Martin Shkreli is the Hero America Deserves

This is the normal physical reaction when one hears the words "Martin Shkreli"

The internet's latest ragefest is all about "pharma-bro" Martin Shkreli. According to the masses Mr. Shkreli is an abomination of a human being with no empathy and a total disregard for a civilized society. He is a spoiled punk brat who uses his influence to make money off of the backs of the less fortunate. He has no remorse. He has no compassion. He is a monster. Martin Shkreli is so bad, that our incompetent elected officials in Washington D.C. are being seen as the sympathetic party when it comes to Mr Shkreli's testimony to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. When one person can make the idiots in Congress looks good, that person deserves to be demonized.

I am not here to demonize Martin Shkreli, I am here to praise him. I in no way support the idea of jacking up the price of a life saving drug in order to make another billion. That is monsterous. The question I have is what law did he break (there is the securities fraud issue, but he has not been convicted of anything)? The press likes to focus on the obscene mark-up on the life saving drug Daraprim. By raising the price 5556% ($13.50 a dose to $750.00 a dose) Mr. Shkreli put lives in danger. Daraprim is used to treat infections in HIV positive patients, and is used globally to treat and prevent malaria. The World Health Organization lists the drug as an essential medicine. This mark-up on a life saving drug, coupled with Martin Shkreli's arrogance, has made the former Turing Pharmaceuticals CEO a popular target for people fed up with corporate greed. The problem is that by raising the price on Daraprim, Mr. Shkreli did not break the law. He embraced a culture that is encouraged by our government and society as a whole. Plus, Martin Shkreli is not the first person to do this.

The practice of pharma companies buying generic drugs and radically raising their prices is not new. Do you know anyone with asthma? There is a very good chance that the asthmatic person uses an inhaler with the drug Albuterol sulfate. This is a life saving medicine for a very treatable illness. In 2013 Albuterol sulfate was $11 a dose. Six months later the price had gone up to $434 a dose, an increase of 4014%. Where was the public outrage towards the pharma companies? The drug was another off patent drug, but the delivery system (inhaler) needed to be redesigned because of new government regulations. The Pharma companies knew the inhalers would be protected by patents, so they jacked up the price of Albuterol to make some extra money (Mother Jones has a nice article describing the situation). I never remember seeing congress scolding at the CEO responsible for this greed?

There are many more drugs, ones not owned by Turing Pharmaceuticals, that have had their prices skyrocket. In 2014 Representative Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland) and Senator Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont) launched a Congressional investigation into the skyrocketing cost of generic drugs. They put together a list of drugs that have recently seen a drastic increase in cost (see the list) and tried to get answers from the pharma companies. There were no answers, there was no public outcry, there was no congressional investigation, there was no prosecution, and there was no change in the laws to make this practice illegal.. These pharma companies were just doing what the United States government allows them to do. 

Now the government wants to get serious because Martin Shkreli is an unlikable fellow. The Republicans (you know the free market guys) and Democrats decide to use Mr. Shkreli as their scapegoat for their own incompetence. They have no case. Representative Cummings  stupidly decided to attack Mr. Shkreli because of the purchase by the former Turing Pharmaceuticals CEO of the one of a kind Wu-Tang Clan album. If I had a few billion dollars I would have bought the Wu-Tang Clan album, they are one of the greatest american bands ever. What is the point of attacking the man for having great taste in music. That whole tirade by Representative Cummings proves that the government is showboating. Those Representatives created this America, Martin Shkreli is just getting rich off of their incompetence.

It is also amusing that all the supposed free market Republicans want to attack Mr. Shkreli and Turing Pharmaceuticals for the price gouge. These bozos have been defending corporate greed for decades. Why are we not yelling at the health insurance companies who are making money off of people getting sick? They set arbitrary prices all the time just to make a few extra billion. The same charlatans in Congress who got mad at Mr. Shkreli will turn around and praise government welfare queens like Jamie Diamon and other business leaders who depend on bailouts. The only reason Congress decided to grill Martin Shkreli is because the internet is mad at him. There is nothing that can be done to stop him. Well the government could try to pass some laws to make this practice illegal, but that will never happen. The Republicans and Democrats alike would never upset their big money donors, no matter how many people need to suffer. 

Martin Shkreli is an american hero. He is the embodiment of the modern American dream. Born to immigrants who worked as janitors, Martin Shkreli made his way in the world be exploiting our inhumane economic culture. We celebrate these people as geniuses. America deserves Martin Shkreli. He is the hero we deserve. He got rich with shady legal practices, he increases his wealth with inhuman actions, and he smirks his way through life. He is a modern American creation. Plus he is also quite aware that Congress is full of imbeciles. While kids are getting poisoned in Flint, Michigan, through the direct fault of the government, the US Congress wants to scold a successful business man. That is the mark of a house led by imbeciles. Thanks you American hero Martin Shkreli for speaking the truth.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing. Do you want to sing the praises of the downtrodden? Come write for us.  

Donald Trump and the Extinction of the White Man

Welcome to the fossil record GOP

Contrary to popular belief, Charles Darwin was not the first person to use the term  "survival of the fittest". Philosopher Herbert Spencer used Darwin's ideas of natural selection and incorporated them into the social economic world. In the late 19th century the the use of "survival of the fittest" was being co opted by people believing in the idea of Social Darwinism. Many business men, right wing philosophers, and politicians would use the "science" of Social Darwinism to justify their consumption of natural resources, their lust for war, their consolidation of wealth, and their misogyny and racism. All of the practitioners of Social Darwinism were white men.

Donald Trump is not a Republican, at least not in the way the Republican Party has been trying to brand itself. The current GOP believes that the public sees them as a small government alternative to the tax and spend ideals of the Democratic Party. The Republican PR machine thinks people will vote for their candidates because the party believes in personal responsibility and freedom. According to the GOP, we only need a government for military purposes, and to execute criminals. Everything else should be left up to the individual. 

Unless you are a woman, then the Republican Party wants to be completely part of your life. Equal pay for equal work is something the GOP has been using large government to stop for decades. The personal health of a woman's body has been obsessed over by the Republicans in Washington D.C. for nearly half a century. Oh and if you are a minority, the small government Republicans want use the full power of Washington D.C. to control your life. The absolute desire to allow housing and hiring discrimination are top of the mind when it comes to the GOP in DC. They cannot leave those decisions up to the states, it has to be a federal issue. If you are poor, the Republicans think the federal government has every right to control your lives. One's right to vote or to collect needed assistance has been a key point to Republican policy in the seat of federal power. All the talk of personal responsibility and freedom, that only applies to the class of rich white men.

This true face of the Republican Party is what Donald Trump represents. The face of misogyny, disdain for the less fortunate, and racism. The 19th century acolytes of Social Darwinism, that is the 21st century Republican Party. Donald Trump makes the establishment uncomfortable because he has removed their mask and exposed their true self. Everything Mr. Trump believes, and that the Republican Party believes, is all about keeping established white men in power. They want to protect a social group that is rapidly going extinct. Donald Trump and the GOP are fighting nature and are about to disappear from the world.

Once humankind planted seeds in the ground and started to create communities society began to evolve. We created homes, cities, and countries. The growth of the community caused the creating of laws and social structure. Monarchy gave way to the republic. Plutocracy gave way to economic socialism. Power being held by a few men gave way to nations being led by publicly elected parliaments and led by female prime ministers. Society evolved by including more citizens. The monarchs of France, who would not evolve, lost their heads. The Czars of Russia, who did not listen to the next generation, were shot. The fascists of the Soviet empire, who would not flow with history, were all deposed. Those that fight history in order to keep the status quo always lose. Always.

The GOP has been trying to reverse social evolution for over a century. They dress up their antiquated views with fancy language that appeals to a minority of Americans. Donald Trump has stripped away the fancy language and embraced the core ideas of Republican Social Darwinism. Keep money and power in the hands of rich white men and do what ever possible to control everyone else. These ideas will not make society progress. These ideas are doomed for extinction, and the practitioners of these views are doomed to disappear. The age of the white man is over. They are not fit enough to be part of the future.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing. Do you disagree? Come write for us.

Empathy and the Myth of Free Will

A society with an abundance of prisons has a lack of understanding

Think of an instance where something terribly unfortunate happened to other people as a result of the actions of a person. Think of the moral judgement placed on the person who took that action. Ideas of what that person could or should have done differently might come to mind. You might think that if you were in their position, you would have done differently and that this justifies the moral judgement and thus a sense of moral superiority.

Now go back to thinking about yourself in their position. Imagine that you were that person. I mean really were that person. You have the same genetics as that person. The exact same set of life circumstances as that person. The same experiences as that person. The whole package. You would also not have your own experiences or genetics anymore. You would no longer be you, but would be that person. Can you say that the choices you made that resulted in this unfortunate happening would be different?

Once you realize the answer to this question, you can start to empathize with this person that you may have started out feeling a sense of moral superiority to. You may start to realize that while we do have choices to make in our lives and we feel the sense of freedom to make them, we really do not have that freedom. We simply make our choices out of a very complex genetic and experientially informed history. The way we experience this is as a sense of free will, but it is an illusion. An illusion we cannot help but fall for most of the time, but an illusion none the less.

So if it is an illusion that is a core part of our decision making process, you may wonder why bother pointing it out or thinking about it at all? One reason is in the example that I stepped you through in the first two paragraphs. It is the difference between seeing someone who does something that causes others suffering as a bad person or seeing them as a person who did something that hurt others. In one case you can have compassion for the person in the other you can dismiss them. One mindset inspires cooperation and understanding while the other inspires aggression, violence, and more suffering. More peaceful interactions and less judgement result.

