Like any extremist philosophy Rand's writings contain elements of truth. The problem is that they offer a philosophical fig leaf for the rich and powerful to fully exploit their situation in business and politics without regard to the negative effects they may have on the rest of society.

A successful civilisation needs to understand the limitations of both sides of the argument and take the best of both worlds.

HAHAHAHAHA!!! I knew it had to be bite or peepee ... almost the best of both worlds ... HAHAHAHA!!! [my special candies are kicking in ... perfect timing] HAHAHAHA!!!

Yes, by using both pacers and wind blockers, the Nike attempt wouldn't have counted as a world record. At one point it was considered that a sub-4 minute mile was scientifically impossible. The science here would be more reassuring if they talked about that fancy equation, and how it matches various real world runners very well. For example, runner A has a VO2 max of 60, and an efficiency of 95% of theoretical peak. It should be impossible for him to get below the equation's theoretical best time of 2:07, but the best in the world with those stats should get close. Science is all about building a model you think is representative of real life, then test it. I don't see any testing of the model here to prove its validity.

Well then you get the best of both worlds!

(I was under the assumption that the US didn't have a preference system, my bad)

You wouldn't associate Whisky with Japan, but last year (2015) there were several that were awarded "best in the world":
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/news/best-whisky-in-the-world-prize-won-by-japanese-malt-for-first-time-as-scottish-distillerie
s-lose-out-9835583.html

I don't know anything about the awarding organization or review process, but it was a wide-spread enough story that it wasn't just a marketing blurb.

That is so fricking awesome, but not at all surprising. Irish sports fans are the best in the world. (I might be biased, but that is an objective fact)
http://www.sportsjoe.ie/football/irish-supporters-in-france-are-being-praised-to-the-skies-by-impressed-locals/82336

Some even more shocking footage
https://www.facebook.com/www.JOE.co.uk/videos/688688267961909/

Still plenty of bands not only releasing albums but albums on vinyl!

I just spent $40 on the new Beastwars album* including a special edition vinyl pressing. The album comes with a download code. No reason you can't have best of both worlds.

I can't tell you if music objectively sounds better on vinyl. It might all be bullshit, but part of the experience of putting a record on a turntable makes it more enjoyable.

*which you should all buy because a) they're awesome, b) they're from NZ and c) their website is http://www.obeytheriff.com (probably the best URL ever)

I completely agree with her about Lars on many points. He often (very often actually) makes his technique seem "the best in the world" when compared to ANY other technique (as there are A LOT of shooting techniques; some that need different bows, materials, and setups).

Kind of like being able to shoot through plate-mail... Lars would NEVER be able to pull that off (of course no one, with a shortbow and the wrong arrow--or tip--will be doing it either; the crossbow is as close as you can get to being small and puncturing plate) as it requires a huge amount of pull force to puncture plate (even heavy English oaken wood shields). The type of bow is a big issue, because that is where you get your draw strength. But, what type of tip you have on your arrow will determine whether or not it even goes into or just bounces off the armor...

However, for the most part, archers didn't try to puncture plate armor--because to be honest about it: it was HARD, it required a VERY heavy bow and expensive tips (of course the bows were also expensive, because they would not be made out of normal material--it might be a specially imported type of wood that could hold up to extreme forces; the string may also be made of something a bit different than normal). So, you didn't have very many people walking around with the innate ability to puncture plate. BUT, what most archers trained a VERY long time to accomplish was extreme accuracy, for one reason alone: armor.

Instead of trying to puncture plate or even chain, archers instead aimed for gaps or areas were there was no coverage (basically anywhere you bend or connect the armor to another piece or tie/connect itself together; so places like under the armpit or along the side of the body were the armor is pulled together and tied shut). Then they may not have to go through anything at all, or they will only have light leather or heavy cloth armor in the way--either way they will penetrate, and they will slowly kill their target by slowing them down and immobilizing them, then moving in for the finishing blow OR if they hit the right place they can just let blood loss finish them off...

