Nak Khid

But like Sadhguru you have never studied with a guru, correct?

https://www.quantamagazine.org/computers-evolve-a-new-path-toward-human-intelligence-20191106/?utm_source=pocket-newtab Quanta Magazine Computers Evolve a New Path Toward Human Intelligence Neural networks that borrow strategies from biology are making profound leaps in their abilities. Is ignoring a goal the best way to make truly intelligent machines? In one test, they placed virtual wheeled robots in a maze and evolved the algorithms controlling them, hoping one would find a path to the exit. They ran the evolution from scratch 40 times. A comparison program, in which robots were selected for how close (as the crow flies) they came to the exit, evolved a winning robot only 3 out of 40 times. Novelty search, which completely ignored how close each bot was to the exit, succeeded 39 times. It worked because the bots managed to avoid dead ends. Rather than facing the exit and beating their heads against the wall, they explored unfamiliar territory, found workarounds, and won by accident. “Novelty search is important because it turned everything on its head,” said Julian Togelius, a computer scientist at New York University, “and basically asked what happens when we don’t have an objective.” The steppingstone principle is a way to inject creativity into artificial intelligence. The steppingstone principle goes beyond traditional evolutionary approaches. Instead of optimizing for a specific goal, it embraces creative exploration of all possible solutions. By doing so, it has paid off with groundbreaking results.

Biden vs Bloomberg, Who would win ?

Origins of Tibetan Monastic Debating Debating has had a long and distinguished history in Buddhism and during the early days if his teachings, the texts tell that he was of the opinion that a true monk argues with no one and stays apart from any public debates. However, there are later texts that show Buddha as a vigorous and successful debater, which have given rise to the modern use of debates in Buddhism. Originally, the Buddha simply taught those who were interested in what he had to say, but in a multi-religious environment in which he taught, and due to the natural tendency to critical inquiry into the beliefs and assertions of oneself, the need to explain and clarify his teachings to other religious leaders and laymen became necessary. Over the years, as can be found in the ancient Buddhist texts, he became a master of debate, and was so successful in converting his opponents that he was often accused of using magic to sway their beliefs. In the later centuries, debating became a part of the normal life of the Buddhist monks, and played an important part in winning intellectuals over to Buddhism. It has also become a formal mechanism for the resolution of sectarian and monastic disagreements, and a person’s own critical engagement with the standard Buddhist doctrines Another form of debate is with one monk asking the questions to a group of monks sat in a circle around the questioner, and the questioner gives his question and chooses one monk from the circle to make his answer. The refuting of the answer is then directed to another monk to continue the debate in a form of round-robin. Tibetan debates are very animated and impassioned, as the whole debate rages back and forth between the two debaters, exchanging questions and answers in logical progression. A debate is a special system of logic where the debaters learn to work with the concepts of what they have been taught, and is a good way to train their thoughts to be logical and to use exact expression. The form of the debates has been adapted over the centuries from the original Indian style of debating, and debates generally hold true consequences, which are logical implications drawn from the defender’s statements. While the questioner has an unlimited number of ways to ask the questions, the defender is limited in how he can form the answer to the questions. These answers include responses like: “The reason is not established,” which is the way to deny the minor premise “There is no pervasion,” which is how to deny the major premise “I accept it,” which means the defender has accepted the argument and the conclusion _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Look at these names of famous spiritual teachers Eckhart Tolle Shri Shri Ravi Shankar Ram Dass Adyashanti Thich Nhat Hanh Sam Harris Mooji Rupert Spira Sadhguru Swami Prabhupada ji (Iskcon) Paulo Coelho Don Miguel Ruiz Some of them do debates others don't What do you think of spiritual teachers who do debates?

. About ARK® crystals ARK crystals are a revolutionary technology that greatly boosts the body's natural ability to attune with the vitalistic and expansive zero-point field of the quantum vacuum. The quantum vacuum represents the revelatory understanding in modern physics that space is not empty; on the contrary, it is the one thing that connects all things. ARK crystals have been precision engineered so that they will couple to vacuum fluctuations when brought into molecular harmonic resonance interactions via the acoustic, electromechanical, and electromagnetic plasma oscillator of the Harmonic Flux Resonator. Following the unified physics principles of inventor and physicist Nassim Haramein, a precise dimensional ratio was found in which the tetrahedral ARK crystals would form optimal harmonic resonances with vacuum-coupling acoustic and electromagnetic frequencies. These structural and dimensional characteristics appear to endow the ARK crystals with a profound ability to link with the non-local entanglement network and energetic dynamics of the quantum vacuum. .