This is not to say that we should just stand by when people cause suffering and do nothing about it. It does change the way we address it though. The realization that punishing the person directly responsible for the action that caused harm does nothing to address the root of the problem has immense value. We can accept that responding to harmful behavior with more aggression cannot bring any solace. If anything it will bring about more harm.

Instead we can address the person in question with compassion rather than judgement. We may still have to separate a person who is a harm to others from those they might hurt, but not necessarily in a poorly funded cell which provides an environment of fear which often causes the problems which lead to acts of harm. We already recognize the difference when the person committing the act has a known mental disorder. We treat them differently in our justice system than those to whom we attribute an act of free will. What I am saying is that we could apply that sense of corrective potential to any criminal act.

Not only does this realization of the illusion of free will inspire us to be more compassionate toward others, but it leads to more compassion toward ourselves. Most of us have realized the harmful result of our own actions at some point in our lives. When this happens we often beat ourselves up over it. Forgetting the perfect vision of hindsight, we tell ourselves that we should have known better. Instead we can realize that we did the best we could with the resources we had available to our minds in the moment and move on to acceptance. Then we may use the experience to learn instead of dwell and cause ourselves further harm. We can be more aware of the influence of our actions the next time and make more positive changes in ourselves.

Do you think your perspective might benefit from a realization that free will is an illusion? Does the idea inspire any other thoughts in you? Let me know in the comments.

Kirk Aug

Kirk runs the idea farm here at SeedSing. Send us your thoughts, and we will publish them here. Do not forget to follow Kirk on twitter @kirkaug.

SeedSing's 10 Most Popular Posts of 2015

Follow me to great writing

SeedSing was born into existence in May of 2015. The idea behind the website was to bring a common voice to the politics and pop culture of our society. We started with the goal to post 3-5 articles a week and hoped to get around 100 unique visitors in each week. We are grateful that the websites traffic has grown beyond those numbers and are looking forward to all the new readers, and contributors, 2016. Today we present the 10 most read articles on SeedSing for 2015.

10. Thank You for Inhaling: Money, Freedom, and the Legalization of Marijuana  The movement to legalize Marijuana made its way to Ohio in 2015. Head editor RD Kulik takes  a look at the reasons for the sudden acceptance, and failure, of marijuana legalization.

9. We Must Halt the Dumbening of our Society  When Tina S contributes to SeedSing, it is always brings the intelligent discourse up a few notches. As someone who respects science, and facts in general, Tina is appalled that we  embrace and celebrate stupidity in our culture. This needs to end.

8.  The Greatest American Band Debate: The Introduction  SeedSing is filled with music lovers. In July Ty decided we should argue about who is the greatest American Band ever. With this introduction the debate was set, and many bands have been nominated since, with more to come.

7. Marty Will Be Here Soon. Do We Have All the Tech He Needs?  Kirk Aug wanted to kick off the celebration for Marty and Doc's arrival to 2015 by wondering how far we have come in inventing all the tech from Back to the Future II. We have come a long way, and even surpassed, many of the films predictions. Still no time travel.

6.The Ohio Problem  One of the very first posts on SeedSing discussed how the national political parties are leaving the cupboard bare for the local politicians. With the 2016 Presidential campaigns kicking into high gear the Ohio Problem will rear it's ugly head once again. Something must be done.

5. Our Future Source for Meat Will Not be the Animals  One of SeedSing's most recent posts quickly has become one of our most read. Kirk Aug looks at the present, and future, of lab grown meat. On top of the nutritional value, what will be the moral value of meat from the lab?

4. What is Real Food?  The debate of genetically modified organisms and how we label food intensified in 2015. Kirk takes a look at the science, and law, surrounding gmo's. Does the place your food was created really matter to the value of your meal?

3. In an Era of Bad Sports Announcers, Cris Collinsworth is the Worst  Early in the 2015 NFL season Ty decided to blow off some steam and label NBC sports personality Cris Collinsworth as the worst announcer in America. The public seemed to agree. Every Sunday night, SeedSing has seen a spike in readership based solely on Ty's piece. Maybe Cris Collinsworth really is the worst of a bad lot.

2. #ILookLikeAnEnginner Needs to have Meaning  Over the summer the twitter campaign #ILookLikeAnEnginner became a big news story. Tina S, a real engineer, was concerned with how this campaign was distorted the world of engineering. Many people agreed with Tina, and her post was shared on a variety of sites across the internet.

1. Please Leave Me Out of Your Cool Beard Club Ty decided to write a small rant about the rise of "cool beard guy" and why he did not care  for their club like mentality. What was supposed to be a small, humorous, post quickly turned  into the most popular piece ever on SeedSing. Dudes with beards seem to be very protective,  and sensitive, about how others view their facial hair lifestyle. If they are not careful, Ty may  just have a few words to say about their jeans and glasses.

Thanks to everyone for your support in reading SeedSing during 2015. We look forward to bringing more intelligent, humorous, and thought provoking pieces in 2016. We are the only place on the internet where you can read about the future of food, the current structural problems in politics, and the annoyance of the "cool beard guy". What more could you want?

RD Kulik (and the contributors to SeedSing)

RD is the creator and Head Editor for SeedSing. You can make the most read list of 2016 by writing for us.

The SeedSing (half) Year in Idea Farming

We have a few ideas

Part of SeedSing's mission is to highlight the ideas and technology that will create a better future. We call this collection of essay's The Idea Farm. Contributors seek out and discuss these innovations on the pages of the website. What began as a few book reviews posted in the Politics/Society portion of SeedSing has grown into its own community. Join us as we highlight the (half) year in Idea Farming.

Kirk Aug started his posting career on SeedSing by taking a look at the unintentional benefits brought to us through piracy. He stayed in the world of computers and customization with a look at a future without an installed dedicated operating system on our computers. The use of one's electronic devices may one day allow us to communicate with anyone around the world. The pirates of yesterday have become the innovators of tomorrow.

How we conduct our day to day lives through technology is rapidly changing. Your car will soon not need your participation to get from point A to point B. The Microsoft Band and Android Wear watches started occupying space on our wrists long before Apple's offering. Even as we speak, unmanned drones are slowly filling our skies, confusing many of library patrons. The productivity of one's office is rapidly changing. Guest contributor Matthew Young highlighted many new technologies beneficial to the business world.  While there does not seem to be a lot of use for 3-D printing in the home, the technology is radically transforming the world of manufacturing. The technology innovations of today will be parts of our normal lives in the future.

The Idea Farm was not only about looking at future tech. Tina S asked us why we celebrate stupidity in our society. RD wanted to know if it is time we give up on the poisonous ideas of capitalism. Kirk wanted to give a proper name to the communicator he carries around to make calls and search the internet. The future is full of questions and uncertainty. Once we have worked our way through these questions, it is best to relax and mediate.

The Idea Farm was very interested in the food of the future. One of our most popular posts came from Kirk and asked us all what is real food. The rise of lab created nutrition may create a safe and guilt free hamburger. If the idea of eating something that looks and taste to natural turns you off, one could always take a sip of some Soylent. The farms of tomorrow are being cultivated in the lab.

The world we are creating is exciting and unknown. Electronics have moved away from the desktop and inhabited every aspect of our world. Hunger and global climate change can be reversed with some of the innovations surrounding nutrition. We have a lot to be hopeful for, and a lot to be anxious about. When the drones fill you with dread, go home and have a nice meditation session. It will all be ok.

RD Kulik (and the SeedSing contributors)

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing. Come join the conversation of tomorrow by writing for SeedSing today.

The SeedSing (half) year in Politics and Society

What is the opposite of progress?

SeedSing was launched on May 1st (National Workers Day) so we could look at politics and pop culture from the common person. We are not interested in influence or telling stories that will protect the egos of the well connected. What started out as one man's personal political philosophy has grown into a discussion covering a variety of topics. Join us for a look back at the year in politics and society.

The first article posted on our Politics/Society section was about The Ohio Problem. Every presidential election states like Ohio become very important to the national Democratic Party. Out of state consultants are brought in to fund raise and create a massive voter outreach program for the presidential nominee. In their effort to secure the state, the Democratic Party forgets about the local candidates. The lack of voter turnout during non-presidential elections is a direct consequence of the Ohio problem. There was another election in November of 2015, and the Commonwealth of Kentucky saw the election of a Tea Party zealot for Governor, large in part because voter turnout was so low. This is directly related to the Republican Party taking over the majority of local offices in many blue states. We identified the The Ohio Problem, and then tried to find out how to solve this issue. Technology and an emphasis on local messaging are two solutions we put forward. In 2016 SeedSing is looking forward to many other solution oriented ideas on how to fix a problem like Ohio.

The how and why of the modern Republican Party was featured many times on SeedSing. The hypocrisy, lack of global leadership, the need to be hateful, the absence of vision, and the celebration of failure, were all on display for the Republican Party this year. The only glimmer of hope in their dreary future seems to be Senator Rand Paul, but the Republican Party does not seem to care about a candidate who can grow the parties voter base. The parties faithful base would rather rally behind a loudmouthed bigot idiot that has never heard of Muhammad Ali or Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

The traditional press and the original internet taste makers were beginning to show their incompetence in 2015. The rise of Donald Trump is upon us because the news people on television love to have a good story. It is time to ignore the press before they really bring disaster to our society. The old icons of the internet were not behaving any better than their television counterparts. Reddit and Gawker may be letting out their final breaths. At SeedSing we believe it is time for the old walled ways of the internet to die, and it is time to make way for a new open discussion.

