shut up because you need me, asshole! The fact that you're still reading this proves me right. Take a look around - European faggots rule Hollywood. Without us, you'd be bored as fuck, so pray that I stay, motherfuckers. Cuz if I go away, you're gonna miss me and I ain't gonna miss you back. You like to laugh at my expense and I don't mind that, but you gotta pay for it somehow. Treat me with respect, that's all I'm asking for. I'm a person, stop treating me like an alien.

Remembering Tim Russert

2008-06-15T01:36:00.000-07:00

I don't want to remember that fucker! Quit shoving him down my throat! Like people care. You're supposed to talk about Barack Obama's supremacy and his brutal fight with McCain. FIGHT TO THE DEATH! There will be torture, blood-sucking, and beheadings! Why don't you instead show some more baby pandas? Fire your "political" team and join forces with Animal Planet! Monkeys are far more attractive than snobbish people. Or even better, you can make an obituary channel. Now that would be unique! Then you can talk about Tim Russert 24/7 and get away with it. Cable Necrophilia Network and Necrophilia Broadcasting Company... Death sure will raise your ratings, guys!

Talking about the media we have today. I love watching TV because it inspires me to hate. Radio stations are even worse but I simply can't stand a minute of that brainwash. 5 songs get played 20 times a day in between 10 minute blocks of commercials and annoying talk shows with retarded hosts. And that shit can really fuck you up in the head if you're passively listening, which means listening without evaluating the information. In most cases, that's what happens, cuz where else do you get exposed to radio waves but in your car, or at work - places where you're already doing something important, so questioning the things that you hear is not really your priority. After a while, you turn into a predictable consumer, and you won't realize how you would start having a desire for things that you don't really need. Brainwash, motherfucker.

So yeah, I choose watching TV, cuz then you're just sitting on a couch doing nothing else. Leaves you plenty of time for thinking about the shit that you observe. I watch Cartoon Network, FX, Comedy Central, or the Sci-Fi channel. But comedy is evil. Look at all these stand-up comedians that talk about the logical reality. People laugh at that shit. When the show's over they forget everything and they feel better about themselves for a while. This creates the impression that the truth is only a thing we could laugh about because we can never live in a world where logic rules. That's why I prefer the purest form of comedy - stupidity and absurdism. Facts ain't to be laughed at, ignorance is! Look at these pathetic fucks - they're actually laughing at their own stupidity when they hear the sad truth about their lives. Does that really lift their mood, or does it subconsciously depress them even more?

Watch out, Tim Russert's ghost is gonna rape your daughter in the ass!

Food is Wack

2008-06-14T01:35:00.000-07:00

Goddammit, food is horrible these days... whatever I put in my mouth feels like poison. It's been one week since I stopped caring about meals. My body weight ain't really my issue, I just don't wanna feel like shit. No matter what I eat, no matter how healthy it is, my body ain't taking chances. Digestion problems, heartburn, headaches, nausea, sleepiness, insomnia, you name it. All of these motherfuckers would take turns FUCKING me in the ass. I used to be a champion eater in my teens. I could eat tons of food and ain't no shit was gonna happen... And before that, when I was a child, my granny used to forcefeed me. I was so skinny that the neighborhood kids would call me "the Auschwitz boy" (still better than my high-school nickname "The Shit"). I was also very energetic; I would always run, climb trees, play soccer, mess with old people, all that kid stuff. When there were no other kids outside, I'd play alone. And look at me now! I'm a wreck... I can't go anywhere on my own cuz I get too self-conscious. I'm stuck at home with no friends and I'm too lazy to exercise because I lack self-motivation.

