Unreasonably Irrational

دوري السوبر الأوروبي

2021-04-30T23:53:00.000+03:00

طلع لنا إعلان دوري السوبر الأوروبي متبوعا بإعلان إنسحاب أعضائه في أقل من 72 ساعة، خلال تلك الساعات القليلة تزاحمة مواقع التواصل الإجتماعي والقنوات الإخبارية بين مؤيد ومعارض، ثم إختفى كل شيء كأن شيء مل يكن.

لست هنا لأطلعكم على خفايا ما وراء الكواليس (سواء ما سبب هذا الإعلان أو كيف تم التوصل إلى إتفاقياته أو حتى ما أجبرهم على التخلي عنه في لمح البصر)، فأنا لست مطلعا على خفايا كواليس كرة القدم (والحق يقال لست مطلعا على كرة القدم نهائيا)، ولكنني هنا لأشرح لكم إستراتيجيات (وسأستبدل هذه الكلمة في باقي المقال بمكر لحاجة في نفس يعقوب) العمل الرياضي المختلفة، والأسباب التي إستدعت تلك الفرق أن تبحث عن حلول، وصولا إلى فكرة دوري السوبر والأسباب التي كانت ستأدي في فشله وإنهيارع في حال إستمرو في العمل عليه (ومعه كانت ستنهار الفيفا).

بداية دعونا ننظر إلى المدارس المكرية الأساسة المسيطرة الطاغية حاليا في عالم الرياضة:

1. الغير ربحية: والفكرة بسيطة، الهدف من المنظمات التي تعمل بهذا المكر هو نشر الرياضة الخاصة بهم وزيادة عدد ممارسيها وجماهيرها، والسبب هو حبهم وإيمانهم بتلك الرياضة. ويندرج تحت هذه المدرسة معظم الاتحادات الرياضية في العالم (الكراتيه، الطائرة، الجمباز، إلخ) وتدعي بعض الإتحادات (على رأسها الفيفا) بأنها من هذه المدرسة (وسأشرح لاحقا سبب إستخدامي لكلمة "تدعي").

2. الربحية: أتوقع هذي واضحة، أهم شي عندهم الفلوس، لكن للتوضيح هذا مو معناته إنهم بيطلعو فلوس على حساب المستوى، لأنهم عارفين إن لو المستوى طاح ما عاد الجمهور يتفرج ولا عاد يدخلو فلوس. وتقريبا نقدر نقول إن غالبية البطولات أمريكية هذا شغالة بهذه الآلية.

3. الداعمة لصناعة محددة: هذي شوية غريبة، لكن عبقرية، أبسط مثال عليها سباقات السيارات، عندك الفورميولا مثلا مكرهم يرتكز على فكرة إن سباقاتهم مصممة بحيث تجعل شركات السيارات تتنافس في دفع التقنيات المتعلقة بالسيارات قدما وبالتالي مع الوقت هذي التقنيات تصل إلى المستهلك.

بعد المقدمة المطولة شوية هذي، خلينا ندخل في المهم، دوري السوبر، أتوقع أهم سبب لنشئة فكرة دوري السوبر هو إن فيفا طول عمرها مسجلة وشغالة بفكر المدرسة الأولى، لكن مع الوقت لقو الشغلة فيها فلوس فصاروا يحاولوا يطلعوا قد ما يقدروا، إلا أن وضعهم إلي أنبنا على أساس غير ربحي مو مساعدهم. خليني أشرحلكم الفكرة بأني أبدء من البداية.

حين تأسست الفيفا كان هدفهم واضح، نشر هذه الرياضة التي أحبوها بين الجماهير وجعل أكبر عدد من الناس يشارك فيها. ومن هنا كان طبعا شي منطقي أنهم يبغوا يزيدوا عدد الأفرق (أو الأندية) المشاركة في الرياضة لأكبر عدد ممكن، وبالتالي كان أي أحد يبغا يأسس فريق يقدر، لذلك نجد مدينة مثل لندن فيها قرابة 18 فريق، وطبعا الفرضية الأساسية إن جميع من أسس هذه الفرق ومن يعمل بها ومن يلعب فيها يقوم بذلك في الأساس حبا في الرياضة. ومن هذا المنطلق، تعتبر فيفا ناجحة جدا.

