search results matching tag: Zoom

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (183)     Sift Talk (11)     Blogs (31)     Comments (769)   

No One Noticed Hawaiian Shirt Worn on 264 Zoom Calls

newtboy (Member Profile)

ant says...

I had to zoom in to see where it was earlier.

newtboy said:

Yes...yes it is. My mistake. I thought the guy rowing was playing a sit on motorcycle game on my 10" screen, and only saw the bench press at full zoom. D'oh!

So...Maybe they're meatheads and picking things up and putting them down is more exciting than nature to them under any circumstances?

ant (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Yes...yes it is. My mistake. I thought the guy rowing was playing a sit on motorcycle game on my 10" screen, and only saw the bench press at full zoom. D'oh!

So...Maybe they're meatheads and picking things up and putting them down is more exciting than nature to them under any circumstances?

ant said:

Isn't that a gym?

Tetris snow

ant (Member Profile)

RNC 2020 & Kenosha: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

eoe says...

Woo boy, this is a doozy! The fact of the matter is a video comment section is not the place to have this conversation. There's too much to discuss, too many questions from one another that are best asked soon after they're conceived, etc. I frankly just don't have the time to respond to everything you said. Don't take this as acquiescence; if you'd like to have a Zoom chat some time, I'd be down.

In any event, I'll respond to what I find either the most important or at least most interesting:

Having theories is definitely the best way to go about most of the things you consider fact (for the moment), but the fact of the matter (no pun intended) is that at some point you'll need to use some of those claims as fact/belief in order to take action. And it's just human nature to, if one believes in a claim for long enough, it becomes fact, despite all your suggestions of objectivity. It's easy to say you're a scientist through and through, but if you're really someone who doesn't believe anything and merely theorize things, I think you'd be a sad human being. But that's a claim that I leave up to the scientists.

> Yes, and I eat animals because they're delicious.

You think that's a defensible moral claim? I find that disgraceful. If you truly think your own pleasure is worth sentient beings' lives then... I don't know what to say to you. That strikes me as callous and unempathetic, 2 traits you often assert as shameful. This is my point. You sound pretty obstinate to at least a reasonable claim. To respond with just "they're tasty". You don't sound reasonable to me.

> You may be correct, but eating meat is hardly the worst thing humans are up to.

Aw, come on @newtboy, I thought better of you than to give me a logical fallacy. The fact that you're resorting to logical fallacies wwould indicate to me that either you're confronting some cognitive dissonance, otherwise why would you stoop to such a weak statement?

> I gladly discuss vegetarianism with honest people, but I'm prepared when they start spouting bullshit like " eating any red meat is more harmful than smoking two packs a day of filterless cigarettes" ...

There is a lot of scientific research (not funded by Big ___) that is currently spouting this "bullshit". What happened to your receptive, scientific, theory-based lifestyle? It's true nutrition science is a fucking smog-filled night mare considering how much money is at stake, but I find it telling that a lot of the corporations are using the same ad men from Big Cigarette to stir up constant doubt.

Again, I find it peculiar that you are highly suspicious of big corporations... except when it comes to something that you want to be true.

Again, this is my point. Take a moment, take a few breaths, and look inside. Can you notice that you're acting in the exact same fashion as the people you purport to be obscenely stubborn?

Check out NutritionFacts if you want to see any of the science. Actual science. I would hope that it would give you at least somedoubt and curiosity.

That's a true scientist's homeostatic state: curiosity. Are you curious to investigate the dozens (hundreds?) of papers with a truly non-confirmation-biased mind? How much of a scientist are you?

> I've never met a vegan that wasn't a bold faced liar in support of veganism, so I'm less likely to give them a full chance at convincing me.

This, for me, raises all sorts of red flags. That's quite a sweeping claim.

> Again, that would be long held theories in my case, and it's not hard to change them. Mad cow disease got me to change until I was certain it wasn't in America. No, I'm not recoiling. I'll listen to anyone who's respectful and honest.

So, you're willing to make decisions based on self-interest and not morality? Well, duh. Everyone does that. It doesn't sound like you had a self-reflective moment. It sounds like you merely had a self-interested decision based on the risk to your own health.

And finally, all your talk about Bob -- of course he acts, consistently, like a twat. I just don't like feeding trolls. I don't think there's anyone on Videosift who's on the precipice and would be pushed over into the Alt-right Pit by Bob's ridiculous nonsense.

> Edit: in general I agree that dispassionate fact based replies with references are better at convincing people than derision, there are exceptions, and there are those who are unconvinceable and disinterested in facts that don't support their lies.

