Meat and pudding, that's blood pudding. A wall made out of that would be the most disgusting thing ever.
Which is a line from an obscure Rollins Band song "Meat and Pudding Don't Go Together". Funny thing about Rollins Band is that there's nobody in the band named Rollins. Wacky rock stars, you know?
Did you know that the original line is from a Pink Floyd song titled "Another Brick in the Wall"? Pink Floyd is a famous psychedelic rock band that started in the 60s. You might be wondering which member of the band is named Pink, but the band isn't actually named for one of its members or any real person at all, similar to Jethro Tull or Dave Matthew's Band. However in the movie "The Wall", which features music from the album of the same name and includes the line about meat and pudding, the lead character is actually named Pink.
Just thought you might want to know a little more about the source of the line that you found humorously modified. You can google "Pink Floyd" if you'd like to learn more.
Great, so rich people will have the privilege of buying drugs and everyone else is screwed. No thanks.
Don't be ridiculous. Rich people aren't the only ones buying drugs today, and they will be cheaper because unless the tax is a 10000% markup it won't equal the "black market tax" where dealers have to charge based on the very real risk they take of going to prison for their crime.
Also, I'm not a libertarian, and thus don't automatically consider sales tax to be a fine for purchasing arbitrary goods, income tax isn't a fine for having a job, and real estate tax isn't a fine for owning a home. If the penalty for being caught with weed today was a fine equal to the tax on a pack of cigarettes, then the legalization movement would be 90% there. In Ann Arbor Michigan it's only a $15 fine for the first offense, and thus enforcement is basically zero. Of course you still have to buy it black market, so it's still much more expensive than if it was legal (and taxed).
Leave it to a libertarian to ignore the real-world practical benefits and instead assume things will somehow actually get worse because of knee-jerk reaction to the word "tax".
Uh, the point is that free market price + tax would still be a lot less than black market prices, and you wouldn't go to prison and lose your house if you got caught with over [insert tiny amount that means you are legally a drug dealer].
I mean sure "legal but no tax" would be better, but to get it legal you gotta make the pitch to the law makers.
Oh, and I do want some regulation like at minimum a rule that you could not cut the product with anything else, especially not tobacco, cus you just know the first thing Phillip Morris would do is make a mj cigarette cut with tobacco so they could continue to enjoy addicts as customers. But I suspect that's as much a pipe dream as tax-free legality.
The problem with FISA was that the 'lawyers' for the Bush regime had purportedly found that the President could disregard any law he liked by exercising the 'inherent powers' of the Presidency. FISA did not have a sufficiently strong exclusivity clause to absolutely knock that defense out. So the compromise reached was to let the telcos off the hook in return for the administration allowing the replacement bill to specify exclusivity.
Yeah, I just want to point out to all those who question whether the President's actions were legal that he has never claimed to have followed the law as written. Since he obviously can't; FISA specifies that if any party to a tapped conversation is a U.S. citizen or legally within the U.S. then a warrant is required. The only legal justification put forward is this "the President doesn't have to obey the law if he thinks it's important that he not do so" theory, a theory which by the way is nothing more than a suggestion of Bush's Justice Department which has not been tested in court (and would almost certainly fail like every other one of the Bush DoJ's "creative" theories when presented to a judge).
If you care about civil liberties it makes no sense to vote for John McCain on the basis that the Democrats were unable to stop the Republicans!
Exactly. I certainly have no love lost for the spineless Democrats elected on a mandate of "stop this bull shit!". But I can tell the difference between those who are to cowardly to stand up for civil liberties and those who bravely tear them down. This is why although highly disappointing, Obama's vote for the bill with telecom immunity on the basis that he disagreed with that provision but felt the rest of the bill should be passed, wasn't as big a deal to me as it is to others. Compromises happen; those who actually wanted telecom immunity to protect the practices of the President are the big deal.
Also, while Bush's DoJ says the President et. al. broke no laws, that's in no way a binding decision and the Obama DoJ would be free to change their minds. So at least hypothetically the whole reason for the telco lawsuits (other than justifiable punishment for their compliance) which is to investigate the Bush program would be moot. Hypothetically. Not holding my breath or anything.