How we live and the way we define people became a topic of discussion all over the internet. Tina S shared her views on what #ILookLikeAnEngineer really means. The saga of Rachel Dolezal briefly made us talk about how we identify race. Kirk Aug recommended books on  the failure that is the war on drugs, and the policy side of death. We took a look at the legalization of marijuana, and it's eventual failure at the Ohio ballot box.  Who we are and how we live will determine the type of society we will die in.

Gun violence became a larger problem with a solution falling farther away. Guns were used as tools of destruction for a racist. Guns were used to kill two people trying to do their jobs. Guns were used to cause terror at rural community college. Guns were used by crazy people to insight terror in Paris. Predictable we decided to fight this terror with more destruction. Each event was covered by the news, and as a society we tried to find meaning. The public was never able to discuss the gun as being part of the problem, and the violence continues. 

We had many challenging discussions at SeedSing about the state of our politics and our society. 2016 looks to be an even more exciting year. We have a Presidential election to look forward to. Will Hillary win it all (probably)? Have something to say about the state of politics and society? Come join our conversation.

Thank you for 2015. On to 2016

RD Kulik (and all the SeedSing contributors)

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing. Do you love SeedSing, but do not want to write? Money is always welcome around here.

Ty calmly teaches Donald Trump about the fine history of American - Muslims athletes

One place covered in gold not owned by Trump

The wonderful President Obama gave a very eloquent, powerful speech on Sunday night in regards to the horrific shooting that happened in San Bernadino, California.

It was a tragic event that happens way too often in the US. These mass shootings need to stop and we need much better laws involving gun control. It's sickening that you can walk into a local Wal Mart or Gander Mtn and walk out with a gun. What has this country come to? Why does everybody need a gun?

Those are questions for a different blog at another time. What I'm writing about today is the ignorant, arrogant, stupid, maniacal and just plain wrong comments world class moron and very racist Donald Trump made during this speech. First of all, he will never be the president. There is no possible world that he becomes president. He's grossly under qualified, he's stupid and he is way too arrogant for the job. He can't run his own business properly, let alone this country. And before you say, you're a liberal and these are just your beliefs, not true. I've heard many prominent conservative republicans that are very pissed and very outraged that Trump is still being talked about as a viable candidate for the republican party. He's a cancer that needs to go away. He's no different than the Kardashian family. He's a joke and his campaign is a joke akin to something "The Onion" would mock on a daily basis. But, like the douchebag he is, he live tweeted President Obama's speech and made one of the most asinine and flat out racist comments on Twitter that I've ever heard.

The President said, "Muslim-Americans are our friends and neighbors, our co-workers, our sports heroes". Then, in his infinite stupidity, Trump said, and I'm giving an exact quote again, "Obama said in his speech that Muslims are our sports heroes. What sport is he talking about, and who? Is Obama profiling?". First things first, that tweet has terrible punctuation. Even I, a career ready college grad, can spot all the grammatical problems with this. He needs to end the first thought with a question mark, not a period. Second, he needs no comma between about and who, just leave it alone. Third, what the shit is he talking about with profiling?! The only person who's been profiling is you, you stupid son of a bitch!

Lets look closely at that quote. Clearly, Trump hates Muslims, be they American or any other country born. If that isn't the definition of racism, I don't know what is. Secondly, there are actual pictures of Trump giving a humanitarian award to one of the greatest Muslim athletes of all time, Muhammed Ali. So, we all now have photographic evidence that he damn well knows of at least one very famous Muslim sports hero. But, Muslim American sports heroes don't just stop at Ali. We have Kareem Abdul Jabaar, Hakeem Olajuwon, Shareef Abdur Raheem, Mahmoud Abdul Rauf, and even Shaquille O'Neal, just to name a few. Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal may be shocking surprises to you, but they have gone about keeping their religion to themselves, making me like them that much more that they don't push religion on anyone. Shareef Abdur Raheem and Mahmoud Abdul Rauf may be lesser known, but they some of my favorite NBA players of all time. I used to have a Abdur Raheem Vancouver Grizzlies jersey when he was first in the league. I loved his game and the tenacity with which he played. Mahmoud Abdul Rauf may only be known to the outside sports fan as the guy who wouldn't stand for the national anthem, exercising his religious right, but he was one of the top point guards in the NBA in the mid 90's. He was a great assist and defensive specialist and he could score buckets when needed. And of course there's Kareem Abdul Jabaar, one of the NBA's all time greats. He was a star at UCLA, going by the name of Lew Alcindor, and that was his name while playing for the Milwaukee Bucks, but he later converted to Islam when playing for the Lakers.

So, let's take all the other guys out that I just mentioned and let's focus on Kareem Abdul Jabaar and Muhammed Ali. Can you think of two bigger names in American sports? Some will throw out Michael Jordan or Mike Tyson, but I know that Ali is a more famous fighter than Tyson and Kareem is right up there with Jordan. And guess what, they're both Muslim-American athletes Donald Trump, you dumbass. Also, in response, both Ali and Jabaar have come out and denounced Trump. I didn't think I could look up to these men anymore, but they just gained a lot more respect from me. Something needed to be said and who better than two uber famous Muslim athletes. Jabaar put out a very eloquent, very poignant piece in "Time" magazine, basically saying that what Trump is doing is basically terrorism. One part of his piece stated that Trump is basically a Manchurian candidate, putting fear into people where it need not be, essentially doing ISIS job for them. He also said that Trump is ISIS greatest triumph. This is exactly what they want out of American's, fear, and Trump is putting it into people that ISIS has no beef with. He also stated that saying Muslims aren't sports heroes is dimwitted and cruel, suggesting that Muslims are "less worthy"  and a "lesser person" because of their beliefs. Jabaar is 1,000 percent correct and I'm so glad he came out against this monster. Something further needed to be said about this and in swooped Ali. Ali stated, and I quote, "there's nothing Islamic about killing people and that goes against the tenets of the religion. Islamic jihadists go against the true spirit of Muslims". He further added, "speaking as someone who's never been accused of political correctness, I believe our political leaders should bring an understanding about the religion of Islam and clarify the misguided ones that have perverted people's views on what Islam really is". Pretty god damn poetic words from Mr. Ali if you ask me.

I figure at this point Trump is just saying whatever comes into his tiny little pea brain. He's never had a filter, but now, he's off the rails. He's Fox News come to life. My brother and editor of the website RD had a perfect response when I posed the idea for this article today, he said that "Trump is saying what all the Fox News anchors think. He's just as racist and ignorant as the whole crew at Fox News". I couldn't agree more. I hope Trump gets the message loud and clear that he's a dip shit of the world class variety. He's so arrogant, that when he speaks, no matter what he says, he believes it. It can be wrong, racist, idiotic, he doesn't care because it's coming from his mouth. Trump is the true terrorist.

I hope that the people who back him get their wish and he runs the country. It will be a shit show of the highest caliber. As I already stated, he can't even run his own company or his own TV show without it eventually failing, so imagine how terrible he'd be as president of the USA. God, it would be awful. I bet he'd get impeached before year one even ended. Go to hell Donald Trump. I hope you get gonorrhea and have to suffer horrible pain for the rest of your life. That's what a racist asshole like you deserves. You suck. And thank you Kareem Abdul Jabaar and Muhammed Ali for being the inspirations you've been your entire lives. You still inspire millions of people today, no matter what some random dick head says. Kareem Abdul Jabaar and Muhammed Ali are more heroic and more American than Donald Trump will ever be.

Oh, and they're Muslim too.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture Editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He admires the patience and humanity of Kareem and Ali, yet Ty can not share their civility when discussing Mr. Trump. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik.

Terrorism Turns us into Monsters

The only way to defeat the terrorists

The tragedy in Paris is still raw. Many people have expressed their unfiltered opinions of the attacks. Some have been more careful in their reactions. The common chorus coming out of the political class, and the media, is that ISIS needs to be bombed into oblivion. Another horrible terrorist attack on an industrialized country, another call to level another nation. We see those like us being killed and maimed, we demand double retribution. The only way to end terrorism is to counter with our superior firepower. This is a trap. The terrorists need our aggression The way terrorism thrives is when we become the monsters.

The way we used to respond to terrorism was through strategic police action. The criminals would be identified, their locations would be found, and the terrorist activity would end via death or capture of the bad guys. Some of the time we would change policy to make terror activity more difficult, such as London removing trash bins from the tube and central downtown. That all changed after September 11th. President Bush days after the horrible attacks promised to do to the attackers what they did to us. Bush promised to level a nation for America's wounds. Bush was good to his word, he did level a nation, two nations. The American people cheered on our campaign of "shock and awe". We incorporated words into our culture like "collateral damage" in order to justify the death of Afghan and Iraqi innocents. The new way to respond to terrorism was to retaliate with our superior might and technology. We became angry when terrorism hit our shores, and the world did not like us when we are angry.

Terrorism caused America to turn into the Incredible Hulk. Extremely powerful, unable to control, and a danger to everyone around us. We were big, green, and willing to destroy anything that got in our path. The United States was so focused on the enemy, that any unfortunate thing between us and our prey was going to be caught in the crossfire. It did not matter how many weddings were bombed, we had to get the Al Qaeda number two. A few hospitals get destroyed, we must depose of Saddam. The US was angry, the US must smash.

