>> ^rottenseed:

Your pain is my amusement. Oh well, you did get a pretty badass story out of it >> ^skinnydaddy1:
Found a nest of those the hard way. Was helping a guy prepping a house for painting. I was on the roof prepping some over hangs. When I got stung the first time. No biggie I thought I'll swat it and go on. I looked down and saw about 10 of the fuckers on my stomach and more streaming out of a hole in the roof. Then as more and more landed on me they all stung about the same time. I screamed, rolled, fell, landed on top of a fence, pinwheeled and landed on the guy. (All the while getting stung again and again) we both screamed. We are now both being stung. Scrambled and dove in to a near by pool. 80+ stings. 3 cracked ribs and 2 broken fingers. (No idea how I broke them) I decided no to work outside anymore after that.
Mother nature does not like me and I've not found enough money to buy a flame thrower so I could fight back.



Well the old saying it true. "“Comedy is tragedy plus time.” -Carol Burnett
and thanks to the internet that comedy gets to the public even faster.
I feel we shall be laughing at the maker of these videos soon. The act of using glass bowls over wasp spray or more efficient means will provide the general public with pain and comedy soon.

Your pain is my amusement. Oh well, you did get a pretty badass story out of it >> ^skinnydaddy1:

Found a nest of those the hard way. Was helping a guy prepping a house for painting. I was on the roof prepping some over hangs. When I got stung the first time. No biggie I thought I'll swat it and go on. I looked down and saw about 10 of the fuckers on my stomach and more streaming out of a hole in the roof. Then as more and more landed on me they all stung about the same time. I screamed, rolled, fell, landed on top of a fence, pinwheeled and landed on the guy. (All the while getting stung again and again) we both screamed. We are now both being stung. Scrambled and dove in to a near by pool. 80+ stings. 3 cracked ribs and 2 broken fingers. (No idea how I broke them) I decided no to work outside anymore after that.
Mother nature does not like me and I've not found enough money to buy a flame thrower so I could fight back.

Found a nest of those the hard way. Was helping a guy prepping a house for painting. I was on the roof prepping some over hangs. When I got stung the first time. No biggie I thought I'll swat it and go on. I looked down and saw about 10 of the fuckers on my stomach and more streaming out of a hole in the roof. Then as more and more landed on me they all stung about the same time. I screamed, rolled, fell, landed on top of a fence, pinwheeled and landed on the guy. (All the while getting stung again and again) we both screamed. We are now both being stung. Scrambled and dove in to a near by pool. 80+ stings. 3 cracked ribs and 2 broken fingers. (No idea how I broke them) I decided no to work outside anymore after that.
Mother nature does not like me and I've not found enough money to buy a flame thrower so I could fight back.

it once happened to me in real life. nothing much to it. Just stung a bit afterwards.

>> ^DerHasisttot:

>> ^ant:
>> ^DerHasisttot:
>> ^ant:
>> ^rougy:
... Now if we all posted our butts instead of our faces....
Then we might be on to something.....


Here's mine!

Hawt!

/me shakes it.

I - like - big thoraxes and I cannot lie
you other ants can't deny
that when an ant walks in with a wasp-waist
And a round thing in your face
You get stung!


Not all species can sting. I am a species that can sting. I never had to use it though.

>> ^ant:

>> ^DerHasisttot:
>> ^ant:
>> ^rougy:
... Now if we all posted our butts instead of our faces....
Then we might be on to something.....


Here's mine!

Hawt!

/me shakes it.


I - like - big thoraxes and I cannot lie
you other ants can't deny
that when an ant walks in with a wasp-waist
And a round thing in your face
You get stung!

@NetRunner

I am a little confuzled about calling @Skeeve and my conversation both true and a non sequitur. I guess because I am addressing a more theoretical, man kind building question and you a more practical one. Your talking about the more practical, of making things work now, I am talking more about how I want things to work, for always. A the difference between the tangible and the ideal I guess.

The examples you pose are actually the exact ones I was thinking of when I think of the brutality of democratic things, at times. I have been considering the statement "the needs of the many..." for the course of a few weeks now. Forgive me, about to go on a tangent, but I want a trial by fire to so speak if you have the time. This will be a wall of text for the uninterested.

