search results matching tag: Atomic

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (396)     Sift Talk (12)     Blogs (39)     Comments (894)   

Beware: Friendly Homosexuals!

chingalera says...

They also considered ducking and covering and building bomb shelters in one's backyard an adequate deterrent to atomic fallout before the advent of not believing everything you hear and see on television or what you're told in school.

Not too much has changed...

Payback said:

I never knew homo-sexuals were actually pedophiliac serial killers.

NOW I KNOW!

shatterdrose (Member Profile)

oritteropo says...

The other discussion was that the "Sonne"/"sun" theme was inspired by the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, and that the Snow White/Schneewittchen theme was from the band watching a lot of Disney films!!!

shatterdrose said:

Hmm, and entrance song for a boxer. Not nearly as exciting as I was hoping. Still pretty good though, but I'm not sure I see the relation between Snow White and boxing lol

americas wars of aggression-no justice-no peace

chingalera says...

People that give a fuck about the true direction of the planet who like to blabber-on ad-naseum about which news corp is their favorite and which one is full of morons, and if you like them well then you must be a moron, or (insert meaningless label here) are the most gullible, the most extremely out-of-touch with what's truly going on. They have let their minds become a sponge for distraction and illusion by the very machine that rapes the planet of human and natural resources for personal gain and consolidation of power.

The mind is a terrible thing to waste on feeding the very machine that enslaves us all.

As a simple example of just how secondary oil would be as a universal commodity you need only to look at who controls the access. If we'd gone the direction of the Bucky Fullers and Teslas that pop-into the grid in every epoch, and shared collectively in a similar mind and vision, people who pick winners and losers would be non-existent or self-aware, and the real criminals on the planet posing as so-called leaders would be raving in asylums or extinct by now.

Why won't the planet use nuclear energy correctly and righteously for example...SAFE power from the atomic components that make up the experiential world?? Because assholes and criminals run the show. Period.

Same with oil. Same with slavery through economic monopoly, same with the mind-control apparatus that force-feeds the gullible their world views based on their insidious, contrived models.

There are way better drugs out there than politics kids......Use your fucking brains?!

Computer Generated Eye Is Awesome!

spawnflagger says...

the resolution of reality is that which can be observed using tools, so 0.05 nm (single atoms) with the right equipment (HRTEM).

Our perception of reality with the naked eye depends on the distance away and how good our vision is. Someone with 20/20 vision can resolve 1 arcminute (1/60th of a degree).

This CG looked real because of all the little details that are part of a real eyeball, that most CG leaves out. Really fantastic indeed.

phyman said:

What resolution is reality? That seemed about right.

How To Beat Flappy Bird (Best Method)

Chairman_woo says...

1. So you are suggesting people who live on 40p a day would give two squirty shits about a smartphone? That is a result of global economic issues of which one person smashing a phone (they presumably own) is negligible to the point of complete irrelevance. Non sequitur, if this is really a concern to you then you need to go after the corruptions and inequalities in our very financial system. Handing down a phone (which is likely near the end of its useful life anyway) is not going to change anything of significance here.

2. I'm suggesting you are making an entirely subjective value judgement about the pleasure and practical use one could derive from the same investment of money/material. Lets not forget he generated around $7000 of personal income from a £50-100 investment. But more than that, perhaps to some people the pleasure and entertainment of smashing that phone was comparable to other activities that might cost the same (e.g. a night of drinking or a weekend away could easily exceed the cost of that handset). Are you suggesting spending £50-100 on leisure activities etc. is morally reprehensible? Let's not forget "smartphones" don't do anything essential for most people, they are luxury items. If you have a problem with 1st world culture that's absolutely fine (laudible even) but you can't be singling out this guy for making a very successful comedy skit when there are people everywhere who's lifestyles could be politely described as "a decadent waste of atoms".

3. Absolutely nothing is stopping that smashed phone from being recycled, many shops would give you a £50-100 trade in on a new handset even in that state as they are typically just melted down anyway (and your new shiny phone contract is worth more to them than caring about the state of your bag of broken phone bits).

