1

Topic: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

If the mankind is not spent on  - it will be possible to direct all energies to a science, to make so that all people had equal odds of development and talents did not disappear in poverty. To solve a problem of prolongation of life, a problem of distant flights in space and populations of planets, a question of copying of consciousness/answer on a question on a difficult problem of consciousness and so forth But the unipolar world is for this purpose necessary to direct all energies to a science, instead of on murders senseless. But. You do not want it. Want to defend national idea, to be sovereign. Thus the idea at you as that is not present. In the USSR the any idea was - communism creation, you this idea . Clearly that the USA repeatedly overtook Russia in scientific achievements. So to you to lose? Simply reconcile before those who knows where to conduct mankind is better.

2

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> If the mankind will not be spent on  - it will be possible to direct all energies to a science, to make so that all people had equal odds of development and talents did not disappear in poverty. On usdn.us c it is necessary to you or at least on csdn.cn

3

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> Simply reconcile before those who knows where to conduct mankind is better. And who it?

4

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, 0x7be, you wrote: S>> Simply reconcile before those who knows where to conduct mankind is better. 0> and who it? I for example

5

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, jhfrek, you wrote: J> Image: J>http://x-true.info/uploads/posts/2015-06/1433602991_66825740.jpg These expenditures will not be in the unipolar world. If Russia subordinates the will to predominant force - that the unipolar world in a pocket. And there both life prolongation, and distant flights in space and the strong AI. Or to play . To you it is more interesting distant flights in space or ?

6

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, 0x7be, you wrote: S>> Simply reconcile before those who knows where to conduct mankind is better. 0> and who it? And that who develops a science. Your browser on which you type messages - in what country is made?

7

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: Why scientific and technical progress can be expensive? It can be, is interesting, useful, but why roads? S> if the mankind will not be spent on  - it will be possible to direct all energies to a science, to make so that all people had equal odds of development and talents did not disappear in poverty. Talents will always disappear in poverty, well that are not able (or it is not interesting to them) to transform the talent into money. It of expenditure on "" it does not depend at all. S> to solve a problem of prolongation of life, a problem of distant flights in space and populations of planets, a question of copying of consciousness/answer on a question on a difficult problem of consciousness and so forth Inflating by budget money, instead of expenditure on "" on an iota does not approach a solution of a problem of prolongation of life, and even possibility of flights on in space, anyway people on distant planets not to mention their settling, does not approach. And a problem of copying of consciousness even if it actually the problem demanding the decision, on budget money does not come nearer at all to the decision. S> but the unipolar world is for this purpose necessary to direct all energies to a science, instead of on murders senseless. It is not necessary. It is totalitarianism and the degradation, all material resources in it will go on satisfaction of whims of very narrow elite. S> but. You do not want it. Want to defend national idea, to be sovereign. Thus the idea at you as that is not present. In the USSR the any idea was - communism creation, you this idea . We this idea not , she appeared not working. S> it is clear that the USA repeatedly overtook Russia in scientific achievements. Note, despite very big expenditure on "" and in many respects thanking it. S> So to you to lose? Simply reconcile before those who knows where to conduct mankind is better. And  this idiotic pathos about scientifically-tehnicheky progress only for the justification of the desire to be the slave to follow through an appeal you... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

8

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

to me it is absolutely not expensive, also as ,  and other abbreviations. To me the family, storage of ancestors, the earth on which they are my dear lived, their tombs. Also it is this country with a developed science and technics on it that attempts to burn it together with all its science most that.

9

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: 0>> And who it? A> I for example You yet did not convince me of it

10

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, s_aa, you wrote: _>  to me it is absolutely not expensive, also as ,  and other abbreviations. To me the family, storage of ancestors, the earth on which they are my dear lived, their tombs. Also it is this country with a developed science and technics on it that attempts to burn it together with all its science most that. And it is possible to take an interest - what for to you of a tomb?

11

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> If the mankind will not be spent on  - it will be possible to direct all energies to a science, to make so that all people had equal odds of development and talents did not disappear in poverty. S> to solve a problem of prolongation of life, a problem of distant flights in space and populations of planets, a question of copying of consciousness/answer on a question on a difficult problem of consciousness and so forth S> But the unipolar world is for this purpose necessary to direct all energies to a science, instead of on murders senseless. S> but. You do not want it. Want to defend national idea, to be sovereign. Thus the idea at you as that is not present. In the USSR the any idea was - communism creation, you this idea . S> it is clear that the USA repeatedly overtook Russia in scientific achievements. S> so to you to lose? Simply reconcile before those who knows where to conduct mankind is better. Scientific and technical progress unconditionally is more expensive to me than the native land. But a problem in that that here not all so is simple. Absolutely it is impossible to tell that the unipolar world is a warranty of scientific and technical progress (as well as multipolar however too). Clearly that it is impossible to lead up to extreme measures of type of world wars. There are still some undesirable aspects. As a whole even the multipolar world can be used with a view of , skillfully controlling human emotions and directing them in the necessary direction.

