In x% of situations, a mindless robot can perform the duty.
fortunately robots are huge dorks.
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Saturday, May 30, 2015
Let's get real up in this bitch.
when a manager gets thrown out of a baseball game, all of the other umpires should immediately charge at him and take him own aggressively before placing his hands behind his back and zip tying them together, pushing him down into the dugout aggressively in a bullying fashion.
well, let's clarify.
when a black manager is thrown out of a baseball game.
or a coach from a basketball game.
let's get real up in this bitch.
and let's keep it real because i'm keeping it real.
well, let's clarify.
when a black manager is thrown out of a baseball game.
or a coach from a basketball game.
let's get real up in this bitch.
and let's keep it real because i'm keeping it real.
Friday, May 29, 2015
Maybe salary caps should have rollover minutes.
Maybe if you're under the cap by a dollar this year, you can go over it by a dollar next year.
Time for some freedom spreading again?
(one must put aside all concerns regarding current trade agreements and treaties to consider the following. one should not hesitate in such an intellectual exercise. what is simply is because it is, not necessarily because it must be.)
Should we make it our national duty to use economic power to force social changes in other countries?
Of course the danger is going too far, and humans almost always, perhaps always, eventually go too far when given the opportunity.
But let's argue in favor of the approach. Let's say that we decide we will not do business with any country that mandates that women wear those full body things in public, or where they can not drive, or where they can not vote.
ie. should we just buy these rights for those women?
What unintended consequences should we be worried about assuming we were successful in the effort? Perhaps the culture isn't ready for such a development? Perhaps there would be pushback? Perhaps violence would result?
How utopian and idealistic is the concept? Is there ANY way to go about such an effort productively and successfully without disastrous uc's (unintended consequences)?
Is it hypocritical of us, based on our history? Sure. You got it. Doesn't seem particularly important in any applicable sense, but if you need to get that on the record, consider it done.
Might France and England have been able to end American slavery earlier through purely economic pressure?
We are talking purely NON-AGGRESSIVE measures now. We are not talking ships surrounding the country, preventing them from coming or going. We are talking a choice, for all involved, as to how they want to behave.
Considering such things makes me feel like a kid again, which makes me both nervous and deeply skeptical.
Should we make it our national duty to use economic power to force social changes in other countries?
Of course the danger is going too far, and humans almost always, perhaps always, eventually go too far when given the opportunity.
But let's argue in favor of the approach. Let's say that we decide we will not do business with any country that mandates that women wear those full body things in public, or where they can not drive, or where they can not vote.
ie. should we just buy these rights for those women?
What unintended consequences should we be worried about assuming we were successful in the effort? Perhaps the culture isn't ready for such a development? Perhaps there would be pushback? Perhaps violence would result?
How utopian and idealistic is the concept? Is there ANY way to go about such an effort productively and successfully without disastrous uc's (unintended consequences)?
Is it hypocritical of us, based on our history? Sure. You got it. Doesn't seem particularly important in any applicable sense, but if you need to get that on the record, consider it done.
Might France and England have been able to end American slavery earlier through purely economic pressure?
We are talking purely NON-AGGRESSIVE measures now. We are not talking ships surrounding the country, preventing them from coming or going. We are talking a choice, for all involved, as to how they want to behave.
Considering such things makes me feel like a kid again, which makes me both nervous and deeply skeptical.
Mohammed cartoon competitions could save the civilized world.
by finally allowing us to exterminate the cockroaches once and for all.
It may be worthwhile to attempt to infiltrate the brainwashing mechanisms and infect them with a "mohammed wants you to jump off a very high bridge" mantra.
By the by
You gotcher mantras.
You gotcher tantras.
And you gotcher yantras.
Back to the topic at hand, about which I have already jumped and confused you (end of literary references/stealing), The competitions serve as the honey pot, forcing us to confront this scourge rather than continuing to attempt to pretend like it can be managed or tolerated by an ever incrementally-or-more-dramatically increasingly authoritarian control and monitoring state
Some parts of humanity are unfit and are worthy of extermination. While such proclamations are generally racially based, this one is not. This is purely behaviorally based, and is entirely appropriate.
A war on terrorism perhaps can never be won but perhaps must be continually fought regardless. It is a festering wound, eating away at our ability to live free lives. A population who claims that they have a right to attack us because of our own exercise of our own free speech is simply incompatible with civilization and is unworthy of any expectations of collective protection.
