TED Community » alex mcghee

Comments

• TEDCred score: +0.20 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A reply on Talk: Doris Kim Sung: Metal that breathes

  Oct 26 2012: She was saying that you could differentiate with respect to the amount of sunlight you want in the building. So in the end that decision (to completely block out the sun, or not) would be made by the consumer/ designer.

• A comment on Talk: Pankaj Ghemawat: Actually, the world isn't flat

  Oct 24 2012: The possibility for most people in a civilized nation to connect to and instantly share anything across the world is available in our current society. This ability is what makes the world flat. As time moves on the speed of information has risen exponentially. The notion that people on average aren't using this ability to it's fullest potential shouldn't take away from the fact that it is possible.

• A reply on Conversation: What is YOUR definition of Freedom?

  Apr 19 2011: This is the discussion I was having with a friend before I posted this thread. Egypt has successfully overthrown their gov't in order to have a nation as free as mine, this made me think, is America the free nation the the world views it as, or has that time past still living on as a lingering iconic fairy tale that inspires 3rd world nationals to be immigrants or rise up in their home land?
  
  So based on all your views of freedom I pose the question... do you feel free in your country?

• A comment on Conversation: What is YOUR definition of Freedom?

  Apr 19 2011: My simple answer is the ability for the population of a given area to control the way its collective body acts, shares and protects. It seems like both of you agree with that statement, but at the same time this statement will invariably alienate a portion of its population. Say 49% voted one way and 51% the other on a major issue, would the 49% feel less free as a consequence? What if it happened to the same person more than once? Ie 51% voted to take your bullets away, then a few months later your guns. (I know that will probably never happen in America).
  
  @richard that question reminds me of the TED talk from Caroline Casey, most of the people from those countries have restricted information on the rest of the world so they cant relate to western influence.
  
  A prisoner in prison, I would say no, reason being that that person would probably choose to live like that because its better than his/her alternative of living on the street. but at the same time s/he is making a consious decision on what to do with his/her life so final answer no/yes.

• A reply on Conversation: Why don't we use technology to have a real Direct Democracy?

  Apr 17 2011: I think a great alternative that can be implemented with very little startup costs and disturbance, would be to make a web site that connects the people to the senator. If we used a gallop poll type voting system we could get a popular decision on certain legislature. this would be one of the many tools used by the senator to help make decisions.
  This system would be very open to fraud so you could limit the amount of votes to the number of registered voters in a geographical area, if the amount of votes for a geographical area goes over its limit then a point value is added per extraneous vote giving you a margin of fraud which can be taken into consideration... the smaller the geographical area you set the more accurate the poll will be.
  I know its not an accurate method but its the best you can do short of making people go to polling stations every week.

• A reply on Conversation: Why don't we use technology to have a real Direct Democracy?

  Apr 16 2011: see
  
  http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/david_bismark_e_voting_without_fraud.html

• A reply on Conversation: Why don't we use technology to have a real Direct Democracy?

  Apr 16 2011: Don't get me wrong I think this is a great idea, I mean early democracy was idealistic in that every one really had a voice and voted on every topic, so much so that the first empire to adopt it pretty much took over the known world. The problem with democracy is that the more populated the nation gets, the more corrupt its government gets. I am sickened every time I hear about a senator taking... well lets just call it what it is, a bribe. Hillary Clinton rallied for affordable health care for 6 years, but when it came time for her to try and get elected she took almost a million from health care lobbies, and as if over night her attitude changed about it, and called her past "ancient history." so yes I agree something has to be done about this type of legal / hard to prove corruption. That being said I still find myself playing devils advocate if nothing else to provide a compelling argument to get people thinking.
  I don't believe we can successfully "prioritize" because fundamentally this is just as bad as govt corruption. (currently who ever has more money wins the vote) as the new game would be who can spend the most money on persuading the population to vote their way. Truthfully if you would like to end corruption then end Americas addiction to corporations. People believe they want a Utopia until they get it.
  Yes I have the time, but don't look at me as an example for Americans, I'm blessed with a job that allows for a lot of "free time."
  
  Thanks for the great conversation... I just hate it when people take conversations into arguments but you don't seem like the type from what I've read.
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Why don't we use technology to have a real Direct Democracy?

  Apr 15 2011: Mostly due to the amount of time needed to spend researching whether or not a bill is actually a good idea or not. See Colorado's bark beetle problem, this is most likely (but not "scientifically proven") due to strict regulation on thinning the pine tree population, or more publicly "deregulation of the forest industry." Bush passed the bill in the early 2000s to thin out the pine tree so this problem would be prevented, but the public saw it as an outrage, and just another blindly signed bill, as he did with so many others (he only vetoed one bill in his first 4 yrs in office). Well due to protesting the population reversed the legislature and within 4 yrs the pine tree took off, with that the bark beetle did as well, and today most mountain sides in Colorado and throughout the west are covered with drying dead pine trees (very sad sight) which as you might be aware is an extreme fire hazard. I know this is an isolated incident but I think it shows exactly why the population, while it intent is honorable, may me more of a detriment to itself, if it blindly made decisions without a team of experts to weigh the pros and cons of every decision concerning them. In summery my short answer is because.... Who has the time?
• +2

  A comment on Talk: Woody Norris: Hypersonic sound and other inventions

  Jul 28 2009: why has no one made a chuck norris joke about this
  
  heres one.
  
  that square device doesn't create magical sound its actually chuck norris whispering in all your ears at the same time.

• A reply on Talk: Woody Norris: Hypersonic sound and other inventions

  Jul 28 2009: I don't believe so this mechanism, as described by Mr Norris, works because of the inconsistent speed of sound. Because light is a constant I cant imagine how light could travel faster than itself, if this were somehow true it would cause a paradigm shift in theoretical physics. I believe the hyperinflation period will be explained after the LHC is back up and running (march of 2010), as well as our understanding of quantum physics and its implications.