I don't even feel like playing videogames! It costs money and shit! And it ain't even fun no more cuz the fuckers made games so engaging and competitive. There's always someone better than you who would love to beat your ass at your favorite games. And then you're thinking "I shouldn't feel bad, that guy is probably a fat slob covered in zits"... it turns out he's a hot guy with abs and a cool hairstyle. Then you try to fool yourself "Eh, I can still beat that guy in real life, he looks like a wuss". Wrong again! Turns out the motherfucker took Jiu-Jitsu classes and he'll whoop your ass in no time. I wish I was a champion eater once again. I'd get a comforting cottage pie and eat the shit out of it. No, wait! First I'm gonna pull out my dick and fuck it like there ain't tomorrow, pretending it's that gamer's girlfriend. Let me put on the Food channel first. Oh yes, being fat is comfortable. I wanna be that fat asshole who doesn't give a shit.

Dick: We are what we eat, Sparx!
Me: I no longer eat dicks for breakfast, but apparently you're still on the same diet.

Bitch, please. Anything that makes you feel good and energized is good for you. No matter how dangerous people say it might be, every person's health is unique, so if it works for you, fuck what your friends say. And don't worry about that BMI horse shit. Some people are actually healthier when they're "overweight", others feel perfect when they're "underweight". I hate doctors, don't ever trust those criminals cuz they'll fuck you up. Be your own doctor; you know best what works for you. See, this is the kind of thinking that destroyed my teeth. This is an old article and it's full of self-justifications for destructive behavior. Be careful what you eat. Don't take my stupid advice, or you'll end up like me - I can't even chew hard food.

Internet Communication

2008-06-12T01:33:00.000-07:00

Let's say you're a sick fuck who enjoys jacking off to violence and rape. What are the chances you find a like-minded person on AIM / MSN / Skype? And what are the odds they would be from your area? You simply can't meet new people using those limited "secure" instant messengers; there are no places to go... What would have happened on IRC? First, you choose a server that's in your area, you connect, and then you enter your keyword "gore" in the channel search bar. Let's say you join the #goregrind chat room. Plenty of sick fucks are gonna welcome you there, and the chances are, many would be willing to trade pornography with you! Some might even wanna mail you a dead corpse of their daughter! I didn't write that.

See, you can't do that kind of networking using private messengers' chat rooms - there is no way of listing them, they are all temporary, and you have no idea if there are gonna be Americans or people from Zimbabwe in there. MySpace networking works if you wanna find a pretentious asshole who doesn't even allow messaging unless you're his friend. People don't realize how limited cyberspace communcation has become, instead of expanding. They choose to surround themselves with boring motherfuckers they're already sick of. Then what's the point of the internet? I say, if you wanna talk to your friends, fucking meet them in person, don't use technology, unless they're miles away from you... It's crazy... Big business wants to narrow down our relationships so that we become less sociable, and better working units. Fuck MySpace, and fuck FaceBook, it's all fake bullshit.

And it's not only finding new people that's important. What happened to group chats? Why is everyone afraid of exposing their opinion to more than one person? I think it's because of the so-called Stroking system. When you people talk to someone, you tend to adjust your attitude and opinions to those of your companion. You compromise your point of view and you stroke your friend and he strokes you back... You're afraid of confrontation and that's why you avoid talking in public. You like discussing people in their absence, but once they enter the room, you're too afraid to speak up. What happened to honesty? We CAN afford a little bit of honesty, you know, just for the sake of stating our differences and showing our uniqueness as individuals. Who needs fake friends anyway? You can have tons of those, but do they serve you a real purpose? Are they mutually beneficial in any other than the circle-jerk way? Think about it. Like Kurt Cobain used to say, it's better to be hated for who you are rather than loved for who you're not.

Time to Grow up

2008-06-11T01:32:00.000-07:00

Faggot: "It's time for you to grow up!"
Spratzaman: "Are you talking to my penis?"

