So I guess you should be required to study medicine from now on before buying medicine? And I better am a qualified car mechanic to make sure the car I'm about to buy isn't going to kill me next time I am on the freeway? Maybe a degree in chemistry, botany and biology to make sure the pesticides on my food and residual medical stuff they pumped into the pig isn't going to kill me if I eat that steak? And maybe I should take my testing kit with me next time I order a mushroom soup to make sure they didn't just dump anything they found in the woods without checking for poisonous specimens?
Because if it does, it's just my own fault, right? If I'm stupid enough to buy it without knowing how to check for those perils, it's my own damn fault.
Can't happen to me anymore, mine somehow crapped its pants when trying to do the creator's update and can't update anymore.
I still don't know whether that's a good thing or a bad thing... but it's a bad thing that I don't immediately think it's a bad thing, that's for sure.
So we can see even more clearer now that the programming stinks, that the sitcoms ain't funny and that the thrillers are formulaic, predictable and anything but thrilling?
Seriously, I recently find way more entertainment in 30 year old shows than in the rubbish produced today.
If people weren't so stupid to just believe whatever story entertains them best...
Seriously, that's the only thing that I could imagine why some outright ludicrous stories get believed. Wanna bet that if I make up some conspiracy about a plot of SPECTRE to create weather phenomenon to blackmail governments across the globe and Trump refusing to pay being the reason for the most recent hurricanes that I'll find some idiots believing it?
It is after all a lot more entertaining and thrilling than just a few hurricanes forming and devastating large parts of the US.
I'm all for handing everyone all the information he'd want to have. Unfortunately there's always some asshole that wants to sell some fairy tale book with "shocking revelations" and "the truth".
Wanting to understand your world is a good thing. Simply following whatever insanity someone spouts, usually in the chase of monetary gains, without even bothering to test the validity of their claims is not going to lead to understanding, though.
What would an atheist nut be like? Being really hell bent on... well, what exactly? Atheism only means that you don't believe in a god. That's not really something you can be very emotionally attached to. How do you get emotionally riled up over not doing, wanting or believing something?
The point is that it doesn't hit people who are assholes. If you want to know what kind of Bizzarro-World YouTube has become, realize that you can monetize making videos promoting "alternative theories" (from flat earth to "medicine" that kills you) but debunking their claims means you get defunded.
That's the general tactics employed in such scenarios. You can have the same from religious nuts. They'll jump from topic to topic to topic until they finally find one you're not an expert in, then use that to "prove" their claim.
It's not even extremist content anymore. It's pretty much any content that could remotely be considered "offensive" by anyone. No matter what or who, if anyone could have a huwt widdle feeling by looking at your video, you're demonetized.
You start questioning the "official" media when what they report don't match your own observation.
That's basically one of the things that fell the communist states. People eventually saw that what they're told by media and politicians does not reflect what they experience. They heard that the plan was fulfilled and overfulfilled yet you could buy nothing in the stores. They heard that they live in the best of all words and saw that everywhere else the world is better.
What's keeping our system afloat is that there is no west showing us how we're being bullshitted.
If I keep making insane claims, at some point in time it's likely that I'll even be right. An easy proof: Think of a number between 1 and 1000. Is it 344? No? Ok, let's try again. Think of a number...
If we play that game often enough, I will guess it. Ain't that amazing? I knew what your number was!
I admit I'm certainly not the person using his 3D-printer very heavily, but is there really a market for that? Personally, I am kinda wary to leave the 3D printer alone while it's working anyway.
How do you get to that middle cloud layer? You're coming from an orbit. Then have to slow down to "hover" there. In between you not only have to get rid of quite a few km/s of speed while inflating something that lets you hover. Now, normal air (N/O, as found here at home) would of course be floating on the mostly CO2 atmosphere of Venus, but we're a far cry from simply filling a multi-ton heavy space craft with air to make it float. If anything, you'd need something akin to a helium balloon as used here, filled with air.
Helium balloons, on the other hand, can't quite handle the stress of entering an atmosphere at multiple km/s.
In other words, you either have to solve how to take the balloons you launch from the surface to the cloud layers to orbit, or you have to solve the problem how to get something from orbit to the cloud layers. Pick your poison.
If you don't land on the planet, you have to ensure that you can remain in orbit. I think I needn't point out how it ends if you don't.
About using balloons: If that was a feasible way to get payloads into an orbit (because that's what you have to do if you want to return whatever went down to the surface), don't you think that we might be already doing something like this here on earth? One of the key problems of spaceflight is that rocket engines behave vastly differently at sea level than they do in near vacuum and that we waste nearly all the fuel just to get out of the denser parts of our atmosphere, so if this could work in any way we'd probably already be doing it.
Sorry, I'm not sold. I've read it and they make some interesting claims, but so far it fails to convince.
Reduce the number of people on it. Instead of sending wheat and corn to developing nations, we should return to sending them weapons. I mean, it did work, we had cheap food, they had to hand over their resources cheaply to buy for the weapons and our weapons industry had a fat export surplus. And there were fewer people.
Slashdot Mirror
Also "free speech" does not mean freedom from consequences.
Actually, it does.
It means that you speaking your mind is not punishable by law. Else we're back at the old Soviet era joke:
"Is there freedom of speech in the Soviet Union?"
"Yes. But there may not be freedom after speech"
So I guess you should be required to study medicine from now on before buying medicine? And I better am a qualified car mechanic to make sure the car I'm about to buy isn't going to kill me next time I am on the freeway? Maybe a degree in chemistry, botany and biology to make sure the pesticides on my food and residual medical stuff they pumped into the pig isn't going to kill me if I eat that steak? And maybe I should take my testing kit with me next time I order a mushroom soup to make sure they didn't just dump anything they found in the woods without checking for poisonous specimens?