But, this requires extreme accuracy, especially in battle AND especially so if you are firing from a horse (if you were lucky you were able to ride behind someone and concentrate solely on firing your shots, then you could add a bit of speed as well). This is the one place that Lars has horribly mislead people--OR he has made a really great breakthrough. But, if Lars never bothers to really demonstrate this stuff, we have no idea how great an archer he really is.

His entire video is one gigantic edit. Every shot and "trick" has been setup with the camera in the right place. The biggest problem is we don't know if it took Lars 1000 attempts to accomplish some of these feats (he makes it sound in some areas that it happens VERY fast, however...but due to the editing, or how he edited it, we actually have no idea if his claims are true) or if he did it in ten...or right off the bat...

That is why I said we needed to wait for Lars to actually talk to us about this whole thing, and to clear various areas up (records and competition). Because he has set a very high bar for himself, and from his own video he seems to be amazing--but, I like many know that if you edit enough and try something over and over again, you can make yourself look like an expert *whatever* whenever you wish to do it...

I agree heavily with her about his historic claims (and also mocking him on his "super clumsy" shots and setups to make fun of "modern" archers); she also points out, correctly, how wrong he is on some of those claims. Like everyone shooting from the left side; which somehow Lars, in ALL his studying completely and utterly missed. Which tells me one thing: she knows more about archery history than Lars actually does.

But, is Lars actually a great archer? Would Lars be a good archer in a battle, or more specifically his "technique"? Lastly, is he really an unique archer more than worth praising? We won't know until Lars does what I mentioned above; he must meet these criticisms head on.

If we allow Lars time to learn how to ride a horse; or it might be a bit more fair to just allow him to ride behind someone controlling the horse, which was a common practice even in battle (then make sure Lars knows how to also fire properly from a horse, since it requires controlling a horse--if you're alone--and staying on the horse using your thigh muscles...which is actually a pretty hard thing to do...and requires expert horsemanship; asking Lars to accomplish this is laughable, as this type of thing would have been a lifetime achievement in the past AND any archer that could fire fast, accurate, and ride a horse by himself...would have been a horrific force on the battlefield; then give him a sword/melee skill--make sure they have a lot of upper body strength--and a very well made, thick steel buckler and he'd be godlike; and then enough armor to protect from arrows...BUT this means you have to be very strong...otherwise you will never be able to accomplish ANY of the feats with the bow mentioned above; BTW, I'm mentioning a superhero right here, there "may" have been a few people like this in history, but they would've been very few and far apart...and more than likely used sparingly).

Mounted archers are extremely powerful against all units that are mounted yet slower than them and of course those on foot and without a long range means of attacking them (at least shorter than the mounted archer's range), this I will always agree with. We already know that mounted archery units could create absolute havoc in the past, see: Alexander The Great. However, eventually people figured out how to deal with this type of threat as well... But, horse mounted archers do have their "nemeses", namely foot archers--since they can take some time (if an arrow comes their way, they block it--it is much harder for a horse archer to carry around a big shield or at least just have on sitting nearby--or you can aim for their horse, which is why above I said that "superhero" like warrior would need a melee skill, because eventually they WILL be on the ground).

So, again, we have to wait and see if Lars bothers to respond to this video and to ALL of the others that have also been made (he did make a lot of people angry; as he did make some stuff up and possibly "overshoot" the mark on other claims and possibly even his own abilities...). I won't hold my breath though.

I think we can all come to a fairly logical conclusion on this. If Lars NEVER responds to anything, then we will have to assume that a lot of his "super-speed" with "accuracy" was due to one thing alone: editing.

Phew, I think that covers everything...it certainly was long enough!!!!

I thought I'd comment about this extremely old video, in reflection. It's funny how many devices around me and others I know have changed dramatically. The PC AND the MAC are no longer near "the top" or need to be near the top (granted, Windows is still the platform to beat for personal PC's, but when it comes to mobile platforms...something that BARELY registered back when we were throwing insults around when this video was shown, it's amazing; and now it IS the thing to beat). Now it is all about Android, Apple, or Windows, with a few secondary OS "foundations" (sometimes with hardware) thrown in for fun.