Anyone who is immature enough to tell you what you should be doing deserves to be dickslapped. You carefully pull out your genitalia and you gently place it on their forehead. The chances are they're gonna like it. Well, another thing you could do instead, of course, is asking them what "growing up" really means to them. To me, it means becoming a person who would take responsibility for his own actions. It has nothing to do with behavior or a lifestyle. You can act like an idiot, play videogames, collect action figures, or even play doctor with little girls, and that wouldn't make you less of an adult, as long as you can rationally comprehend your actions, and you expect what kind of outcome they could produce - e.g. spending time in jail - and trust me, nobody would mistaken you for a kid, once you're in court facing child molestation charges.

My point here is that someone being unemployed does NOT make them immature. In fact, they might as well end up being more reasonable than most adults who force themselves to conform in order to get a shitty job. What happens next - most get stuck at life, their personal morality gets distorted, and they lose touch of who they really are. Frustration follows: lack of emotions, except for a strong feeling of emptiness. So they decide to switch jobs, get a promotion, get married, or whatever. But they no longer know what they want, because most of them get lost. So no matter how much money they earn, they still remain unhappy. So now they acknowledge that they have a mental problem and they decide they should get some professional help, which later leads to drugs, because the market always screams at us: "FEELING DEPRESSED? BUY DRUGS! THEY WILL MAKE YOU HAPPY AGAIN!" These mature people end up being lifeless sacks of shit. Walking corpses running on drug gas. Way to be an adult, asshole! And you still think you're better than me? Bruce Campbell would not agree. Bring in the chainsaw, dude! There's more coming!

Well, okay, let's say that a small percentage of the greyfaces actually found happiness in what they were doing, which is possible if you show up in the right place at the right time - thanks to randomness. So these successful people get all cocky about it, and most of them have the perception that you should be doing whatever they're doing if you want to not suck at life, and they're all like "LOOK AT ME, I MADE IT! I AM A GREAT EXAMPLE AND A ROLE-MODEL FOR YOU, SO DO WHAT I TELL YOU, OR ELSE YOU ARE IMMATURE AND STUBBORN!" So a lot of dumb motherfuckers fool themselves and buy that shit, convinced that it's the right thing to do, and most of them end up like the zombies I mentioned in my first example. And this shit happens because they don't realize each person's happiness lies within, and it's unique for everyone. One might find it in being a stock broker, while another might find it in raping grandmothers and fucking dead corpses.

We can't judge our inner desires, for they give us the will and purpose to live. Consider the risk and do it, live your life to the fullest! That's what growing up should be about. Don't let the greyfaces win, they are all brainwashed weaklings. Next time someone tries to make you feel bad about procrastinating, make sure to show them the balls you have for doing it, or in other words, tea-bag them. I hate single words hanging on a new line, so that's why I wrote this last sentence.

Band Management

2008-04-19T01:30:00.000-07:00

1. Songs
First of all, get some songs done. Make sure they sound homogeneous and compose in a simple structure, using these 6 parts: intro, verse, pre-chorus, chorus, bridge, outro. Try to make each song dynamic - do a moderate part, a quiet part, and finish off with a climax. THE LYRICS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT. Write most of them in First Person - that way anyone who could relate to the topic, would find it easier to sing along. Emotional songs sell. Negative emotions make people vulnerable, and that's why they should be your main focus: "I Suck", "I'm depressed", and "I Hate You" lyrics. There is an exception to the negativity rule: the "I Rule" and "I'm the Best" songs tend to sell a lot, too. Everybody loves singing a song about how cool they are (don't forget the First Person rule). Now, make sure that more than 50% of your lyrics are substantial, depending on the lifestyle you have chosen to represent. For example, if you're a punk band, make sure to include political and unconventional topics, or else you're gonna lose credit and respect, and no one's gonna take you seriously.

2. Attitude
You have to choose a lifestyle that your band represents, and then you have to really overhype it. Defend your causes, and always try to prove a point. People love that. And with attitude comes symbolism. You need to create a symbol of that chosen lifestyle - it could be a part of your outfit, a logo, a gesture... something that people could easily imitate and recreate. Explain to them what's YOUR meaning and concept of life, or what's the reason behind your rebellion. That's the most important thing: ALWAYS overhype; define a new genre, act as if what you are doing is special, explain WHY it is special, give the audience many words, confuse them, make them believe you're a higher being. Before all that, make up a really cool band name: unique, easy to spell, and easy to remember. Use Google and see how many search results there are for that name - the less, the better.

