Comments by "DynamicWorlds" (@dynamicworlds1) on "Metatron" channel.

  1. 114
  2. 110
  3. 81
  4. 54
  5. 51
  6. Complex language requires being able to encode information into a sensory medium with a high "bandwidth" and keeping that information in a specific order. Due to the way smells work, this makes a poor medium for this. Despite what hive insects like bees are able to achieve with it, they're limited to a specific set of information they can communicate. They do, however, make decent mediums for information sets that change on evolutionary timescales, such as emotions. Visual might seem like a good way to go, but it tends to be expensive (bio-luminescence or lots of movement) and often ties up important body parts when it's even capable of being fast enough. It will most likely be a 2ndary channel for information, much like how we use body language, but it's limitations get in the way of evolving as a primary medium for complex language. (though, unlike smell, it is possible, as we can see with sign language) Really, auditory, especially vocal, is the way to go, and convergent evolution will drive species towards it. That said, auditory ranges being incompatible could be a trial to overcome, though not insurmountable with some very basic technology. The big questions are: How does one attempt to teach one's own language to an alien? (they'll likely be trying to do the same with us anyway) How does one comprehend an alien mind? Think about taking a magic universal translator and sticking a hunter from the stone age, smith from 700AD England, noble from 1700AD France, farmer from 2000AD Congo, tax collector from 1300AD China, warrior from 1000BC Greece, fisher from 900AD Mexico slave from 100BC Rome, priest from 2000BC Egypt, monk from 1500AD Japan, and yourself in a room and try to have everyone just get along. Now realize that this is just the tutorial level because you're all the same species (using the same brains), from the same planet, all from within a few thousand years of each other, and most of you have some knowledge of at least 1 or 2 of the others. Now remove those advantages, have several billion voices clamoring behind them, arm everyone, and try to negotiate and cooperate without killing each other.
    39
  7. 36
  8. 28
  9. 25
  10. 20
  11. 17
  12. 16
  13. 15
  14. 14
  15. 13
  16. 12
  17. 12
  18. 12
  19. 12
  20. 11
  21. 11
  22. 10
  23. 10
  24. WarblesOnALot actually, that's (sadly) only the cover story. The reality is that old news media (who was feeling the heat of competition from YouTube news channels who weren't bought off) scoured the site to find one hateful video that had an ad on it which slipped through YouTube's previously existing filter system and jumped on it to try and get YouTube to crack down on content. A selection of large companies (such as Walmart and several predatory banks) joined in step immediately to boycott YouTube. Their motivation is that they were used to their advertising dollars buying bias, and the rise of people turning outside of TV news with said bias was leading to a wave of public opinion that threatens their goals. To give a couple specifics, Walmart really likes their suppliers to outsource their products, so they were hugely in favor of the planned TPP trade deal. While Trump may have latched onto it in his campaign, the original push-back against it came from the internet latching onto something that was supposed to happen quietly and spreading around how terrible it was. The banks, on the other hand, have had a nice long streak from Bill Clinton, to Bush, to Obama, to Hillary/Trump of presidents that would happily play ball and let them continue to screw over people more. Then Bernie (who's campaign was largely driven by the grass roots on the internet) came along and threatened that con-game and they were NOT happy about that. Of course, the mainstream media instantly piled on this, because of their ever shrinking credibly and viewer base. Meanwhile, youtube works with them to roll out TV news channels, and eventually "youtube tv" shortly thereafter (at a time-period which suggests they started this plan immediately after the first corporations started the boycott). To top things off, the same "news" corporations are really just huge media conglomerates who make money on non-news content, and so are perfectly happy to see other good content get hit, even if it's not political. To give an example relevant to this channel (beyond just time spent watching youtube competes with time watching TV), General Electric may have gotten into the game because of MSNBC (which they own) but, among other companies they hold, they also own The "History" channel, which is directly threatened by channels like this that make actually historically accurate content that people want to watch (& for far lower production costs than their BS shows). I could give more specifics if you want, but this is wall of text already long enough.
    10
  25. 8
  26. 8
  27. 7
  28. 7
  29. 7
  30. 7
  31. 7
  32. 6
  33. 6
  34. 6
  35. 6
  36. 5
  37. 5
  38. 5
  39. 5
  40. 5
  41. 4
  42. 4
  43. 4
  44. 4
  45. 4
  46. 4
  47. 4
  48. 4
  49. 4
  50. 3