As other people keep pointing out, explosives are not used to 'pulverize' buildings in controlled demolitions.
They are used to remove the structural integrity and let the building pulverize itself. If I break your knees, I don't have to push you downard to get you to fall to the ground.
Yeah, no kidding, yet another way our conspiracy theorist friend is off base. His whole mental defect is he doesn't see how the building could pulverize itself.
The best thing about the Saitek flight sticks, at least from my perspective, is that that they're adjustable. I have small hands, and with a lot of flight sticks half the buttons are simply out of reach and the hand rest platform is inches below where my hand is so I get tired holding my arm out. So from a comfort standpoint, Saitek is the only game in town for me. Good thing they're also pretty good joysticks.:)
Yeah, quite a lot apparently. In his my rebuttal to the "707 is tiny compared to a 20 story building" post, he posted a slew of trivial facts including the weight of the 707 at a mere 150,000 kg. Apparently that hits the "omg that's big and thus equal to other bigs" level in his brain.
Here's my question to you: if the kinetic energy of the towers was equal to 200 tonnes of TNT, and if this amount of energy was not enough to cause the effect we've seen, then HOW MUCH explosive would have been required?
Haven't you figured it out? Actual numbers and math don't amount to much. 707s are big as buildings, and the only thing that can pulverize a building is explosives. The actual comparative amount of energy that would be required is not the point. Only explosives do that, not falling buildings.
And you seriously think 150,000-170,000 kg is anywhere close to the weight to a 10-20 story tall 1-acre area steel and concrete building? You're truly an idiot of colossal proportions. The fact that you'd even post that spewing of mostly irrelevant stats as though it backed you up in any way is hilarious, yet also sad.
And yes, a building did fall on a building. As soon as the upper stories started to move, they were in fact falling, and the amount of energy it acquired after falling the 10 feet to hit the next floor is ridiculous. Yes you might expect to see dust clouds fly out the lower floors when explosives were used. If you had anything approaching the most basic of clues regarding physics, you would also expect to this to happen when 20 stories of steel and concrete impacted the floors beneath them.
It's sad, really. With everything that it is possible to find fault with or find suspicious before and after 9/11, you choose to harp on the dumbest -- that when the structure of a skyscraper is weakened by fire, causing the uppermost portion of it to begin to fall, it is impossible for that building to suffer catastrophic destruction without the aid of deliberate demolition. It basically requires ignoring the most basic facts about skyscrapers, not to mention physics, and also requires conjuring a rube goldberg conspiracy theory to justify taking the actions even if they were necessary or possible.
Good job on the duplicate post, btw. I'll start calling you Doublemint Dumb.
Not exactly apples and oranges - those fires occurred long before the prevalence of the modern steel skeleton skyscraper. Many cities indeed could burn in a similar fashion today, but it won't be the skyscrapers, it'll be the old wooden and brick buildings that SHARE WALLS with each other.
Yes I agree, but when your city is one building, you necessarily share walls with everything else. So add in that we know steel structures are vulnerable to fire, and those old fires are somewhat relevant. Even old Chicago wasn't as monolithic as this Ziggurat will be. The point is that relying on fire suppression and emergency response teams to save the lives of people in or near the affected area is a bad gamble, and having evacuation plans (and designing the building-city so that this is possible) would be prudent.
Well let me give you my personal experience about it. I have a relative named "David Hall." Pretty common name huh? Well he was put on the terror watch list years ago because there is a suspicious person named David Hall. He was able to determine that the person they were after was many years older, had a different birthdate, SSN, and even lived in a state he had never been in.
Since he flew a lot for work, the unfortunate consequence was being FULLY searched EVERY time he went through the airport. He finally called up the TSA once and told them, "How about I just come into your office. If I am your man, ARREST ME! If I'm not, then get me off of this list!" to which they responded, "I'm sorry sir, but it doesn't work that way."