In the safety of our shores we cheered on this destruction. The destroyed hospitals, weddings, and innocents was never shown on the news. The bodies of kids sent to die in war were not covered on the network news. When Saddam was executed via hanging, we celebrated the end of Iraqi unrest. We were wrong. When Osama Bin Laden was gunned down in a bedroom we celebrated the end of Al Qaeda. We were wrong. When Jihadi John was bombed off of earth, we celebrated the death of ISIS. We were wrong. 

Every time the United States used over the top crushing force to destroy the latest identified terror group, we create a new and more dangerous group. The Bush administration was built for starting wars. These hawks had no idea, and no intent, to end these wars. Bush's folly of endless wars created the unstable and overtly dangerous ISIS. The terrorists who use a warped incorrect version of Islam as their ideology need to have a clear cut enemy. These monsters need the western world to be overtly aggressive to Islam. Charlatans like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly are some of ISIS's greatest weapons. The need to define Islam as a central problem helps ISIS to recruit. Young, unemployed, and ostracized Muslims are more receptive to the idea of hating the west when the popular media of the west preaches hate towards Islam. When innocent Muslim families are destroyed in a drone strike intended for a few terrorists the idea of the west as the enemy starts to take hold. When the U.S. can justify the killing of innocents in the name of global security, ISIS will use the killing of innocents as an equal method of war. If ISIS was able to wipe an entire US city off the map because a military base was close by, the world would scream in horror. When we kill innocents because they unfortunately live close to terrorist bases, the monsters gain sympathy. Our fear and anger is delivering new, desperate, recruits to the terrorists. 

The monsters of ISIS caused over 400 casualties in Paris. So far 129 innocent people have died. The French government over the weekend bombed known ISIS strongholds in Syria. Innocent families were undoubtedly killed in these bombing runs. Here in the United States we continue to bang the drums of war. Hillary Clinton regrettably used the specter of terrorism to justify donations to her presidential campaign from Wall Street billionaires. Egoist Donald Trump ramped up his hate filled campaign for President of the United States by telling the nation he would consider shutting down mosques he deems dangerous. Failing republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush is using the attacks to try and jump start his fading campaign. The rest of the republican field is falling all over each other to blame President Obama, Hillary Clinton, and anyone else their followers hate. Hours after the attacks, the US political class was screaming for more war. The media was demanding the current crop of presidential candidates to come up with a plan to destroy these terrorists. We were angry, we need to smash.

Smashing everything in our path is not a solution. Terrorism needs to end. Peace is the natural evolution of humanity, and terrorism is causing us to not evolve. To honor the innocents of terror, we should not create more terrorism. Killing Saddam, Bin Laden, Jihadi John, and a number of other monsters did not end terrorism. Killing children and families has increased the perception of the West wanting to destroy Islam. The media feeds the terrorists when they cheer on war. The political class emboldens the terrorists when they argue over what words we should use to describe the monsters. The need for the right wing to alienate all Muslims is making fighting terrorism much more difficult. Our past and current course of action feeds terrorism. We need a new plan. We need a global community to end terrorism. Paris should be the wake up call. Terrorism has turned us into a rampaging monster. Peace will bring us calm.

Stand with Paris, and with Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, anywhere else terrorism and war has touched. Stand proud and demand peace. Terrorism will end when we refuse to be the monster. Peace will prevail when we learn to not be the Hulk.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. His opinions are strong, but really needs your strength. Write for SeedSing. 

Thoughts on Paris

It seems that whenever tragic events of great suffering unfold I find myself attracted to the Twitter hashtags and other various online commentary related to these events. I am less interested in what the profit driven media has to say about these sort of events and more interested in what actual people without such a motive have to say. Since I have heard about what happened and is happening in Paris I have been spending much of my time looking into the thoughts and feelings of people around the world in reaction to these events.

One of the topics centered on in these reactions has been religion. The reactions regarding the intersection of the Paris attacks and religion are spanning several spectrums. I have read tweets from some of those who self-identify as atheist calling out religious ideology in general as the cause of this tragedy. I have read comments from some of those who self-identify as Christian who perpetuate the idea that Islam is inherently violent and thus justify grouping all who call themselves Muslim in with these attacks. I have read posts from some of those who self-identify as Muslim who are desperately pleading to disassociate Islam from the attack by pointing to specific entries in the Quran which show the peace that they see as representative of Islam. I have read the thoughts of some who want to take the focus off of religion entirely because they do not see how it could be related.

Most of my personal thoughts on the matter are with the people of Paris. I imagine that they are feeling terrified right now. Sadness and anger are probably also very prevalent. They need a sense of security and safety and stability and respect. They are extremely lacking in all of those needs right now. They also need some support and empathy from the rest of the world right now which is something that many people are also offering. There is a lot of that in the online discussion and it is good to see.

I do not want to be the person who says that we need to take the focus off of religion. I know well that just as some receive a sense of peace from the ideals of Islam or whatever religion they follow there are always those who can use alternative text in the same book to justify such inhumane acts. I think it is important to discuss the influence that religion has in any event. But as much as some of that influence might cause suffering, some people need the influence of religion, however flawed it may be, to give them solace in these times.

I have been the self-identifying atheist who quickly rises up to call out religion as the cause of all the suffering. I can appreciate the need to understand why things like this happen and to want to have a solution to the suffering no matter what ideological affiliation one might identify with. But our problems are more complicated than that.

The blame never lies in one place. Yes, the ideas of religions can be used to justify horrendous acts. But to abolish Islam, Christianity, etc. is, to those who peacefully follow those philosophies, to make an enemy in the abolishers for taking away their source of solace and community. We are all participants and influencers in a world that allows people who commit these atrocities to exist. If there is blame to be dealt it belongs to us all.

Perhaps instead of focusing on who or what ideas to blame, it would be more useful to focus on the unmet need. The attackers maybe needed a sense of community. In the common worldviews which offer an abundance of sides to take, labels to adhere to, and others to blame it is no wonder that some find their sense of community in such aggressive groups. Groups such as these who have come to the flawed understanding that in order for their to be peace for their group those who they can identify as “others” must be destroyed. The need for understanding can never be met with violence. One who wins a violent conflict never proves who has the truth. They only prove who has the strength. Understanding is not found there.

I guess I just needed to get these thoughts out. These events will likely be an ongoing worldwide discussion for a while. I think that the best thing to do is to react with empathy and support for the suffering, discuss how we all might come to a common understanding of the world, and take non-violent actions which help cement the sense of community that has the potential to result.

Kirk Aug

Kirk coordinates SeedSing's Idea Farm. Follow him on twitter @kirkaug.

Ty is tired of idiots who fight coffee and embrace racism

Idiots make my head hurt

I don't get political on this site ever. I'm not into politics and I feel that's its best, for me, to keep my political beliefs to myself. Politics are RD's thing and he does them well. But, two recent news stories have really gotten to me. They've both made me angry for very different reasons. I feel that I need to talk about these things because, if I keep them inside, I'll explode.

I am going to start with this whole Starbucks thing with the red cups. First of all, who really gives a shit about the cup that you're drinking delicious coffee out of? I've never noticed the cup before, but these recent stories coming from jack ass religious people are boiling my blood. The religious right is complaining that Starbucks is unholy because they aren't doing their Christmas or holiday cups this year. They're just doing a red cup. First of all, I like that Starbucks is trying to not affiliate itself with any holiday. A corporation shouldn't have to tell or show you their religious beliefs. Who cares what you believe in, as long as you aren't hurting anyone and the product is good? That's what I say. But, these asshole Christians coming into a Starbucks, or going on live TV or social media and degrading Starbucks for "taking the Christ out of Christmas" need to get a god damned life. Hey assholes, maybe the people who run Starbucks don't celebrate the same holiday that you do. People all over the world celebrate different holidays. That's why people should say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" this time of year. Not everybody is a Christian, I hate to burst your bubble Catholics and any other iteration of Christians. Also, how do you know that your "God", if there is even a God(I personally don't believe there is) celebrates Christmas? Just because your dumbass Bible tells you so doesn't make it true. The Bible is as reliable as someone saying, "I heard it from a friend of a friend". It's all hearsay and conjecture, and written by governments so the established white people stayed in power. It's ridiculous story after ridiculous story passed down and rewritten many times. Basically, the Bible is a crock of shit. It's as reliable as a story from "In Touch" magazine or "Us Weekly". It's a rag, and it's false. I used to believe pretty heavily in this stuff, and if you do believe, that's great for you, just don't stuff your religious opinion down my throat, I don't care. But, I grew up and was taught science through my folks. Now, I am a man of facts, not faith. So, all you wacko Christians going into Starbucks and saying your name is Merry Christmas, get a life and find some real things to complain about. Instead of bitching and moaning about a stupid cup, put your religious fervor towards something that matters. Try helping starving children overseas and in America. Do something that helps, stop complaining about a cup.

A bunch of imbeciles.