The only viable option seems to be an in your face and right up your ass, no-holds-barred freedom bonanza, mocking and humiliating all the stupid losers in the world who think that if someone else draws a cartoon it should be a capital crime, especially those who are willing to commit the act, whether or not they are willing to kill themselves in the process.
The cockroach population is relatively small, stupid, sad, pathetic, desperately seeking a purpose in life and can most likely be forced to eventually come to terms with the fact that we will draw, say and express whatever the fuck we want, whenever we want to, and that as long as we're not threatening others in the process, it's nobody else's goddamn business, via humiliation and alienation from mainstream culture (whose approval is, after all, the entirety of what they are seeking).
No other outcome can be accepted.
It may be worthwhile to attempt to infiltrate the brainwashing mechanisms and infect them with a "mohammed wants you to jump off a very high bridge" mantra.
By the by
You gotcher mantras.
You gotcher tantras.
And you gotcher yantras.
Back to the topic at hand, about which I have already jumped and confused you (end of literary references/stealing), The competitions serve as the honey pot, forcing us to confront this scourge rather than continuing to attempt to pretend like it can be managed or tolerated by an ever incrementally-or-more-dramatically increasingly authoritarian control and monitoring state
Some parts of humanity are unfit and are worthy of extermination. While such proclamations are generally racially based, this one is not. This is purely behaviorally based, and is entirely appropriate.
A war on terrorism perhaps can never be won but perhaps must be continually fought regardless. It is a festering wound, eating away at our ability to live free lives. A population who claims that they have a right to attack us because of our own exercise of our own free speech is simply incompatible with civilization and is unworthy of any expectations of collective protection.
The only viable option seems to be an in your face and right up your ass, no-holds-barred freedom bonanza, mocking and humiliating all the stupid losers in the world who think that if someone else draws a cartoon it should be a capital crime, especially those who are willing to commit the act, whether or not they are willing to kill themselves in the process.
The cockroach population is relatively small, stupid, sad, pathetic, desperately seeking a purpose in life and can most likely be forced to eventually come to terms with the fact that we will draw, say and express whatever the fuck we want, whenever we want to, and that as long as we're not threatening others in the process, it's nobody else's goddamn business, via humiliation and alienation from mainstream culture (whose approval is, after all, the entirety of what they are seeking).
No other outcome can be accepted.
I find it funny that
many Islamic terrorists physically resemble roaches, especially with all that horrible facial hair.
I also find it funny that they have those hope-filled, brainwashed, trance-like eyes.
In an intellectually safe environment, I would be inclined argue that they are not criminally responsible for their actions and should be sent to a safe place where they can eat apple sauce and creamed corn every day and watch programs like Barney and Sesame Street.
In a cage by themselves, of course.
Forever.
I also find it funny that they have those hope-filled, brainwashed, trance-like eyes.
In an intellectually safe environment, I would be inclined argue that they are not criminally responsible for their actions and should be sent to a safe place where they can eat apple sauce and creamed corn every day and watch programs like Barney and Sesame Street.
In a cage by themselves, of course.
Forever.
Monday, May 25, 2015
While I don't believe that pot's a "gateway drug"
i do believe that BAD (ie. weak) pot can be if that's all you have access to.
the good stuff? no way. it's just scary enough to be the end of the progression rather than the beginning.
the good stuff? no way. it's just scary enough to be the end of the progression rather than the beginning.
Everyone but police must be right.
Everyone else has to be correct in their determination. Police do not. Police have the legal right to be completely wrong in defense of themselves. They can repeatedly shoot an unarmed individual with no consequences as long as they say they felt fear.
But you or I? Let's start with the most obvious case. Kill a cop because you feel threatened. Of course you will go to jail forever. (you can go ahead and include a "car backfire" in this process, or a "firecracker", or a "poppy thing kids throw on the ground".... none of this will matter, i assure you)
Now just go shoot another unarmed "subordinate of the authorities". You'll still go to jail for the majority of the remainder.
But not a cop. He has legal immunity.
Here is the new proposed law: it is 100% the responsibility of the police officer to correctly identify a threat. The use of unnecessary force, even if proven after the fact, is a crime, even for police officers, and the confusion caused by MANY police officers being ALL WRONG, ALL AT THE SAME TIME, does NOT excuse ANY of the officers use of UNNECESSARY, UNJUSTIFIED force, AT ANY POINT IN ANY CHASE/ARREST PROCESS.
The mandatory minimum charge is manslaughter and the minimum term is 5 years.
THIS is your job. NOW you are really risking your life. NOW you can feel good about yourself. NOW you can realize that you've actually been much safer all these years than those you've been supposedly "protecting".
NOW you can hopefully help be part of a "solution" rather than being very much a part of the problem.
But you or I? Let's start with the most obvious case. Kill a cop because you feel threatened. Of course you will go to jail forever. (you can go ahead and include a "car backfire" in this process, or a "firecracker", or a "poppy thing kids throw on the ground".... none of this will matter, i assure you)
Now just go shoot another unarmed "subordinate of the authorities". You'll still go to jail for the majority of the remainder.
But not a cop. He has legal immunity.
Here is the new proposed law: it is 100% the responsibility of the police officer to correctly identify a threat. The use of unnecessary force, even if proven after the fact, is a crime, even for police officers, and the confusion caused by MANY police officers being ALL WRONG, ALL AT THE SAME TIME, does NOT excuse ANY of the officers use of UNNECESSARY, UNJUSTIFIED force, AT ANY POINT IN ANY CHASE/ARREST PROCESS.
The mandatory minimum charge is manslaughter and the minimum term is 5 years.
THIS is your job. NOW you are really risking your life. NOW you can feel good about yourself. NOW you can realize that you've actually been much safer all these years than those you've been supposedly "protecting".
NOW you can hopefully help be part of a "solution" rather than being very much a part of the problem.
Saturday, May 23, 2015
Industrial Advancements and Percentage Displacement
What percentage of workers were "displaced" by each major industrial advancement?
What percentage is in danger of being displaced by robotics and AI?
What percentage is in danger of being displaced by robotics and AI?
Evolution is almost entirely mistakes.
i had a point on this.... what was it...
oh yeah, as we go through life frustrated by man's apparently inherent nature to rush into mistakes of all imaginable sorts, perhaps we should instead be thankful for it. it's that nature that finds the answer. without that nature, timidity would probably rule and would therefore make the species less fit.
of course we're also rushing into our own extinction via technology, but that assumes FNYIE (facts not yet in evidence) and so we'll ignore it for now.
oh yeah, as we go through life frustrated by man's apparently inherent nature to rush into mistakes of all imaginable sorts, perhaps we should instead be thankful for it. it's that nature that finds the answer. without that nature, timidity would probably rule and would therefore make the species less fit.
of course we're also rushing into our own extinction via technology, but that assumes FNYIE (facts not yet in evidence) and so we'll ignore it for now.
Thursday, May 21, 2015
So I'll grant that this may be racially based,
but in Mosby's most recent interview announcing the revised charges, she comes off like a petulant child who isn't quite ready for such a particularly public role.
But like I said, it could be due to racial "bias", or at least be based on race-based differences in mannerisms and tone. I personally do not believe that is the case in this instance but one could assume I almost never would.
But like I said, it could be due to racial "bias", or at least be based on race-based differences in mannerisms and tone. I personally do not believe that is the case in this instance but one could assume I almost never would.
Extra points
Just require that the person kicking the XP was on the field for the TD. Make it the scorer if you like.
It doesn't seem like the goal has to be the de-emphasis on kicking as much as a de-emphasis on kickers. I guess the risk is that you veer back towards rugby when the goal is specialization and points. I assume that risk is a non starter for most owners but I don't think that should be viewed as overly important. They are, after all, just the finance.
Somewhat along those lines, Bob Kraft's legacy has taken a real beating over the last few months. Regardless he will forever be the guy who saved the franchise and helped spawn the championship era for the region.
It doesn't seem like the goal has to be the de-emphasis on kicking as much as a de-emphasis on kickers. I guess the risk is that you veer back towards rugby when the goal is specialization and points. I assume that risk is a non starter for most owners but I don't think that should be viewed as overly important. They are, after all, just the finance.
Somewhat along those lines, Bob Kraft's legacy has taken a real beating over the last few months. Regardless he will forever be the guy who saved the franchise and helped spawn the championship era for the region.
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
two neat things..
1. steph curry, and the fact that he plays for that specific team. i actually thought they had disbanded.
2. the fact that the Lakers got the #2 pick. lots of pressure, potential for that situation to reignite that franchise.
this has been two neat things.
