1) to be clear, I'm team Nikola Tesla, not the car company, but I like them too

2) I agree Musk may be a credit thief, or at the least he allows the perception that he's the inventor of his companies products to go uncorrected, but is he a patent thief? I've never heard him accused of that.

Edison, on the other hand, directly claimed invention credit for inventions he did not invent and outright stole patents from their rightful owners repeatedly.....and he publicly murdered elephants for fun.

A well rehearsed climb I assure you. A properly positioned camera to give the perception of great height. Most likely just a warm-up routine with no supportive gear. This is only about 100 ft from base and a pro-climber would not be exhausted by this. Classic view whoring. The overhang was route was specifically chosen so he could have something hang-off of. Another example of a low-achiever recklessly putting themselves in harms way so they can talk about adventure and achievement. Emergency workers are sickened by this. You are not suddenly "cool", "interesting", or respected by this.

Wow... he had a dream.

And we all know that every dream is 100% real!

Especially that one I had as a kid where a giant witch popped out of a giant jack-in-the-box and chased my family in our car. Totally 100% real.

Just because you agree, or you want it to be true doesn't mean it is. This is the exact problem so many on the right, like @bobknight33 have. If the info aligns with their perception of reality it must be accurate, no matter how bad or unreliable the source, and no matter what other evidence contradicts it.

And they still don't. But hey, this is pop science. It is now expected to be horribly wrong and highly entertaining. To be successful, it must only affirm existing beliefs (or challenge weakly held beliefs) for a great number of people. The perception of accuracy and truth only needs to persist for the length of the video + or - a few minutes for early dropouts and comment skimming.

Indeed, your ratio is basically the opposite, even with the pills. But perhaps it will improve over time.

(often though these drugs don't fix the root cause, they address the symptoms which means you'll be on some form of pills forever, until you fix the underlying issue, which the doctor should have mentioned, but a lot of doctors are so disheartened these days because their patients rarely listen, or are scared of being called 'fat shamers' so they don't bother with the speech anymore)

Take a look at the success stories on ForksOverKnives.com we aren't exactly miserable.

When you feel for yourself how good life is when you are the master of your health and therefore fate, life becomes far far better. It's powerful, your whole perception of the world will change, and the fleeting pleasure you get from Butter or bacon doesn't compare, and of course we're eating cusine from across the world. We've given up nothing, just changed the ingredients.


I know yall think im a biased vegan, which is why I like to refer people to the success stories on plant based websites. You can see the life and passion return into people's eyes, there lives are transformed. The weight-loss is a mere side effect of being healthy.


https://www.forksoverknives.com/the-10-most-popular-plant-based-success-stories-of-2018/

Well weed can mess up your depth perception.

Then again, maybe he's just an idiot.

@Ickster
"That we're equating that with something like gay people being refused service because of who they are says a lot about how skewed our perception of balance is."

This is the fundamental point. I DON'T equate the two at all.

But as soon as we open this door, we have to deal with the permutations of it.

Let's say that for the sake of argument, gender identity and sexual orientation are now protected classes (legally, they're not, but let's assume they are).

Ok, you can't discriminate against someone for being LGBTQ. Great, that is obviously correct.

But we're making the argument here that you CAN discriminate against someone based on their political affiliation. Would you be ok with someone refusing service to Obama? Hillary? Bernie? What about an employer in a Republican town who finds out their employee is a prominent local democrat?

I get the argument and honestly, I agree with most of what you've said. If any of Trump's cronies had shown up in my (completely imaginary) restaurant, I'd probably have turfed them out with a lot less civility than SHS was shown.

But I'm just not sure that the world following my example is a good idea....

Until you've argued that black is white, the sun rises in the west, that we've always been at war with Eastasia, and are perfectly willing to fuck over most of the world for your own self-aggrandizement, you have come nowhere near to sinking to Trump's level.

SHS was politely asked to leave a restaurant because of her role as a willing and eager mouthpiece for policies that physically and emotionally have hurt (at a minimum) thousands of people. That we're equating that with something like gay people being refused service because of who they are says a lot about how skewed our perception of balance is.

People making the civility argument in good faith (i.e., not Fox talking heads) are making it because they actually have a moral compass and know that two wrongs don't make a right.

However, what was done to SHS isn't a wrong--no harm was done to her other than embarrassment, which is exactly what she should be feeling about her role in the world. When people are being terrible, whether it's a child, the president, or one of his enablers, they need to be told politely but firmly that it's not OK.

Think of this less as pouring gasoline on a fire and more like a controlled burn to help control the blaze.