لكن مع الوقت ومثل ما يقولوا (لمن الفلوس جريت في أيديهم)، بدء الجميع ينظر إلى تلك الأموال ويطمع فيها، خصوصا أنهم يرون الرياضات الأمريكية وكيف تنتج الأموال بشكل غير طبيعي (43 من أغلى 50 فريق رياضي في العالم في أمريكا، 26 منهم من دوري كرة القدم الأمريكية التي لا يكاد يتابعها أحد خارج أمريكا). وهنا تبدء المشكلة، لأن منطقيا إذا أردت إنجاز نتائج مشابهة للبطولات الأمريكية، يجب عليك مشابهة الطريقة الأمريكية في التعامل مع الرياضة، وهذا يعني بالضرورة شطب كل ما قامت به الفيفا حتى لحظتها، بل وقد يعني شطب الفيفا من أساسها، والبدء من جديد بآلية وفكر مختلفين تماما.

تسأل كيف الفكر مختلف وليش ما يقدروا يطبقوه بدون شطب الفيفا، السبب مثل ما قلنا هو التوجه من البداية كان السيطرة على الرياضة بهدف المادة. وهنا في ديناميكية سوق تلخبط شوية فركزوا معايا، من حيث المبدء المنافسة هي أحد أهم عوامل تطور أي صناعة، وهذي الفلسفة التي تبنتها فيفا في طريقة تطوير صناعتها، إنهم يزيدوا الفرق، بالتالي تزيد المنافسة، وبالتالي تطور رياضتهم. وقد يكون هذا المبدء صحيح في العموم، لكن حين تكون صناعتك في المنافسة ذاتها، وهذا ينتج مفارقة غريبة، فحين تكون صنعتك هي المنافسة، فأنت حين تزيد المنافسة تزيد العرض، وفي عالم الأعمال زيادة العرض تعني بالضرورة إنخفاض في الأسعار والدخل. وهنا جاء الفكر الأمريكي، فقرر أنه لزيادة قيمة المنافسة يجب الحد منه، فحصر عدد الفرق في البطولة على عدد محدود جدا من الفرق، وفي أغلب الأحوال يمنع تواجد أكثر من فريق في نفس المدينة (وإن أمكن في نفس الولاية) ثم يعطي هذه الفرق حصريات على موقعها الجوغرافي، فلا تتنافس مع بعضها في التسويق والرعايات داخل ذلك الموقع الجيوغرافي.

هنا يدخل الكثير من مناصري مدرسة الفيفا الفكرية، ويقولوا بأن آلية الفيفا هي الأفضل لإنتاج أفضل الفرق على الإطلاق، لأن هذه التنافسية المفتوحة تضطر كل فريق للعمل على تطوير نفسه حتى يتمكن من الارتقاء إلى البطولات الأهم، وإن حصر البطولات على فرق محددة يجعلهم يتكاسلون بعد أن ضمنوا مراكزهم. وأقول أن هذه المعلومة صحيحة وخاطئة في نفس الوقت، ذلك أنها لم تحدد نطاق صحتها. ودليل خطئها هو البطولات الأمريكية ذاتها، فأفضل لاعبي كرة السلة في العالم على الإطلاق هم لاعبي الدوري الأمريكي بلا منازع وعدد الفرق من هذا الدوري ضمن قائمة أغلى 50 فريق في العالم يساوي عدد فرق كرة القدم من باقي العالم في تلك القائمة، بينما باقي العالم حيث التنافس مفتوح للجميع، لم يقدموا فرقا بقوة الفرق الأمريكية أبدا. ودعوني أوضح، أنا هنا لا أتحدث عن المنتخبات الرسمية، وإنما عن الأندية والفرق المحلية. إن جعل البطولة مغلقة يزيد في الحقيقة التنافس بين اللاعبين ابتداء لرفع مستواهم حتي يتمكنوا من اللعب في أحد تلك الفرق المحدودة.

