User talk:Leasing Agent

<!-- ...moved from User talk:71.100.166.228 on 14:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

You wanted to know about Jews, on some question page, right? You can ask me what you like, if you're being serious. I won't accuse you of being anti-Jewish, or give a knee jerk reaction, in fact it's better to say directly what you think and ask me any question directly.--Urthogie 00:36, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * are you Jewish?
 * yes.
 * do you believe in God?
 * yes.


 * Are you Jewish by birth and ancestry or by decision to become a Jew?
 * by birth and ancestry, although I was once an atheist and then came to believe in God and Judaism though my own intellectual and spiritual pursuits.


 * "From this I intend to develop a hierarchy of characteristics which hopefully will not have to remain dynamic but which at least some parts may prove themselves to be stable."
 * Well, I think there's an inherent flaw in thinking you can categorize any cultural group with certain characteristics. Of course, you can identify certain common characteristics among Jews, but to say something is an essentially Jewish trait is not exactly logical.  I know many Jews, both in my family and in my community which have such varied personalities as one would find between Jews and Christians, for example.


 * Also, a lot of this depends on how we define "Jew". It seems to me, though, that no matter which of the many definitions of "Jew" you choose, there will not be much sense in attempting to categorize "Jewish characteristics."


 * Attitudes towards money and God and other things vary just as much between Jews as they do between any other culture. I therefore don't think your project will discover any universal characteristics or attitudes, as this would amount to absolute cultural determinism, something which obviously doesn't fit such a diverse group of people.


 * Predestination might fit on religious grounds a diverse group of people. I think Presbyterians identify if not hold this point of view. However, even though Jews may have diverse characteristics for instance does any Jew believe that Jesus Christ is Divine? I would say no and that this is a distinguishing characteristic of the Jews. However, that does not mean that all people who call themselves Christian belief that Jesus Christ is Devine so in terms of a survey for instance it might be impossible to characterize either a Jew or a Christian according to whether they believe that Jesus Christ is Devine. In my mind for instance in order to characterize Jesus Christ as Devine or as God my perception of God has to change. But these details and fine points are exactly what a dynamic classification scheme is intended to reveal. As is, most people seem to have only their own idea of what a Jew is rather than rely upon a consensus which could be provided by a classification study. If nothing is learned from such a study then one can easily enough revert to old knowledge and beliefs. 71.100.166.228 02:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * "By doing such a study Jews may likewise find a particular group which better reflects their true feelings, beliefs and practices than the one with which they are currently envolved."


 * Jews are already capable of doing this, and many do. Many become christians.  Others become marxists.  Others reject isms entirely.  Jews, like all human beings are constantly developing new attitudes towards everything in the world.


 * Not necessarily if they are disabled or have a handicap, illness or disease. Classification schemes are capable of offering highly valuable assistance just as a road map is capable of helping you to find a little known street. I know a young Jewish man who is homeless and lives on the street. To the best of my knowledge he is not addicted to drugs and claims only to be suffering from incurable OCD. I find it odd that he would pick the street as a place to live and take jobs such as construction site cleanup when he must wash his hands or at least wipe them with tissue paper every few minutes even if he is in a very clean environment. Perhaps if he knew of other Jews with similar problems which a classification scheme might reveal he could find a supprt group he felt comfortable with. 71.100.166.228 02:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I hope this helps give you some perspective, --Urthogie 01:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

A lot of this, like I said, depends on how you're defining "Jews". If you're going by religious belief, then yes, none of us belief in Jesus Christ.

