רליינס

הרבה זמן עבר מאז שכתבתי פה ויש סיבה טובה לכך. מאז ועד היום אני עסוק בבניית רליינס, החברה שהקמתי ביחד עם ישי.

רליינס היא כלי שמנהל את מערכת היחסים בין בעלי דירות לדיירים שלהם. אנחנו מאפשרים למשתמשים שלנו להעביר שכר דירה אונליין, לעקוב אחרי הדיירים, לנהל חשבונות, להזמין תיקונים ועוד ועוד ועוד.

אנחנו עובדים קשה כבר שנתיים ועכשיו סוף סוף קרובים לסיום. אם לא יהיו בעיות, תוך חודשיים נעלה לאוויר ונוכל להתחיל לעזור לאנשיםלנהל טוב יותר את מערכת היחסים הזו.

כך או כך, רליינס נמצאת פה
www.reliancerent.com

Long Time no Write

So, Yes. It has been a while since I updated this blog. It is not just because no one reads it, though that is sadly true. It is mostly because I have started another blog.

I've been working on a start up company over the past year with my business partner Ishai. Lately we decided to create a blog about our experiences in this crazy start up world. Here is a link to a great post and the main page:

http://thereliancejourney.wordpress.com/2012/10/25/wibbly-wobbly-timey-wimey/

http://thereliancejourney.wordpress.com/

See you on the other side.

New Poll Shows 'Screw You!' in the Lead for 2012 Election

'Screw You!' is now the new favorite to win in the coming 2012 presidential elections, according to recent polls. A telephone poll asked: "If the elections were to be held today, who would you choose to vote for president?" Screw was cited as the leading candidate with 42% of the votes, followed by 'Fuck off!' with 26% and 'Stop calling me!' with 17%. The rest were unresponsive.

The respondents were, in fact so enthusiastic in their reactions, they tended to yell the answer at the caller, a pollster remarked. Often before the question was even finished being asked.

It seems 'Screw you!' is a strong candidate in the congressional race as well, beating out opposition in almost every state other than New York and Illinois where 'Fuck off!' still has the lead.

Studies Show Suicide Effective against Alzheimer

New studies show smoking to be somewhat effective as a preventative measure against Alzheimer disease. Great! Finally a rock solid study to show those annoying New York health freaks, who will feel really stupid one day as they lay in their beds dying of nothing. This study simply proves what we all knew all along: heavy smokers are far less likely to ever reach a point where they need to worry about such a disease as Alzheimer.

It is at this point that I would like to suggest a couple of other options for further research:

Suicide, I believe, could eliminate Alzheiner's all together. And if you happen to be pro-life, murder should be just as effective. A timely murder or suicide would prevent disease and dramatically lower ones health care costs. Who knows? on a large enough scale this solution might even hail the end of global warming - if you believe in such things.

I do Recall a Song that Spoke

I do recall a song that spoke

of hair such as yours in a flowing cascade.

In a rhyme it demands then your eyes to evoke.

I cannot recall if they’re blue or they’re jade.

for whoever will have you envy was made.

In the evening the cold then an image paints

your body so wrapped in the arms of a blanket.

I could never conform to a brothers restraints.

nor a monk who still prays to the image of saints

as he dreams of a sanctity seen from afar

for a woman you are

You, are only, glad, when you’re quiet and lonely.

And to listen to songs of the far of the near,

so I fear,

when I stare at you quietly sitting alone I may find

that everything else escapes from my mind.

Residing, my sole, in your delicate mind.

And so trapped then from me it is later departing.

As my body and I just leave it behind.

In my dreams I am spread as a rug to your feet.

Just to have you please tread on a radiant heat.

So on evening recall in a blanket to wrap

Soon you’ll find our eyes will meet.

I do recall a song that spoke

such words only whispered when two are alone.

And till dawn it demands your ears to invoke,

it awoke.

I do recall a song that spoke.