Yeah, I was on the watch list myself, in some relatively minor category I guess. "Chris Burke" isn't exactly an uncommon name. Despite not being hassled by security since a few months after 9/11 (obviously I fell into some random Scary Hippie profile that they grew enough of a clue to stop using), suddenly I started getting the super-search every time I went through security, and couldn't use self check-in, and other minor inconveniences.
I found out when I asked an airline ticketing clerk what was up. She said there must be an evil Chris Burke out there (hey, I thought that was me!), made a phone call, said it was all cleared up, and after getting the super-MEGA-search going through security, I haven't had any problem since.
So not nearly as annoying as the cases where it takes years to get off the list and requires some act of God -- I guess there must be different levels of watch list that you can be arbitrarily placed in -- but still stupid.
I work at an airport, in administration, and trust me when I say this has very little to do with dark political conspiracies, and a lot to do with the government's haste to show they were "doing something" after 9/11.
I didn't need an airport administrator to tell me that this is all just Security Theater, but thanks for the confirmation just the same.
Did you know that TSA will now be issued police-like blue uniforms, with metal badges, just like cops? Airport police and the metropolitan police departments that supplement them just looooove that, and there's the inevitable talk of actually giving said TSA agents firearms. Unlike some other police departments, TSA agents are being encouraged to wear their uniforms and badges in their spare time, in order to enhance the agency's "visibility" to the public.
Oh goody, we can have our very own Security Theater Troupe performing for us, only with non-voluntary audience participation!
While this hypothesis makes some sense, there should be at least some archeological record of mixed Cromagnon and Neantherthal remains, along with some weapons to prove it, no?
Theoretically, but since both Neanderthal and Cromagnon had burial rituals and the battles would have probably been small-scale village vs village, it may require a lot of luck to actually find a site where the bodies were left where they died.
they embraced Open Source. Weapons. Tools. Technology as a whole. Homo Sapiens stole everything from them, made some improvements and made it Closed Source. Neanderthals had to buy their own inventions back. The competitive disadvantage put them under.
Ah, that explains why Oog isn't around anymore, breaking heads with his Open Source CD.
Did you just not get it? Why would you evacuate a city or large skyscraper if you didn't have to? Sure, fires can spread quickly, but has NY been burnt to the ground by a few random fires in its sky scrappers? Nope, that city seems to be still standing. If we've figured out how to build single building skyscrapers that can isolate a fire and most of the surrounding floors barely notice, why don't you think we can design an entire city like that? You don't evacuate everything, only the isolated areas that are currently dangerous. This is like whining that NY is doomed if any single one of its skyscrapers burned because there would be the potential that the fire could spread to the rest of the city. Here is a clue. Dubai like NY has a fire department and will design such structures so most people don't have to leave their spots when the fire fighters pop by to put the random fire out.
I think there's something you're not getting. That philosophy was tested on 9/11, and found wanting. Not only did thousands die in the towers themselves because the fire could not be put out before it caused fatal damage to the structure, the loss of water pressure due to the collapse of those towers caused the fire suppression system in WTC-7 to fail to live up to the task of saving that building.
No the entire city didn't burn down, because most of the skyscrapers are not touching and aren't part of the same structure. San Francisco, Chicago, both of these cities were burned down in part or in their near entirety when fire spread from one abutting building to another. When your entire city of a million is one building, how far will the fire spread and how much can you depend on the emergency response to put it out?
Or am I supposed to consider thousands or tens of thousands of lives lost because they could do nothing but stand around and hope the fire department saves them an acceptable loss?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh yeah, and he's a time traveller, but don't let him know that I told you that.
Dude, everyone knows that... in the future!
Meat and pudding, that's blood pudding. A wall made out of that would be the most disgusting thing ever.
Which is a line from an obscure Rollins Band song "Meat and Pudding Don't Go Together". Funny thing about Rollins Band is that there's nobody in the band named Rollins. Wacky rock stars, you know?
What were we talking about again?