This Jewish homeless man has a disease, OCD. There are non-jews that have this disease. I fail to see any evidence of any unifying "characteristic" to be classified.--Urthogie 02:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You are missing the point of modern classification... Modern dynamic classification methods can process extremely vast numbers of characteristics and elements using neural networking techniques with the specific goal of minimizing the number of queries necessary to find any particular element. However, the characterisitcs which are virtually insignificant and pushed to the end of the hierarchy still have a role to play since data in a classification can also be searched for characteristics like OCD. Right now this man is turned off by non-Jewish participants either atheist or Christain or those from other religions yet wonders the street seeking help from Jewish Begal makers instead of perhaps seeking help from a Rabbi. His mind is not functioning in an organised or systematic way which the data and techniques that would be available without requireing him to go through a series of state social worker or religious recruiting interactions might help him better find his way. 71.100.166.228 03:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, can you tell me about neural networking techniques? Specifically, what do you know about neuroscience, or informatics, or cultural studies whatsoever?--Urthogie 03:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * As to my own personal working knowledge... some perspective background first... My career started many years ago, before the personal computer became available, with the question I posed to a Presbyterian minister who first informed me that computers were superior to man. I asked him if computers had been asked whether God existed or not. His answer was "Yes," and what they had said was that they did not have enough information. Naturally I wondered if with sufficient information a computer could answer the question. I became curious as to whether, “thinking” like a computer, I might be able to (with enough knowledge) answer the question myself. As time progressed I realized that what I really needed to do was to have a computer simulate human “thinking” instead of the other way around.


 * This idea evolved into:


 * a.) using logical equation reduction as the method,
 * b.) using multiple state logic as a human does instead of binary state logic like computers, and
 * c.) feeding the computer equations which represented both sides of the argument, i.e., that God existed or did not.


 * My searches eventually revealed a method of logical equation reduction suitable for computer application that was limited only by computer capacity in terms of the number of variables it could handle (Harvard Chart Method of logical equation reduction). I rewrote the method to handle multiple states. First problem: the method required that all possible combinations of variables be placed in a table for processing. Table size was determined mathematically by (s^v)*((s*v)-1). (I am currently developing, after many years of neglect, a distributed version for expanding the capability of this program for utilization of many computers via the Internet.)


 * (Skip to the next paragraph to avoid this personal part of the story if you want...) It turns out that so much memory is required to build the table that even the largest computer at the time could only process 32 variables and 32 states - enough possibly to allow the computer to run across the street without getting hit by a car. Then it dawned on me that I would never find a computer with the capacity to reduce to minimum form any where near as many variables and states as God. End of project. God exists as the logical consequence of being defined as an entity with the capability to reduce to minimum form an infinite number of equations having and infinite number of variables with an infinite number of states, instantaneously. God exists in the sense that nature abhors a vacuum and God is the entity which ultimately fills the void of infinite processing capability inline with His omniscience, omnipotent and omnipresence definitions. So my question was answered. What should I do now?


 * In the course of looking for a way to make a computer "think" like a human being I had explored classification methodology. Long story short a Stanford PhD who was working at the Lovelace Center in New Mexico published an optimal classification computer capable methodology suitable for real time microbiological classification/identification just before personal computers came onto the market (1976). It was developed utilizing a variety of methods including fuzzy logic and neural networking. The Center had written a computer program to implement the method on a GE timeshare terminal but the program itself was proprietary and not available to me so I used the detailed and adequate description to write my own on my first personal computer – a TRS-80 Model I, back in 1978.. The current personal computer version allows entry and output data to be presented via an Excel spreadsheet and I've used it with no problem for such things as processing the USDA cultivates database with 1920 elements and 83 characteristics, and optimizing the order of characteristics of a multitude of various materials, personnel and tasks.


