84072 pts Β· January 19, 2013
A sturdy creature, fond of drink and industry.
"Nobody is going to extinguish anybody using just their identities or views"As I said, the exterminating is done with force, in accordance with views. Prompted, and driven, by views. With targets chosen for their views. You're talking like you come from a world where there were never Nazis.That quote is great though. It should be on a plaque above a sign pointing the way to the gas chambers.
Then you cede control of society to the Nazis. They will abolish that tolerance. It's a fervent desire for them.They aren't trying to influence you. They intend to extinguish you. Physically. They advertise it. They recruit people who wear identifiers announcing their shared intention.You are treating "views" as ethereal and intrinsically harmless. As though views and force are of non-overlapping magisteria. They aren't. Theirs include the use of force to end the freedom to have other views.
What if my view is that people like you should be exterminated and all viewpoints other than mine should be forbidden?
Google essentially mirrors huge swathes of the web, that's where AMP links take you.That version is sometimes stripped down to be more suited for mobile, but it always means Google controls the whole exchange. You're not even visiting the BBC with that first link, you're visiting Google's copy.It's a way for Google to record your behaviour, and control what you see, even when you aren't interacting with a Google product.
Ampless: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c33706jy774o
Twilight Zone was 59, Outer Limits and Dr. Who were 63. I'd guess scifi on TV was the biggest it had ever been (still not terribly big) when Star Trek was funded then launched in 66.They were all borrowing very heavily from serialised magazine scifi like Amazing Stories.
#48 Whole family of Hitlers."One was asked to change his name by the president of the company where he worked. But he refused ... They argue that their Hitler came first, and theirs is the only family of true Hitlers in the world, and that Adolf wasn't even an actual Hitlerβwhich is true ... Adolfβs father, Alois Hitler Sr., was born out of wedlock as Alois Schicklgruber [and later changed his name]."https://www.amusingplanet.com/2018/03/the-good-hitlers-of-circleville.html
It's not even the "opposite of conservative". That's progressive, quite literally.Liberalism was the enlightenment era politics that ended up being the third way between socialism/communism and monarchism/tyranny. The French and US revolutions were π·πͺπ°ππ¦π―π΅ππΊ liberal. Frankly, all modern politics are liberalism outside the regressive dictatorial group that Trump is attempting to join.
Small stabilised album from the time /gallery/tianjin-explosions-stabilised-PQGCa
You're probably in the top few percent, basically everyone here will be top 10 ($10-20k income). Tons of people here will be in the top 1 ($30-60k income). Each percentile is 80 million people. The bottom 67 don't emit much carbon for obvious reasons.Percentile breakdowns of humanity aren't going to be informative when it comes to deciding whether some rage-bait stunt means you have any responsibilities.(replaced comment to improve values, add graph)
Paper straws are a sideshow, ignore them. Make your straw out of whatever, it won't matter.The worst few hundred lifestyles probably emit as much carbon as a few hundred k ordinary Americans. Maybe less. So who cares? Ignore them, guillotine them, it won't matter. Except to them.But the carbon emitted in making the stuff you bought, or the journeys you take, or the energy you use, is largely on you. Otherwise it's eating a burger while blaming McDonald's for how much beef it uses.
It's working better than the implied alternative - making a huge deal about the memeable excesses of a few, so justifying not controlling our own behaviour.A very, very, rich person's lifestyle might do 1000x the harm yours or mine does to the world, but there are π£πͺπππͺπ°π―π΄ of us. They're just outliers, get over them.
Awe-ditorium?
Not too surprising. A tradition like that is very unlikely to be uniformly adhered to across time and place.QI will presumably have found good-enough sources for something close-enough to each of those claims, but portrayed them without that caveat. I doubt they'd just invent all that whole-cloth, but they will be less discerning than wikipedia when it comes to making that section of the show work.They'll also have (not unreasonably) omitted all the parts which don't match.
They continue to move "up", as we see them. Over the course of a cycle, they appear to us to move all the way "up", then all the way "down", and appear edge-on at the half-way point each time.The entire cycle is roughly 30 years long (a Saturnian year), but varies a little with earth's inclination and motion.It's basically the same as seasons on earth. A planet's axial tilt stays the same, so for half the year, the north is leaning toward us and the sun, and the other half the south is.
"Smith allegedly told authorities that the stunt was one of many pranks that he films and posts online as a job, which he said makes him anywhere from $6,000 to $10,000 per month."I have some sympathy for Section 230 protection for enablers of democratised online speech. But not for the monopoly controlling the public square paying someone to commit crimes then pretending they've never heard of them.If you can pay someone six figures, you can afford to glance at their videos.
