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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)