 * There are, however, a number of extremely sophisticated programs for grouping people according to the results of psychological evaluation based upon responses to questions at kiosks and online such as used by eHarmmony for dating and Blockbuster, Sports Authority, and of course Wal-Mart for applicant screening. The problem with tapping their already massive databases is getting them to share their results for applicant self-improvement feedback or for applicant public assistance. No companies are willing to share any data; calling it proprietary. This means starting from scratch building my own database and using my own programs. Psychological evaluation software is available and comes with a predefined database but all are copywrited so I’m back to building my own database and doing the optimization as well. 71.100.166.228 06:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You seem to be a rather strange man with a lot of strange questions that require a lot of immense knowledge. Your questions are based on some false premises.  Your understanding of predestination leads you to think it has something to do with cultural determinism it doesn't.  Your project is doomed to fail unless you educate yourself on these subjects.  You clearly have no experience or knowledge in these areas.  Study!--Urthogie 19:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * How do you know I am a man? There is the knee-jerk answer I referred to on the discussion page. Strange indeed. Not being an expert or even knowledgeable yourself you seek merely sufficient information to jump to the wrong conclusion and then attack rather than interact or offer to provide any help. This is quite typical and expected but a provider to confirmation nonetheless. As for comparing predestination and cultural determinism you have obviously not read either article. Once you do you may see the relation one has to the other if only for comparison sake along with the concept of free will. Please take your own advice. As for my projects they have already succeeded quite well thank you. It is the project begun by Jesus Christ to save the Jewish people from themselves which in your case has obviously failed but fortunately not in mine. You have rejected God’s message in favor of what? ...to loose it sporadically to such things as the Spanish Inquisition and the thing you believe was the Holocaust. The Bible makes clear what happened during and preceeding WW2 was a warning for the survivors who remain on the road to the end of what many people believe will be the end of Jews. If Jesus could not bring this message to you then I certainly can not but again in regard to predestination when I became Christian I became predestined to try. Have a good one and may God bless. Diligent 01:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Noone gave a kneejerk answer, including me, even though you constantly pushed for it by asking about Jews as "ants", telling us we need to be converted to Christianity, bringing up the Holocaust for no apparent reason but to tell us it's a sign from whatever "god" you worship, and saying you want to categorize us on culturally universal and determined criteria. This is called confirmation bias. Whoever you are, guy/girl, you need Jesus.  Maybe he'll stop you from being crazy.  I'll be fine with God.  One God, one love, peace.--Urthogie 04:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Your problem is that you say you believe in God but you are lying. Either that or you do not really know who and what God is. This is the key to the conversion to Christianity of so many. It is a reaffirmation that you actually believe in God as the basis for calling yourself a Jew instead of doing so for some other reason like ancestry. The reason you do not want Jews to be classified on the basis of any criteria is so that this can remain hidden and not be revealed. I know. I've been there and I'm not going back. Have a nice day and may God bless. Diligent 05:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, go let me get this right... you were Jewish? Wow. Anyways, you can't know whether I believe in God or not.  You can't read my mind or anyone elses.  Christianity is not for me, sorry buddy.  I believe in a purely monotheistic deity.  Jesus doesn't interest me.  I think his teachings are kind of a crappy philosophy to be honest, and I think his life sets a bad example for everyone who follows him.  I also think that praying to Jesus, or any other human being (idol worship) is explicitly forbidden, and is one of the most sinful things you can do after killing, stealing, etc.  But this is just my opinion.  I have my religion, you can have yours.  PS: How did you expect to convert anyone by hiding your intentions?  It's very sneaky and dishonest.