Did you know that the original line is from a Pink Floyd song titled "Another Brick in the Wall"? Pink Floyd is a famous psychedelic rock band that started in the 60s. You might be wondering which member of the band is named Pink, but the band isn't actually named for one of its members or any real person at all, similar to Jethro Tull or Dave Matthew's Band. However in the movie "The Wall", which features music from the album of the same name and includes the line about meat and pudding, the lead character is actually named Pink.
Just thought you might want to know a little more about the source of the line that you found humorously modified. You can google "Pink Floyd" if you'd like to learn more.
Great, so rich people will have the privilege of buying drugs and everyone else is screwed. No thanks.
Don't be ridiculous. Rich people aren't the only ones buying drugs today, and they will be cheaper because unless the tax is a 10000% markup it won't equal the "black market tax" where dealers have to charge based on the very real risk they take of going to prison for their crime.
Also, I'm not a libertarian, and thus don't automatically consider sales tax to be a fine for purchasing arbitrary goods, income tax isn't a fine for having a job, and real estate tax isn't a fine for owning a home. If the penalty for being caught with weed today was a fine equal to the tax on a pack of cigarettes, then the legalization movement would be 90% there. In Ann Arbor Michigan it's only a $15 fine for the first offense, and thus enforcement is basically zero. Of course you still have to buy it black market, so it's still much more expensive than if it was legal (and taxed).
Leave it to a libertarian to ignore the real-world practical benefits and instead assume things will somehow actually get worse because of knee-jerk reaction to the word "tax".
One who cared about the rule of law.
Next dumb question?
What is the point of that?
Uh, the point is that free market price + tax would still be a lot less than black market prices, and you wouldn't go to prison and lose your house if you got caught with over [insert tiny amount that means you are legally a drug dealer].
I mean sure "legal but no tax" would be better, but to get it legal you gotta make the pitch to the law makers.
Oh, and I do want some regulation like at minimum a rule that you could not cut the product with anything else, especially not tobacco, cus you just know the first thing Phillip Morris would do is make a mj cigarette cut with tobacco so they could continue to enjoy addicts as customers. But I suspect that's as much a pipe dream as tax-free legality.
The problem with FISA was that the 'lawyers' for the Bush regime had purportedly found that the President could disregard any law he liked by exercising the 'inherent powers' of the Presidency. FISA did not have a sufficiently strong exclusivity clause to absolutely knock that defense out. So the compromise reached was to let the telcos off the hook in return for the administration allowing the replacement bill to specify exclusivity.
Yeah, I just want to point out to all those who question whether the President's actions were legal that he has never claimed to have followed the law as written. Since he obviously can't; FISA specifies that if any party to a tapped conversation is a U.S. citizen or legally within the U.S. then a warrant is required. The only legal justification put forward is this "the President doesn't have to obey the law if he thinks it's important that he not do so" theory, a theory which by the way is nothing more than a suggestion of Bush's Justice Department which has not been tested in court (and would almost certainly fail like every other one of the Bush DoJ's "creative" theories when presented to a judge).
If you care about civil liberties it makes no sense to vote for John McCain on the basis that the Democrats were unable to stop the Republicans!
Exactly. I certainly have no love lost for the spineless Democrats elected on a mandate of "stop this bull shit!". But I can tell the difference between those who are to cowardly to stand up for civil liberties and those who bravely tear them down. This is why although highly disappointing, Obama's vote for the bill with telecom immunity on the basis that he disagreed with that provision but felt the rest of the bill should be passed, wasn't as big a deal to me as it is to others. Compromises happen; those who actually wanted telecom immunity to protect the practices of the President are the big deal.
Also, while Bush's DoJ says the President et. al. broke no laws, that's in no way a binding decision and the Obama DoJ would be free to change their minds. So at least hypothetically the whole reason for the telco lawsuits (other than justifiable punishment for their compliance) which is to investigate the Bush program would be moot. Hypothetically. Not holding my breath or anything.
Have they learned how to implement USB specs yet?
The last joystick I bought used the old game port interface, so damned if I know. :)
Aw, I thought that was the Gentoo version!
As other people keep pointing out, explosives are not used to 'pulverize' buildings in controlled demolitions.