I have one of everything now. My phone an Android, my tablet an Apple, and my PC Windows. Though I still have the one major gripe about Windows and Apple as I did back then; for Apple it is it's need to make self-related products that "you need" to make anything work--much like Nintendo's business model. Microsoft is extremely "information grabby" and they love to lock you down into a certain setup, depending on how you buy or bought your computer (for instance, if you put it together yourself, you can get away from most of these issues--which is what I do; but, most people don't have this luxury). To be honest, I find my Android run devices (my cellphone and my Roku--and as I go forward I imagine a few more will go down that road) to be the best of both worlds, and they typically get along with "both worlds" the most.

Not that Android doesn't have it's own (the Borg) problems, especially as we move into the future. But, as these posts show us, within five years something just like Android (Google) can become a powerhouse that has to be reckoned with. I can't wait.

I still hate Macs!

*promote the master!
welcome back @blankfist
ya'all need to start taking notes.

this guy was super entertaining,i thought he was gonna have an embolism at the halfway mark.

hiiiiilarious!!!

look,no matter which direction you approach this situation the REAL dynamic is simply:power vs powerlessness.

we also should establish which form of libertarianism we are speaking.cultofdusty criticizes the bastardized american version and this dude come from a more classic libertarian (sans the unbridled capitalism).so there should be no surprise they are at odds in their opinion.this man is defending a libertarianism that cultofdusty may not even be aware of at all.

libertarianism has little or nothing in common with the republican party.

so when this dude posits that the corporation is the fault of government,while not entirely accurate,it is also not entirely wrong.corporations in the distant past were temporary alliances of companies,with the blessing of the people (government) to achieve a specific job or project and once that project was complete,the corporation was dissolved.

it was a cadre of clever lawyers,representing powerful interests who convinced the supreme court that corporations were people and hence began the long road leading us to where we are now.

so it was partly the government that fascillitated the birth of the corporation.

i do take issue with this mans assessment of public education.his commentary is the height of ignorance.while i would agree that what we have now can hardly be called 'education".his blanket and broad statements in regards to public education TOTALLY ignores the incredible benefits that come from an educated public.he ignores the history of public education,as if this system has been unchanging for 100 years.

that is just flat out...stupid..or more likely just lazy,regurgitating the maniacal rants of his heroes without ever once giving that 100 years some critical study.

so let me point to the the late 50's and 60's here in the USA where our public education was bar-none the best in the world.what were the consequences of this stellar public education?
well,...civil rights marches,anti-war movement,womens rights movement and a whole generation that not only questioned authority and the entrenched power structures but openly DEFIED those structures.

this absolutely petrified the powered elite.
during the height of the anti-war movement nixon was forced to baricade the white house with school buses and was quoted as saying to kissinger " henry,they are coming for me".

again,the fundamental premise is,and has always been -power vs powerlessness.

so over the nest few decades public education was manipulated and transformed into a subtle indoctrination to teach young minds to tacitly submit to authority.

which this man addresses and i agree,i just disagree with his overly generalized non-historically accurate puke-vomit.

my final point,and its always the point where libertarians lose their shit on me like an offended westboro baptist acolyte (its actually two points) is this:
1.if we can blame the government for much of the problems in regards to concentrated power and the abuse that goes with that power,then we MUST also address the abusive (and corrosive) power of the corporation.many libertarians i discuss with seem to be under the impression that if we take away the symbiotic relationship between corporations and government that somehow..miraculously..the corporation will all of a sudden become the benign and productive member of society.

this is utter fiction.
this is magical thinking.
many corporations have a larger GDP than many nation states.this is about POWER and there is ZERO evidence any corporation will be willing to relinquish that power just because there is no government to influence,manipulate or corrupt.

