Slashdot Mirror

Its been done.

Some of the methods being used are covered in this symposium. 7 hours and some dead air (starts about 14 minutes in) but if you're interested in the topic, well worth your time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Donald Trump is looking for ghost writer for new book

The Art of the #PussyGrab

...staff asked to grade each other throughout the day using a ratings system called "dots."

FFS. People still think crap like this works? It will swiftly degenerate into alliances, feuds, and an arena mentality.

See what Deming said

It is better to yield to the customer than the designer.

They need to stop messing about with the algorithm and just go back to the subscription feed being the main way people find videos. Doing this would better build trusted relationships with creators rather than pushing people toward random stupid videos.

People think YouTube is a platform for 12-year-olds watching each other scream at video games. But there is some genuinely smart and thought provoking content there if you take the time to work around the algorithm and find it.

On YouTube you can find smart videos on Physics, Art, Information Processing, Current Events, Buisness or practically anything else you can think of. I could honestly post hundreds of videos like these. I can find them because I use RSS but most users aren't going to do that.

YouTube's goal with the algorithm is to promote longer watch times and become more like traditional television or Netflix. But if YouTube would instead embrace the strengths of its own platform and allow the relationship between the creators and viewers to be the driving force for it as a platform; YouTube could become something much more than TV.

They need to stop messing about with the algorithm and just go back to the subscription feed being the main way people find videos. Doing this would better build trusted relationships with creators rather than pushing people toward random stupid videos.

People think YouTube is a platform for 12-year-olds watching each other scream at video games. But there is some genuinely smart and thought provoking content there if you take the time to work around the algorithm and find it.

On YouTube you can find smart videos on Physics, Art, Information Processing, Current Events, Buisness or practically anything else you can think of. I could honestly post hundreds of videos like these. I can find them because I use RSS but most users aren't going to do that.

YouTube's goal with the algorithm is to promote longer watch times and become more like traditional television or Netflix. But if YouTube would instead embrace the strengths of its own platform and allow the relationship between the creators and viewers to be the driving force for it as a platform; YouTube could become something much more than TV.

They need to stop messing about with the algorithm and just go back to the subscription feed being the main way people find videos. Doing this would better build trusted relationships with creators rather than pushing people toward random stupid videos.

People think YouTube is a platform for 12-year-olds watching each other scream at video games. But there is some genuinely smart and thought provoking content there if you take the time to work around the algorithm and find it.

On YouTube you can find smart videos on Physics, Art, Information Processing, Current Events, Buisness or practically anything else you can think of. I could honestly post hundreds of videos like these. I can find them because I use RSS but most users aren't going to do that.

YouTube's goal with the algorithm is to promote longer watch times and become more like traditional television or Netflix. But if YouTube would instead embrace the strengths of its own platform and allow the relationship between the creators and viewers to be the driving force for it as a platform; YouTube could become something much more than TV.

They need to stop messing about with the algorithm and just go back to the subscription feed being the main way people find videos. Doing this would better build trusted relationships with creators rather than pushing people toward random stupid videos.

People think YouTube is a platform for 12-year-olds watching each other scream at video games. But there is some genuinely smart and thought provoking content there if you take the time to work around the algorithm and find it.

On YouTube you can find smart videos on Physics, Art, Information Processing, Current Events, Buisness or practically anything else you can think of. I could honestly post hundreds of videos like these. I can find them because I use RSS but most users aren't going to do that.

YouTube's goal with the algorithm is to promote longer watch times and become more like traditional television or Netflix. But if YouTube would instead embrace the strengths of its own platform and allow the relationship between the creators and viewers to be the driving force for it as a platform; YouTube could become something much more than TV.

They need to stop messing about with the algorithm and just go back to the subscription feed being the main way people find videos. Doing this would better build trusted relationships with creators rather than pushing people toward random stupid videos.

People think YouTube is a platform for 12-year-olds watching each other scream at video games. But there is some genuinely smart and thought provoking content there if you take the time to work around the algorithm and find it.

On YouTube you can find smart videos on Physics, Art, Information Processing, Current Events, Buisness or practically anything else you can think of. I could honestly post hundreds of videos like these. I can find them because I use RSS but most users aren't going to do that.

YouTube's goal with the algorithm is to promote longer watch times and become more like traditional television or Netflix. But if YouTube would instead embrace the strengths of its own platform and allow the relationship between the creators and viewers to be the driving force for it as a platform; YouTube could become something much more than TV.

