Recent Comments by rottenseed subscribe to this feed

Louis C.K. - The Way We Talk

Solar Roadways

rottenseed says...

You're fucking high.

The "over-arching" question is "why would you double up the roadway as a solar-powered generator?" It doesn't make sense, you'd spend just as much time running this solar panels parallel to the roadways.

This idea is impractical as it was the FIRST time I saw this on the sift...


criticalthud said:

@rottenseed
"silly" is kinda subjective.
the lightbulb wasn't an extension of the candle, it was a completely different approach.
To find a different approach, you are always treading against the norm.

I think what makes this idea somewhat attractive is that the roadways already exist, they are typically unshaded, and they are always being closed for maintenance as it is.

the over-arching question as usual is whether or not you would use more energy in production than you would recoup in use, over the long-term, calculating in maintenance costs.

Solar Roadways

rottenseed says...

Honestly though, this idea is silly, why not just have panels that run parallel to the roadways? That way no roadway has to be closed down for replacement and the material engineering nightmare of creating a high-friction, transparent, strong material won't exist.

Solar Roadways

The Helical Model

rottenseed says...

This is a cool presentation and idea, however my spidey senses....they be tinglin'. The number one reason why is because of the various planar discrepancies this model offers. For the most part, relative to our point of view, the planets' orbits are coplanar (on the same plane). Maybe this model would offer the same "effect" but I'm not about to try the math. It just seems like a "earth is flat" theory to me (although more convoluted).

"The Next Level", rather amazing desk/pc combo

Buttery Flaky - They will get it right at some point..

Piers Morgan: "You are an incredibly stupid man"

rottenseed says...

not really because you can't stop second hand smoke with smoking, whereas you can stop home invasions and bad guys with guns, with guns.

The intentions of most legal gun owners are not malicious in nature. Some are just hobbyists, some just have them for protection from those brandishing (most likely) illegal guns looking to do them harm...there's no way of avoiding those situations. If a bad person, such as the coward that took out the children, has horrible intentions, the only thing you can argue is the ease with which he managed to obtain the weapon. It was obviously too easy for a man with mental disabilities to get them. But with the intentions of killing innocent children, there are a hundred ways to do it without a gun. Would he have gone through more trouble had he not had access to guns? Maybe. Maybe not. But he had those horrible intentions and the capacity to carry them out, and that's the horrendous part of this. It's the part that scares every sane person is: how could somebody want to do that?

The reason why the issue has been shifted from "how could somebody do that?" to the means in which he did it, is because humans like to think they have total control of their environment and a wildcard such as mental insanity scares people just as much as our own mortality. Whereas blaming something tangible is easy because we could "technically" stop it. So we end up blaming things like video games and guns.

Sorry I'm trying to avoid other examples (Timothy McVeigh, etc.) because they are hackneyed, but some of them might give an insight as to the cause and the ends being more significant than the means.

kulpims said:

since you started with the cancer analogy -- that's like saying you're going to start smoking (more) because you're afraid you'll get cancer from second-hand smoke. and since everyone else is already smoking cigarettes the best way to deter other people from smoking is to light up yourself. doesn't make any sense, does it?

Piers Morgan: "You are an incredibly stupid man"

rottenseed says...

200 years?! But I want it NOWWWW!

That makes sense, sort of...except for the fact that there could still be an influx of guns from outside of the US (mainly from Mexico). Unfortunately as the US is continually learning with the drug war, prohibition doesn't work. As long as these things that people want exist, and the technology is there to make it, it will be made, and traded for. Because, like you said, guns are a part of our culture (or the wingnuts culture).

If you want my honest opinion about guns; I don't give a shit if somebody wants to own guns or if they don't. At least nobody's throwing acid in people's faces *ahem*

KnivesOut said:

@rottenseed I agree that it won't be an over-night operation. The wingnuts would absolutely freak out if the evil gubment actually did "COME FOR OUR GUNS". We'd have a civil war.

The long view is to start reducing the number of guns produced. Start making it more difficult to get them. Start buying guns back from the citizenry at market prices (and then destroy them.)

This might be a 200 year plan...

Piers Morgan: "You are an incredibly stupid man"

rottenseed says...

How then, do you go about removing the guns from America? Essentially we have 1 gun per person (accounted for). So if a wizard could magically snap his fingers and *poof* there went the guns, then yes, I'd say we should get rid of them. But what you're saying is the equivalent of "man, you should really get rid of cancer, it's killing people. You should make cancer illegal."

The poison is already in the well, and you can't get it out, so people do the best they can do: buy guns for protection.

kulpims said:

no, man, you misunderstood me. I'm not opposed to americans owning guns. I mean, go ahead; shoot yourselves to death, I don't give a fuck. just saying, seems bloody insane to me ... why would you need policemen then, if all you need is to arm every man, woman and child in america so they can defend themselves against each other? you're not living in the times of the wild wild west any more and you're not some 3rd world country where non-functional states can't provide adequate protection for their citizens ... and don't give me that 2nd amendment bullshit, cause you're all reading it wrong

Sneaky pedestrian

Sneaky pedestrian

Salvia is for winners! Or...

rottenseed says...

I always enjoyed this drug on very very very rare occasion. If you want to ever see what reality is like without your ego's filter (I know that sounds weird but it's the best way I have to describe it) I would recommend this substance. Plus it only lasts a 5 (sometimes scary) minutes.

I would say that this is the most mind-expanding drug I've done in the most simple of ways. It's the equivalent of showing old money an alternate reality by taking away his/her money.

zor said:

Kids! Don't do these kinds of drugs: Some ways of being separated from reality and interfering with your memory are a lot like death. However, if you must do them make sure you are with people you trust and are away from water, fire and gas cans. Make sure there are people with you who can kick your ass or restrain you if you have problems.

Dodge vs Chevy tug of war goes too far.

On Seniority for Power Point Accrual (Sift Talk Post)



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon