Mar 31 2012: I do understand and respect them. I respect anything that gives people a reason to be there best. I respect the comfort they find in answers to the mysterious questions of the universe and am envious that they can find comfort in the most devistating times through their faith. however, I was not brought up to believe and I also have my seperate views, which should be equilly respected. My strongest belief being that good things don't just happen to good people, although being 'good' can build bridges to rescources needed, but the bottom line is that you have to make things happen.
Mar 24 2012: There shouldn't be any profits in this.. These corperations shouldn't be able to make money on this since we are paying taxes to keep the convicted in these prisons, and we pay for their medical, hoursing etc.; the last thing we need to be doing is paying more to give them a profit from this....
Mar 24 2012: If someone is that insistant about their idea being the only correct one, then I feel obligated to defend the other side equally, even if its not quite what I believe. I think information should be shared. However, I tend to avoid those 'religion talks' as they never end well...
Mar 24 2012: A shared experience brings two people onto common ground and opens a door way for interaction. I think that would automatically lower resistance between people, but I have no knowledge of how it would effect heart pathways...
Mar 23 2012: I agree that technology 'desenditizes human feelings' and makes things less personal, as I prefer to actually 'hang out' rather than text, etc., and find it incredibly annoying that in the company of other people, 50% of the time they are texting, etc. However, I would also like to argue that this technology does enhance collaboration and interaction. I think that by using these other means of communication, it allows for more communicaition within the same amount of time, which is more productive, more organized communicaition, which also saves on time and keeps like ideas together, and reaches out on a broader spectrum of people and ideas. Also, in some instances emotions can be communicated through technology as it is not able to be elsewhere (i.e. my 'friend' can be very shy and communicates alot of what he feels through internet messaging, which he would not be able to do in person. So it gives some people an edge they may never have had)
Mar 23 2012: In defense of the people who you say are ' too concerned with how many zombies they can kill in a video game', there are many people who spend most of there time and thought in making ends meet with minimum wages jobs, and who also support other friends/ family, and don't have the time or energy to make changes like this. Life can be very hard, and some people are just so caught up in the stress of making ends meet. This would not be the first thing on their mind, and if their destressing/relaxation consists of sitting back and playing a video game then so be it.
Mar 23 2012: I think that with development there will be destruction, because nothing is perfect and things usually do not go as planned. I also believe that when a new idea emerges (in reference to development), people get excited and because the POTENTIAL positive outcome outweighs the POSSIBLE negitive effects, we are quick to act 'in the name of human advancement'.
Mar 23 2012: Is the cup half empty or half full? It could be looked at either way. It is not a new idea, but it is an alteration of something else, that creates something new and different.
Mar 23 2012: So, having read this, my response is no.. I don't know much about this issue (actually I didn't really know this was going on), but I can't believe that we would do this esp. ith how sly and money hungry these politicans and corporate leaders are.
However, if the choice is either to let the inmates go because we cannot afford to keep them incarcerated, or allow these corporations to handle the expenses then I supposes its to the lesser of two evils.. (then again I htink we may be a bit too harsh with the punishments and alot of these ppl don't need to be in the prison system).
It's not as bad as Putting them in the hands of a private individual / corporation.... could be worst :/
TEDCred score: +0.20 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Conversation: To what extent are you "Open-Minded" when it comes to a topic you dislike or hate the most? Can you change or accept the fact of it?
A reply on Conversation: Can a free society survive under commercialized imprisonment?
A comment on Conversation: To what extent are you "Open-Minded" when it comes to a topic you dislike or hate the most? Can you change or accept the fact of it?
A comment on Conversation: What is the power behind a shared experience?
A reply on Conversation: Development or Destruction, where are we heading?
A reply on Conversation: Development or Destruction, where are we heading?
A comment on Conversation: Development or Destruction, where are we heading?
A comment on Conversation: Are we creating something new, or changing something old?
A comment on Conversation: Can a free society survive under commercialized imprisonment?
However, if the choice is either to let the inmates go because we cannot afford to keep them incarcerated, or allow these corporations to handle the expenses then I supposes its to the lesser of two evils.. (then again I htink we may be a bit too harsh with the punishments and alot of these ppl don't need to be in the prison system).
It's not as bad as Putting them in the hands of a private individual / corporation.... could be worst :/