Birthday Jingles are in store for you Tingles. Hope your day is replete with mingles

The inherently chaotic event that exists in the otherwise predictable / trainable environment of driving a car is the unplanned / unmeasured disturbance. In control systems that are adaptive or self learning, the unplanned disturbance is the killer - a short duration, unpredictable event for which the system is unable to respond to within the control limits that have been defined through training, programming and/or adaptation. The response to an unplanned disturbance is often to default to an instruction that is very much human derived (ie. stop, exit gracefully, terminate instruction, wait until conditions return to controllable boundary conditions or freeze in place) which, depending on the disturbance, can be catastrophic. In our world, with humans behind the wheel, let's call the unplanned disturbance the "mistake". A tire blows, a load comes undone, an object falls out of or off of another vehicle (human, dog, watermelon, gas cylinder) etc.

The concern from my perspective (and I work directly with adaptive / learning control systems every day - fundamental models, adaptive neural type predictors, genetic algorithms etc. ) is the response to these short duration / short response time unplanned disturbances. The videos I've seen and the examples that I have reviewed don't deal with these very short timescale events and how to manage the response, which in many cases is an event dependent response. I would guess that the 1st dead person that results from the actions or inaction of self driving vehicles will put a major dent if not halt to the program. Humans may be fallible, but we are remarkably (infinitely?) more adaptive in combined conscious / subconscious responses than any computer is or will be in the near future in both appropriateness of response and the time scale of generating that response.

In the partially controlled environment (ie. there is no such thing as 100%) of a automated warehouse and distribution center, self driving works. In the partially controlled environment where ONLY self driving vehicles are present on the roadways, then again, this technology will likely succeed. The mixed environment with self driving co-mingled with humans (see "fallible" above) is not presently viable, and I don't think will be in the next decade or two, partially due to safety risk and partially due to management of these short timescale unplanned disturbances that can call for vastly different responses depending upon the specific situation at hand. In the flow of traffic we encounter the majority of the time, would agree that this may not be an issue to some (in 44 years of driving, I've been in 2 accidents, so I'll leave the risk assessment to the actuaries). But one death, and we'll see how high the knees jerk. And it will happen.

My 2 cents.
TB

I would say that, as Governor, if he is out mingling with the public it is in an official capacity. He has guards, lackeys, and others that could have ran in and got the coffee if he didn't want to be exposed to praise (or criticism).

It may also have been the only venue available, ever, to that lady to say something to him. She could have protested outside his offices or complained via email, but those things are easily ignored. Now if she had thrown something or attacked him, I would say it wasn't appropriate.

This situation is sad and ironic.

The area known as Judea was renamed Palestine during the time of Roman emperor Hadrian.
The residents of Judea/Palestine were forced to convert from Judaism to Christianity around 400 ad by the Romans, and later in the 700's ad were forced to convert to Islam.
They never left. They just changed religions. The children of the Jews of the new testament, are the Palestinians of today (now practicing Islam).

Many years passed, the Eastern Roman empire resided over much of the area, ruled out of Turkey, and the region was more or less all-right. Along the way it changed names to the Ottoman empire.

After WW1, the Ottoman empire shrank dramatically, and renamed itself to simply Turkey. However it still held some lands that were not actually Turkish (eg. ~Syria), and was still a mini-empire.
Around this general time period, Palestine became a British colony.

During WW2, there were many displaced Europeans of Jewish faith that had nowhere to go.
(*Britain didn't want them either, most places didn't. Anti-Semitism was rather common at the time. Even the Nazi eugenics policy wasn't much criticized at the time. re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#Supporters_and_critics. Actually, the Nazi's strong association with anti-semitism + all the anti-Nazi propaganda during WW2, helped cure a lot of anti-semitism in Europe.).
In the late 1940's Britain split occupied Palestine into smaller-Palestine+Israel, and assisted in relocating WW2 displaced Europeans of Jewish faith to Israel. Which at face value made sense, because "the bible says Jews are from Judea". However the area from which was established Israel was more or less ~devoid of followers of the Jewish faith in the 1940's.
And that's the irony! The British creation of Israel involved taking land from Palestinians (i.e. The children of the original Jews of Judea), and giving it to Europeans of Jewish faith (foreign immigrants).