--Urthogie 06:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Jesus was a true Jew. Anyone who follows Him merely accepts the true faith of the Jews not the beliefs or teachings of persons who are not true Jews. If you were not being deceptive and dishonest then you would not classify Jesus or I yet reject classification of all Jews including yourself and other untrue Jews. I might think your classification of Jesus and myself wrong but since I subscribe to the truth what I think has no bearing on consequence but since you subscribe to lies whatever you think will eventually be washed away by the truth and the consequences not as you desire. Whether you convert or not has little or no consequence for me personally other than having someone else with whom to share and enjoy the truth. Sure by becoming Christian I obligate myself to inform you of the truth so that you can make a decision for yourself but if you reject Christianity the real consequences will be born entirely by yourself. My only agenda if you want to call it that is to inform. Your agenda is to prevent the message from getting through on the misguided assumption that you can by doing so avoid the consequences of things like the Spanish Inquisition or the so called Holocaust. You have succeeded in preventing the message from getting through to yourself even though the purpose of Christianity is not to harm the untrue Jew but to save the untrue Jew from him or her self. The concern of Christianity is that you are trying to prevent others from accepting the message Christ brings so naturally Christians object since they believe this is something you have no right to do. To understand and accept Christianity as an untrue Jew you would first have to convert to becoming a true Jew which is something you are apparently unable and unwilling to do. You want to remain the kind of Jew who does not obligate themselves to adhere to the will of God but rather to adhere to your own will and the will of the world and only pretend to be a true Jew. You do this on the hope that you can get away with it before the consequences can catch up. As for classification of the Jews it is not longer in my hands. Just as the classification of microbes has been automated so has the classification of people. True Jews are being distinguished from untrue Jews through the process of classification as a natural consequence of the process itself. I do not know how or when the untrue Jews will be singled out and separated from the true Jews and delt with according to what is foretold in the Bible but expect this will happen whether you try to deny it or not. If I can help you in any way please let me know. Have a good one and may God bless. Diligent 12:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I don't need you to tell me if I'm a true jew or not. In fact, you don't know much about Jews, which is why you think you can culturally classify them in some sort of hierarchy. Sorry, but I am a true Jew. I'm true to myself, and you can say "blah blah blah I know the truth convert to Jesus all you like" and I won't care. Christianity, as I said before, I think of it as a pretty crap religion. I could list the reasons why, but I don't need to. I've researched it, I've been to churches, and it's not spiritually or intelectually appealing-- whatsoever. This is not because i'm "lying to myself", but because I actually, truly, regard it as not for me, and pretty stupid to boot. You have abritrary standards and you clearly just want to convert everyone, and you're actually making your religion look pretty bad.--Urthogie 18:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually I not really trying to get you to join a church or any form of organized Christianity. I have problems with such organizations myself because they really do always seem to have an agenda. I'm not the model Christian and I do not pretend to be. So for the sake of argument let’s just say that you are trying to convince me to be Jewish instead of Christian which I do not think is the case but let’s just look at it this way for the sake of our discussion. So why am I a Christian when I could choose to be a Jew? Doing so would relieve me of all the BS you think Christianity is all about. I could be wealthy with no guilty conscience and a bunch of other things. So why not? Perhaps you have never encountered a situation in your life where you had to choose between keeping your possessions or ego or other things in the world versus keeping your soul. Fortunately when such a situation occurred in my life I already knew about Jesus Christ but I wanted to know from my own analysis (and not that of an organized religion) what Jesus Christ was all about. I used logic as the basis for evaluating what He had to say. Since I'm really not trying to convert you (and you do not want to be converted) I won't repeat any of what I learned here except to say that my approach was completely unbiased and instead of looking at what He had to say as the basis for His building a new church, etc. I put all of that away. I just listened to what He was saying. That's how I know that you are not a true Jew. You claim to be a true Jew. You may have all of the things that would qualify you as a Jew in the world but what keeps you from being a true Jew is your lack of having a soul. You don't have one because your claim to being a Jew is not based upon the things that Christ said it was but on the things that He and Moses and Abraham said that it was not. This is what makes you an untrue Jew and fortunately through the process of classification the next thing like what you call the holocaust will only go after untue Jews because they lack a soul instead of all Jews including those Jews who do. I have chosen to be a Christian because I wanted to keep my soul. Have a good day and may God bless. Diligent 22:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