But only if your first, automatic, action was to get the knife out.A little knife is super useful in everyday life, but here they automatically grab the lead and keep the tension off the dog's neck first. As I think most people would and probably should. Having done that, it's clearly an effort to control the lead/collar with both hands and their body. In that situation, I doubt I could get a knife out and cut the lead any faster or more safely than what they did.
The policy will be whatever minimises the chances of stupid fights starting in the midst of 20,000 people in a confined space.There might be some staunchly pro-Israel person involved in setting the details of that, but who knows.From the venue's point of view, what matters is that there are people who might respond violently to that shirt. Is it their role, or the other 19,950 guests' to take on that hassle? Honestly, I might say yes, as a social obligation. But I understand them saying no.
It could very well be. I don't know the community any more, or this person. But it was bad enough in the past when acceptance and esteem were the wages of being obstinate and saying insane stuff.Now, like most of the internet, it is inherently a business as well and that is not going to serve to clear the waters.
It is, and moreover it's obviously a little bit irregular in shape and density.But I will bet my entire life, and all who sail in her, that that's not the caveat this person was making.
> or a snowstorm or something (which would undermine the production of a profitable video) he's saying no more than he literally has to, and leaving the rest for later.Embarking on the trip demonstrates something, though we can't really know what. But having done so, he had no choice but to admit that he saw what he saw.
I do understand what you're saying but it's a hill I'll die on: I give him no credit whatsoever for the "admission". I stepped away from studying conspiracism a long time ago, but did come to understand them. I don't know this person - if it's a job for them because they're a true believer, or if they say true believer things to get money and acceptance.I don't know what course they'll take from here.Be interesting to see how this lands in the community, but beyond faking technical issues >
To be clear, he only admits that he thought there was no 24hr sun before. Now has seen 24hr sun. So now he admits that the thing he saw exists.He still rejects the idea that the earth is spherical.This kind of nonsense should not be necessary. Perhaps it's good it's happening. Perhaps it legitimises the idea that this is a "debate" with many valid views. But having experienced it fully and in person he has admitted the π’π£π΄π°ππΆπ΅π¦ minimum and, frankly, he's been π§π°π³π€π¦π₯ to even admit that much.
"Nobody is going to extinguish anybody using just their identities or views"
As I said, the exterminating is done with force, in accordance with views. Prompted, and driven, by views. With targets chosen for their views. You're talking like you come from a world where there were never Nazis.
That quote is great though. It should be on a plaque above a sign pointing the way to the gas chambers.
Then you cede control of society to the Nazis. They will abolish that tolerance. It's a fervent desire for them.
They aren't trying to influence you. They intend to extinguish you. Physically. They advertise it. They recruit people who wear identifiers announcing their shared intention.
You are treating "views" as ethereal and intrinsically harmless. As though views and force are of non-overlapping magisteria. They aren't. Theirs include the use of force to end the freedom to have other views.
What if my view is that people like you should be exterminated and all viewpoints other than mine should be forbidden?
Google essentially mirrors huge swathes of the web, that's where AMP links take you.
That version is sometimes stripped down to be more suited for mobile, but it always means Google controls the whole exchange. You're not even visiting the BBC with that first link, you're visiting Google's copy.
It's a way for Google to record your behaviour, and control what you see, even when you aren't interacting with a Google product.
Ampless: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c33706jy774o
Twilight Zone was 59, Outer Limits and Dr. Who were 63. I'd guess scifi on TV was the biggest it had ever been (still not terribly big) when Star Trek was funded then launched in 66.
They were all borrowing very heavily from serialised magazine scifi like Amazing Stories.
#48 Whole family of Hitlers.
"One was asked to change his name by the president of the company where he worked. But he refused ... They argue that their Hitler came first, and theirs is the only family of true Hitlers in the world, and that Adolf wasn't even an actual Hitlerβwhich is true ... Adolfβs father, Alois Hitler Sr., was born out of wedlock as Alois Schicklgruber [and later changed his name]."
https://www.amusingplanet.com/2018/03/the-good-hitlers-of-circleville.html
It's not even the "opposite of conservative". That's progressive, quite literally.
Liberalism was the enlightenment era politics that ended up being the third way between socialism/communism and monarchism/tyranny. The French and US revolutions were π·πͺπ°ππ¦π―π΅ππΊ liberal. Frankly, all modern politics are liberalism outside the regressive dictatorial group that Trump is attempting to join.