That then resulted in middle-eastern resentment and backlash over western invasion/occupation/seisure-of-land. This resentment against immigrating European Jews caused 'Jews at large' to be discriminated against throughout the middle-east, and that in turn led to a migration wave of regional-Jews from the surrounding areas into Israel.
This resulted in a concentration of Jewish-faithed immigrants of European and middle-eastern ethnicity, all in Israel - further displacing the original residents.

Basically, in the end, the original people of Judea were kicked out of their homes and their lands given to immigrants... and they really resent it. While in the mean time the immigrants acclaim to have a god given right to be there because there is some old paper that says that people of their faith are from the area.

Ta-da.

Britain could have just sent Europeans of Jewish faith to Palestine, and made it an integrated nation.
But nope, they had to displace people and create a bunch more problems.
Gee, thanks Britain.
I pretty much face-palm when I hear "this conflict is thousands of years old" (when it's only been ~66 years).


Note :
I make the distinction between ethnically Jewish and religiously Jewish.
I use the phrase "Europeans of Jewish faith" to clarify that these were displaced Europeans, who may have had an ancestor or two way way way up the family tree that was from Judea - but were otherwise European and of Jewish faith - who may have lived in an area with little mingling with outsiders, and hence a visually distinct appearance (i.e. what made it possible to make visual caricatures of their people, such as : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eternal_Jew_%281940_film%29)
You can also play semantics with "what is ethnically Jewish, when the ethnicity is labelled after the faith", etc.

There's also the geopolitical aspect. Israel is the only "Western" nation in the middle-east. Given that the area is globally significant in terms of resources, that makes Israel a critically important ally. So the rhetoric will always lean.

Personally, I wonder if the things that European Jews suffered during WW2, didn't create some mental/emotional baggage that today plays itself out with how they treat Palestinians. Sort of a "I don't care about your suffering, because I've been through worse" kind of situation.

However, I understand how Israel does not want an open integrated society with Palestinians. The Jewish population is rather small, and in an integrated society they would be such a small proportion that they would essentially be bred out of existence within a few generations. For those who wish to preserve their culture, that's 'kind of a big deal'.

-scheherazade

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Commercial Actors, Mingle, Jon Lajoie' to 'Commercial Actors, Mingle, Jon Lajoie, meta, comedy, dating' - edited by lucky760

Man - the only animal seemingly NOT indigenous to this planet and doesn't know how to respect and co-mingle with all other life on the planet.

The metaphor of an endangered species of duck is still apt.


No. It is not an apt comparison, you should stop using it, thinking in these brackets and stop listening to whomever told you this crap:


1. Human beings are at the top of the food chain, intelligent, social and able to make babies with one another, as previously stated.

2. Ducks can be saved by humans because humans can save ducks because: point 1. Ducks cannot form eco-departments of duck governments to save other ducks. Because they are fucking ducks. Certain species of ducks cannot breed with other species of ducks. Because they are actually different in more ways than colour. So saving a certain species of duck makes sense for biodiversity and etc. Also, plants and whatnot.

3. Now: Human beings of whatever colour, culture or other dividing feature your racist brain cooks up, are NOT DUCKS. They are all equally human. All. Equally. Let it sink in. Aaaalll. Eeeequaally. Not one single person is above another.

The above considered, I plead that because a particular civilization finds itself below replacement level it is in a perilous state and merits attention. This is a conclusion that, again, assumes an overreaching, unfettered respect for diversity.


There it is again, the racism. See point 3 for physical racism. Now to your cultural racism: "Civilisations," cultures, religions are NOT DUCKS. They are collective constructs. They diminish, they go inert. You can look at them in museums. Because there are almost always remnants and relics. But cultures are never dead. They are not murdered, driven away by evil muslims, outbred or dying off.

Cultures go on in the following cultures. They are absorbed. They are mixed. They are in flux. As I mentioned before. Cultures change. It is inevitable. A few hundred years ago, German was spoken on the British isles. It mingled with Scandinavian, Celtic and french languages and cultures --> English.