Being in a monastery helps because many distractions and temptations are removed and you can do it on a temporary basis But you have to like the idea of being monk. If you don't and you are just after a result it would be very hard

Approach now, it will be a great victory. You will not get this opportunity again

death

Can you speak about the differences of meditating with a mindfulness approach where one notes thoughts in order to let go of them and be in the present vs. repeating a mantra to transcend Also what is the difference in what your are calling "formal sessions" and are those mindfulness of TMI ? thanks

https://resonancescience.org/about/nassim-haramein/

I'm not voting for him but this race just changed

Nov 24 Michael Bloomberg launches Democratic presidential bid By STEVE PEOPLES NEW YORK (AP) — Billionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, one of the world’s richest men, has formally launched a Democratic bid for president. Full Coverage: Election 2020 Ending weeks of speculation, the 77-year-old former Republican announced his candidacy Sunday in a written statement posted on a campaign website describing himself as uniquely positioned to defeat President Donald Trump. He will quickly follow with a massive advertising campaign blanketing airways in key primary states across the U.S. “I’m running for president to defeat Donald Trump and rebuild America,” Bloomberg wrote. “We cannot afford four more years of President Trump’s reckless and unethical actions,” he continued. “He represents an existential threat to our country and our values. If he wins another term in office, we may never recover from the damage.” Bloomberg’s entrance comes just 10 weeks before primary voting begins, an unorthodox move that reflects anxiety within the Democratic Party about the strength of its current candidates. As a centrist with deep ties to Wall Street, Bloomberg is expected to struggle among the party’s energized progressive base. He became a Democrat only last year. Yet his tremendous resources and moderate profile could be appealing in a primary contest that has become, above all, a quest to find the person best-positioned to deny Trump a second term next November. Forbes ranked Bloomberg as the 11th-richest person in the world last year with a net worth of roughly $50 billion. Trump, by contrast, was ranked 259th with a net worth of just over $3 billion. Already, Bloomberg has vowed to spend at least $150 million of his fortune on various pieces of a 2020 campaign, including more than $100 million for internet ads attacking Trump, between $15 million and $20 million on a voter registration drive largely targeting minority voters, and more than $30 million on an initial round of television ads. He did not say how much he would be willing to spend overall on his presidential ambitions, but senior adviser Howard Wolfson did: “Whatever it takes to defeat Donald Trump.” Wolfson also said that Bloomberg would not accept a single political donation for his campaign or take a salary should he become president. Even before the announcement was final, Democratic rivals like Bernie Sanders pounced on Bloomberg’s plans to rely on his personal fortune. “We do not believe that billionaires have the right to buy elections,” Sanders said as he campaigned in New Hampshire on Sunday. He continued: “That is why multibillionaires like Mr. Bloomberg are not going to get very far in this election.” Elizabeth Warren, another leading progressive candidate, also slammed Bloomberg on Saturday for trying to buy the presidency. “I understand that rich people are going to have more shoes than the rest of us, they’re going to have more cars than the rest of us, they’re going to have more houses,” she said after a campaign stop in Manchester, New Hampshire. “But they don’t get a bigger share of democracy, especially in a Democratic primary. We need to be doing the face-to-face work that lifts every voice.” Bloomberg does not speak in his announcement video, which casts him as a successful businessman who came from humble roots and ultimately “put his money where his heart is” to effect change on the top policy issues of the day — gun violence, climate change, immigration and equality, among them. Bloomberg has devoted tens of millions of dollars to pursue his policy priorities in recent years, producing measurable progress in cities and states across America. He has helped shutter 282 coal plants in the United States and organized a coalition of American cities on track to cut 75 million metric tons of carbon emissions by 2025. But he is far from a left-wing ideologue. Bloomberg has declined to embrace Medicare for All as a health care prescription or the “Green New Deal” to combat climate change, favoring a more pragmatic approach. Still, he has endeared himself to many of the nation’s mayors, having made huge investments to help train local officials and encouraging them to take action on climate, guns and immigration in particular. Ahead of Bloomberg’s presidential announcement, the mayors of Columbia, South Carolina, and Louisville, Kentucky, endorsed him. Despite that show of support from at least one prominent black leader, Bloomberg may have trouble building a multi-racial coalition early on given his turbulent record on race relations in New York. He angered many minority voters during his 12 years in the New York City mayor’s office for embracing and defending the controversial “stop-and-frisk” police strategy, despite its disproportionate impact on people of color. Facing an African-American congregation this month in Brooklyn, Bloomberg apologized and acknowledged it often led to the detention of blacks and Latinos. The apology was received skeptically by many prominent activists who noted that it was made as he was taking steps to enter the race. The campaign will be headquartered in Manhattan and managed by longtime adviser Kevin Sheekey. Wolfson will also play a senior role. Bloomberg’s team did not establish a super PAC before launching the campaign, preferring to run the primary campaign and a simultaneous set of general election-focused moves like the anti-Trump internet ads and voter registration drive out of the same office. The path ahead may be decidedly uphill and unfamiliar. Bloomberg plans to bypass the first four states on the primary calendar — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina — and focus instead on the crush of states that vote on Super Tuesday and beyond. It’s a strategy that acknowledges the limitations of entering the race at this late stage and the opportunities afforded by his vast personal wealth. His team has noted that several candidates have devoted much of the year to building support on the ground in the earliest states, and Bloomberg needs to be realistic about where he can make up ground. Nearly a quarter of primary delegates are up for grabs in the March 3 Super Tuesday contests, which have gotten far less attention so far. Bloomberg has openly considered a presidential bid before, but as an independent. He declined to enter the 2016 contest only after deciding there was no path to victory without the backing of a major political party. He explored a run earlier this year, too, but decided there was no path with establishment-favorite Joe Biden in the race. Biden’s perceived weakness, along with the rise of progressive firebrand Warren, convinced him to reconsider. “We believe that voters are increasingly concerned that the field is not well positioned to defeat Donald Trump,” Wolfson said of Bloomberg’s decision to change his mind. Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway actually praised Bloomberg’s tenure as mayor when asked about his announcement Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” But she said his entrance into the 2020 race “means the Democratic field is underwhelming.” Should Bloomberg ultimately become the nominee to take on Trump, she said, “We’re ready.” Conway cast doubt on whether he’d be welcomed by Democratic voters. Initially registered as a Democrat, Bloomberg, a Massachusetts native, filed paperwork to change his voter registration to Republican in 2000 before his first run for New York City mayor, according to a spokesman. In June 2007, he unenrolled from the GOP, having no formal party affiliation until he registered again as a Democrat this October. While some will question his newfound commitment to Democrats, he vowed allegiance to the party in an Associated Press interview earlier in the year, saying, “I will be a Democrat for the rest of my life.” __ Associated Press writer Hunter Woodall in Manchester, New Hampshire,