The other thing that has me upset is this whole situation going on in Columbia, Missouri at the University of Missouri. To get it out in the open immediately, I side with what the students and players did, going on strike until that racist, ignorant and arrogant piece of shit president resigned. They did the absolute right thing. What makes me angry are people out there calling these students and athletes spoiled and arrogant and saying that their scholarships should be revoked. What kind of ass backwards shit is that? These kids did something very important and took a stand against racism. Why should the football players have to give up their scholarships? Why do people think that going on strike made these kids feel entitled? How is what they did any different than when we have a labor union strike? These laborers, who seem to be the majority of people that dislike what the students and athletes did, get upset when another company comes in and undercuts them, offers a lower price to make a product and that certain company goes with the cheaper price. Then, while driving around or taking my son to his basketball game, I have to see grown ass adults holding a sign that says "Shame on Lucky's Market" or "Shame on insert company name here" for hiring non union workers. I'm sorry, but I thought your beloved America was a country that was built on commerce. Why wouldn't a company take a cheaper price to give you the same product? Who gives a shit if the name Boeing is attached when some other company can make me the same stuff for a lesser price. So, I ask again, why is what the students and the athletes at the University of Missouri did any different than when laborers go on strike? The only difference I see is racism. The now former president of the University of Missouri was and is clearly a racist. He does not care about students of color. Take their non violent protest when they stood in front of his Corvette and he had his driver, because of course he has a driver, rev the engine and eventually bump into some of the students. What the hell is that? Why don't these kids deserve to feel safe? They are away from their families, most of them in a new town, and they have to deal with stupid ass, privileged white boys yelling racial slurs at them and the president of the university does nothing. That's a crying shame. Did I miss something, because I thought we were in the 21st century. This is supposed to be a golden age where everyone is equal. Men, women, white people, black people, brown people, Chinese people, so on and so forth. But, this doesn't seem to be the case on Missouri's campus right now. They reverted to the 50's, and that was not a good time in America. I find it totally obnoxious that the people complaining the most about the protests are white people, that I assume. are all conservatives. That's absurd. Get over yourselves. We are all equal, contrary to what you dumbasses believe, and what these kids did was 100 percent in the right. Stop bad mouthing them and telling them they deserve to have their scholarships revoked. If they deserve that, all the laborers out there deserve to have their jobs taken away when they go on strike. Fair is fair, right? Conservatives will tell you an eye for an eye, right?

Just stop with all the nonsense and realize that we are in the 21st century. Not everyone celebrates, or even believes in Christmas, and we are all created equal. That's what they wrote in the Constitution over 200 plus years ago. We are all equals. And a big thank you to RD for giving me this platform to get on my soapbox about these two issues today. I needed to get this off my chest. I know I'll hear from people in the comment section and all I can say is, this is one man's opinion on these issues.

Take it or leave it.

Ty

Ty is the Pop Culture editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. His goal in life is to attend a gay wedding in Indiana that serves pizza at the reception. Follow Ty on twitter @tykulik

Thank You for Inhaling: The Lessons of Ohio's Failure in Trying to Legalize Recreational Marijuana

Not the new buckeye

Ohio's attempt to legalize recreational marijuana went down to  defeat on election day. It was beaten quite soundly. I do not think that Ohio's Issue 3 was a good law, it was a terrible law. Bad law or not, it was much better than the archaic laws we have right now. Our very own Kirk Aug goes as far to say the marijuana laws are flat out racist. I tend to agree with this sentiment. Because Issue 3 did not pass, using and possessing Marijuana is still highly illegal in Ohio. Doctors can not prescribe it. Users are considered criminals. People who sell it will go to jail. Marijuana is still illegal because of greedy investors, bad politicians, and out of date political thought. Marijuana is still illegal in Ohio because my home state refuses to face the present.

What is the saying that applies here? Perfect is the enemy of the good. Many of my pot supporting friends, let's call them pot smokers, would tell me that they were hesitant to support issue 3. Why would illegal pot smokers not back a legalization measure. One simple word - monopoly.  They were uncomfortable with the fact that issue 3 gave a monopoly to a few well connected donors. I also had the same reservations, yet I still supported the initiative because it made marijuana legal. I am not a pot smoker, but I believe in legal weed. I constantly found myself arguing about the true definition of a monopoly, and what a good law compared to a perfect law even means. I was having these arguments with supporters of legalization. I had trouble convincing them of voting for Issue 3. Lose your most loyal supporters and things will not turn out well on election day.

The word monopoly is where Responsible Ohio lost the legalization battle. The ballot initiative itself had the word monopoly in it. There is another aphorism in politics that says if you are defending, you are losing. Issue 3 was on the defense from day one. I kept seeing commercials on tv with plenty of attractive white people espousing the benefits of legal weed. At the end of each commercial the fine white folk, usually Nick Lachey, would tell me to vote yes on 3 and no on 2. The commercials would always reference the opponents, and opposition arguments, of legal marijuana. In there own commercials Responsible Ohio was making the oppositions case. They were defending, therefore they were losing.

The biggest failure of Ohio's attempt at marijuana legalization was not the defeat of Issue 3, it was the victory of Issue 2. The Ohio legislature put Issue 2 on the ballot as a way to protect the good citizens of Ohio from groups creating a monopoly on new state businesses. The wording of Issue 2 is intentionally vague, and many experts have said the law could stop citizens from trying to move Ohio into the future. The new law passed by issue 2 would add another political layer of bureaucracy to the referendum process. If there is a citizen movement to change the government in Ohio, you better hope the non-partisan committee who is reviewing your request is politically on your side. Marijuana legalization did not just lose this year, due to the passage of issue 2, legalization may have been lost in Ohio for a generation.

 Another failure of the pro-legalization movement is how Responsible Ohio used the idea of progress to hide their greed. The Issue 3 ballot initiative was not launched until the general public was frozen out of any business opportunity associated with future marijuana business in the state. The Ohio legislature used the anti-monopoly idea as a way to hide their reach for more power. All of Ohio lost when Issue 3 was defeated and issue 2 was victorious. The Buckeye state lost needed tax revenue, lost resources being tied up by the moronic War on Drugs, and lost the chance to be at the front of the line of an inevitable part of future society. Ohio also lost the ability for citizens to try and create progress in their state. 

If you want legal weed be truthful with the voters, know that greed will drive your most loyal supporters away, and believe in your message. I for one was looking forward to visiting my local legal marijuana dealership, owned partly by Oscar Robertson. I was going to give this whole smoking marijuana thing another go. But alas there will be no legal way for me to get my weed.

Where the hell do I go now?

RD Kulik

RD is the Head editor for SeedSing. Without marijuana he will just continue to drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes. Those are way safer. Tell him your solution to America's problems by writing for SeedSing.

The Government is Keeping Us off of Mars

This is the only rocket NASA can afford.

Do you know who Scott Kelly and Mikhail Kornieko are?

Do you know who Alan Shepard and Yuri Gagarin are? (I really hope you do.)

What about Neil Armstrong, does his name ring a bell?

How about Mark Watney, I am going to assume you have heard of him?

According to my basic internet / personal polling research most people know that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, Yuri Gagarin was the first person in space, Alan Shepard was the first American in space, and Mark Watney is a fictional character who is stranded on Mars. Most people have no idea who Scott Kelly and Mikhail Kornieko are, and that is a huge shame. 

Astronaut Kelly and Cosmonaut Kornieko are just past the half way point of a year long mission on board the International Space Station. One of the goals of this mission is to determine what prolonged time in space does to the human body. Kelly and Kornieko volunteered to be human guinea pigs in our quest to travel farther into space, first stop Mars. Read all about their amazing mission here.

Andy Weir's sci-fi novel The Martian (and the recent Ridley Scott Film based on the book) tell the story of Mark Watney and how he survives on Mars when he is accidentally left behind (read this book, it is outstanding). The story is filled with real scientific scenarios based on the ideas we have about the hospitality of Mars.  The realism of the book help make it, and the movie, a huge hit. It is not out of the realm of possibility to think that we could make a manned mission to Mars in the near future. There are still some very large issues to figure out, like how are we going to stop our Mars explorers from being cooked alive by radiation. We are working to figure out these problems, and the first human steps on a different planet are forthcoming. Humanity is on the verge if interplanetary travel.

The biggest leap of faith in Weir's book is the idea that NASA is well funded enough to support the cost of manned Mars missions. Americans always seem excited about the possibility of space travel, yet our government never has the will to commit money to the endeavor. The budget to run all of NASA in 2015 was approximately $885 million. The US congress has spent $5 million (and counting) on their admitted politically motivated Benghazi committee.  The US house has spent northwards of $75 million trying to repeal Obamacare. The pointless never ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost at least $4 trillion, and that does not account for the medical care returning veterans will require. There have been billions of unaccounted for money the US has distributed all over Iraq and Afghanistan. A manned mission to Mars is estimated to cost around $100 billion. The point is that our government balks at the price tag for manned space exploration, yet they have no problem wasting money on politically motivated pet issues and other forms of fraud. The latest tea party hero, Jim Jordan of Ohio, costs the taxpayers around $120 million every year so his district can continue to manufacture tanks that the Army does not want. The fiscal conservatives halt NASA and our future, yet waste untold amounts of money on things that do not advance humanity.

Our government's lack of investment in space exploration contributes to the public's dismissive attitude about current space explorers. What Gagarin and Shepard did was dangerous and unknown. What Armstrong did was dangerous and inspiring. What Kelly, Kornieko, and all current space travelers do is dangerous and vital to our future. Mark Watney is more well known because The Martian is a great book, and the hero represents our hopes for what a future of interplanetary travel will look like. Weir's hero is dependent on what NASA has done, and will do. Our future on Mars has its genesis in what Kelly and Kornieko are doing on the International Space Station. We will get excited about Mars when we have heroes to root for. Our current astronauts are these heroes. They should be celebrated at least as much as a fictional character.