You must extend your own desire to protect a unique given species to the right of a nation to maintain its own identifying characteristics. Realize that the desire for prosperity and sustained existence of a nation does not by definition mandate the impingement on another.

Bullshit. Any nation's "identifying characteristics" did not exist 200 years ago and will not exist in 200 years time. It doesn't even need an outside influence to do it. It happens. "Nations" do not have a right to maintain characteristics. Those which tried, failed. We live in a globally connected world now in which ideas, culture, science and knowledge can be shared freely. Look at yourself being lectured at by a post-racial, post-fascist human being on the internet. Whatever culture you belong to, it changed a lot and it will keep changing a lot. This is called progress. Otherwise we'd all be talking a babylonian language.


On the other hand, if like GenjiKilpatrick you harbour a sense that "whites" deserve to be eradicated because of who they are... you're barely human.

As far as I can see here, he never said such a thing. This is your irrational fearful racist mind at work. Try to look outside your head. I guess you misread this: Not to mention - Adult White Males have been the most privileged, self-entitled, killin' & manipulating "lesser" cultures type homo sapiens on the planet for a few centuries now, at least.
He says that white men were basically "in charge." Nowhere does he call for an eradication.

And again you are calling a fiction of your own "barely human". I do not think it, Genji does not think it. This is your racist mind creating fictions you can lash out at. Try to see how your own fears are all without merit. Group B will not destroy anyone's culture. They will enhance it. As they have done before. And Group A will enhance them. As they have done before. In fact, there are no group A or B. Just humans with interchanging, intermingling cultures. Stop thinking in black and white. In every aspect.

*promote Phase separation would be the areas where the liquids "meet" and yet don't co-mingle together.

His intention was good but it's rather unprofessional to leave in midst of an interview. Just sayin'.

It's sorta like capturing a window spider and releasing it outside in midst of a job interview or saying hello to his friend while he's at the principal's office. Do remember that he just came out of a police station fighting extradition facing a rape charge in Sweden. (which is another debating case of immaturity of him and people he mingles with)

It just goes to show his attitude towards all this media attention, that he's not taking things very seriously, not much different from a love-starved kid getting attention by being naughty.

What he's doing with wikileaks has made headlines, fighting against the tyrannies of corporate controlled and concentration of power. That's good. But he's also a man that does not care much for conventional rules, and he'd rather play this role of vigilante and in fact loving every minute of it. He's just as immature and selfish as any one of those crooks he is ought to expose them.

He likes the fact that he can play outside the boundaries, that he is above the law. In fact that's what his work is about, by means of backhand deals and illegal information leaks. But he's doing these bad things to the bad guys, which is the major difference and why some people view him as a hero. So his existence is in itself a constant clash of irony, a people's hero out to fight against world's problems, by practicing the same techniques the baddies are using, and enjoying his role in it.

>> ^COriolanus:


How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a race problem. I am talking about the final solution to the black problem?
And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?
But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a racist.
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.


wow, really.
It's not and never has been a problem about race. It's a problem with ignorance. If the mideast emigrated to Japan it would be just as well. Their people need to live in places that have come to understand values of free speech and anti-authoritarianism. First-worlders need to see that these are normal people just like everyone else. And yeah, I would call you a racist for seeing the problem and motivations as inherently race-based and latching onto that. Perhaps you have a different definition for the word. I don't understand why you'd have strong pride in your skin color. It's like you're saying all the blue eyes need to stop mingling with the general population since they'll become extinct over time. Blue-eyed power, huh. But I guess thanks for the reply.

Yes, I will have to plead temporary insta-sanity on this one.

I was if I remember correctly, coming from the angle that Obama is featured in this video and that the 08 election was a turning point in the government and the opponents to the current government blame barrack, ludicrously that is. I mingled it all together 16 hours ago.

You are such an awesome mum...

In reply to this comment by UsesProzac:
I'm so excited to homeschool my son. I'm not religious at all and don't want to shelter him from that sort of thing in any way; it's fully up to him how he decides to go in that regard. I'm just picky and I have no faith in the school system here in the US. He's a year old and I've been working on teaching him basic sign language for the last six months. It helps a lot in figuring out what he wants and needs.