which brings me to point number 2:
my libertarian friends.
you live in a thing called a society.
a community where other people also live.
so please stop with this rabid individualism as somehow being the pinnacle of human endeavour.im all for personal responsibility but nobody lives in a vacuum and nobody rides this train alone.the world does not revolve around YOU.

but i do understand,and agree,that the heart of the libertarian argument is more power to the people.i also understand their arguments against governments,which directly and oftimes indirectly disempowers people.

i get that.its a good argument..
BUT...for fucks sake please admit that the corporation in its current state has GOT TO FUCKING GO!

because if you dont then ultimately you are trading one tyrant for another and in my humble opinion,ill stick with the one i can at least vote on or protest.

there aint nothing democratic about a multi-national corporation.they are,by design,dictatorships.

so i will agree to wittle the government down and restrict its powers to defense (NOT war),law and fraud police,if you agree to dismantle and restructure the seven headed leviathan that is todays corporation.

deal?

Me, I like my science-fiction when they don't cheat and make up silly stuff like a 'selectable' blower. Anyone who knows even a tiny bit about how a roots supercharger works sees those scenes from TRW and groans. The blades of the impellers need to spin because the carburetor is sitting on top of it. No impellers turning, means no air or fuel passing it, means the engine no worky .

That being said, I could see how a Paxton (basically a belt driven turbo) style supercharger could be set up to work, using an electric clutch from a air conditioning pump and some interesting intake plumbing. Instead of the best of both worlds, it's probably the worst of both.

You'd be better off with a variable boost NO2 system.

Now, don't think that I don't know about the 1920s Mercedes engageable roots superchargers, it's just that the one on the Interceptor in the movie isn't that style, and they merely shot the engine starting up when Max "pulled the switch".

Yes, Saddam era Iraq was better for the rest of the world than the current situation, by far. Far from perfect, but far better. More mass killings, rapes, and threats against us and our interests (and Iraqis, Iranians, and Kuwaitis)today than under him from what I see.
We didn't go to Iraq to support Iran or (in the latest instance) to support Kuwait. We put and kept Saddam in power BECUASE he was an enemy of Iran. I supported ousting Saddam out of Kuwait, and even limiting his abilities then, but not a second protracted 'war' for chameleon reasons with no plan for after he's gone. Removing him left a power vacuum that was an easily foreseeable problem we did little to solve and is now biting us in the ass.
You are misunderstanding because you are apparently equating what's 'best' for their 'neighbors' with what's best for the world. Saddam had little to 0 ability to strike beyond his border nations, so he did not pose a threat to us (except to those still believing the BS apocalyptic hype for the 'war' which have all proven to be lies). A power vacuum in the middle east is NOT what's best for all, or obviously even what's best for the neighbors, and IS a threat to us.

The US healthcare system is the best in the world.... interesting. Not sure why they insist on that.

Please then....Don't put your seed into any woman ever, is my advice to you and the best for the world.

Look dude, first of all yer making comments on a thread addressing a user theo47, who hasn't been active in quite some time(about 6 years ago) and on this site and that means, no one read the rant you just spewed-

Next and most meaningful, yer definitely gonna get kicked-off the site or ignored and probably won't wanna be here anyhow after the ass-rendering you'll get from some of the more give-a-fuck users. Like me, I could give a fuck about anything you think or, might give an incredible amount of fuck....

BUT-When you come-off spouting your opinions littered with insults to (I'll agree, liberals are confused cretins for the most part, full of head all-up-in-ass) folks who will only deride you based on your delivery and verbiage well, you must be one of those gluttons for punishment.

Incidentally, I was another user in another life and hammered that cat theo47 (whom I otherwise dug) so hard for his atheist dick-riding spiels that he up and bailed-Couldn't stand that guy, talked way to much shit about god vs. not-god

-Cheers and a heads-up oh and, after reading your rant my critique is that you have been dosed with the programming that best suits your world view...which, like all of ours, is frighteningly limited and entirely too fucking deranged.