Major declines in population could result. Problem solved!

Overpopulation is only a temporary problem. Nature is rather self regulating.

You mean like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

there's shitloads of amazing commentary and criticism on youtube. Plus tons of great original animation. Go to the ExtraCreditz channel and watch the recent "Dan Recommends" series. Search for pony.mov and Brain Dump. Ever want to see anime picked apart by a film critic? Digibro. And Kim Justice's retrospectives on British computing are amazing.

This story caught me by surprise because I'm watching more youtube than regular TV these days.

there's shitloads of amazing commentary and criticism on youtube. Plus tons of great original animation. Go to the ExtraCreditz channel and watch the recent "Dan Recommends" series. Search for pony.mov and Brain Dump. Ever want to see anime picked apart by a film critic? Digibro. And Kim Justice's retrospectives on British computing are amazing.

This story caught me by surprise because I'm watching more youtube than regular TV these days.

there's shitloads of amazing commentary and criticism on youtube. Plus tons of great original animation. Go to the ExtraCreditz channel and watch the recent "Dan Recommends" series. Search for pony.mov and Brain Dump. Ever want to see anime picked apart by a film critic? Digibro. And Kim Justice's retrospectives on British computing are amazing.

This story caught me by surprise because I'm watching more youtube than regular TV these days.

Sawstop has a similar invention..

As you can see from this animation, when dinosaurs were roaming the forests of Antarctica 70 million years ago, the continent was still quite centered on the south pole.

As seen in Alaska, trees can survive several months of no sunlight, if the temperature is warm enough.

My assertion was that the comings and goings of ice ages did not kill any of the species alive today, which is self-evidently true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

...The game's changed and you could have changed with it, made it a place where you could have made a profit (albeit smaller) but smarter people beat you to the punch. Now you all bleed at the altar of Apple, Amazon, and Google while we go around the corner and get what we want for nearly free.

Burn in hell you corporate, backward assholes. ...

Stop, my penis can only get so erect. ;)

That supermarket has aisles full of cruelty-free and healthy alternative foods that you can buy.

Your philosophy seems to be predicated on minimizing cruelty. Please meditate on the following.

Contrary to what you learned in Disney movies, it is incredibly rare for an animal to die of disease or old age. The ultimate fate of nearly every living non-human animal on this planet is to be eaten alive. The fortunate ones die early in the process. Being diseased simply makes it easier for something to catch you and eat you (usually while you're still alive).

You are incorrectly assuming a zero base state - that by not consuming meat, you are somehow saving these animals from suffering being eaten. That is not the case. You are merely delaying the inevitable. If you allow these animals to live out their natural lives, you consign the vast majority of them to suffer a cruel death just like in the above videos.

OTOH, when I go fishing, I bleed my catch prior to taking it home to prepare as food. Based on testimony from people who have almost bled to death, this is one of the best ways to die - it feels like falling asleep. So given that (1) everything eventually dies, (2) your actions almost always lead to animals suffering a natural death by predation, and (3) my actions lead to them suffering the most painless death possible, my way actually results in less cruelty than yours.

Put another way, your philosophy is based on the incorrect belief that an action (eating meat) means you are responsible for the consequences (an animal has to die), but inaction means you are not responsible for the consequences. But everything has consequences - both action and inaction. Choosing the route of inaction may make you feel better in a self-centered world-view, but in this case it actually increases the amount of cruelty that animals suffer.

That supermarket has aisles full of cruelty-free and healthy alternative foods that you can buy.

Your philosophy seems to be predicated on minimizing cruelty. Please meditate on the following.

Contrary to what you learned in Disney movies, it is incredibly rare for an animal to die of disease or old age. The ultimate fate of nearly every living non-human animal on this planet is to be eaten alive. The fortunate ones die early in the process. Being diseased simply makes it easier for something to catch you and eat you (usually while you're still alive).

You are incorrectly assuming a zero base state - that by not consuming meat, you are somehow saving these animals from suffering being eaten. That is not the case. You are merely delaying the inevitable. If you allow these animals to live out their natural lives, you consign the vast majority of them to suffer a cruel death just like in the above videos.