When I was first exposed to this phrase/idea, it was from Spock. And from then on, I always took it as the rational position one has to take to help the whole at the cost of the one. It was a profound idea in my youth. It had such a charity to it. It seemed to speak to the core of what is good. Everything that is good about man was contained in that one simple phrase. The devil is in the details, though, so I decided recently to examine my long held Vulcan heritage.

Over the past couple of years, since my fall from Grace, I have been increasingly interested in the role of evolution in the social development of our species. We have a lot in common with our animal kin, especially the social nature of mammalia. The role of emotions and intuitive social orders with post rationalized rule set changes are the order of our creed. For an animal that has a very long gestation period, few offspring per litter, and long maturation periods, certain social orders HAD to be developed or we wouldn't survive. Many of our longest held evolutionary advances aren't because they are "good" morally, but are good for survival when being chased by tigers. In that, I think the democratic pricible is actually as old as social creatures, and even more basic, as force.

I think the reason Spock's words stung so true in my heart of hearts is it spoke to millions of years of culture beyond my ability to fully comprehend. It spoke past my reason to the core of my being. Now, when I examine the phrase "the needs of the many..." and take into light the core being, I find a much different sentence. Let me tell you what I found that I didn't expect.

I find that the statement of "the needs of the many..." very closely relates to the Democratic position. When your tribe is 20 people, and the fate of your people all hang in the balance of routine decisions, evolutionary speaking, to survive, it is easier to remove the rational component of this choice. The rational implications of every choice you make determining the fate of your entire race is a burden that doesn't aid in decision making. It is much "better" to program in an emotional response and have that being post-rationalize later, intelligence is actually more of a burden than a tool in this area. This way, we remove the impotence one might face in the light of such a larger than life issue, and set in that mind a continuing sequence of emotional ties to the event through post-rationalizations.

I think the reason Democracy works so well, given this situation, is it very closely mimics the "rules of the jungle." By that, I mean force. Democracy is an interesting formalization of the rules of the jungle. Instead of the force being a stick or a knife, it is a vote. We might not consider our vote a weapon, but essentially, when you boil it down it is our most trusted language. So much so, that every animal we face understands it. We have subjugated nearly every animal on this planet via force, and now try our hands at the very planet itself. All the while, we never asked ourselves the question, is using force right?

When being chased by a tiger, you can't ask that question. Even more so, it is the application of force that seems to drive the evolution on this planet forward. However, it only advances the flags in the due course of force. Any being that comes after HAS to play by these rules or be defeated before it can flourish. But is this the way it HAS to be? Does humanity find itself on the precipice of being able to change the entire course of evolution on the planet? Perhaps so. Slowly, we have taken the cunning, and brutal wolfs of the winter lands to being the noblest of companions. And cats, wait, never mind, fuck cats.

Humans might soon, within perhaps our children's, children's lifetime, find themselves in the unique position to change the rules of the game, for good. Weather or not we want to will be the only question. So the question is, why? What is so wrong with Democracy and the underlying shreds of managed force something to be concerned about? Let me bring on my final point.

The course of discovery seems to be without end for man. It seems inevitable, that in time, each human will have access to such a level of technology that any one person could end all life on the planet with little to no effort. Our only current solutions for it are that of liberty, which would only take one crazy person to end it all, or regulations, of which would have to be of the most extreme kind to protect against knowledge that is easy to acquire and use. It seems that the current rules that bind this planet along with mans advancement in technology have set us on a collision course with a cruel destiny. While not a certainty, I do believe it is certain that the tools of Democratic force will not save us from our own self imposed destruction.

While I have still not made all my points, like why I also think the democratic position is actually bad (perhaps even morally bad); in spite of that, I do suppose that it is insufficient to manage our path. It isn't that I want it to be wrong, it is that we truly need something else if we intend to survive past an infant species. If we lose the game, the cycle of force will most likely continue on without us, spawning forth new entities of force. But if we win, we will rewrite the rules for all existence on the planet. No longer bound to rules that keep up from being eaten by tigers, but by rules that extend us to the furthest reaches of our dreams.