3. Indirect Involvement in the Media
To get the word out, though, you need to have good public relations skills. I divide PR in two divisions: direct and indirect involvement in the media. I'll start with the latter, which is also the easier one, as long as you have connections. Make a list of all the well-known people you know, and start contacting them. They could be musicians, actors, or just some local popular kids. Make them wear your band's t-shirt. Influence them into mentioning your project in interviews, or press conferences. If they are musicians, ask them to cover one of your songs. Or you can remix one of their songs and have it on their album. Convince everyone you know to give your music maximum exposure at parties or radiostations, if you know any DJ's. Once you have an album out, call all the music magazines and e-zines, and ask them to review it.

4. Direct Involvement in the Media
Do a research on bands that represent the same lifestyle and ideals you do. Go to their shows, stay after the end, talk and take pictures with them. That way others can recognize you more easily, and you also make good connections. Do interviews: talk about your concept, rebellion, etc. Do TV appearances: talk about your lifestyle, talk about how great your equipment is, and don't forget to spread controversy, if you wanna be scandalous, but never fuck with the media themselves, because they can destroy you. Write your band's name and include it in as many places, as many times as possible - use stickers, posters, markers, whatever you got. And of course, don't forget to take countless pictures of your band with everybody looking great. Invest in a music video, and make sure that the budget is high enough to make it look incredibly impressive.

5. The Internet
Pay for an official well-designed website with sections like Pictures, Press, Bio, Media, and Merch. Make a MySpace profile with a simplistic, but legit, design - easy to navigate, with Merch and Tour Dates on it. The songs on the player should be worksafe. For a beginner, hide the profile views and the number of friends you got, and put in "New Profile" in the headline. Never comment back and never reply to messages - that would ruin your celebrity status. A fun thing you can do on the internet is spread rumors and controversy about your band. Make up stories about getting kicked out, doing crazy shit on stage, hate mail, lawsuits, etc. And don't forget, kids: include the band's name EVERYWHERE!

6. Live Performances
Being in a band, you gotta understand that you are an ENTERTAINER. Most people don't get impressed by a good musical performance... in fact, most won't even know the difference between a good and a bad one. All they care about is getting a kick out of the show: meeting people, acting irrational, getting autographs. So don't worry about having little talent or skill. Work on your GIMMICK! Before every show, rehearse your dance moves and your speeches. Stage presence makes for 60% of the concert. If you wanna be edgy, hire stooges and stage some scandals: plot the event; inform the club owners and pay them before the equipment damage is done (if there is any). Make the stooge attack you or boo you off the stage, get in a fight with them, have fun with it. Learn from the almighty Andy Kaufman.

Never headline if you're a beginner. Make friends with other similar bands and open for them. Otherwise you're likely to get little to none audience (excluding your friends and family). Try to get involved in festivals and battles of the bands. After a good show, get off stage, meet the fans and talk to them. Sign some autographs, let them take some pictures with you, make out with them; in two words: make the fans feel special. That's your guarantee that they're gonna come back next time you're playing. And they're definitely gonna spread the word. Another part of live performances are parties. You and your band buddies get invited to a party - what do you do? Treat it as a show! Rehearse what you have to say before going. Analyze possible situations that are gonna make you look cool. Play your music.

7. Album Production
Finally, once you've gained some momentum, it's time that you produce an album. Think of an overall concept, a theme for the whole album. Tune up and optimize all of your instruments. If they're not good enough, rent some better equipment. Produce at least one hit song, even if you have to compromise with your values - these are the risks you take to be successful. Finally, get someone to record and mix all of that for you, and you're ready to go.

That's my formula for success. Drop me a line if you find any flaws in it.