OTOH, when I go fishing, I bleed my catch prior to taking it home to prepare as food. Based on testimony from people who have almost bled to death, this is one of the best ways to die - it feels like falling asleep. So given that (1) everything eventually dies, (2) your actions almost always lead to animals suffering a natural death by predation, and (3) my actions lead to them suffering the most painless death possible, my way actually results in less cruelty than yours.

Put another way, your philosophy is based on the incorrect belief that an action (eating meat) means you are responsible for the consequences (an animal has to die), but inaction means you are not responsible for the consequences. But everything has consequences - both action and inaction. Choosing the route of inaction may make you feel better in a self-centered world-view, but in this case it actually increases the amount of cruelty that animals suffer.

First of all, there are no Feminazi's.

So, this person doesn't exist?
So this hashtag #killallmen must mean be nice to them?

First of all, there are no Feminazi's.

So, this person doesn't exist?
So this hashtag #killallmen must mean be nice to them?

There was a documentary made https://www.youtube.com/watch?... about a tribe that ate it's dead and got the human form of mad cows disease. From what I recall the disease is mostly concentrated near the bones. Cows got this disease because carcases were being ground up and mixed into their feed.

" until everyone realized". This is a good example of Argumentum ad populum or "appeal to the majority" - a fallacious argument

No, it isn't. It was a glib expression that intended to convey the notion that even the Russians/DNR/LNR, who are usually thick as fuck, realized that their own side was responsible for that particular shelling of civilians. Perhaps you don't understand that because English isn't your first language; perhaps you're just being a little too desperate in stitching together your attempt at an argument.

You are constantly calling separatists "Russians". They are not Russians, they are Ukrainian citizen

Russia's DNR and LNR terrorists generally consider themselves Russian, and their ranks contain an abundance of Russian mercenaries. The lowest estimate I've seen (from DNR sources) is that the DNR/LNR are 30% Russian mercenaries, if you exclude the Russian commanders and regular Russian military that fill their ranks; the highest estimate I've seen (from a Russian ultranationalist DNR commander, and confirmed by an Armenian DNR mercenary) is that they''re 80% Russian. The commanders who issue their orders are Russian, and they function as divisions of the Russian army, so there's nothing wrong with calling them Russian.

You are such an obvious Ukrainian doing his job.

Yep, you got it. The cash-strapped Ukrainian government has nothing better on which to spend its money than slashdot posts. It's not Ukraine, but Russia that has an army of trolls, who flood message boards with disinfo. Incidentally, the post to which you responded was +3 Informative, until daylight broke in St. Petersburg, and it got modded down to 0 by your compatriots, who seem to think they have magical powers to determine who is/isn't Ukrainian, but still can't get the hang of using an article properly.

During the war they were shelling separatists who were in the cities among civilians.

At what point did anyone say that this doesn't happen? It probably does, as the Russians have a habit of using civilians for human shields, just as Putin promised they would. None of this would be happening if Russia hadn't invaded Donetsk. Your own FSB agent, Strelkov, said that if he hadn't kicked off the war in Donbas (he was sent by Russian security services, under the guise of working for nationalist oligarch Malofeev), there would be no war. He would eventually say that the war has ruined Donetsk, and if he could have known in advance what would happen, he would never have invaded. Russia is responsible for every single war casualty in Ukraine by virtue of being the aggressor nation - can you get that through your thick, nationalist skull?

Radical Islam have been around for so long that the pattern is very clear. They grow and implode on themselves, over and over again.

Well. Last time it took 1200 years, with good part of Europe ending up in quite bad shape.

Take a look here (ignore what guy is saying, he might be biased, focus on the map, which is based on facts)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I think that better statement is that Islam was continously expanding in aggresive manner since its founding, but got a hicckup in last 200 years, where it has stopped, lost most of its power and had to regrow. I'm not really looking forward for another 1200 years of fighting...

burn tax payer money, BURN!

EEVBlog - Solar Roadways are Bullshit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Fortnine

We create motorcycle content with a rare twist: honesty. FortNine releases new videos on Tuesday and Thursday. Expect travel documentaries, motovlogs, gear reviews, motorcycle reviews, crash tests and more.
The engine behind our channel is fortnine.ca. Canada's largest online powersport retailer gives us the freedom we need to produce legitimate reviews. We are not indebted to the manufacturers we cover, and that means we don't have to pull any punches!

Nerdist

Welcome to Nerdist. We've got video entertainment for all of your nerdy passions and a whole lot of funny. You are what you watch!