I think it will all start by eating all the cats, because anything that will bite you in your sleep isn't fit in this new world. And I yield my time back to an audience that is most likely not interested in my thought processes that go to solving less than practical problems. I will only continue on request as to not come off as pedantic, well, more so.


edit, grammar

That was blankfist. Later that day we went snorkeling off the coast of Mombasa and he got stung by a jellyfish so I had to pee on him.
Good times.

@blankfist well, that's what makes it opinion and not fact.

As for "fear-based politicking", are you saying all statements that evoke fear are bad in some way? For example, I know this guy who likes to post videos about how the Fed is going to destroy America with hyperinflation. Is he doing something wrong?

Setting that aside for a moment, I didn't come away feeling afraid about anything listening to this clip. Instead, I came away feeling sorrow about the thought that maybe something could have been done to at least lessen the scale of the damage that Loughtner did. I didn't hear a recounting of some dire and immediate threat to me in what he said, I heard a pretty scathing admonition that my own indifference on the topic might have contributed to the death of a nine year old girl. That stung a bit.

I haven't really felt like I cared about gun control as an issue since I was a teen. Even then, it was more about being contrarian with my right-wing friends at school than really giving a shit about it.

It's a topic I think is worth having a debate about again. I'm not thinking anything radical here, maybe just simply limiting the size of clips on semi-automatic weapons again.

Since you're something of an absolutist about these kinds of things, I'm happy to hash it out in terms of me simply supporting bans on private ownership of rocket launchers and nuclear weapons.

Ack! I don't think they stung him at all!

Well, lets see...

I don't know who any of these people are. I don't know where they live or what they do. As anyone could, I could research it, but my point is, I have no vested interest over one side or the other.

To my brain:
I see someone approaching the vehicle, when they shouldn't be and stuffing a sign into a window in an offensive manner.
Then I see, what could be security pulling her back, and several other people joining in.
Then we loose sight of what's going on.
SWITCH to the other video.
I see a disguise being removed and a woman being pushed to the ground.
Then as that guy is pushed off her by another woman, the "Second' man gives her an extra push with his foot (as if to say, "You've failed, stay down.")

So in the end, what I make of this is: Someone went where they knew they wouldn't be welcomed, tried to stir a bee hive, succeeded, got stung and then, cried foul.

- Was she in the wrong? Yes.
- Was there a lot of energy in the air? Yes.
- Should they have hurt her? No.
- Did she need to be pushed to the ground? Don't know - she was resisting being detained - I can't tell.
- Did he recognize her, and out of spite, put his foot into her. Possibly, yes.
- Should they have detained her and called the police? Yes, and they did.

What I do see clearly is that politics and it's supporters all act like children in the playground with no adults around to supervise them. I personally find all the "Hoopla" of chanting, cheering, partying and rallying quite childish and sophomoric. I'm not surprised whey their festivities go awry.

It makes me think of William Golding's, "Lord of the flies."

Joaquin sucked through his teeth on that last comment. Think it genuinely stung as a good jab ought to.

>> ^shuac:

>> ^Duckman33:
>> ^shuac:
Agreed about Norton products sucking. In my 25 years as a PC enthusiast, I've tried all the AV products at one point or another and the New Orleans levy system had fewer breaches than Norton.

That's why it's the #1 selling Av product, because it sucks so much.

Yes, it's got a huge market share but not because it's an effective product. It's simply marketed well (this commercial for instance). And how much was it to produce this commercial? Those funds could have been used to make a better product, no? You see, son, market share is the important thing when you're as big as Norton, not program effectiveness.
I hate stating the obvious because it's such a waste of time & effort...but biggest does not mean best. I mean, duh. And aren't you just a tad biased, being a Norton employee? I have boatloads of PC experience. I've forgotten more about PCs than most people know and in my experience, Norton is a mediocre anti-virus/anti-malware shield.
Yes, I've used them recently. When you guys started using disc imaging tech for your install routines back in 2006-2007 (I may have the year wrong but you know what I mean), I figured I'd give you another try. Damn, it really did install the quickest I'd ever seen, I gotta give you that. But within the year, I found a fucking keylogger happily recording all my keystrokes. Seems to have slipped between the tightly-machined cracks of the #1 selling AV product. Well done. After changing all my passwords and getting a new debit card, I uninstalled that shit and never looked back.
These days, I run a combo of BitDefender and Emisoft Anti-Malware on Win 7 64 and manual-run-only version of Spybot. Emisoft in particular is a frighteningly effective malware shield. But I am completely non-loyal when it comes to AV programs. I buy a one year license and if I get stung during that year, out it goes.