A manned mission to Mars is inspiring and necessary. People are flocking to read, and see, The Martian because it inspires hope and pride in humanity. The scientific discoveries made through the space programming are staggering. When President Kennedy told us we had ten years to land on the moon, the technology did not exist. Nine years later we landed on the moon and started a new computer revolution. We do not have the technology to walk on Mars, yet. When a strong leader emerges in our government, and we are challenged as a nation to rise up, we will see humans walk on Mars within our lifetimes. What great technical revolution will follow? Astronaut Mike Kelly and Cosmonaut Mikhail Kornieko are getting us ready to travel beyond the moon. Their work is paving the way for a future Mark Watney. We deserve to experience the awe and pride of interplanetary travel. We deserve a government that believes in the future.

Thanks to NASA.gov and Space.com for their help in my research. Seriously go read The Martian.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head editor for SeedSing and the other host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He is wondering if Valentine Micheal Smith is waiting for us on Mars. Join the conversation by writing for SeedSing.

The Constitutional Conservatives Have No Clothes

I am not interested in looking at naked republicans

Let me be the one millionth and first person to call out the hypocrisy of the "constitutional conservative" crowd. The ones who wrap their rhetoric around the infallibility of the US Constitution are some of the most unpatriotic Americans in our country's two hundred plus year history. They are afraid to call them selves republicans because the constitutional conservatives have built an unmovable, pure, ideology. There is no room for compromise in their feeble minds.

The latest news surrounding a bigot who refuses to grant any marriage licenses because of her hateful views on gay marriage has once again exposed the constitutional conservative charlatans. Kim Davis took an oath as an elected official to follow the law of the land, not the law of a god. She may now be a "born again" christian in fidelity to her fourth husband. In her brain, a god's law may be bigger than the US Constitution. That is ok by me, but it is not ok with the constitutional duties of her elected position. Kim Davis should not be in jail, she should be removed from her job. The details may not yet exist to remover her, yet I believe the means to remove her do exist. She took an oath to follow the law, she has broken this oath. She is unfit to execute the duties as clerk. There I just let Kim Davis be hateful and out of jail, and I used the US Constitution.

So Sean Hannity, Rick Santorum (sorry for the crude language), Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bobby Jindal, Mike Huckabee, and any other self professed constitutional conservative, what is your solution to solve the Kentucky clerk problem? I understand you use the term constitutional conservative as  code for your white christian male victimhood. I understand you only care about the constitution when it can justify your misogyny, racism, and greed. I know you want to make sure that power can be consolidated into the hands of a small group of white men who can rule over like monarchs. Just please stop dragging the poor US Constitution in the mud with your ignorance and hate. If you want to live by the word of the King James Bible (a book manipulated by a rich white king), then I suggest you start forming your own theocracy. America does not need your hate and ignorance.

Over one million and one people know these constitutional conservatives are frauds. Unfortunately the national media will still treat their ideas as part of a credible debate. The media is broken, but the constitution is not. Kim Davis is constitutional unfit, and her conservative supports are equally unfit. There is no debate. Look away from the constitutional conservative crowd. They are marching through the streets naked in their white male christian victimhood.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing and host of the X Millennial Man podcast. He keeps his pocket US Constitution handy so he can remember how many amendments exist. Have thoughts on society today? Write for SeedSing. 

Let's talk about how guns kill people

ed note: These are the thoughts of the head editor and do not reflect all of SeedSing. We believe in giving everyone a voice and welcome any respectful dissent.

Let me find the words.

There was another senseless killing of two innocent people by a person with a gun. Allison Parker and Adam Ward were doing their jobs. Their particular television jobs at Virginia station WDBJ did not cause anyone undo harm. They were not out destroying people's lives. Allison Parker and Adam Ward were living their lives, going to work, and looking forward to good life ahead of them. A gun ended those dreams.

I am not going to go over the crime. I will not mention the name of the person who killed Allison Parker and Adam Ward. I will not speculate why the crimes were committed. You can find that information out there on the internet. The only thing I want to talk about to prevent more senseless deaths like Allison Parker and Adam Ward is how they were killed by a gun. Guns kill people, guns have killed a lot of people this year alone. That is the purpose of a gun, to kill. I love when people use the concept of a swimming pool is less safe for your home than a firearm. So every time I jump in the pool, I am less safe than every time my untrained self handles a loaded firearm? Swimming pools are for swimming, guns are for killing. The gun is way more effective at killing someone than a swimming pool is.

The pro gun argument is filled with false statistical comparisons. I get tired of hearing about how we have more guns and less crime. Crime is down for a large number of reasons, the amount of guns is not one of them. There is no credible information that can link drops in violent crime with increased gun ownership. If this was the case, our urban areas would be virtual crime free utopias. The increase in gun ownership has added to the number of accidents and suicides. Every pro gunner leaves those statistics out of their arguments. More guns means more effective ways to kill and be killed.

The weapon used to cruelly kill Allison Parker and Adam Ward was a handgun. This is another incident of a handgun being used to kill a person. I have rarely seen stories about responsible hunters going out and using a handgun for sport. Yet the NRA makes damn sure that anyone, even people who cannot pass a background check, can get their hands on a handgun. People that want to kill can easily go out today, purchase a handgun, and then complete their task of killing a person with a bright future. We can thank the rich old white men at the NRA for the privileged of living in this society. 

I am tired of these killings. Crime has existed since we climbed out of primordial sludge, that is not what tires me out. I am tired because we can do something about these senseless killings. Allison Parker and Adam Ward were killed because a madman could get a handgun thanks to the NRA and their bought politicians in Washington DC. We have the ability to stop these killings. The cowards in our federal government will wait out the initial public sadness, and then they will talk about how our gun laws need to be relaxed. This happens every time, and I am pissed off about it. I want to live in a society where random crime is not enhanced by guns. Guns kill people.

I am sad for the people who know and love Allison Parker and Adam Ward. They will never be given comfort by the idiots in DC and the NRA because of greed. We are supposed to be the greatest society in the history of mankind, we can do better. The NRA wants a world where we are less safe. The cowards and DC have no care for the American people. I have one thing to say to the both of them.

Guns kill people.

RD Kulik

RD is the Head Editor for SeedSing. Do you disagree - tell us.

Thank You for Inhaling: Money, Freedom, and the Legalization of Marijuana

The new buckeye?

The state of Ohio is going to vote on the legalization of recreational marijuana this November. Under Issue 3, Ohio would allow for marijuana use for medical and recreational purposes. People would be allowed to keep a very small number of plants to be used for personal use only. The passage of Issue 3 would make marijuana legal in a state where it is completely illegal.  Many progressive, and libertarian, leaning people have hailed this ballot initiative as a sign that Ohio is embracing the 21st century. Freedom is about to win.

How did a fairly prudish state like Ohio suddenly jump on the push for marijuana legalization? Ohio is rarely a trailblazing state. The top industries in the state are automotive, agriculture, and consumer products. The people who work in these jobs tend to be a bit more socially conservative. Procter and Gamble, one of the world's largest consumer goods company, quietly pushed for Ohio's 2004 gay marriage ban to be defeated. The ballot initiative passed overwhelmingly. Southwest Ohio, the home of Procter and Gamble, voted over 75% in favor of the issue. It does not seem like the people of Ohio would support an issue that the people of Oregon seem to embrace.

The people of Ohio are not being asked to support the same kind of marijuana legalization as many of the other states. Issue 3 using the idea of legal weed as a way to create a new monopoly on a product that is already flowing through the state. A product that is run by the black market, and is not taxed. The voters of Ohio are being told that Issue 3 is about individual freedom and sociological inevitability. This is not totally true. The people behind the initiative, Responsible Ohio, have already but in place the ten growing sites. Politically connected, and large corporate interests, are already lined up to take control of these grow sites. The passage of Issue 3 will make marijuana legal, and it will make a lot of rich people a whole lot richer. Money is the key to marijuana legalization.

I was a college kid in the mid 1990's, and like many other college kids, I tried marijuana (a few times). I inhaled, and learned it was not for me. Many of my peers made smoking weed a part of their lives. These people got married, took good jobs, had kids, took better jobs, and many of them still smoke weed. Whenever the discussion of decriminalizing marijuana would come up, many of my peers would say that I am not the right person to advocate for the pot smokers. I did not understand the lifestyle. My argument was not to wrap pot up as some great medical breakthrough. Every time I would see some retro goth person extolling the virtues of medical marijuana, and how it helps their back pain, I would cringe. The advocates for legalization were not helping their cause because the argument was false and they would not grow their circle of supporters. I wanted to make marijuana a cash crop for states who were having their taxes dwindle due to fiscally irresponsible state governments. If you could convince the states that there is a potentially new revenue stream that would not require you to raise taxes on the citizens, you have a winning issue. The secondary benefit is people could legally smoke pot.

The financial reward is the number one reason we are seeing the push to legalize marijuana. States are in a bidding war with each other over business taxes. Corporations regularly move manufacturing to right to work states that have very little, or none, business taxes. Corporations see the windfall in getting free land from the government, and producing a product with a very healthy mark-up. Sin taxes (i.e. cigarettes, alcohol) are very easy for the public to accept. Legal weed will have a healthy tax placed on it's sale. The non-weed smokers saw the dollar signs, and the weed smokers will get their victory.

Marijuana should be legal. It is archaic that we live in a society where something is illegal because moralists from over one hundred years ago thought God would be mad if they smoked pot. Issue 3 may not pass in Ohio this November. The initiative is a corporate giveaway, and Ohio is still pretty moralistic. Without Ohio, legal weed is coming. The dollars just add up.