Alan Thrall (powerlifting, strongman)

Glove and Boots

A puppet web series. With puppets. On YouTube.

Fortnine

We create motorcycle content with a rare twist: honesty. FortNine releases new videos on Tuesday and Thursday. Expect travel documentaries, motovlogs, gear reviews, motorcycle reviews, crash tests and more.
The engine behind our channel is fortnine.ca. Canada's largest online powersport retailer gives us the freedom we need to produce legitimate reviews. We are not indebted to the manufacturers we cover, and that means we don't have to pull any punches!

Nerdist

Welcome to Nerdist. We've got video entertainment for all of your nerdy passions and a whole lot of funny. You are what you watch!

Alan Thrall (powerlifting, strongman)

Glove and Boots

A puppet web series. With puppets. On YouTube.

Fortnine

We create motorcycle content with a rare twist: honesty. FortNine releases new videos on Tuesday and Thursday. Expect travel documentaries, motovlogs, gear reviews, motorcycle reviews, crash tests and more.
The engine behind our channel is fortnine.ca. Canada's largest online powersport retailer gives us the freedom we need to produce legitimate reviews. We are not indebted to the manufacturers we cover, and that means we don't have to pull any punches!

Nerdist

Welcome to Nerdist. We've got video entertainment for all of your nerdy passions and a whole lot of funny. You are what you watch!

Alan Thrall (powerlifting, strongman)

Glove and Boots

A puppet web series. With puppets. On YouTube.

Fortnine

We create motorcycle content with a rare twist: honesty. FortNine releases new videos on Tuesday and Thursday. Expect travel documentaries, motovlogs, gear reviews, motorcycle reviews, crash tests and more.
The engine behind our channel is fortnine.ca. Canada's largest online powersport retailer gives us the freedom we need to produce legitimate reviews. We are not indebted to the manufacturers we cover, and that means we don't have to pull any punches!

Nerdist

Welcome to Nerdist. We've got video entertainment for all of your nerdy passions and a whole lot of funny. You are what you watch!

Alan Thrall (powerlifting, strongman)

Glove and Boots

A puppet web series. With puppets. On YouTube.

So what you're saying is that a lot of people aren't following the rules and breaking the law, but the one vehicle actually being operated under the conditions of the permit is the hazard?

And what good does it do to post speed limits well below actual traffic speeds? Studies have shown and the safest speed to drive is the speed of traffic, not signficantly below it or above it (search for the Solomon Curve). If traffic is already going between 65 to 75 mph and the posted speed limit is 55 mph, it's far more realistic to expect the one vehicle driving 55 mph to speed up to a speed within the 10 mph pace as opposed to expecting that the rest of traffic will slow down to the speed limit. On a related note, have you ever seen the following video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... It pretty much shows that slowing down traffic to a speed that it normally doesn't flow at just leads to a tailgating platoon of vehicles that will have a much more difficult time avoiding any hazards on the roadway compared to when they're more spread out.

Hillary Clinton, and her cronies in the news media have spread so many lies and so much fake news that when genuine news does happen nobody is going to believe it.

Funny. Fake news is associated with Trump, as he attracts the low-information, poorly educated voters (which is why Trump said, "we love the poorly educated"). Inforwars is pro-Trump. Kremlin propaganda, including Nazis such as Kremlin-linked political philosopher, Dugin, is pro-Trump (do yourself the biggest favor ever, and watch this video of Dugin endorsing Trump). Twitter bots spreading fake news? You guessed it - pro-Trump.

A couple of fake news writers, who made loads of money generating outrageous BS for Trump fans stated that they tried the same tactic on a Democratic leaning audience, but were making far less money, so they decided not to diversify their operation beyond the "deplorables" crowd.

Donald Trump, was elected by the people

He was elected by almost 3 million less people than Hillary. Do go on...

telling the people directly what he plans on doing

Like being friendly with Russia, and starting a trade war with China. "Lock her up," "drain the swamp," "deport them" and his other greatest hits seem to be out of favor, however. Unless, by draining the swamp, Trump meant handing over the country to oil execs.

Russia is feeling dangerously powerful because of it.

Russia is feeling dangerously powerful because Trump was elected. A member of his team was recently in Moscow, talking about unconditionally lifting sanctions; the purpose of this is to enable companies like Exxon, run by people like Tillerson, to make a few billion dollars, at the expense of Ukrainian and Syrian lives. Trump voters have given the presidency to a sociopath who defends Russia against findings by his own country's security agencies. If Trump voters wanted to sell of their country's sovereignty, for the aggrandizement and financial benefit of the Trump clan: mission accomplished.