فكيف تكون تلك فكرة ضمان الفرق لمقاعدها تجعلهم متكاسلين صحيحة؟ الإجابة هو ما تفتق به أذهان من عملوا على دوري السوبر، حين قرروا أن ينشؤوا دوري تضمن فيه 15 فريق مقاعدها بينما تضطر 5 فرق أخرى للتنافس على تلك المقاعد. أولا الفرق نفسها، 6 منها بريطانية (4 في لندن)، 3 إيطالية و3 إسبانية، هذا يعني أنه لن تستفيد كثيرا من الأفكار الحصرية الجيوغرافية التي تطبق في أمريكا، كما أنه ستفقد البطولة الجماهير الغفيرة من باقي أوروبا، وهذا يعني مع الوقد فقد جماهير الفرق هذه نفسها. صحيح أن الفرق نفسها لها جماهيرية كبيرة جدا، ولكن جزء كبير من تلك الجماهير سببه هو البطولات التي تشارك فيها تلك الفرق مع باقي الفرق المحلية والأوربية ولو فقدت تلك البطولات فستفقد جزء كبير من حماسة جماهيرها. ثانيا فكرة وجود فرق الخمس فرق الباقية التي ستضطر للتنافس للوصول إلى تلك البطولة، سيؤثر سلبا على ال15 الأولى، إذا أن تلك الفرق ستشعر سيكولوجيا بالراحة لضمان مراكزها ولن تجتهد، ضمانهم لمركزهم ولكن بسبب شعورهم إنهم لا يحتاجون بذل الجهد لتلك المراكز بينما تلك الفرق (الأقل منهم) تحتاج لإثبات نفسها. باختصار المنافسة غير العادلة، ففي النظام الأمريكي الجميع على نفس المنصة، الجميع ضمن مركزه (نوعا ما)، فالجميع يتنافس من نفس نقطة القوة أو الضعف.

باختصار، إذا أراد أحدهم أن يحقق نفس الطريقة الأمريكية في كرة القدم، يجب أن يبدء من الصفر، بطولة بعدد محدد من الفرق، موزعة بشكل عادل بين الدول الأوروبية، جميع تلك الفرق ثابتة ولا يمكن تغيرها بسهولة.

ياسر بهجت

@YBahjatt

New Energy, Really?!!

2012-11-29T15:15:00.000+03:00

Every where you look these days you find someone talking about energy. Some would clam to work on Green Energy, others call it renewable energy, and almost all of them call to think creatively when it comes to our energy options.
That all sounds pretty nifty and dandy, but to be honest, I think they are all wrong or not being honest.

Let me take them one at a time, let us start with the clam of green energy. Those who use that word imply that these energy sources are environmentally friendly and do no harm to nature (unlike the old bad carbon based or nuclear sources). And that is just totally misleading.
As they say, there is no such thing as free lunch. all that you are doing is replacing one harmful effect on nature with another. Let me explain how.
Solar PV for example has multiple harmful effects on nature (and I would argue that for now it is more harmful than any fuel). Here is a list of some of these:

Many scientists clam that it takes more energy to produce a solar cell than it would generate in its entire life, that means that we consume some other energy (fuel) to make the cells, but then the return is much less that the energy we spent in the first place. Shouldn't we have just used the fuel directly?
The chemical composition of the cell is toxic and harmful to the environment, so when we need to replace them in 20-30 years we will have to introduce a toxic materiel to the world.
To generate electricity with solar cells, we need to cover large landscapes. These lands had wild life that depended on the solar energy that was there, so we are harming them. Also, new wild life will now move in under the shade, creating an even bigger instability the the natural order of things.

If we go to Solar thermal, will my guess is that we might get rid of 1 & 2, but we can never solve 3. And I can go on about every single so called green energy source.

Secondly let me talk about a clam they all make by stating the word "Energy". They might all say energy but what they really are talking about is "Electricity". You might think that they are one and the same, but the reality of things is they are not.
You need energy to move your car, and that energy is kinetic energy. Today, we use fuel that has chemical energy, we brake it down to get thermal energy that in turn is converted to the kinetic energy we need to move the car. Replacing our fuel with Electricity solves nothing really, in fact I would argue that it is way less efficient than fuel and creates far more problems.
You see every time you convert one type of energy to another you lose part of it in the process, so in the example of our car, we made 3 conversions, chemical -> thermal -> kinetic (or that is what you think, it is actually much more complicated if you think about how we got the fuel).
What if we replace the engine with an electric motor? will you will get a much more complicated process, starting from the end we will get Kinetic <- Magnetic <- Electrical, and the electrical (at least so far) comes from Chemical -> Thermal -> Kinetic -> Magnetic -> Electrical, so we have a total of 7 steps from fuel to our desired Kinetic energy rather than just 3. And even if you replace fuel with any other sources of energy to get electric, you will still need more steps than fuel would. This makes the efficiency of an electric system very low, the only thing that can try to make up for that lost efficiency is the mass central production, by having large scale electric generation facilities.
The other issue with electrical energy is that it issues when stored on a large scale. Electricity can be stored in capacitors and coils, these are nice on the millimeter scale, but if you want to use them on large scale they turn into deadly nightmares. So the solution to this so far is to convert it to some other type of energy and store it, then convert it back to electricity when you need it. Batteries for example is a chemical energy storage. This means that you lose part of the energy when you store it, and again when you want to use it. And unfortunately you cant generate electricity exactly as you need it, the moment you generate it you have to either use it or store it, otherwise you lose it all together. There are many ways to try and manage that, but all in all, this dramatically effects the efficiency of electricity. And it is even much worse when the electrical generation is uncontrollable (solar, wind, etc.).