Millions of People Can’t be Wrong

When confronted with the issue of the existence of God, many people call upon the masses for support. “So many people can’t be so wrong about so much”, they say. becoming a non-believer would be like calling ones ancestors and millions of his fellow believers stupid. They can’t all be wrong, can they?

In some cases it could be considered a great rule of thumb to check ones self against a crowd. We do so every day, as we weigh our actions against what our friends find acceptable. Whenever we contemplate our individual morality, the social circle can be a great measure. It is not illegal to be impolite to a co-worker, but we try not to be. We do so because it is not socially acceptable. And that’s fine.

In other cases, however, the majorities opinion is less valuable. Whenever an issue involves expert knowledge, the opinion of those without such knowledge would be a waste of time. We should definitely not hold a vote on whether or not ethylene glycol should be added to our food. The vast majority of people have no idea what ethylene glycol is and so would be useless in the decision (it’s antifreeze by the way).

This line of reasoning is true in the religious debate as well. when it comes to the moral issues, advanced societies tend to pick and choose the parts of their religion which is agreeable within that society. And so, to a large degree, most cultures morality is exceedingly similar. Customs may differ, but the basic morality of different cultures is often the same.

When it comes to the origin of the universe and the evolution of life, however, common wisdom suddenly diverges. Suddenly the numbers are against the religious. No matter what religion one subscribes to, most of the people of the world think he is fundamentally wrong. When the questions are not ones of morality and human action but cosmology, biology and geology, the religions become heavily divided. Can we really invoke common wisdom to defend issues that are beyond common knowledge?

What about our ancestors? Were they all wrong?

We know they were wrong about some things. Today we know the world is not flat. That it rotates around the sun. That germs exist. We can also point to moral divergences over the years. Today we consider our ancestors wrong on moral issues such as slave owning, or the rights of woman in society. Most of us think they were morally wrong in their treatment of Africans or homosexuals.

Is it really so hard to believe they were wrong about God as well?

Personal Miracles

In my experience, people often invoke miracles as evidence toward the existence of God. A miracle is an event within the physical world. It is for that reason that I am quite fond of them. Physical events can usually be tested.
In this chapter, however, we will deal only with the case of personal miracles. Those are the kind of miracles which most commonly remain within the realm of a single individual. Most often pertaining to miraculous healing or divine intervention in such cases as accidents or war. We will not, in this chapter, discuss other claimed miracles such as the parting of specific seas or the miracle of child birth. Those will be discussed in the future I hope.

As far as miraculous healing is concerned, the test is fairly simple. It is a well known medical fact that, sometimes, sick people heal. Cancers sometimes go into remission. Every once in a while infections subside. However such cases are rare enough for doctors not to consider them a viable treatment option. Later, we hear the stories of people who were told they have a month to live and then survived another twenty years. It’s a miracle.

But not every type of sick person heals. If it were God who is healing the sick, we would assume he does so by his own plan or morality. We would not expect him to do so based on an individual illness. God is almighty. He can heal anything. Right?
If this is the case, then why does God only heal people who suffer from ambiguous disease's? Disease’s which could have healed on their own anyway. And yet God never heals amputees. Surely there are amputees from all strata of the moral realm. Surely not all such people are evil and undeserving of a miracle. And yet this never happens. Never. Not rarely. NEVER!
Which leads me to the conclusion that God either hates amputees or people intemperate the good things that happen to them in the way their parents told them to. Religiously.

What about the other form of personal miracles? People survive accidents and war every day. Many of these are considered miracles. “I should have died in that car accident, but God intervened and saved me.”
These sorts of miracles are the same religious interpretations as the ones mentioned earlier. These, of course, harder to make fun of without the ready example of amputees.
But why don’t we just call this sort of interpretation by its real name: Narcissism.

“I was supposed to die in that car accident, but the almighty God, creator of the heavens and the earth, intervened in order to save me. I must be such an integral part of his grand cosmic plan that he suspended all of the laws of causality and physics for me to keep living. I am that important. Now I know I should run for president.”

Or maybe you just got lucky.

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/