It's not clear that Russia has any intention to minimize civilian casualties. For one thing, their proxy forces (the DNR and LNR) get paid to fire off a certain amount of salvos, and when they shoot these artillery shells, they often fire pretty indiscriminately. This guy is located in Lugansk, and his Twitter timeline is dedicated to keeping track of the artillery shelling, in case anyone's curious about it. Second, Russia controls all of the media in the occupied territories, and their MO has been to get one of their GRU/FSB-connected "journalists" into an area (there are certain channels, such as LIfeNews, which are particularly linked to Russian security services), have the Russian journalist direct artillery or tank fire into a civilian target, and then present the footage under the guise of "the junta" shelling Donbas civilians - this is intended to foment a local uprising against Ukraine, but it only works on the most gullible individuals, and according to Russian pollsters, most people in Donbas still support Ukraine.

Possibly two most famous incidents of Russia shelling civilians in Donbas were the Volnovakha bus station bombing (it was an MH17-like situation, where the Russians thought they hit a Ukrainian military target, took credit for it, realized they hit a civilian target, and started fabricating stories that Ukraine did it) and the Mariupol bombing, in which Russia killed at least 29 people, and injured at lest 97. Another famous one was a Donetsk city mortar shelling, which, of course, the Russians tried to pin on Ukraine, until everyone realized that the shelling was done by mortar, the mortar used has a range of a few km, at most, and the nearest Ukrainian position is 20km away; at that point, the Russian terrorists shut up about it. In summary - the only sure way to limit civilian casualties, is to get the Russian invading force off of Ukrainian territory.

That looks like one of the Uber cars. SF and California are pissed that they did not apply for a permit like everyone else for testing their vehicles and that their cars are blowing through red lights and making unsafe turns.

Tesla is fairly specific that they are currently not L5 autonomous. They really don't want people to use autopilot on undivided roads. If you want to go fast, don't use autopilot, it's as simple as that. The current autopilot is best used on divided highways and freeways since it doesn't understand things like stop signs or stop lights.

The new cars come with a much more comprehensive set of sensors so that they will be capable of fully autonomous (L5) driving in the future but the software is not ready. The new system has a lot more cameras and radar capability.

Here is a video showing Tesla's autopilot 2.0.. The neat thing with this video is it also shows what the autopilot system sees and identifies. You can see the autopilot stopping for pedestrians jogging by the side of the road, for example, as well as stopping at red lights and stop signs. Granted, this sort of driving is far less complicated than driving in San Francisco.

Driving in SF is not for the faint of heart if you are not used to it. It's easy to get lost with the one-way streets, especially if your GPS gets lost due to the tall buildings (a common occurrence). With the bicycle lanes and lots of crazy rules and having to dodge double-parked vehicles and pedestrians I've found it to be one of the most difficult places to drive. It seems that Uber's engineers are not taking things seriously when their test cars make these mistakes. In order to test an autonomous vehicle a permit is required. All of the other manufacturers who are working on this managed to go and get the proper permits so I see no reason why Uber doesn't. Uber seems to generate a lot of controversy and is frequently subject to lawsuits because they feel they can do whatever the hell they want. I have friends who drive and they much prefer driving for Lyft because they treat their drivers a lot better (like making it easy for passengers to give tips).

Here's an aricle talking about how Uber's cars illegally cut into bicycle lanes. SF tries to be a very bike friendly city. The way the bike lanes work there is that near a right turn they move left so that the car turning right is in the far-right and the bike lane is between the right-turn lane and normal traffic. That way, cars making a right are less likely to suddenly cut off bicyclists.

Daily Mail is a tabloid.

But even that is better than the "usual media outlet" used by Craig Murray (and most of the right-wing blogs "reporting" his words) - Alex Jones Bitch! Two days BEFORE the Daily Mail interview.
You know... the inter-dimensional baby-sacrificing lizard-men guy.