They are used to remove the structural integrity and let the building pulverize itself. If I break your knees, I don't have to push you downard to get you to fall to the ground.
Yeah, no kidding, yet another way our conspiracy theorist friend is off base. His whole mental defect is he doesn't see how the building could pulverize itself.
The best thing about the Saitek flight sticks, at least from my perspective, is that that they're adjustable. I have small hands, and with a lot of flight sticks half the buttons are simply out of reach and the hand rest platform is inches below where my hand is so I get tired holding my arm out. So from a comfort standpoint, Saitek is the only game in town for me. Good thing they're also pretty good joysticks. :)
Big numbers only confuse small minds.
Yeah, quite a lot apparently. In his my rebuttal to the "707 is tiny compared to a 20 story building" post, he posted a slew of trivial facts including the weight of the 707 at a mere 150,000 kg. Apparently that hits the "omg that's big and thus equal to other bigs" level in his brain.
Here's my question to you: if the kinetic energy of the towers was equal to 200 tonnes of TNT, and if this amount of energy was not enough to cause the effect we've seen, then HOW MUCH explosive would have been required?
Haven't you figured it out? Actual numbers and math don't amount to much. 707s are big as buildings, and the only thing that can pulverize a building is explosives. The actual comparative amount of energy that would be required is not the point. Only explosives do that, not falling buildings.
And you seriously think 150,000-170,000 kg is anywhere close to the weight to a 10-20 story tall 1-acre area steel and concrete building? You're truly an idiot of colossal proportions. The fact that you'd even post that spewing of mostly irrelevant stats as though it backed you up in any way is hilarious, yet also sad.
And yes, a building did fall on a building. As soon as the upper stories started to move, they were in fact falling, and the amount of energy it acquired after falling the 10 feet to hit the next floor is ridiculous. Yes you might expect to see dust clouds fly out the lower floors when explosives were used. If you had anything approaching the most basic of clues regarding physics, you would also expect to this to happen when 20 stories of steel and concrete impacted the floors beneath them.
It's sad, really. With everything that it is possible to find fault with or find suspicious before and after 9/11, you choose to harp on the dumbest -- that when the structure of a skyscraper is weakened by fire, causing the uppermost portion of it to begin to fall, it is impossible for that building to suffer catastrophic destruction without the aid of deliberate demolition. It basically requires ignoring the most basic facts about skyscrapers, not to mention physics, and also requires conjuring a rube goldberg conspiracy theory to justify taking the actions even if they were necessary or possible.
Good job on the duplicate post, btw. I'll start calling you Doublemint Dumb.
Speaking of, whens he gonna put a new album out?
Are you talking about M.C. Escher who designed the crazy staircase house? Or David Bowie, who lives there?
For friction to be present, the object being inserted into the tube must be large enough to touch the sides. That must be your problem.
Weird, the cow in that picture is clearly pointing east!
Not exactly apples and oranges - those fires occurred long before the prevalence of the modern steel skeleton skyscraper. Many cities indeed could burn in a similar fashion today, but it won't be the skyscrapers, it'll be the old wooden and brick buildings that SHARE WALLS with each other.
Yes I agree, but when your city is one building, you necessarily share walls with everything else. So add in that we know steel structures are vulnerable to fire, and those old fires are somewhat relevant. Even old Chicago wasn't as monolithic as this Ziggurat will be. The point is that relying on fire suppression and emergency response teams to save the lives of people in or near the affected area is a bad gamble, and having evacuation plans (and designing the building-city so that this is possible) would be prudent.
Well let me give you my personal experience about it. I have a relative named "David Hall." Pretty common name huh? Well he was put on the terror watch list years ago because there is a suspicious person named David Hall. He was able to determine that the person they were after was many years older, had a different birthdate, SSN, and even lived in a state he had never been in.
Since he flew a lot for work, the unfortunate consequence was being FULLY searched EVERY time he went through the airport. He finally called up the TSA once and told them, "How about I just come into your office. If I am your man, ARREST ME! If I'm not, then get me off of this list!" to which they responded, "I'm sorry sir, but it doesn't work that way."