Because if it does, it's just my own fault, right? If I'm stupid enough to buy it without knowing how to check for those perils, it's my own damn fault.
Great. MS outsourced outsourcing to India to an Indian.
The one that says "blame predecessor".
I give him half a year to a year to the "reorganize" one.
He is not alone.
The MBAs said... so you really let the clowns run the circus?
Can't happen to me anymore, mine somehow crapped its pants when trying to do the creator's update and can't update anymore.
I still don't know whether that's a good thing or a bad thing... but it's a bad thing that I don't immediately think it's a bad thing, that's for sure.
So we can see even more clearer now that the programming stinks, that the sitcoms ain't funny and that the thrillers are formulaic, predictable and anything but thrilling?
Seriously, I recently find way more entertainment in 30 year old shows than in the rubbish produced today.
If people weren't so stupid to just believe whatever story entertains them best...
Seriously, that's the only thing that I could imagine why some outright ludicrous stories get believed. Wanna bet that if I make up some conspiracy about a plot of SPECTRE to create weather phenomenon to blackmail governments across the globe and Trump refusing to pay being the reason for the most recent hurricanes that I'll find some idiots believing it?
It is after all a lot more entertaining and thrilling than just a few hurricanes forming and devastating large parts of the US.
I'm all for handing everyone all the information he'd want to have. Unfortunately there's always some asshole that wants to sell some fairy tale book with "shocking revelations" and "the truth".
Wanting to understand your world is a good thing. Simply following whatever insanity someone spouts, usually in the chase of monetary gains, without even bothering to test the validity of their claims is not going to lead to understanding, though.
Only to delusion.
Not quite. They actually DO have a set of beliefs they believe quite strongly in. It's not really that different from a religion.
What would an atheist nut be like? Being really hell bent on ... well, what exactly? Atheism only means that you don't believe in a god. That's not really something you can be very emotionally attached to. How do you get emotionally riled up over not doing, wanting or believing something?
The point is that it doesn't hit people who are assholes. If you want to know what kind of Bizzarro-World YouTube has become, realize that you can monetize making videos promoting "alternative theories" (from flat earth to "medicine" that kills you) but debunking their claims means you get defunded.
That's the general tactics employed in such scenarios. You can have the same from religious nuts. They'll jump from topic to topic to topic until they finally find one you're not an expert in, then use that to "prove" their claim.
It's not even extremist content anymore. It's pretty much any content that could remotely be considered "offensive" by anyone. No matter what or who, if anyone could have a huwt widdle feeling by looking at your video, you're demonetized.
You start questioning the "official" media when what they report don't match your own observation.
That's basically one of the things that fell the communist states. People eventually saw that what they're told by media and politicians does not reflect what they experience. They heard that the plan was fulfilled and overfulfilled yet you could buy nothing in the stores. They heard that they live in the best of all words and saw that everywhere else the world is better.
What's keeping our system afloat is that there is no west showing us how we're being bullshitted.
And a stopped clock is right even twice a day.
If I keep making insane claims, at some point in time it's likely that I'll even be right. An easy proof: Think of a number between 1 and 1000. Is it 344? No? Ok, let's try again. Think of a number...
If we play that game often enough, I will guess it. Ain't that amazing? I knew what your number was!
Well, after half a bottle I sounded like a Scot (i.e. nobody sober could understand me), so I'd say it was.
I admit I'm certainly not the person using his 3D-printer very heavily, but is there really a market for that? Personally, I am kinda wary to leave the 3D printer alone while it's working anyway.
But make sure it's really 18 year old scotch. I once went home with something I thought was 18 but ... not worth the hassle, trust me, so not worth it.
The last person using it forgot to turn it off when they left.
Then I guess it was a good thing that we went over from time to time ourselves to carpet bomb the crap out of them to "cull the herd"?
How do you get to that middle cloud layer? You're coming from an orbit. Then have to slow down to "hover" there. In between you not only have to get rid of quite a few km/s of speed while inflating something that lets you hover. Now, normal air (N/O, as found here at home) would of course be floating on the mostly CO2 atmosphere of Venus, but we're a far cry from simply filling a multi-ton heavy space craft with air to make it float. If anything, you'd need something akin to a helium balloon as used here, filled with air.
Helium balloons, on the other hand, can't quite handle the stress of entering an atmosphere at multiple km/s.
In other words, you either have to solve how to take the balloons you launch from the surface to the cloud layers to orbit, or you have to solve the problem how to get something from orbit to the cloud layers. Pick your poison.
If you don't land on the planet, you have to ensure that you can remain in orbit. I think I needn't point out how it ends if you don't.
About using balloons: If that was a feasible way to get payloads into an orbit (because that's what you have to do if you want to return whatever went down to the surface), don't you think that we might be already doing something like this here on earth? One of the key problems of spaceflight is that rocket engines behave vastly differently at sea level than they do in near vacuum and that we waste nearly all the fuel just to get out of the denser parts of our atmosphere, so if this could work in any way we'd probably already be doing it.
Sorry, I'm not sold. I've read it and they make some interesting claims, but so far it fails to convince.
Reduce the number of people on it. Instead of sending wheat and corn to developing nations, we should return to sending them weapons. I mean, it did work, we had cheap food, they had to hand over their resources cheaply to buy for the weapons and our weapons industry had a fat export surplus. And there were fewer people.
What't not to like?