So why Electrical? will that is very simple, we have already spent lots of money on the infrastructure for Electricity and we want to keep using it. And this would help us focus all our research on just one type of energy rather than investigate all of them.

Is there any other way?
I honestly do not know, but here are my thoughts on the matter:

Since there is no such thing as green energy, we should not be so possessed by making every thing green. What we should be doing is diversify. I mean by focusing all our energy on one source we concentrate the damage on one part of Earth's echo system, and that can be hard to repair. But if we have small levels of damage on every system, will chances are that the natural immune system of Earth would be able to repair the damage.
Use and store the energy as you need it. Why not work on new technologies that transmit & store Kinetic energy for example and then supply that to cars? So we take the Kinetic energy from the wind, store it, transmit it to the car, use it as is. Store the thermal energy from the sun and use it for cooking or the light from the sun to use instead of bulbs. You get the picture. We will still need to generate electricity for all of our electronic devises, but that is but a fraction of what we use electricity for today.

Solving the Time Travel Paradox

2012-11-24T09:45:00.005+03:00

Time travel has always been my favorite SciFi topic. But it has inherently one main issue, the PARADOX.
A simple version of a paradox (to explain it to those of you who for some strange reason are still reading and yet do not know what a time paradox is) would be, say you travel back in time, and while you were driving around in the car you stole (shame on you), you have an accident and kill a kid, who turns out to be you!!!
Now, the problem is, if you just killed your self when you were a kid, that means you never grew up, thus never actually traveled back in time, therefore you did not kill your self, that means you actually do grow up AND do travel back in time to kill your kid self, leading to the point that you did not grow up, ...... you get the drift.

So now, if we are to assume that time travel is a possibility (or at least if we want to build a mathematical module for it) we must resolve this paradox issue.
And I assume I have (although I am pretty sure I created a few other issues in the process) solved this issue by changing a few things we are currently assuming about time.
these changes and some of their implications are as follows:

Time is 3 Dimensional: this means that time is not just one access with forward and back as our only options. I propose calling them tX, tY & tZ.
Time is expanding: starting from the Big Bang, time is expanding outwards in every direction just like the physical 3D space is. Forming a sphere that has its tX,tY & tZ center is 0,0,0 AND its radius is the amount of time since time began.
Movement in time (just like movement in Space) is vectorial.
Awareness is a single point in time and is the only thing that moves in 3D time, physical objects do not move in time.
Awareness is only active when our awareness occupy the same 3D time as our physical object.
There is a natural force (T) in 3D time, just like gravity the physical space, that is constant and is pushing outwards from the center.
There is a second natural force (P) that is on a plane that is always vertical on T. The exact direction of P on that plane is determined by our actions
The faster a physical object's speed is, the more it is effected by T and more resistant to P.
The more an object conscious of the physical world, the less it is effected by T and more effected by P.
Unconscious objects are equally effected by both forces.
Unlike normal space, an infinite number of objects can occupy the same 3D time location.
Every object has a shape and location in 3D time. And a single physical object can have multiple objects in 3D space.
Objects in 3D time are fixed. In other words, you can not move any objects location in 3D time, you can not change its movement in 3D time, you can not change its shape in 3D time.
What moves in 3D time is our perception/awareness.
By interacting with any object in 3D time, you apply a force to you awareness' vector in 3D time, causing it to change direction in 3D time.
Time travel would be defined as moving your awareness from the edge of one of your 3D time objects to the edge of another.
Actual time (AT) is the distance from the tX,tY,tZ point and the center 0,0,0 (radius)
Time passed (TP) is the difference between between the actual time of two points.
Our perception (OP) of time is measured as the distance our awareness travel in 3D time.
Measured time (MT), is the distance an unconscious object travels to move from one Actual time to another.