"saying humans are born with either a penis or vagina isn't a hateful statement against people."
It absolutely is hateful to hermaphrodites, clearly saying they aren't human. Use the qualifier "usually" or "almost always".

"As for gender being something different than sex, if you define it that way"
No, you said that. I'm saying all the physical attributes of gender are changeable besides the brain, and many humans with male gonads have female brains, and vice versa. Today, gonads can be surgically changed, so where is gender? I argue it's in the brain, which today can't be changed.
Gender is different from sexuality, clearly, no?
Edit: I guess I do think gender is different from "sex", if sex is determined solely by your gonads.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinction
....as to who cares about gender....the bigoted bakers do. ;-)

We're talking perceived race, gender, sexuality, ethnic group, as identified by the discriminating individuals. They don't DNA scan or brain scan customers before serving (or denying) them, they react based on perception.

Skin color, that's totally changeable. Never heard of spray tans or bleach? Try watching Eddie Murphy's 'White like me'.

Odd you might argue against perception being the measure, since you seemed to argue that gays could be perceived as acceptably heterosexual by not acting on their uncontrollable urges and desires, bypassing the bigoted discrimination, essentially by lying.

Again it's about perceived ethnicity, not actual genetic heritage. Like you say, your actual heritage is unidentifiable by strangers, so less important to this discussion of public business discrimination.
If I want my wedding cake for me and Chris, and I wear my pink paisley silk shirt, leather chaps, choker, and heavy makeup to buy it that doesn't make me gay but the bigot baker would still deny me because he would assume I was.

Congratulations! Your video, Perception of programming versus the reality, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 194 Badge!

Your video, Perception of programming versus the reality, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I don't disagree, but there's difference between the common perception and the professional, educated perception. Even when I was a kid in the 70's, it was still being portrayed as just being scared out of your wits in movies and cartoons, not a real physical injury.
I know many people knew better even then, but I would bet some still don't.

Your absolutely right that characterising an entire generation as the 'same' is flawed.

However, I also believe there is more to the whole 'entitled millenials' view than just the bias of 'those darned kids again'.

I think the lumping of generational groups is just a miswording and but reading of the problems facing society at different times. Baby-Boomers as a generation were just people, same as millenials, same as anyone else. The thing is, kids born between 1910 and 1930 grew up in a world at war. Baby boomers grew up in a post world war/cold war era. The societal problems that shaped those times and people still existed, so dismissing the problems as just perception or bias isn't necessarily a good idea.

I've been out of high school 20+ years, and the notion of participation ribbons for everyone was already starting then. The notion that losing or winning isn't important, even if you lost because you were lazy, or won because of years of hard work was already starting. The problem of basically denying hard parts of the real world has been building for 20 years, and the current generation has been buried even deeper in it.

For anyone born in Canada or the USA to cry that no amount of hard work, talent or anything else can help them get ahead and that the system must be changed to help them is insidious. When 80-90% of everyone born in Canada or the USA will never know real hunger, never face homelessness, never have a warlord burn and destroy everything they own, complaining about the inherent injustice of being born where you were as a Canadian or American is just wrong.

The ideology that has grown up in the western world over the last 20+ years has the stink of the rich, entitled world we've enjoyed here. We have a society so removed from hardship, that hardship is working 10 hours a day, 5 days a week to lead a life more comfortable than 90% of the world.

It's not millenials, it is however the society that millenials are growing up in(so all of us).

I totally agree with you, but I think you touched a problem that causes confusion....rape is rape, defined as unwanted penetration of the victim.
That's why men only counted for +-15% of victims outside of prison, and women a small percentage of perpetrators of "rape", they don't penetrate the men in most cases...This leads to the perception that this is mostly men attacking women, and for pure penetrating the victim rape it is....but if you add unwanted insertion (putting their penis in mouth/vagina/rectum against their wishes, etc) that male victim number skyrockets. If you count any sexual assault, unwanted sexual touching, it's near 50/50....with the same going for perpetrators. I was flabbergasted by that statistic.

If people don't want to make distinctions, do it across the board, which means going after the so far ignored women abusers with the same zeal....I've yet to hear a single one called out in the #me too movement, it's appearing to be pure male bashing, sadly.

So much wrong.

Reality is not subjective. That's insane. Your perception of reality is subjective, but only if you aren't careful.

(Redacted)

Mental defect doesn't mean mental illness. It means your brain chemistry might be abnormal and react abnormally to drugs. Parkinson's isn't considered mental illness for example.

This story was about him stupidly taking totally unknown drugs from unknown sources, why on earth are your panties in such a bunch because I stated the obvious, that this is not a normal marijuana overdose experience?

Pretty weak, bro.
(You've already been chastised for the silly name calling)