Besides as a matter of pedantry my point clearly stands, doing NOTHING in a drawer is clearly inferior to generating $7000, and providing 2mins of hillarity!?!?!?!? (the comparison was between hammer and drawer not drawer and charity) What you did there was called a "straw man" (i.e. twist my word's to make a different argument that helps make your own point)

4. The phone is old and they are not built to last (again feel free to rant on our disposable culture but leave this guy out of it) as @Payback pointed out it's probably knackered anyway.


Somewhere in your argument is some righteous and commendable rage about the inequalities of the global market but you're focusing it in the wrong direction here. Be angry at the CEO and shareholders of Samsung who profit from human death and suffering in the Coltan mines, the Corrupt banks that hold a fake debt over the poor populations of the world or the Complicit governments that support them. Or maybe go after the Ideologues and philosophers that conceived and spread the culture of consumer and corporate greed driven economics.


Basically anything but rage at this guy for making a IMHO pretty funny video on a budget that utterly pales into insignificance compared to just about anything else.



Could he have handed it down? Sure. Could he have traded it for a crate of jack Daniels, a half ounce of weed, an animatronic chicken alarm clock, a present for his wife etc. etc. etc.?

Your argument taken to its logical conclusion would condemn anyone that spends money or resources on anything other than practical necessities or charity. I'm not saying that's what you meant, but that's what your argument as stated invites.

A10anis said:

1; £50-£100 may not be much to you, but there are countries where the population exist on around 40 pence a day, I'm sure they would consider it a lot of money.

2; You saying; " smashing it with a hammer is no different to most of the mindless procrastination they get used for anyway," is rather silly. A Non-sequitur.

3; It doesn't beat "languishing in a drawer." Money - albeit a small amount- can be made from old phones or, if you care, given to someone who can't afford one. That, incidentally, is the major point I was trying -unsuccessfully it seems - to make.

Bernie Sanders tears into Walmart for corporate welfare

chingalera says...

For enoch-Uhhh, at the end of the day, who are we to judge, period? My gentle chiding of Sagemind was more was more of an atomic bomb indictment of his take on 'reality' ( a personal construct ), the loaded use of language to parrot a framework for a way of thinking whereby so-called intelligent peeps give power away rather than embracing it, and my own coluratura-filled vitriolic on the overall tone and timbre easily recognized by anyone who doesn't think too hard about how they are being ass-fucked daily by shit-think.

Your own reductio ad absurdum with the dick-sucking options available to hard-working individuals well, I can appreciate your coming to the defense of a wayward soul but....Maybe the smarter and more fastidious folks in the herd should get more creative with such actions suggested later like tax fraud or even homicide if they want to see some tangible changes to digression of systems they so fervently defend.

The Five Worst Weapons Still in Use

Big Budget Hollywood Movie About Noah's Ark with Russel Crow

billpayer says...

Great post. Don't know why you used "God" in your explanation, it's a totally irrelevant reference.
Let me describe Entropy wholly and completely to you:
"Probability"
As you mentioned evolution creates structure. Hell, atoms, molecules, galaxies, stars, gravity, magnetism, create structure.
In an atomic world, a noisy chaotic world, systems are far more likely (think brownian motion) to drift into noise than to maintain their structure. ie. There is a billion ways a system can be disrupted, and only one way where it is perfectly intact... Hence systems (or evolution or life or matter whatever) will always move towards disorder. This is Entropy.And yes, life, gravity, matter, are all working against this disorder.

Chairman_woo said:

(read above, too big to quote)

Unmanned: America's Drone Wars trailer

A10anis says...