Which is where that Craig Murray story started in that form - where it's a talk about him being center stage, claiming everyone else is wrong.
Back then they still had to cherry pick the actual Guardian article where Murray's stance was mentioned as an "opposing view" to the title and the core of the article.
CIA concludes Russia interfered to help Trump win election, say reports

Isn't it great that now tabloids are giving time directly to Murray, so you can quote a rag without linking to the article where he comes off as profanity slinging loon?
Or better yet! His blog.
Where he rants about the conspiracy to remove that Guardian article (while begging people to buy his book) from the Guardian's front page.

While the article was not taken down, the home page links to it vanished and it was replaced by a ludicrous one repeating the mad CIA allegations against Russia and now claiming â" incredibly â" that the CIA believe the FBI is deliberately blocking the information on Russian collusion.

Apparently, Murray doesn't understand the concept of a dynamic web page.
But he sure as hell leans towards conspiracy theorist way of thinking, doesn't he? Can't find that link... must be a conspiracy to hide it from you.
Just like when you spam people with your conspiracy theories and no one rushes to your blog - it must be Facebook conspiring against you.
Good thing that "calling out Facebook" still works. Or as some might call it - asking his followers to spam his link around.
All 650 of them, which by his math means his blog should get 200k+ hits. But he'll clearly settle for a dozen or so.

And while we're talking about his blog... do notice how his claims change over time.
First he, in his own words, "met the person who leaked them" while talking to the Guardian and quoting himself from the same "hidden" article.
By the time he talks to Daily Mail - it's "leakers" and "sources" and "identities" (Oh my!).
And he's gone from "I've met the person who leaked them" to this:

Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C.
He said the individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.

Apparently, now he DIDN'T actually meet the person who leaked them. Or was that persons?
It's kinda hard to keep up with all the... how does Murray put it? Ah yes... Utter bullshit.

BUT WAIT! THAT'S NOT ALL!

As a good pal and collaborator of Julian Assange he's coming to Assange's defense once again.
Cause if what CIA claims is true - Assange is nothing but a "useful idiot" to Putin. Which makes Murray into a... what exactly?

Funny thing is... Last time he came to Assange's defense like that he publicly outed one of the women who were accusing Assange of sexual assault.
This time he does no such thing while admonishing "truly execrable" journalists for treating "the US government, for goodness sake" (actual quote) as a credible source.
While HE and Assange ARE credible because "I have a reputation for inconvenient truth telling" (another actual quote).

And yet he doesn't out the source he claims t

You may very well be right about that. But freedom of speech isn't about ensuring that everything done serves a useful purpose. Your proposal to criminalize disrespect of what YOU stand for is fascism, pure and simple. You try to paint it as something else, but you're straight up delusional.

If it isn't for a useful purpose then why do it? It's done to incite. As much as a punch in the mouth. Since the guy doing it often has nothing to lose, kind of a tough situation. More on this later.

Not sure if you realized it or not, please don't put words into my mouth. I know the left loves to tell other people what they think the other person is thinking, stop it. Listen more. Do you even know what fascism is? Clearly not. I'm not a fascist. Did I ever say it should be criminalized? No. Here, find out what fascism is all about - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Bundle of sticks, H - "stronger together"... Humm.... Coincidence? Her Clinton Foundation, Eva Perone's foundation - anther fascist... coincidence?... Just sayin'

The left? Oh boy. Nazis? The Nazi party may have started as a left-wing party, but it ceased to be one on The Night of the Long Knives when every single leftist in it was purged (see: executed) by the Hitler-supporting far-right wing of the party. You don't get to call the Nazi atrocities some kind of left-wing stereotypical behavior... Well, you do, because you're free to do and say anything you like, regardless of how stupid it is, as long as it doesn't infringe on my rights.

Wow. Just wow. Revising history too. Know about communist, socialist and fascist? Clearly not. You have no clue. It's funny you think leftist become right. A lot of people were thrown off by the question to Stalin. They asked him where were the NAZIs compared to Communism. He said the Nazis are to the right, yes, right of Communism. Still plenty far to the left. Redirection.

Reminds me when they tried to make Americans all think in the 1960s that the racist Democrats all became Republicans and the Republicans became Democrats. http://blackrepublican.blogspo... . I still know people that believe that.

You need to get out and see the world. 1%? Not even close. Pretty high up- sure. Nowhere near 1%.