RD Kulik

RD Kulik is the Head Editor for SeedSing and the host of the X Millennial Man Podcast. He tends to be a bit high strung and needs to mellow out sometimes. Give him some advice.

#ILookLikeAnEngineer needs to have meaning

Do the people who drive the trains look like an engineer?

I am conflicted about this one.  This #ilooklikeanengineer movement.  I’m a woman.  I have a BS in Mechanical Engineering, and a couple decades of “hard” technical experience.  I self-identify as an engineer, even though a big chunk of my current work is paper-push..., I mean management.  I’m also really glad that people like Mary Barra (BSEE) and Ursula Burns (MSME) have thrown in with the movement, not just because they’re major CEO’s, but because they are actually ENGINEERS.  And actual engineers seem to be only half of the #ilooklikeanengineer movement.

In principle, this hashtag is great.  Engineers aren’t just dorky white or Asian boys who are good at math.  I bet in a lot of places, boys with average aptitude in math and science are tracked for engineering, and yet their schools/parents don’t do the same for girls with equivalent or even better aptitude.  That happens.  I graduated from Purdue University’s College of Engineering in the 90’s.  Purdue has a history of actively recruiting and supporting women engineers, and prides itself on having started the first Women in Engineering program.  For all their efforts, female enrollment there is currently about 20% right now, per their own website.  (I can’t speak to black and Latino enrollment, but I’m guessing they’re similarly underrepresented.)  So I’m all for anything that encourages a more expansive view of what an engineer can look like.

But the problem with this hashtag is while it expands the view of what an engineer looks like, it’s also trying to expand the definition of what an engineer actually IS.   Engineering is a specific field of study.  And one of my pet peeves is the conflation of “engineer” with “person who works with any kind of technology.”  Words have meaning.  And, despite recent abuse of the language, web developers, coders, and network architects are not engineers.  The noun “engineer” implies engagement with the PHYSICAL sciences; the application of chemistry and/or physics to solve a physical problem.  It implies grappling with scientific unknowns, and imperfectly modeling the physical world.  Well, either that, or a person who drives a train.  (My alma mater’s website backs me up on this:  computer science is not listed under the College of Engineering.)

I’m not suggesting that other STEM professionals are lesser or greater.  My mom had a long career in IT working on mainframe software.  My dad is PhD chemist.  But they don’t call themselves engineers.  And frankly, even though he’s certainly earned the right to be called Dr. S as an honorific, it would be pretty misleading for me to say “my dad’s a doctor” without some kind of qualifier.  Look, dentists and CPA’s are both highly trained and respected professionals.  But my dentist doesn’t call herself an accountant, because she’s NOT one.  Words have meaning.  And if your education and work don’t involve the application of physical engineering principles, you aren’t an engineer.   The team that designed the Wii U hardware?  Engineers.  The team that designed Mario Kart 8?  Not.  (I intend no disrespect, quite the opposite.  Mario Kart 8 is awesome.)

All these web designers, software developers, etc. who are jumping on the #ilooklikeanengineer hashtag (including the woman who started it) are undermining their own point.  Because all the sexist guys who are real engineers can point to these women and say, “Well, I don’t have to listen, because what you do is programming/web design/etc.  You don’t even know what an engineer is.”  

The set of engineers is a subset of the set of STEM professionals.  (It’s the E part!)  But there are also the S, T, and M parts.  They are disciplines and fields of study in their own right, and deserve recognition and respect.  And once they get it, maybe people can stop gussying up their job titles by adding “engineer” as some kind of professionalizing suffix.  All girls should be encouraged to take calculus and physics in high school, and know that they can have any career they want, in either software development, cell biology, applied math, nuclear engineering or whatever.  So I really respect the intent behind the hashtag.  But please, stop diluting my profession.  Pick a different word.  And I’ll tweet the hell out of #ILookLikeaSTEMprofessional!

I welcome any and all rebuttals. 

It’s a bit old, but for an excellent piece on why STEM training is great for women in particular: Check this out.

Tina S.

Tina does not look dorky or like a boy. That does not stop her from engineering (or paper pushing) like a boss. Join the debate by writing for SeedSing.

The Death of the Old Internet: A rebuttal and revisit.

A few weeks ago I wrote a piece on the problems at Reddit, Gawker, and Ashley Madison. This morning I uploaded a podcast recorded days after the article that discussed the current death of the old internet.  The future of the internet is a topic that consumes my mind throughout a large portion of the waking day, I think I actually dream about the idea on some nights. I am excited, and saddened, when I think about how many of my favorite sites have changed with the times, and how many of them have failed to adapt. Being a beginner in content creation for the internet, I wanted to learn from all the successful people in the past, and heed the warnings of the failures. The new internet is where I want to live, it is where we will all thrive.

On August 6th, the website Vox.com published an article by Todd VanDerWerff titled 2015 is the Year the Old Internet Finally Died . I was initially shocked that there was an article out there with a similar headline, and many of the same ideas I had proposed. My first basic thought was "Have I been ripped off?". Then my rational brain took over and reminded me that Vox, Todd VanDerWerff, or any other large professional news organization probably did not rip off my piece. They did not know the article, or SeedSing, even exist. I really wish they had ripped me off, because that would mean some big dogs are reading, and agreeing, with the ideas I am presenting. I highly doubt, but am naively hopeful, that is the case.  

VanDerWerff's piece recounted some of the same problems I talked about surrounding Gawker and Reddit. The Vox.com article was more researched, and devoted a lot more words to the overall topic. The author also has experience working with websites I frequently visit. He is definitely more of an expert on the death of the old internet than I am. I also believe he is wrong in his conclusions of the new internet. Where VanDerWerff thinks we are getting away from community and long form expression (funny considering his piece was definitely not that short) I think that long form articles will be a big part of the make up in the new internet. We are entering a new age of enlightenment. The ideas of the common people, not only the connected elites, have a place on the new internet. Real, positive change needs to be explained, and explanation takes up screen space.

The professional internet writers are more interested in their personal profiles, they have forgotten about writing to the masses. Clicks and monetization seem to be the only concern for these old bloggers. The A.V. Club is a website I visit everyday. I have been there since the launch, and have no reason to change my loyalty. The A.V. Club is also in danger of not being a viable part of the new internet. They have built a community of writers and readers, and have walled off that community to anyone else. The movie reviewers have been my go to source for Paul Thomas Anderson praise and Adam Sandler hate. They are incredible predictable in their "reviews". I am sure Sandler's latest movies stink, but I also really did not care that much for There Will be Blood or The Master. Those views will invite the stupidest inside joke scorn from the commentators and a more professional rejection from the writers. The A.V. Club has created a community for the writers, and this shows a lack of vision. If you want to write about anything, pop culture especially, you need to understand and expand the audience. Creating a community of people that only think like you is the same as going to church (or the Republican National Convention). The kids in the high school audio visual club were awkward because they were assholes about what was cool (it was almost never something that was cool). The A.V. Club wants to be the asshole, they will also get to have their little room that no one else wants to go in.

Cracked.com is another website I have visited nearly everyday since their launch. What I enjoyed about Cracked was how they would talk about the worst fictional towns (Gotham City number 1) or the dumbest GI Joe vehicles (so many dudes hanging off of the sides). This was a site for nostalgic men over the age of 30, but who really want to be 13 again. As the audience changed, Cracked started to change with it. Their articles started to take on an intellectual vibe (with some crude humor), but at the same time the core purpose of the website stayed the same.  Their commentators hated the change. Recently Cracked has added a BuzzFeed feature looking at the news of the week, which their commentators hate. The personal experience articles, where the editors talk with people who have interesting jobs and life experience, have brought a whole new group of people in. The commentators predictably also hate this. Cracked does not care what the commentators think, those people will still come to the site that they fell in love with in 2005. Cracked is interested in growing the community by adding new people.

Todd VanDerWerff's piece lamented the fact that the new internet is removing the nice communities of the old internet. That is a good thing. The old internet was built with walls, and walls do not foster ideas. Many of the writers from the "professional" sites want to live in an echo chamber where only their ideas are correct. That kind of behavior leads into problems like ones facing the current national Republican Party. As communities start to meld, innovation takes off. The New York Times is going extinct because they have created a public persona that only the sycophants can believe in. Dissolve.com did not last past two years because The A.V. Club had already captured the "I like it because it is not popular" film crowd. Reddit created a wall by being where all the awful people can go and be unfiltered. When Reddit tried to take that wall down, their image was forever tainted. A new and better Reddit is being incubated right now to takes it place. Facebook created a community in the old internet and crushed the more free MySpace. In the new internet Facebook has brought down its walls and has become something that looks a lot like the free world of MySpace. VanDerWerff even points out that BuzzFeed may be disposable viral content, but they also produce insightful journalism. That is why BuzzFeed's community is one of the largest on all the internet.

We have the ability to radically remake global society into something grand. The grad student of yesterday would study Dunbar's number. The world at large can get a easier explanation through the Cracked article on The Monkey Sphere. The cult television show of yesterday would be lucky to last one season. Now Yahoo is not just a search engine, you can watch the latest season of Community. Expanding and dissolving communities is how we innovate. The new internet will bring more knowledge, culture, and freedom to the entire world. 

Standing on your island and you will only see the water. Standing on a continent and you can touch all of society. The internet does not need to be special for a few. The internet needs to be useful for all.