There will never be an easy solution, but in discussing drones there are points that deserve deliberation;
The Pakistani government cannot be seen, publicly, to condone drone strikes. However, given the carnage being done by the taliban, which they are finding difficult to contain, behind the scenes they actually do.
Terrorists existed long before drones and to believe that ceasing their use would reduce terrorism is naive and dangerous.
Manned or unmanned - and no matter what care is taken - weapons cause collateral damage. But these weapons can be highly effective, as was demonstrated in the "taking out" of the pakistani taliban leader last week.
If the terrorists had the same technology they would, certainly, use it. At the moment they are restricted to suicide bombers and maniacs with AK's who massacre innocents in schools or shopping malls etc. If/when they acquire chemical, biological, or atomic weapons you will see just how "restrained" in there use they truly are.
All weapons can be used for evil. The difference is, who controls them and how they are used. You just have to ask yourself, who would you prefer to hold the military advantage?

Google and NASA's Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab

charliem says...

These computers will save the world.
Big claim...they are a big game changer though.
They have more conventional processing power than a traditional CPU with registers the size of the count of all atoms in the known universe.

i.e. 64 bit CPU...has 64 bit registers....

In-sane.

Would The World Be A Better Place Without Hitler?

rex84 says...

A great question. Can't vouch for the accuracy on this page, but it presents some interesting facts re: that and other topics related to a Nazi atomic bomb. http://www.unmuseum.org/nbomb.htm

radx said:

A disturbing idea for sure.

I know it's just a very visual illustration of how history might not change for the better if key elements are changed, but just to expand on his little thought experiment...

They wouldn't have had access to the neccessary raw material, would they? Pretty much every sort of metal alloy was in short supply even during the late '30s. The occupation of Narvik brought some relief, but still, a nuclear weapons program requires some pretty exotic material that you can't get at Tesco.

Hummingbird Hawk Moth

Why America Dropped the Atomic Bombs

bcglorf says...

I can't quite figure some of the aspects that outrage people over this. Some objections and concerns seem just very naive or ill informed.

Objecting to the goal of attaining absolute superiority over Japan just makes no sense to me. I mean, it is realized that it was a war being fought, for the presumed purpose of establishing superiority over each other? The difference between Japan being willing to surrender with a host of conditions versus unconditional surrender isn't trivial. Unless you want to fight another war later you want the ending to be decisive and sufficient to prevent it coming up again any time soon.

I also think the humanitarian outrage at, gasp, atomic bombs is terribly ill informed. The allies killed a lot more people in many other bombing campaigns and to much more brutal effect. It strikes me as misguided to be so focused on what is in many, many ways a lesser catastrophe than other attacks the allies made.

Why America Dropped the Atomic Bombs

pensword says...

This is really crap.

This imperialist fuck's argument amounts to this:

1) The US will need to defeat Japan through military means
2) The US wants to avoid "another Okinawa" (with a quote from Truman)
3) The US needed to drop the atomic bomb

So, lets look first at that Okinawa analogy. Okinawa, as with other pacific islands, were particularly brutal because of both their strategic importance to the Pacific front as well as their terrain. Both because of they needed to be seized in order to cutoff mainland Japan (and isolate it) and their small, heavily dense terrain caused warfare to be at times hand-to-hand, the battles here were desperate and ugly.

This leads us to the next point: the whole presupposition with the imperialist fuck's argument is that there was no other way but occupation, in the form of Okinawa, to end Japan's empire.

This is false. The US had other options to end the war. Occupation of Japan wasn't a strategic necessity in the way occupation of the pacific islands was. The US could have maintained a bombing campaign while getting the rest of the world to pursue political/diplomatic talks with Japan.

The reason the US dropped the bombs wasn't to end the war (which was already war, de jure shit aside). It was to a) ensure supremacy over Japan (which isn't the same thing as ending a war) and b) to ensure global imperialist hegemony.

Amerikkka doesnt give a shit about saving lives. What about all the people firebombed in Dresden? What about all the imperialist adventures before and after WWII? Don't give me some ethical crap about a country, at least 1/4 of which was still under apartheid conditions, that wants to save lives because it respects human life so it drops atomic bombs on an already defeated people.

lucky760 (Member Profile)



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