I've done quite well getting around the world. I've seen some real toilets. I rent to people that came from some real toilets in the world. I even have my own airplane. You need to get out more. Here's an article that I think will help -
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

So, if you include that top 1% with the other 99% of Americans, we're all in the top 1% of the world.
Go ahead, call the Washington Post a fascist/right wing paper. That'll be funny. You need to admit you're wrong. Even our poor have it darn well. To me.. man.. you really don't know. I've seen stuff that I couldn't get out of my head for a year. Still disturbs me, however even if I had a billion dollars to throw their way, it wouldn't change anything. Few things very briefly, however corruption would get probably all of it.

Again- an attack on the things you stand for is not an attack on you. You don't get to censor those who attack your beliefs. That's fucking fascism. You are a fascist. I don't personally burn flags, but I defend the *RIGHT* of asshats to do it.

Wow. Just wow. Really wow. You seem to defend the left. The left/democrats are all about telling us what we can and can't do. Regulations - which carry the power of law. From farms to where we can fish... all kinds of stuff. They even want to tell us what we can think. Anything other than what they

Nuff said
https://www.youtube.com/user/T...

I just noticed your clarification below. On that, I agree--there's no good evidence regarding who performed the phishing attack on Podesta.

The domain of the phishing link is obscure, the fake phishing email itself claims there's hacking from the Ukraine, etc. I doubt that any of that information is true and you'll end up like Vizzini if you decide whether or not the phishing emails claims regarding its own origin are factual or counter-factual.

further perpetuate the climate hoax

Honest question. Do you actually believe that more than 90% of climatologists have somehow been bribed to lie?

If "yes", wouldn't "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" imply that one should find clear evidence of mass bribery before dismissing the climatologists' conclusions?

It would also mean that within a typical sample of scientist, that 90%+ are bribe-able. I also find that an extraordinary claim. It's never before happened on any other topic.

About that "more than 90%" figure. Please look at how they came up with that. You'll find out we don't even know who these "scientists" if they really are scientists are because they're all anonymous.

Here's a real scientist, his name is John Coleman and he founded the weather channel. He wants to talk to you about this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Let the truth set you free.

Did you actually watch the hearings on that? Yes, they "cleared" her. The FBI only recommends prosecution (or not). It'd then go to Loretta Lynch to actually prosecute her, which was obviously not going to happen for a favorite Democratic presidential candidate.

Look here, for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC1Mc6-RDyQ

They found that she lied to Congress, repeatedly (a crime, albeit one punished far too little--see, e.g., Clapper). They found that she had a ridiculous amount of classified info on an uncleared server, some of which was so sensitive, they couldn't even describe it to Congress. We had the subpoena for Wiener's laptop unsealed yesterday, discussing that it's a criminal probe and telling us that the full extent of the investigation is not known to the public. Talking heads were saying it wasn't enough, but it details how much top secret information was on there if you actually read the damned thing. The "news" agencies, of course, don't bother linking to it for the most part, so I can see why people would get confused.

they seriously need a scrum or party or a bonus or something and the whole fucking team *STOPS* for 3 weeks solid and focuses on NOTHING but performance, performance, performance.

Take a look at Servo, Stylo, and Quantum. Here's a longer talk that goes over some of the you can expect.

they seriously need a scrum or party or a bonus or something and the whole fucking team *STOPS* for 3 weeks solid and focuses on NOTHING but performance, performance, performance.

Take a look at Servo, Stylo, and Quantum. Here's a longer talk that goes over some of the you can expect.

Thunderfoot did a rebuttal of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
But hey, the Chinese are free to waste their money on it if they want.

I've likely returned to this too late to do much good, but some points need to be made... First, both you and David below aren't quite reading the missingkids.com quote correctly. It's not saying that 74% of kids in social service care are running away, it's saying that out of the 1 in 5 runaways who are victims of sex trafficking, 74% were in the care of social services when they went missing. That's a very troubling statistic to consider...

As to #pizzagate, consider this report... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... followed up by this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... We have an apparent anomaly, followed by a possible explanation, mebbe... but the explanation may raise even bigger questions.
  We can be sure that there's some fishy stuff going on with the D.C. elite considering Hastert, Weiner, Clinton/Epstein, Wade Sanders, the list is extensive... Consider some of this resource... https://www.corbettreport.com/... and especially go through the exhaustive collection of links throughout the comments section there. Exploitation of the weak by the rich and powerful is a very real problem and with Mr. Alefantis is one of 'em... http://www.gq.com/gallery/50-m... By the way, the basement is under Buck's Hunting and Fishing, not Comet Ping Pong... https://www.youtube.com/result...
"It is easier to deceive a person than to convince them they've been deceived..."