Monday, May 18, 2015
Living space size/density and health
are you likely to be physically healthier if your house is tiny and you share it with your sisters and brothers who you hate and with your mom who pretty much hates everyone, due to the fact that you'll be highly motivated to stay away from the home except to sleep and eat?
Such or similar conditions do undermine a seemingly significantly high percentage of stories of great individual triumph.
Such or similar conditions do undermine a seemingly significantly high percentage of stories of great individual triumph.
Sunday, May 17, 2015
Spare a slice of bread, sir?
We all agree that it is morally acceptable for a hungry woman to steal a slice of bread, correct?
...
...
Saturday, May 16, 2015
Friday, May 15, 2015
Thursday, May 14, 2015
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
isn't it easier to have driverless trains than cars?
seems dramatically simpler. they already have much of the detection and control infrastructure.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
Monday, May 11, 2015
What shall we seek today?
Shall we seek rage-filled conflict or serenity and contentment?
Feels like a rage day but that could change.
Feels like a rage day but that could change.
TV News is a scary movie.
I think each newscast should begin with a "based on actual events" disclaimer.
Thursday, May 7, 2015
Speaking as fish
I, for one, believe we should have compassion for our friends who live in the deserts above.
Their existence is so unimaginably awful that it could drive any one of us to such madness.
There but for the Grace of Dagon, go we, amirite? Huuuh?
Alright then. May the feeding now resume.
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
Drone Rental
biggest industry of all time?
yep.
course it's a vague description. kind of like saying "doing stuff that others want for an agreed upon price."
yep.
course it's a vague description. kind of like saying "doing stuff that others want for an agreed upon price."
Tuesday, May 5, 2015
We always ask, "What do you want to be when you grow up?"
Maybe we should ask, "How do you want to help people when you grow up?"
Are white racists against blacks as justified as
black prejudice against police if it is based on personal experience, or not and why?
(of course the question should be "white prejudice against blacks" but this wording creates some additional up-front resistance, easily overcome, which can then increase the chances of the argument convincing others)
there are some apparently likely responses (ie. choice), but i think they open additional questions. ie. "nature/nurture. are all cops bad?" then start chipping away at the instinctive thought-processes (cops... bad... cops... bad... especially if my friends are around listening to what i am saying.... especially then... cops.... bad..." and broaden the questions to find appropriate levels of abstraction for analysis.
(of course the question should be "white prejudice against blacks" but this wording creates some additional up-front resistance, easily overcome, which can then increase the chances of the argument convincing others)
there are some apparently likely responses (ie. choice), but i think they open additional questions. ie. "nature/nurture. are all cops bad?" then start chipping away at the instinctive thought-processes (cops... bad... cops... bad... especially if my friends are around listening to what i am saying.... especially then... cops.... bad..." and broaden the questions to find appropriate levels of abstraction for analysis.
Sunday, May 3, 2015
Mass. State Police say "no thanks" to body cameras.
Draw your own conclusions.
I certainly have, long before this poke in the public eye.
I certainly have, long before this poke in the public eye.
Saturday, May 2, 2015
The Fort Lee traffic case
i really hope they have more evidence of conspiracy than just the one guy's words...
The police union spokesperson
declared the charges
- a "rush to judgment"
while simultaneously declaring factually that
- the officers had done nothing wrong.
so i guess it's too early to say "we think they did something wrong and believe there is enough evidence to bring charges" but it's never too early to say "they did nothing wrong."
lolololololololololol
- a "rush to judgment"
while simultaneously declaring factually that
- the officers had done nothing wrong.
so i guess it's too early to say "we think they did something wrong and believe there is enough evidence to bring charges" but it's never too early to say "they did nothing wrong."
lolololololololololol
Mosby may have overcharged
she may not have nearly as solid a case as many think, and it may have still been the right call.
the worst case would be that it causes a total collapse like with Casey Anthony and sets the dynamic back rather than forward,
the best case is that most plead to slightly lesser and at least one is convicted of at least some of the charges in open court. or would it be better to get all of them to plead? probably.
there are some appearances of conflicts, but it's kind of past the point of worrying about anything like that. a correction is needed, the correction is being resisted as it (almost?) always is, so the correction has to be implemented with some extra force/aggressiveness, and a few more broken eggs.
it's unimaginable that no one is convicted of any crime in this specific situation. it's just not a viable option. it would probably reach a point of near civil war in various communities.