Norton products were #1 in the market when I started here in '99 and we didn't have adverts like this back then, so what's you're explanation for that? Symantec didn't really start pushing the products until the last 5-6 years or so.

Yes I know that bigger isn't better, but Symantec has made strides to improve the product, and has accomplished that goal. Proven by the reviews and benchmark tests. And no I'm not biased. If it was shit, I'd be the first to say it was. I already admitted that I wouldn't touch the consumer products when I first started working here, what more do you want?

So let me get this straight, SON. You are blaming an AV software for your inadequacies? If you have "boatloads of PC experience" and have "forgotten more about PCs than most people know" you wouldn't get keyloggers on your system to begin with. I certainly have never had one on any of my systems. Guess you should stay away from warez, and games you download from torrent sites, eh? Because that's typically where they come from. Again, I have been using computers since '95 and I've had a total of 2 viruses, one from an ISP's installation floppy, and one that a roommate downloaded onto my system 2 years ago when I was at work which ended up to be a fake AV program or what I like to call extortionware. As Tymbrwulf said, you can't rely ONLY on AV, anti-spyware, and anti-malware products to protect your system, if you do you're a fool. It also takes common sense, OS patches, software patches, etc. Viruses/malware/spyware can, and do use vulnerabilities in OSes and installed software to infect a machine even though it has a 100% perfectly working AV software installed on it. But why am I telling you this? You're the computer expert you should already know this right?

"I hate stating the obvious because it's such a waste of time & effort", but there's no AV software that 100% effective. If you find one let me know because I can tell you it doesn't exist. As I said in a previous post, things will always get by AV software because they depend on customer submissions, and definitions in order to stop threats. They are REACTIVE not PROACTIVE. Which means if a new variant of an old threat, or a new threat altogether gets released in the wild. Guess what? You, or somebody else is going to get infected, period. Again, if you were the computer expert you claim to be you'd understand this fact. Also, if you seriously think that you will find an AV software that will protect you 100% from threats, you are in for a rude awakening my friend. I wish you good luck in your endeavors.

>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^shuac:
Agreed about Norton products sucking. In my 25 years as a PC enthusiast, I've tried all the AV products at one point or another and the New Orleans levy system had fewer breaches than Norton.

That's why it's the #1 selling Av product, because it sucks so much.


Yes, it's got a huge market share but not because it's an effective product. It's simply marketed well (this commercial for instance). And how much did it cost to produce this commercial? Those funds could have been used to make a better product, no? You see, son, maintaining/increasing market share is the important thing when you're as big as Norton, not program effectiveness.

I hate stating the obvious because it's such a waste of time & effort...but biggest does not mean best. I mean, duh. And aren't you just a tad biased, being a Norton employee? I have boatloads of PC experience. I've forgotten more about PCs than most people know and in my experience, Norton is a mediocre anti-virus/anti-malware shield.

Yes, I've used them recently. When you guys started using disc imaging tech for your install routines back in 2006-2007 (I may have the year wrong but you know what I mean), I figured I'd give you another try. Damn, it really did install the quickest I'd ever seen, I gotta give you that. But within the year, I found a fucking keylogger happily recording all my keystrokes. Seems to have slipped between the tightly-machined cracks of the #1 selling AV product. Well done. After changing all my passwords and getting a new debit card, I uninstalled that shit and never looked back.

These days, I run a combo of BitDefender and Emisoft Anti-Malware on Win 7 64 and manual-run-only version of Spybot. Emisoft in particular is a frighteningly effective malware shield. But I am completely non-loyal when it comes to AV programs. I buy a one year license and if I get stung during that year, out it goes.

>> ^rottenseed:

Let me retell what really happened so that nobody thinks that pinky has magical "hemophilia" smelling capabilities.
Bees come.
Boy gets stung.
Dog sees bees and tries to play with them/eat them (cuz that's what dogs do).
Boy runs in house.
Leaves the dog that inadvertently saved his life for dead.


This is quite literally the dumbest news story I've seen in a few months. Can I vote myself off this fucking planet?