I've likely returned to this too late to do much good, but some points need to be made... First, both you and David below aren't quite reading the missingkids.com quote correctly. It's not saying that 74% of kids in social service care are running away, it's saying that out of the 1 in 5 runaways who are victims of sex trafficking, 74% were in the care of social services when they went missing. That's a very troubling statistic to consider...

As to #pizzagate, consider this report... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... followed up by this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... We have an apparent anomaly, followed by a possible explanation, mebbe... but the explanation may raise even bigger questions.
  We can be sure that there's some fishy stuff going on with the D.C. elite considering Hastert, Weiner, Clinton/Epstein, Wade Sanders, the list is extensive... Consider some of this resource... https://www.corbettreport.com/... and especially go through the exhaustive collection of links throughout the comments section there. Exploitation of the weak by the rich and powerful is a very real problem and with Mr. Alefantis is one of 'em... http://www.gq.com/gallery/50-m... By the way, the basement is under Buck's Hunting and Fishing, not Comet Ping Pong... https://www.youtube.com/result...
"It is easier to deceive a person than to convince them they've been deceived..."

I've likely returned to this too late to do much good, but some points need to be made... First, both you and David below aren't quite reading the missingkids.com quote correctly. It's not saying that 74% of kids in social service care are running away, it's saying that out of the 1 in 5 runaways who are victims of sex trafficking, 74% were in the care of social services when they went missing. That's a very troubling statistic to consider...

As to #pizzagate, consider this report... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... followed up by this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... We have an apparent anomaly, followed by a possible explanation, mebbe... but the explanation may raise even bigger questions.
  We can be sure that there's some fishy stuff going on with the D.C. elite considering Hastert, Weiner, Clinton/Epstein, Wade Sanders, the list is extensive... Consider some of this resource... https://www.corbettreport.com/... and especially go through the exhaustive collection of links throughout the comments section there. Exploitation of the weak by the rich and powerful is a very real problem and with Mr. Alefantis is one of 'em... http://www.gq.com/gallery/50-m... By the way, the basement is under Buck's Hunting and Fishing, not Comet Ping Pong... https://www.youtube.com/result...
"It is easier to deceive a person than to convince them they've been deceived..."

Oh, it does happen in other fields. The popular podcaster/vlogger Stefan Molyneux discusses this often.
https://www.youtube.com/user/s...

He's done a few videos on how corrupting the global warming theory has been. He's also done a few videos recently on how the fields of biology and medicine are coming into conflict with the social sciences. If someone does a study on how ethnicity can affect things like intelligence, athletic ability, disease resistance, or affect much of anything really then that person risks being called a racist. Likewise with people studying sex/gender and risking being called being sexist.

This is a big problem. If we ignore ethnicity when doing medicine then we put lives at risk. For example it's no secret that sickle cell anemia exists primarily within the population of people with sub-Saharan ancestry, there's not much controversy there. However, those pointing out that AIDS tends to be spread by sharing needles and male homosexual intercourse risk being called a homophobes and/or whatever slur can be used on people that want to ban drugs. (What does one call a person that wants to ban drugs and be mean about it?) If we go so far as to ignore all such tendencies out of a fear of being called a racist, sexist, or whatever "-ist" then we put real and actual people at risk of death and injury from improper medical treatment and advice.

I remember someone mentioning the blending of psychology and biology happening, but not in a good way, perhaps this was in one of Stefan Molyneux's videos. My brother had a neighbor that was a professor of "physical psychology" or something like that. This guy basically studied how chemicals in the brain affected mood and behavior. That's the good kind of blend of psychology and biology. The bad kind is when people use scientific language to explain how white people are all racists, and uses a doctorate in "social biology" to claim authority on the issue.

This has a parallel with "climate science". People who enter the field with an agenda to "prove" that people are bad for the environment, not to discover how the climate works, are a problem. When a person outside of "climate science", but still with considerable knowledge on the subject, comes along with data contradicting the "science" of "people equals bad" then they are run out on a rail and told to leave the "climate science" to the experts.

It's easy to claim that 97% of climate scientists agree when anyone that disagrees is immediately claimed to not be a climate scientist.

Who cares about twitter. Its far more important that netflix gets their basic things right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

A District Court in Texas, eh? I wonder which one...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...