12

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> And that who develops a science. All developed countries to some extent develop a science. Now, by the way, China in this field types turns. How to you China as the world leader? S> your browser on which you type messages - in what country is made? It is difficult to tell. At me Chrome, it generally . There , I suppose, from all over the world However, it is not absolutely clear, as the browser concerns a science.

13

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: A> And it is possible to take an interest - what for to you of a tomb? s_aa let about tombs answers, and I will ask, what for to you ?... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

14

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

S> to you it is more interesting distant flights in space or ? And you ceased to drink cognac in the mornings? What for to me flights? To look at one more lifeless ? To me it is expensive Russia, such what it is also a point.

15

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, pagid, you wrote: A>> And it is possible to take an interest - what for to you of a tomb? P> s_aa let about tombs answers, and I will ask, what for to you ? At least to win an old age, illnesses and death.

16

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> These expenditures will not be in the unipolar world. If Russia subordinates the will to predominant force - that the unipolar world in a pocket. And there both life prolongation, and distant flights in space and the strong AI. S> or to play . S> to you it is more interesting distant flights in space or ? In 90-s' there was quite to itself a unipolar world. Russia then generally on what did not claim and with pleasure conceded where it is possible. China yet did not start to claim for an essential role. States then for some reason actively played .

17

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

A> And it is possible to take an interest - what for to you of a tomb? How to explain blind that such color? At you simply the organ misses which understand such things. A mutation probably the such.

18

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, Shmj, you wrote: S> So to you to lose? Simply reconcile All 4 years ago Ukrainians were "", and now look, for slavery heats

19

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, 0x7be, you wrote: 0> In 90-s' was quite to itself  the world. Russia then generally on what did not claim and with pleasure conceded where it is possible. 0> China yet did not start to claim for an essential role. States then for some reason actively played . Explosive development of information technologies, computers, the Internet, a wireless communication etc. began in 90. It is difficult to tell - bound it is the facts or coincidence is simple, fairly I do not know. It is possible to make only the assumption that if there was a rigid cold war, can be in the West would be more restrictions in civil application of computer technologies.

20

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: A> At least to win an old age, illnesses and death. It is impossible, only to delay. Not on many, and from a practical side a healthy way of life (without what or extreme measures, including excessive aspiration to this most healthy way of life) unique a practical method to achieve small successes in this aspiration. It any more without saying that the victory over an old age and  contradicts "interests"  to population therefore as kills her.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>

21

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, s_aa, you wrote: _> How to explain blind that such color? At you simply the organ misses which understand such things. A mutation probably the such. Similarly - how to explain to the schizophrenic (simply example) that that that he "sees" and "hears" - only hallucinations in its brain?

22

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

A>> And it is possible to take an interest - what for to you of a tomb? _> how to explain blind that such color? At you simply the organ misses which understand such things. A mutation probably the such. A grief to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you remind the whitewashed tombs which outwardly seem beautiful, and a sewage is inside full of bones of dead persons and everyone. And you outwardly seem to people just, and are inside full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. (c)

23

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: A> Explosive development of information technologies, computers, the Internet, a wireless communication etc. began in 90. It is difficult to tell - bound it is the facts or coincidence is simple, fairly I do not know. It is possible to make only the assumption that if there was a rigid cold war, can be in the West would be more restrictions in civil application of computer technologies. I doubt that cold war here somehow affected. Rapid growth was outlined already in 80-s' and there was all  in process of development of technical possibilities.

24

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, pagid, you wrote: P> It is impossible, only to delay. Not on many, and from a practical side a healthy way of life (without what or extreme measures, including excessive aspiration to this most healthy way of life) unique a practical method to achieve small successes in this aspiration. Though to delay, and it will be visible further. The healthy way of life is certainly good thing, but it gives that small results. More precisely, more or less guarantees that the person will be not not comprehended absolutely by silly death for example from  or redose P> It any more without saying that the victory over an old age and  contradicts "interests"  to population therefore as kills her. Human population contradicts my interests therefore as if something happens (for example )  me, and even an eye does not blink. So why I should care of its interests? Yes, certainly we need a society therefore as on a singleton we a little that can. But it only the tool, instead of end in itself. We should be beyond population and to take everything, including own evolution, completely in the hands. Moreover, I am convinced that it all the same inevitably happens.

25

Re: To you scientifically technical progress or "native land" is more expensive?

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: A> Though to delay, and it will be visible further. To whom it will be visible? A> the healthy way of life is certainly good thing, but it gives that small results. More precisely, more or less guarantees that the person the silly death for example from  or a redose At least does not comprehend absolutely it, anything else is not present. A> Human population contradicts my interests, These are your problems, human population on it to spit. A> therefore as if something happens (for example )  me, and even an eye does not blink. So why I should care of its interests? You can not care, you are not lonely, anybody and does not care of its interests, from the very beginning. A> yes, certainly we need a society therefore as on a singleton we a little that can. But it only the tool, instead of end in itself. We should be beyond population and to take everything, including own evolution, completely in the hands. Moreover, I am convinced that it all the same inevitably happens. They are such "you"? Cheloveko-gods? Cyborgs? So it is all from fiction, and there is normally enough  a low manner.... <<RSDN@Home 1.0.0 alpha 5 rev. 0>>