All of what you said is based on the premise that Christ and your interpretation of him are correct. Neither premise is true, so all of what you just said is BS.--Urthogie 15:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * That is your untrue Jew (not Kosher) opinion against the opinion of true Jews like Peter, Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Am I to reject their testimony (and that of countless others) in favor of your own? The evidence and testimony supports the former rather than your own. You neither read nor believe and so long as you do not you will remain an untrue Jew who can not be saved from his or her self. Until this is changed you have no hope of becoming a Jew that is true (not just physically Kosher but spiritually Kosher as well). Have a nice day and may God help you to reach the correct conclusion and God bless. Diligent 19:43, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't care if you reject the "true Jew" (aka Jews who are "true" because they have converted to your bullshit religion) testimony. I'm not a moronic evangelist like yourself.  You can believe in falsehoods all you like, just don't tell me that I'm not "true" until I believe that crap.


 * Also, you have to be incredibly stupid to not recognize that some people have pure monotheism. You sir, are worshipping a "god" which goes against the essential elements of the ten commandments.  You're an idol worshipper trying to convert Jews to idol worshipping by telling them they aren't "true".  You should be incredibly ashamed of yourself--Urthogie 17:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments about anti semitism
A recent comment by you at the Humanities Ref Desk makes you sound racist. I'm sure that wasn't your intention and that you have no prejudice against Jewish people. Perhaps you'd like to amend your comment before someone takes offense. --Dweller 12:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You seem a bit more aware perhaps than I of what may offend others. Please elaborate on what you think I should say to correct the thing you feel is an offense. Diligent 12:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

You inadvertently seem to have a) defined a Jew as someone who "lives their life for themselves instead of for God" and b) given a green light for anti-semitism against those people. Those sentiments will, I guarantee, cause offense. And I am sure you would rather not appear to be an offensive bigoted anti-semitic racist, which I fear your statement currently implies. Which is why I'm posting here asking you to reconsider your words, rather than posting to an admin noticeboard saying that you're a racist. --Dweller 12:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Dweller, I do not think the Jews are a race and I do not define Jews as living their lives for themselves instead of for God. After all Jesus Christ Himself was a Jew was He not? So were his deciples, were they not? Diligent 12:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You can think whatever you like, but postings that imply you're a racist are not wise. --Dweller 12:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Dweller. Freedom of thought and freedom of expression and speech are the very means by which racism was overcome in America. Withour freedom of thought and freedom of expression and speech Blacks would still not be able to vote. Diligent 12:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Think what you like. But freedom of speech does not come without restrictions. Your attempt at clarification at the desk still leaves an offensive remark to my mind. Because this may be subjective, I will solicit others' opinions. --Dweller 13:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes Dweller I think you are being extremely subjective and I'm sure you can find othes to help you who are equally if not more subjective than you. Diligent 13:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

________________________________________________________________-


 * Came here on my own, thanks, to ask you very, very nicely to please take the premise of the reference desk to heart -- that is, to stop using it as a soapbox.


 * You don't need to give me permission to think what I like; I am the only one who can give or withhold such permission.  And you're welcome to believe what you like -- this isn't about your beliefs.


 * But expresing those beliefs IS hurtful, whether you want to accept that or not. And expressing those beliefs in the reference desk is out of place -- it is not part of the very premise of reference.


 * I'd stay out, really. But I'd like my students to be able to use the reference desk as a space to ASK QUESTIONS about their work, and the dicomfort you create makes this an unsafe place for those kids by the standards of a public school environment.    That's sad.


 * Feel free to respond, and feel free to be you.  But know that I will not be back to see if, whether, or how you may have responded.   You had your chance to make me think you were worth conversing with.  Now I'm just asking, nicely, on behalf of some kids that need a good place to ask reference questions, to leave it alone, so it can be that place.   Jfarber 14:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jfarber,

The only premise I'm following is that the Wikipedia is a place to learn not only from the excellent articles but by asking questions. Since I was raised as a Christian my whole life naturally when I receive answers that lack the knowledge I've been taught it the answers I receive either raise further questions or must be rejected in that regard. Unless the Wikipedia and its reference desks are intended to be exclusively Jewish or gentile then there should be no cause for restriction beyond common decency for the expression of opinion in a discussion to pin down and to clarify various points. This is how all of us learn and grow. If you want to keep your kids from growing then I would suggest this is not the place except for perhaps indecent or sexually orientated or direct expressions of prejudice and hate. Thanks for allowing your kids to ask questions so that their perspective as well as their knowledge may be increased. God bless. Diligent 19:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your signature
Hi, it came to my attention that your signature is identical to an existing user, which is outlined in the guidelines of signatures. If possible, could you change it to something that more resembles you and not another user? Thanks. --Wirbelwind ヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 10:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * As far as I know the signup system checks for duplicate signatures. If it does not and allows different users to have the same signature then Wikipedia signatures are like words that have different senses which forces the reader to determine on his own which one the writer intended. You should not identify with signatures anyway as if they were names proper. Diligent 16:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * "In no circumstance should a signature be used to impersonate another user: in particular, a signature should not be identical to the actual username of an existing user." See User:Diligent. --Wirbelwind ヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 18:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)-->