Yeah, I was on the watch list myself, in some relatively minor category I guess. "Chris Burke" isn't exactly an uncommon name. Despite not being hassled by security since a few months after 9/11 (obviously I fell into some random Scary Hippie profile that they grew enough of a clue to stop using), suddenly I started getting the super-search every time I went through security, and couldn't use self check-in, and other minor inconveniences.
I found out when I asked an airline ticketing clerk what was up. She said there must be an evil Chris Burke out there (hey, I thought that was me!), made a phone call, said it was all cleared up, and after getting the super-MEGA-search going through security, I haven't had any problem since.
So not nearly as annoying as the cases where it takes years to get off the list and requires some act of God -- I guess there must be different levels of watch list that you can be arbitrarily placed in -- but still stupid.
Not only that, but the list is used for political dissidents too, not just terrorists or dangerous criminals.
ZOMG NO! The promised that they'd only use DHS/TSA authority to combat terrorism! They pinky swore!
If you can't trust a government pinky-swear, what can you trust? Man, I'm so disillusioned.
I work at an airport, in administration, and trust me when I say this has very little to do with dark political conspiracies, and a lot to do with the government's haste to show they were "doing something" after 9/11.
I didn't need an airport administrator to tell me that this is all just Security Theater, but thanks for the confirmation just the same.
Did you know that TSA will now be issued police-like blue uniforms, with metal badges, just like cops? Airport police and the metropolitan police departments that supplement them just looooove that, and there's the inevitable talk of actually giving said TSA agents firearms. Unlike some other police departments, TSA agents are being encouraged to wear their uniforms and badges in their spare time, in order to enhance the agency's "visibility" to the public.
Oh goody, we can have our very own Security Theater Troupe performing for us, only with non-voluntary audience participation!
While this hypothesis makes some sense, there should be at least some archeological record of mixed Cromagnon and Neantherthal remains, along with some weapons to prove it, no?
Theoretically, but since both Neanderthal and Cromagnon had burial rituals and the battles would have probably been small-scale village vs village, it may require a lot of luck to actually find a site where the bodies were left where they died.
they embraced Open Source. Weapons. Tools. Technology as a whole. Homo Sapiens stole everything from them, made some improvements and made it Closed Source. Neanderthals had to buy their own inventions back. The competitive disadvantage put them under.
Ah, that explains why Oog isn't around anymore, breaking heads with his Open Source CD.
Naw, McCain is too old for Rambo theatrics. With his age and sage wisdom he's really more like the Oracle.
Did you just not get it? Why would you evacuate a city or large skyscraper if you didn't have to? Sure, fires can spread quickly, but has NY been burnt to the ground by a few random fires in its sky scrappers? Nope, that city seems to be still standing. If we've figured out how to build single building skyscrapers that can isolate a fire and most of the surrounding floors barely notice, why don't you think we can design an entire city like that? You don't evacuate everything, only the isolated areas that are currently dangerous. This is like whining that NY is doomed if any single one of its skyscrapers burned because there would be the potential that the fire could spread to the rest of the city. Here is a clue. Dubai like NY has a fire department and will design such structures so most people don't have to leave their spots when the fire fighters pop by to put the random fire out.
I think there's something you're not getting. That philosophy was tested on 9/11, and found wanting. Not only did thousands die in the towers themselves because the fire could not be put out before it caused fatal damage to the structure, the loss of water pressure due to the collapse of those towers caused the fire suppression system in WTC-7 to fail to live up to the task of saving that building.
No the entire city didn't burn down, because most of the skyscrapers are not touching and aren't part of the same structure. San Francisco, Chicago, both of these cities were burned down in part or in their near entirety when fire spread from one abutting building to another. When your entire city of a million is one building, how far will the fire spread and how much can you depend on the emergency response to put it out?
Or am I supposed to consider thousands or tens of thousands of lives lost because they could do nothing but stand around and hope the fire department saves them an acceptable loss?