it's kind of embarrassing to see a crowd of hundreds of black people being pushed back by walls of white dudes and dudettes, many of whom are entirely out of shape, wearing riot gear and carrying and using weapons.
it's a dynamic that is not long for this world.
the worst case would be that it causes a total collapse like with Casey Anthony and sets the dynamic back rather than forward,
the best case is that most plead to slightly lesser and at least one is convicted of at least some of the charges in open court. or would it be better to get all of them to plead? probably.
there are some appearances of conflicts, but it's kind of past the point of worrying about anything like that. a correction is needed, the correction is being resisted as it (almost?) always is, so the correction has to be implemented with some extra force/aggressiveness, and a few more broken eggs.
it's unimaginable that no one is convicted of any crime in this specific situation. it's just not a viable option. it would probably reach a point of near civil war in various communities.
it's kind of embarrassing to see a crowd of hundreds of black people being pushed back by walls of white dudes and dudettes, many of whom are entirely out of shape, wearing riot gear and carrying and using weapons.
it's a dynamic that is not long for this world.
Friday, May 1, 2015
W.O.G.!!!! (Without Googling!!!!!)
When has any protest group ever donned the
EXACT
SAME
GARB
AS
THE
GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES?
ie... riot gear.
that's what i would do if you tried a curfew on my neighborhood.
riot gear on both sides, and a sweet, kickass, awesome, Ron Burgundy-esque battle, hopefully including a morning star.
EXACT
SAME
GARB
AS
THE
GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES?
ie... riot gear.
that's what i would do if you tried a curfew on my neighborhood.
riot gear on both sides, and a sweet, kickass, awesome, Ron Burgundy-esque battle, hopefully including a morning star.
Cop story:
he did it himself...
we knew he was going crazy, banging his head against the walls..
but we didn't buckle him because he always puts on a melodramatic show and we thought he was faking....
course if we had body cams we'd have the evidence available that you used to
a. determine he was a consistent faker (historical evidence of arrest behavior)
b. determine that his behavior wouldn't be considered dangerous by a reasonable person as he hit his head
fox news guest was just about the worst supporting witness you could imagine.
OOOOHHH... NOW CHARACTER ASSAULT.... OMFG
- he/she's almost making me feel bad for cops. they might simply be this confused and simple.
we knew he was going crazy, banging his head against the walls..
but we didn't buckle him because he always puts on a melodramatic show and we thought he was faking....
course if we had body cams we'd have the evidence available that you used to
a. determine he was a consistent faker (historical evidence of arrest behavior)
b. determine that his behavior wouldn't be considered dangerous by a reasonable person as he hit his head
fox news guest was just about the worst supporting witness you could imagine.
OOOOHHH... NOW CHARACTER ASSAULT.... OMFG
- he/she's almost making me feel bad for cops. they might simply be this confused and simple.
if Gray had a criminal record
is carrying the knife, even a non-switchblade, a crime?
did he have any warrants?
of course most of the arrests were marijuana related, total nonsense arrests designed specifically to allow police to control anyone they want to, so they never should have occurred and shouldn't be relevant in any substantive sense OTHER than the potential circumstances at the moment the police decided to arrest.
but if they had a legal reason to arrest, then all the "unlawful arrest" related charges fall apart.
did he have any warrants?
of course most of the arrests were marijuana related, total nonsense arrests designed specifically to allow police to control anyone they want to, so they never should have occurred and shouldn't be relevant in any substantive sense OTHER than the potential circumstances at the moment the police decided to arrest.
but if they had a legal reason to arrest, then all the "unlawful arrest" related charges fall apart.
Butterflies flapping wings...
What would you say is the percent chance that the current immediate outcome (criminal charges) would have come about without:
- a single moment of looting of private businesses
- a single moment of public protest
now what would the chances be without the video?
- a single moment of looting of private businesses
- a single moment of public protest
now what would the chances be without the video?
it was not a switchblade as had been reported before...
when? by whom? i mean let's play devil's advocate. let's assume that a television journalist (and i'll not even use quotes) actually does take her job very seriously. let's assume she believes the concept of journalism and television journalism is to elucidate and inform.
let's assume all that.
let's assume she has problems with "bad reporting".
let's assume she has problems with "bad sources" and "bad sourcing".
let's assume she cares.
why wouldn't you point out where the report came from, and who most quickly ran with it?
why?
why?
why?
dissonance truth
find a reason stop with silly assumptions
aaaand choose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)