Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Poor Losers Ruin Facebook Giraffe Game

It's always the bad apples that spoil whatever the heck you can find good in life. You'd think something as simple, harmless, and fun as a riddle circulating Facebook might get an exemption. But sadly, no.

The giraffe riddle has been a big hit on Facebook. It's a riddle that, if you answer wrong, you replace your current profile picture with a picture of a giraffe for three days. It's a good riddle and a lot of giraffes were showing up on profiles. Oh what fun. Kind-a cool. Interesting at least.

But some of the losers couldn't stop themselves from losing twice, the second time by being poor losers. The first hint of a break from what millions of people were doing, apparently without experiencing great mental anguish, I found at snopes.com. Snopes reported, as it so often does, on a hoax related to the giraffe riddle, finding that there is no virus related to posting an image of a giraffe on your page. But then, at the bottom of their response they, for no apparent reason at all, reported that there were two possible answers to the riddle.

It was a bit suspicious. The snopes article was posted at almost the same time, if not before, as the first hoax postings about potential viruses in giraffe pictures; which is so utterly stupid and unbelievable to begin with that … well, you get the point. It looked like someone wanted to give credibility to something other than the right answer. Just in case you don't know the riddle, here it is. And I won't bother to warn you there's a spoiler here, because the losers have already spoiled it.

It's 3 a.m. The doorbell rings and you awaken. You have unexpected visitors, your parents. They have come to eat breakfast. You have strawberry jam, honey, wine, bread, and cheese. What do you open first?

Obviously it's not strawberry jam, honey, wine, bread or cheese. There's no choosing between them without some long and uninteresting metaphysical analysis that would probably turn out to be wrong, and this is just a riddle. So, you do the smart thing. You back up a little to see what's left. The doorbell rings? Oh, there ya go … “open” the door.

BZZZZT! Wrong answer. You were smart, but this is why so many giraffe pictures were showing up on Facebook. It's not what you open “first.” First, unless you're going to stumble around running into things for a while, using your hands to find the door, you open your eyes. See there. That's what makes it a good riddle. The riddler knew that you were smart enough to move beyond the condiments and drinks and planted the answer further back. Clever.

Snopes contends there are two possible correct answers, making the editor who wrote it a double loser.

But then, I found the same information in an article in the Huffington Post. “Answers:”, it contends are "The door" and "your eyes." “After all, it's 3 a.m. in the riddle.” Suck it up Alexis Kleinman, and just post a damn giraffe as your profile picture. After all, it's only for three days.

Since then, double losers have been posting objections and protests because they got the answer wrong and these other double losers have already fooled them into thinking they might not be, or at least given them an excuse not to make good.

In any case, the bad apples have spoiled the fun again.

Monday, October 28, 2013

Obama Struggles with the Idea that People Might be Real

American presidents, legitimate or not, have perhaps the best personal psychology teams in the world. That Obama entered the White House as a sociopath was apparent. Narcissism trumped reality to an extent generally only seen in third world dictators. Although beyond cure, it's possible that some sense of humanity may be awakening.

The facade of emotionless, staged self-confidence appears as though it may be breaking down a bit. When he attempts a personal connection with his audience and claims to have been “frightened”, there is something in his eyes that suggests he might know what being frightened actually feels like. Don't get me wrong. Sociopaths are manipulators who study and mimic the behavior of others. In order to fit in, they are forced to spend their whole lives learning and practicing the ruse. They're good at it. So it's possible to be fooled, especially just looking at YouTube clips, into thinking that their theatrical behavior is genuine. I'm not suggesting a miracle. I'm not claiming that he's seen the light. But maybe there's a glimmer, even if only appearing momentarily on the periphery.

To be sure, even if at times his behavior hints at understanding emotion, we're not far from the starting point. He still tends to call attention to himself, how he feels, and what his struggles are as a way of connecting. His references to others, like staged examples of ObamaCare winners, are intended to reinforce the fantasy of Barack Obama's success as a ruler. Empathy is impossible for a sociopath, so it makes no difference whether or not the examples are real. It comes as no surprise that vast differences have been discovered between his success stories and the actual experiences of his props. They are irrelevant. All that matters is his own delusion-enhancing experience in the moment.

Any naiveté that may have allowed him to believe (if it existed at all), intellectually, that ObamaCare could be a good thing is most certainly gone now, unless paranoia has him believing that every concrete fact is part of a conspiracy against him (personally) or that actualization of his grand plan in the form his critics predicted is merely another hallucination. Here we are, at the end of a stand-off in which the großer Führer demands its continuation. In the real world, the loss of health care combined with a downward spiraling economy will be devastating to “the masses.” But what does it matter?

It might matter to Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama II. This may seem an odd analysis, but if I were a sociopath, I would be searching for my lost humanity, of the point of blockage in order to knock it out. (At least it seems logical to me. The mind is an amazing thing.) We can ask, if it is possible, at what point could the mass misery that he causes will Barry be able to feel pain? A bit optimistic perhaps from a psychological perspective. Maybe he's simply finds suffering curious and expects higher intensity and a larger sample may give him a better look. Is it real? And if it is, what is it like to be truly human? Perhaps it just provides more opportunity to study the behavior of others who actually feel, in an habitual effort to appear normal.

Lack of empathy is far more serious than just not being a good guy in one's heart. We all naturally understand others, our fellow human beings, by understanding ourselves. Feelings of love and pain and embarrassment and everything else are real to us because we experience them. We have a deeper sense of others, even that they are real, because they behave in ways that are familiar to us. To be unable to make this connection can take a man to a psychologically “scary” place (even if it's great logical, possibly life-threatening uncertainty rather than normal emotion) in which others, people, entities which should be like you are not. (And now you have a hint why the left is so driven to force you to be like them.) To cause pain is to ask about its reality. Do they continue to scream? Or do they, or some great bored cosmic jester, eventually get tired and admit that “life” as we know it is nothing but a crule hoax?