This might all sound very complected, but let me try to explain it with a few examples:

Normal life: in our day to day life, Our perception of time is the same as the measured time, the reason for that is that we just flow with things with a very low frequency of interactions with the physical world.
Deep thinking: we always find that when we are in a deep thinking mode, we find that time fly's very fast, the reason being our disconnect with the physical we are less effected by P. This results in a shorter distance to travel between two AT spheres than the measured time between the same two sphere.
Boredom: as you are highly attached to the real world and are noticing every aspect of it, we are effected strongly by P. this forces us to travel sideways, meaning we need to travel a much longer distance to get from one AT sphere to the next.
Speed of Light: when an object travels @ the speed of light it would theoretically not be effected by P. In reality, P's effect can never be zero. Meaning you can never travel on the exact direction of the T vector. This allows for increased speeds to try and come closer to T. The line that falls on the T vector is the shortest distance between any two AT spheres. (if you want the mathematical explanation of how this fits with the relativity equation just comment here)

This is the time relativity equation
If we move it around we get

This looks like a trigonometric function.
And that means we have at least two dimensions here in time.
What you also would see is that the triangle turns into a line as v approaches c.
This basically means that at that speed we only see the intersecting line as a dot from our single time dimension point of view.

Its my life

2012-11-22T14:56:00.002+03:00

Here is a thought, a strange one I am told
I will tell you what I think if I may be so bold

This is my life so my choices are my own
What I say, What I do, they reflect on me and me alone

I do not want to offend you, nor show disrespect
I just see things that you somehow neglect

This is my life so my feelings are my own
What I love, What I hate, this feeling in my bone

I have my calling and mark to leave
I am not boring, I got things to achieve

This is my life so my actions are my own
What I value, What I ignore, to the world I will make it known

I learn what I want so I can excel
I do what I love, don't care if it wont sell

This is my life so my thoughts are my own
What I dream, What I create, I am not another clone

The future I see, is mine to grasp
Once I am there I am sure you will gasp

This is my life so my assets are my own
What I make, What I produce, this is my throne

I change the world and make it anew
Am I so wrong to follow my hugh

This is my life so leave me alone
Stop forcing me to live it as if it was your own

No Fiction No Reality

2012-01-31T15:43:00.000+03:00

Last week I went to GCF2012 in Riyadh, and to be totally honest I only enjoyed 3 things: the networking, the Saatchi and Saatchi presentation & the panel of SciFi writers.
And what most enjoyable to me was the opportunity I got to spend some quality time with some of best SciFi writers in the world (such as Catherine Asaro, Marl O'Green & Dr. Arlan Andrews) and got to discuss some very important fictional topics ;-)

The main topic that I was exploring is the effects of fiction and especially the scientific type on the advancement and prosperity of any society. I have always believed that the main drive behind advancement was SciFi, and would argue that we are yet to see any new invention or gadget that has not been dreamed up in a SciFi story before some engineer/scientist made it happen.
This is very apparent when you look at the contrast between the USA & Japan, each has its own rich and unique SciFi culture, and that clearly shows in the kind of technologies they are each working on. I would argue that the Japanese have a very deep emotional and psychological SciFi that looks more into the supernatural, while the USA has a much more materialistic kind of SciFi that focuses more on the physical looks, feel and power of technology. And this difference clearly effects how products are developed and designed in both these countries.

My point in most of the discussion was that you need a good SciFi culture to drive your economy , and when an economy's quality of SciFi production goes down, so does the economy it self. I believe that the main drive behind the fall of the US economy is what we see in the movie industry today, where they are now recycling SciFi ideas from the 80s. in my opinion that shows that the creative drive in this economy is drying up and no one is willing to invest in digging deeper to keep it running, therefore forcing it to dry off even faster.

But how dose SciFi effect progress and why? what are the main components in SciFi that if perfected would drive an economy forward? What is it about SciFi that drives us humans to advance? and more importantly, How is it that SciFi writers have the vision to know that the bold ideas they are presenting are actually scientifically possible even though every one at the time of writing it called fiction? and building on that, why is it called fiction when it turns out that it was possible?