Social interaction isn't something I'm worried about. It's easy to find groups of like-minded parents to mingle with. There's a slew of athletics and groups to participate in that will easily provide a healthy camaraderie and social skills. Summer camp, specific classes in schools for only a certain part of the day, museums and libraries, etc. Lots of ways to work around it. It takes a lot of effort to meet those needs but for my son, I'm willing to work my ass off to ensure a rich, engrossing education tailored just for him. I won't stifle him and I'll encourage his interests and passions and hopefully, he'll be more ready for college than I was. Or ready to do whatever he loves and be successful at it.

You don't need a teaching degree to know how to impart knowledge and wisdom, to give someone the tools to think and reason and make their own way.

I'm so excited to homeschool my son. I'm not religious at all and don't want to shelter him from that sort of thing in any way; it's fully up to him how he decides to go in that regard. I'm just picky and I have no faith in the school system here in the US. He's a year old and I've been working on teaching him basic sign language for the last six months. It helps a lot in figuring out what he wants and needs.

Social interaction isn't something I'm worried about. It's easy to find groups of like-minded parents to mingle with. There's a slew of athletics and groups to participate in that will easily provide a healthy camaraderie and social skills. Summer camp, specific classes in schools for only a certain part of the day, museums and libraries, etc. Lots of ways to work around it. It takes a lot of effort to meet those needs but for my son, I'm willing to work my ass off to ensure a rich, engrossing education tailored just for him. I won't stifle him and I'll encourage his interests and passions and hopefully, he'll be more ready for college than I was. Or ready to do whatever he loves and be successful at it.

You don't need a teaching degree to know how to impart knowledge and wisdom, to give someone the tools to think and reason and make their own way.

Not only is it art, there is also a very compelling story hidden in there about the three glasses with colored liquid... they would not be intimidated by the shooter... first they deflected the bullet and second they refused to let their contents be mingled... I was at the edge of my seat and want a 3rd shot.

@dystopianfuturetoday. Let's use your example. Cat wants to eat the mouse, but by doing so it would be encroaching upon the mouse's life. That doesn't work.

@bcglorf:

...it still doesn't seem like 'victim pays' is an ideal approach. Rape victims have a hard enough time coming forward in our current system, adding court costs on top doesn't seem prudent... If you want to mandate fixed court costs, isn't that just more regulation?

I get what you're saying, but a victim can and would sue for the court costs as part of their settlement. That's pretty routine. But, again, who pays for it when the victimizer is found guilty and refuses to pay? I don't know. I don't have all the answers. Also, fixed court costs aren't government regulations; they're the cost of a service and therefore a user fee. And I'm not sure how the cost is determined. I'd imagine by the cost of paying people to facilitate the court, pay the judge, pay the bailiff, pay the jurors, etc.

There are two tricks though. First and foremost is deciding who gets to pick what is essential and what isn't? ...The second trick is each item marked as untaxable increases the taxation required on what's left in order pay for the services everyone agrees are needed to protect the line where 'my rights begin'.

The essentials are pretty clear. Is it a $30 million dollar home? Why not? You have to have a home, so who cares what the cost of it would be? And there's always the fear of the non-essential items getting taxed heavily, that's why it's important to limit government's greed and growth. How? I don't know. How do we do it now? We don't. It's a tricky thing, and I certainly don't have the answers.

Argue as much as you want about the failings of your military(I'm Canadian), that doesn't make you better of without one. Take an honest look at just the last 100 years and try to picture where America would be with no standing army to speak of.

How many times has Canada been invaded by foreign nations? Seriously. Think about that. You guys don't mingle in foreign affairs like our policy makers do. That's this country's major problem. The US goes around the world pissing everyone off, and we wonder why the terrorists attack us.

Now look at Afghanistan. It's a fraction the size of the US, and many nations have tried to occupy it. None have done it successfully. Now imagine a nation trying to take over this country where so many citizens are armed. First we have a sprawling land mass. Second we have an armed population. They'd never succeed. Never.