these are opposites? and which spiritual teachers are you referring to?

please also contribute to the write a haiku thread, click

Get out of the house and stop making excuses for being a spiritual couch potato

THE HINDU-YOGI SCIENCE OF BREATH By YOGI RAMACHARAKA (Link removed by moderator)

TRUMP: ART OF THE MEAL by Jim Carrey

How has the internet splintered our democracy? | Ramesh Srinivasan

1939 PDF (Link removed by moderator)

It depends on the quality of the heroin

The amount you are doing is beyond self improvement aims. It is more like what someone wold do to pursue an awakening. If you don't want an awakening reduce the amount of time for a while. Then find a good teacher to advise

when you say you do 6 hours of mediation is that regular sitting meditation?

so even nondualists are screwed

Rupert Spira https://non-duality.rupertspira.com/read/all_that_is_ever_known_and_all_that_ever_is154 The fact that Consciousness only experiences itself through one mind is a belief held by one mind! There is no evidence for it. This is called solipsism. Non-duality states there is only Consciousness. Solipsism states there is only the content of our own mind. These two statements may appear to be similar but in fact they are poles apart. The former is the source of sanity, the latter insanity. In order to know anything apparently objective, Consciousness must take the shape of the mind. It is by definition only possible for the mind to hold one thought/image/perception at a time. In other words, this apparent limitation is inherent in the structure of the mind. However, it is a mistake to project this limitation of mind onto Consciousness and presume, as a result, that Consciousness is limited. Let us take the example of two minds, mind A and mind B. Mind A consists of thought/sensation/perception A and mind B consists of thought/sensation/perception B. Mind A is one single ‘object’ known by Consciousness; likewise mind B. Now mind B could never appear in mind A because one object cannot appear in another. So it is impossible for mind A to know mind B. In fact mind A does not know anything. It is known. Likewise mind B. However, the fact that one object can never appear in another object or even that two objects can never be present ‘in the same mind’ at the same time does not tell us anything about that which knows each mind. In fact, why could there not be an infinity of minds all appearing in and simultaneously known by the same Consciousness? I am not proving that this is the case. I am only suggesting it as a possibility and in doing so exposing the fallacy of the ‘only-this-mind’ belief. I am not suggesting that my model of a multiplicity of minds appearing simultaneously in one Consciousness is an accurate model of experience. There are no accurate mind-made models of the reality of experience. However, I use this model as a possibility to rescue non-duality from being equated with solipsism. Solipsism is simply an exaggerated form of the ‘I-am-the-centre-of-the-universe’ belief that characterises the apparently separate entity. Non-duality is rather the opposite of this. It is the experiential understanding that there is no centre to the universe. Love is another name for this understanding in which all seeming things are known to be one seamless garment, made out of Consciousness alone, each apparent part intimately connected to all other apparent parts. Even that is not quite true because of the presumption of parts, but such are the limitations of the mind when speaking of something that is beyond its conception or perception. * * *