But as usual my big mouth got me to places I did not intend to go, and I was put on the spot to lead something I did not intend to lead.
Dr. Arlan Andrews, when asked about SciFi in the Arabian world decided (without consulting me) to point me out of the audience as the future of the Arabian SciFi culture (thank you Dr. Arlan Andrews, for throwing that responsibility on my shoulder).

So guys help me out here, if we are to build a SciFi culture for the Arabic world (I know it is ironic that I am writing about this in English), what do we need to focus on to build this culture? how can this SciFi culture help drive us forward into the 21st century? and on a much more controversial topic, how would we have our own SciFi and what are the aspects that would differentiate us from the rest of the SciFi that exists in the world today?

The Emergence of a new Species

2012-01-26T04:26:00.000+03:00

What happened in Egypt has come to show that humans do evolve. Infact that just happened.
As a species, this generation is totally different than their parents. The way they think, communicate, take decisions, process information or even coordinate.
These two are so different that the mightiest of the parent species was unable to grasp even the basic concepts of the new child species.
The following is a comparison to show how apart these two are & why I think this is evolution:
- Social: The previous generation was limited in its social reach to a hand full of peers, the new generation socializes on a global scale.
- Information: the old generation had slow data processing by reading books and waiting for information for days and some times months, the new generation processes thousands of bits of new information every day from all over the world.
- Processing: The old generation toke its sweet time to process information and take decisions, the new generation finds new information, processes it and make a decision in a few seconds.
- Communication: the old generation communicated with a limited number of others withing a limited space and it always was ONE to (ONE or Many), the new generation communicates with thousands of others and mostly in a Many to Many fashion.
- Technology: Historically the older generation are only slightly behind on technological update (since the updates were so slow) and were superior to their new generation by accumulated experience, NOW the new generation have passed their older generation technologically and have the ability to accumulate and transfer experience very quickly.

Ctr+Alt+Del

2012-01-16T23:00:00.000+03:00

For all of us technical PC users we just love Ctr+Alt+Del, it is such an amazing feature that should be in any operating system (maybe that is why I do not like Apple).
Ctr+Alt+Del allows you to just kill any application or operation you do not like OR even just wipe out your memory and restart the system fresh.

Ctr+Alt+Del comes so naturally that it is the first thing that comes to mind when faced with any real life issues.
Take for example Education, the system is just so tangled and resources are so stretched it is almost in a deadlock and the output is Crappy. The system freezes a lot, and the script is almost never executed. The output buffer is so full it is corrupting the data, and the data burners are so over used and under supplied that they can no longer sustain quality.
Don't you think we need to Ctr+Alt+Del and just kill this process and fire up a second one?

What about the Economy? the debt is so high it is a joke, the bus's bandwidth is drained by recurring processes of interest that are like a virus overloading your CPU, and the memory is so overheated that it is making up numbers that never existed.
What do you say, Ctr+Alt+Del? trust me it will finally show you the real power of the system you are running this baby on.

And do not get me started on transportation especially in the developing world. The infrastructure project keep making memory calls to addresses way beyond the available address limit, and the CPU is not getting any useful data from the storage drives. Its like you are not getting smooth streaming although your T1 line is up, somehow one of these Trojans has triked your anti-virus and is now sucking up your bandwidth.
Come on, you must want to Ctr+Alt+Del by now. With all of these crappy applications running with such performance YOU MUST want to just kill them all.
These issues all seem to me like the Y2K issue, no one thought these systems through. Most of these issues could have been avoided from the start had someone paid attention while designing them.

Next time I will talk on some design issues (you know what you are supposed to do before telling people how great your application is), and maybe we can come up with some designs that are so Unreasonably Irrational that they might actually work.

My First Blog here

2012-01-16T15:47:00.000+03:00

Some of you might already know me from my page on FaceBook and my blog there.

I will try on my blog here to present something different than what I am presenting on FaceBook.
My FaceBook page was and will remain as a much more personal nature than what I will be posting here.
Here I will try to show my wildly Unreasonable ideas to the point where it is Irrational to persist on perusing them any more.

The ideas I will talk about will cover a wide range of topics from Education, Religion, Science, Sports (eSports to be precise), Economy and even time travel.

I know that most of you might find these ideas utterly insane or even boarder line ..... (I can't really find the word for it, if after you read my posts this word comes to you please let me know).
So please do post your thoughts (and insults if that would make you feel good), oh and please try your best to kill these ideas and cure me of my Irrationally Unreasonableness.

See you on my next post