Small stabilised album from the time /gallery/tianjin-explosions-stabilised-PQGCa
You're probably in the top few percent, basically everyone here will be top 10 ($10-20k income). Tons of people here will be in the top 1 ($30-60k income). Each percentile is 80 million people. The bottom 67 don't emit much carbon for obvious reasons.
Percentile breakdowns of humanity aren't going to be informative when it comes to deciding whether some rage-bait stunt means you have any responsibilities.
(replaced comment to improve values, add graph)
Paper straws are a sideshow, ignore them. Make your straw out of whatever, it won't matter.
The worst few hundred lifestyles probably emit as much carbon as a few hundred k ordinary Americans. Maybe less. So who cares? Ignore them, guillotine them, it won't matter. Except to them.
But the carbon emitted in making the stuff you bought, or the journeys you take, or the energy you use, is largely on you. Otherwise it's eating a burger while blaming McDonald's for how much beef it uses.
It's working better than the implied alternative - making a huge deal about the memeable excesses of a few, so justifying not controlling our own behaviour.
A very, very, rich person's lifestyle might do 1000x the harm yours or mine does to the world, but there are π£πͺπππͺπ°π―π΄ of us. They're just outliers, get over them.
Awe-ditorium?
Not too surprising. A tradition like that is very unlikely to be uniformly adhered to across time and place.
QI will presumably have found good-enough sources for something close-enough to each of those claims, but portrayed them without that caveat. I doubt they'd just invent all that whole-cloth, but they will be less discerning than wikipedia when it comes to making that section of the show work.
They'll also have (not unreasonably) omitted all the parts which don't match.
They continue to move "up", as we see them. Over the course of a cycle, they appear to us to move all the way "up", then all the way "down", and appear edge-on at the half-way point each time.
The entire cycle is roughly 30 years long (a Saturnian year), but varies a little with earth's inclination and motion.
It's basically the same as seasons on earth. A planet's axial tilt stays the same, so for half the year, the north is leaning toward us and the sun, and the other half the south is.
"Smith allegedly told authorities that the stunt was one of many pranks that he films and posts online as a job, which he said makes him anywhere from $6,000 to $10,000 per month."
I have some sympathy for Section 230 protection for enablers of democratised online speech. But not for the monopoly controlling the public square paying someone to commit crimes then pretending they've never heard of them.
If you can pay someone six figures, you can afford to glance at their videos.
But only if your first, automatic, action was to get the knife out.
A little knife is super useful in everyday life, but here they automatically grab the lead and keep the tension off the dog's neck first. As I think most people would and probably should. Having done that, it's clearly an effort to control the lead/collar with both hands and their body. In that situation, I doubt I could get a knife out and cut the lead any faster or more safely than what they did.
The policy will be whatever minimises the chances of stupid fights starting in the midst of 20,000 people in a confined space.
There might be some staunchly pro-Israel person involved in setting the details of that, but who knows.
From the venue's point of view, what matters is that there are people who might respond violently to that shirt. Is it their role, or the other 19,950 guests' to take on that hassle? Honestly, I might say yes, as a social obligation. But I understand them saying no.
It could very well be. I don't know the community any more, or this person. But it was bad enough in the past when acceptance and esteem were the wages of being obstinate and saying insane stuff.
Now, like most of the internet, it is inherently a business as well and that is not going to serve to clear the waters.
It is, and moreover it's obviously a little bit irregular in shape and density.
But I will bet my entire life, and all who sail in her, that that's not the caveat this person was making.
> or a snowstorm or something (which would undermine the production of a profitable video) he's saying no more than he literally has to, and leaving the rest for later.
Embarking on the trip demonstrates something, though we can't really know what. But having done so, he had no choice but to admit that he saw what he saw.
I do understand what you're saying but it's a hill I'll die on: I give him no credit whatsoever for the "admission". I stepped away from studying conspiracism a long time ago, but did come to understand them. I don't know this person - if it's a job for them because they're a true believer, or if they say true believer things to get money and acceptance.
I don't know what course they'll take from here.
Be interesting to see how this lands in the community, but beyond faking technical issues >
To be clear, he only admits that he thought there was no 24hr sun before. Now has seen 24hr sun. So now he admits that the thing he saw exists.
He still rejects the idea that the earth is spherical.
This kind of nonsense should not be necessary. Perhaps it's good it's happening. Perhaps it legitimises the idea that this is a "debate" with many valid views. But having experienced it fully and in person he has admitted the π’π£π΄π°ππΆπ΅π¦ minimum and, frankly, he's been π§π°π³π€π¦π₯ to even admit that much.