Thought about this fubar a second time. Upvoting cause the intention was genuinely good. A family that plays together stays together. Plus her nose job will not just be for vanity.

https://kottke.org/plus/misc/images/broccoli-tree-vandal-00.jpg

Hmm, and still no response from @WhyWhyBother. That, plus what @lucky760 said, means I vote *ban

What would you recommend for an alternative here? There are inevitably going to be seniors who don't have family available to help them, and who reach a point where they're unable to care for themselves. I can only think of four options at that point:
1) Hope there's a local charity that is willing to take care of them, has adequate funding to do so, and isn't abusive. If this is unregulated there's a high likelihood of abuse occurring, and if it is regulated then you have government involved, which appears to be something you'd oppose. There's also the issue of unequal access - if it's charitable then it's inherently not mandated, so it's nearly certain some people will not have any such charity in their area (see #3).
2) Somehow have private, non-charitable entities handle it? I've no idea how this would work, as any non-charity is pretty much by definition motivated by profit, and a profit motive plus caring for the elderly is certain to lead to abuse (perhaps not in all cases, but I'd expect it to be quite common).
3) Nothing / good luck, oldies.
4) Government intercession.

In this case, a safety net facilitated by the government strikes me as the best of the available options. The problems highlighted in the video seem likely to stem from insufficient oversight and planning. I'd wager that's due to lack of funding, as this is exactly the sort of program which would be seen as a low-risk target when budget cuts come around, at least from an electoral perspective. After all, if the people impacted by this are those who don't already have people in their life who care for and can advocate for them, and being put under guardianship removes their voting rights, then where's the harm to a politician in reducing the funding?

It seems to me that a well-funded guardianship program, with proper oversight in place, would have the best chance of minimizing the suffering of elderly individuals who can no longer care for themselves. I can understand the libertarian preference for minimal governmental interference in the lives of the public, but this strikes me as a case where that simply doesn't work. If you can think of a viable option #5, or can make a case for 1, 2, or 3 being legitimately more helpful than a well-run option #4 (which is clearly NOT what's discussed in the video), I'm absolutely open to considering it. At the same time, implementing #4 in a way which doesn't leave it vulnerable to budgetary volatility is also a not-insignificant challenge.

Damn, I'm procrastinating really well tonight. That was long.

The *average* padlock isn't. But there are very high quality locks in the 80 dollar plus range that protect against people with tools.
They may not stop someone from getting past them in an isolated spot, but they're hardened enough that a person with a grinder will need 15 or more minutes ... and with that kind of noise and risk of attention it's not worth it.
So buddy goes and knocks off your master lock with a hammer

Not to be all hipster and such, but I stopped using Facebook about 5-6 years ago, when Google Plus came out. I liked Google Plus, because it put me more in contact with people of similar interests and seemed to help me avoid crazy family members.

After a year or so I stopped using G+ as well. I just didn't find that kind of connection useful to me. Not sure what it was, but it felt like I had to participate in order to get anything out of it.

I was probably off all social media until about 2 years ago when I got on Twitter. I have been pretty happy with the asynchronous nature of it.

I really should just delete my FB account.

Good call, sounds like Chinese to me, plus that bus at the end has Chinese characters on it.

Hmm. 5.5 minutes of good info, making us think about tricky ways that online stuff gets us to click or pay attention to stuff that isn't good for us (the audience) but can benefit the creator/host.

And then there is a brief cut to black that doesn't obviously mark an endpoint, continued background music that doesn't mark the change, followed by a paid sponsorship shill for "hey, if you're worried about this shit, TOTES BUY THIS VPN DUDES" plus icons for "obviously you want some merch or to donate to my patreon!".

insert [I don't want to live on this planet anymore.jpg]

Maybe I'm just a cranky bastard in my old age.

A few of those didn't actually ring a bell in terms of having heard them before, and I knew the names of a few that I had heard:

(spoilers, I guess?)
1. I instantly knew that was the William Tell Overture, I would think a lot of people know that one?

2. Know the song, but didn't know the title without seeing it. But I'm sure that I've heard the title (Entry of the Gladiators) before.

3. Didn't know the song (or the title -- Liechtensteiner Polka).

4. Know the song, knew it was Strauss, didn't know it was "Fruhlingsstimmen". Gesundheit. As an aside, the stare plus the eyebrow action in this one is hilariously well-suited to the song.

5. Knew a variant of the song, didn't know it was "The British Grenadiers". Pretty sure I first heard this one as music in the old-school NES game "Pirates" by Sid Meier.

6. Knew the song, knew it was Chopin's "Piano Sonata No. 2 Op. 35", also know that it is commonly referred to as "Marche Funebre" (although that title can be applied to other songs also). Dude also gets a lot of mileage out of the creepy stare at the camera on this one.

7. Don't think I've ever heard this one, didn't know the title (A Dog's Life).

8. Knew the song, knew it was by Strauss, didn't know the title (An Der Scthonen Blauen Donau).

9. Knew the song, knew it was the "Chicken Dance". I'd think that anyone that's ever been to a wedding pretty much has to know this one -- but maybe that's just a midwest US thing?

10. Eventually recognized the song, but not until he got a bit into it. Didn't know the title (Colonel Bogey March). Still think it should 'properly' be titled "Lisa, her teeth are big and green. Lisa, she smells like gasoline."

*ban selflink

below in yt description

######## For other latest tech stuff also checkout #########

= https://safetricks.org/

= https://www.youtube.com/c/SafeTricksO...

= https://www.facebook.com/SafeTricks

= https://www.instagram.com/Pahul_Singh

= https://twitter.com/@SafeTricks

= https://plus.google.com/u/0/+PahulSin...

Plus, the scent of burning axe body spray is a mild improvement.

You want to defend yourself from bad government with an AR-15? How did that work out for the people in Waco? An AR-15 isn't going to defend you from the government. A Michigan militia isn't going to cut it either. The only thing that will defend you from the government is a 2+ Star General who doesn't like what the government is doing and gets his troops to agree.
For dealing with Robbers/Mice - A normal cat, is much better suited in that case. An AR isn't going to provide you any more protection, in fact it will likely provide less. There are 2 schools of thought for home protection - A big bang to scare/kill a robber or accurate and a little less deadly. I'd go for less deadly as then I don't have to worry so much about rounds flying through walls and hitting other people. A 12 gauge with bird shot should be perfect for that, loud as hell, but wont blast through the drywall and hit a kid. Plus it will get a nice spread, so I'm likely to hit whoever was dumb enough to come into my house. An AR-15 will go right though the walls - of my house and maybe the one next door.
So I don't need a bad cat to defend myself. A good cat does it well enough and it isn't worth having the bad cats on the streets keeping me up all night.

I was taught to:
1) drill or chop holes close to shore first to check thickness
2) Carry a long pole/piece of wood (6 feet plus) so that if you fell, you wouldn't go under the ice (the idea of being swept under ice and not getting back to the hole you fell into...)
3) If going to rescue someone, tie off/get a line around yourself, and spread your body weight out by crawling/using a saucer/pan/kid's plastic sled...and offer them a line, pole, or thrown sleeve of a garment, not your hand.

anyway, looks like it was pond--they just lost some dignity.

I remember hearing that the who came up with FedEx got a bad grade in his business school class because the idea wasn't considered possible; the cost of entry is all of those facilities worldwide plus all of the airplanes or in other words pretty damn high; and then you have to turn all of that on at the same time; so if you're first you pretty much have a monopoly and can set really high prices; so the rewards are extremely high, but so are the costs and risks

i've got a cel phone.
it tells time plus i can access virtually all of human knowledge.