RD Kulik

RD is the creator and Head Editor for SeedSing. If any big websites are watching us for content, Hi there. Drop us a line seedsing.rdk@gmail.com

Kirk reads "Being Mortal" by Atul Gawande. He thinks you should pick it up.

Time to read a bit more.

I am not sure what lead me to reading this book. It was certainly a recommendation that resulted from the use of some algorithm, probably Amazon or Overdrive, based on books I have read in the past. But I have no idea which book or books that I have read provoked this recommendation. Many times throughout I found myself wondering how this was related to other books I have enjoyed. Nonetheless, it was an excellent recommendation and I could not put it down.

Being Mortal by Atul Gawande is a book about how our culture handles aging and dying. Gawande is a surgeon who has seen far too much end of life suffering in the well intentioned attempt to fix or give hope in the face of a hard fact of life: that it must eventually come to an end.

Gawande investigates how the elderly have been treated traditionally in a time before our world of fast paced and over committed lives when instead of having strangers care for people at their final days, it was more commonly the role of their descendants. It was a time when multiple generations often shared a dwelling and folks were free to continue writing the story of their lives with a lot more autonomy and meaning than they are afforded by many of today's arrangements.

The focus today, Gawande points out, is instead on safety and health restoration. Safety is often a concern that counters the autonomy that gives life meaning. It is also most often a priority of the family, friends, and doctors rather than the ill-fallen person themselves. The traditional setup of nursing homes is for the peace of mind of the brood of the elderly who are often making the decisions as well as the efficiency of the institution rather than focusing on what the needs of the residents are.

Often times when patients find themselves in a condition that is unlikely to be repaired they hold out hope that they can go back to the way things were prior to the ailment. It is not just the patient and their family that hold on to these hopes, but the doctor as well. Gawande points out that, statistically, doctors predictions for how long someone with a life threatening disease will live are on average longer than what really ends up being the case.

Doctors also often see their role as one to fix the problem and are dumbfounded as to how help them realize which choice is best for the patient on an individual level, especially when that best choice is less aggressive. Gawande describes two typical types of doctors. Those who are authoritarian, or as he puts it, paternal. These are the doctor knows best types. Then there are doctors who simply lay out all the options in a very informative manner. A sort of, “here are your options, pick one” scenario.

A third option proposed by Gawande is a what he calls shared decision making. There are a few questions, albeit difficult ones, that can help get down to what the ill really wants to do. What are your biggest fears and concerns? What goals are most important to you? What sacrifices are you willing to make and unwilling to make? Having these hard discussions can tremendously help everyone involved help find the decision that is best for the individual.

Unfortunately, this kind of care is not common. It is just not how a lot of doctors see their role. There is hope though. Gawande writes of assisted living centers that have started to focus more around the needs of the residents. The advanced directive is a step in the right direction and palliative care is becoming a wider spread specialty. However simply being a specialty is not enough. Doctors in general as well as families and loved ones need to start addressing these questions before we can be truly sensitive to providing the absolute best quality of life possible in the end. 

I highly recommend giving this book a read.

Kirk Aug

Kirk is SeedSing's writer on society, science, and whatever else his brain may fancy. He received the good reading certificate in elementary school 5 out of six years. Follow him on twitter @kirkaug.

Welcome to the future: The Babel fish lives (in electronic form)

Welcome to the Future is SeedSing's look at trends and technology that are shaping the world we will live in. Submit ideas of interesting sociological or scientific ideas that are altering our current lives to seedsing.rdk@gmail.com .

Ever since I heard of the babel fish in Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy or the universal translator used in the Star Trek series, I have been thrilled with the concept. As someone who is interested in the perspectives of as many people as possible, the idea that I could communicate with anyone no matter where they are from or what linguistic background they had was very compelling.

I remember when I first became aware of Google Translate. The first thing I did was find various Spanish or German chat rooms on IRC and tried to talk to people by translating my English into their language and then translating the response back manually. As cumbersome as this was, it also gave me a feeling of exhilaration.

Playing around with translate on the internet is fun and all, but it has become a useful tool in meat world too. Last year when my partner and I went to Mexico I used it quite a lot. Not only was translate helpful, but Google Now recognized that I was in Mexico and knowing that I was natively from the US gave me an easily accessible currency conversion without my having to do anything except enter the numbers. The way technology does things like this without me even having to think about it is tearing down international borders and I am overjoyed to see it.

We still have a long way to go before we will have babel fish or Star Trek level universal translation, but the space is progressing nicely. Coupled with voice transcription technologies, we are starting to see near real time language translation. Earlier this year the Google Translate app began to have a feature which takes what a person says in one language, transcribes it to text, translates it, and says the words aloud in the target language. From what I have heard the feature is still pretty error prone, but it will only get better over time. Another feature that came with that same update is the ability to hold the camera up to some text and get a translation of that text overlaid on the camera’s image on screen. It even does a pretty decent job of matching color and font on the translated image.

Microsoft, who owns Skype, is also making huge headway in the universal translation space. Skype users can now connect with people translating between English, French, German, Italian, Mandarin, and Spanish in near real time. Google is reportedly working on similar technology for its Hangouts service.

Language barriers are definitely being broken and this is amazing. The more that people of different backgrounds can understand each other, the more compassionate we will all be toward each other. It surely is not the pervading solution to violence and hate in the world, but it will at least be helpful in the reduction of it.

Kirk Aug

Kirk is able to communicate with his SeedSing colleagues. The problem is he is seeking more insightful conversation, and that conversation may be in another language. Talk to Kirk by following him on twitter @kirkaug.

Welcome to the Future: Kirk looks at self driving cars Part 2

The new Tesla? Code named T-Edsel?

This is a follow up to part 1 of Kirk's look at self driving cars.

I cannot say I particularly enjoy driving. I enjoy the convenience that comes with driving. I like being able to go anywhere I please at a near whim. But the experience could be improved as far as I am concerned. I could find better use of my time than staring at the road. Sometimes, if I have the extra time, I take public transportation because it is not the commute that I dislike, but the bore of it. I love to have the opportunity to read a book or interact with my partner or my kids while I get to my destination. The passengers of the vehicle that I pilot get this. The technology is soon here for me to get this too. And it can be public transportation but with the same privacy I now enjoy. When thinking about self-driving vehicles, these are some of the ideas that delight me.

How about I start with the public transportation aspect. As of right now, if I want a fast way to get to my destination I need to own my vehicle. This means several things. I need to have insurance. I need licenses. One for myself to drive and one for the vehicle to be on the road. I need to have a place to put this vehicle when I am not using it, which happens to be the vast majority of the time that I own it. I need to maintain it; gas, oil changes, and the like.

Contrarily, once self-driving vehicles are widespread, I no longer need to own the vehicle. Transportation will be a front door service and it will be much faster, cheaper, and more versatile than taxi cabs currently are. There will probably be periodic rates for frequent users to benefit from. I need to run to the store because I forgot the milk? A couple of smart phone taps and I will have a vehicle in my driveway within minutes. This comes with exactly the same privacy that I already have with my own vehicle and with the other aspects of owning a vehicle obscured into the cost of the transport and taking no physical effort on my part. Because we do not pay a driver, this will cost less than a cab. The economic implications are definitely something to consider here, but I will wait for another post to get more into that.

Another thing that excites me is the environmental impact. Once the use of public self-driving vehicles is set in we can start making all sorts of cuts in where we currently have waste in exchange for convenience. One example is that it is no longer going to be one vehicle taking you or your party everywhere. Right now I drive a SUV, but I am no where near using all the space and power that requires a SUV every time I drive. Many times it is just me. Cut to the self-driving vehicle service, and I can specify exactly how many seats and storage I will need. Getting groceries? A one seat vehicle with enough storage for a bag or two will do. Going on a date? A two seater with no storage works. Family vacation? Four seats and lots of storage. Taking the dogs along? Special storage options available. A lot less energy wasted. I could go on.

An added energy benefit is the fact that a human is not navigating. Some drivers are certainly more efficient than others, but all of us are have emotions. Those emotions necessarily affect our driving. We misjudge how much time we have we have to make the gap, then in attempt to recover we slam on the gas. We switch back and forth between lanes in a jam on nothing more than a hunch wasting countless energy. Not only can computer give up the emotional aspect of driving, but the can also communicate telepathically. Self-driving vehicles can communicate with other self-driving vehicles in a way humans never can. Need to merge? There is no guesswork, just a seamless merge. Traffic jams on the interstate? Reroute X number of vehicles to a secondary route.

The last benefit I want to address in this post is the additional freedom of the youth of tomorrow. Say your ten year old wants to go to a friend’s house but there is no one to provide the ride. With a self-driving vehicle service, there is.

This may scare some parents. I certainly know more than a few parents who want to keep their kids locked down as much as they can for as long as they can. For these parents, there will probably be ways to secure the service to only be used with particular amounts of permission. There will also be kids who get around this as they always is with technology lockout systems. (Another topic for another post I suppose.) And sure I think that a certain show of responsibility should exist before a kid can set out in a self-driving vehicle alone, but this takes down a lot of barriers to those kids who are deserving of that responsibility. They do not really need to be responsible enough to drive a vehicle in order to benefit from the geographical freedoms associated with it.

How do you feel? Are you excited about the changes to our world that self-driving vehicles might mean? Are you concerned about some of the details that have yet to emerge into our collective consciousness? Let’s discuss it.

Kirk Aug

Kirk is getting settled into his virtual cubicle of internet journalism. He is looking for ideas on other near future technologies that will change your life. Follow him on twitter @kirkaug