Ironically, I think science has disproved this. Facts don't change minds in situations like this. There are lots of articles on this. I didn't have the wherewithal to dig into their citations, but I leave that (non-confirmation-biased) adventure for you. [1]

---

I knew I wouldn't make this short, but I think it's shorter than it could have been.

Lastly, I'm with @BSR; I do appreciate your perseverance. Not everyone has as much as you seem to have! Whenever I see Bob... doing his thing, I can always be assured you'll take most of the words from my mouth. [2]

[1]
Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds | The New Yorker
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds

This Article Won’t Change Your Mind - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/this-article-wont-change-your-mind/519093/

Why People Ignore Facts | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/words-matter/201810/why-people-ignore-facts

Why Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201812/why-many-people-stubbornly-refuse-change-their-minds

Why Facts Don't Always Change Minds | Hidden Brain : NPR
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/743195213

[2] This comment has not been edited nor checked for spelling and grammatical errors. Haven't you got enough from me?

newtboy said:

If the remarks being contradicted are not only smug they're also ridiculous, devoid of fact, racist, and or dangerously stupid (like insisting in May that Coronavirus is a hoax that's not dangerous and is a "nothing burger", and everyone should be back at work), and contradicting them with facts and references and +- 1/4 the disrespect the original remarks contained makes people vote for Trump, that does indicate they were already trumpsters imo.

Edit: It's like Democrats have a high bar to clear, but Republicans have no depth too deep to stoop to.

Trump changes Bob's beliefs daily, every time he changes a position Bob changes his belief to make the new position seem reasonable to him. He is not consistent. No other opinion matters to him.

I don't hold beliefs, I have theories. It's easy to change your theory when given new information, I do all the time. Beliefs don't work that way, so I avoid them as much as possible.

Yes, and I eat animals because they're delicious. I would eat people if they were raised and fed better, but we are polluted beyond recovery imo.

You may be correct, but eating meat is hardly the worst thing humans are up to. Killing for sport seems worse, so do kill "shelters", puppy mills, habitat destruction, ocean acidification, etc....I could go on for pages with that list. I try to eat free range locally farmed on family farms meat, not factory farm meat. I know the difference in quality.

I gladly discuss vegetarianism with honest people, but I'm prepared when they start spouting bullshit like " eating any red meat is more harmful than smoking two packs a day of filterless cigarettes" (yes, someone insisted that was true because they didn't care it wasn't, it helped scare people, I contradicted him every time he lied.) The difference is, I could agree with some of their points that weren't gross exaggeration, I agreed that excessive meat eating is horrible for people, I agree that most meat is produced under horrific conditions, I would not agree that ALL meat is unhealthy in any amount and ALL meat is tortured it's entire lifetime because I know from personal experience that's just not true. We raised cattle, free range cattle, in the 70's. They were happy cows that had an enjoyable life roaming our ranch until the day they went to market, a life they wouldn't have if people didn't eat meat.

I've never met a vegan that wasn't a bold faced liar in support of veganism, so I'm less likely to give them a full chance at convincing me. The fact checking part of my brain goes on high alert when talking with them about health or other issues involved in meat production, with excellent reason.

Again, that would be long held theories in my case, and it's not hard to change them. Mad cow disease got me to change until I was certain it wasn't in America. No, I'm not recoiling. I'll listen to anyone who's respectful and honest.

Here's the thing, Bob consistently trolls in a condescending, self congratulatory, and bat shit crazy way. Turnabout is fair play.
As the only person willing to reply to him for long stretches, I know him. I've had many private conversations with him where he's far more reasonable, honest, willing to admit mistakes, etc. (Something I gave up when he applauded Trump lying under oath because "only a dummy tells the truth under oath if the truth might harm them, Trump winning!") When someone is so anti truth and snide, they deserve some snidely delivered truth in return. Bob has proven he's undeserving of the civility you want him to receive, it's never returned.

Bob does not take anything in from any source not pre approved by Trump. I've tried for a decade, and now know he only comes here to troll the libtards. It doesn't matter if you show him video proof and expert opinions, he'll ignore them and regurgitate more nonsense claiming the opposite of reality. He's not trying to change minds, in case you're confused. He's hoping to trick people who for whatever reason refuse to investigate his factless hyper biased claims and amplify the madness. That he comes here to do that, a site he regularly calls a pure liberal site (it's not) is proof enough to convict him of just trolling.

Trolls deserve derision.

I spent years ignoring his little jabs, insults, derisions, and whinging and trying hard to dispassionately contradict his false claims with pure facts and references, it was no different then.
While privately he would admit he's wrong, he would then publicly repeat the claims he had just admitted were bullshit. When he started supporting perjury from the highest position on earth down as long as they're Republican but still calls for life in prison for democrats that he thinks lied even not under oath, he lost any right to civil replies imo. He bought it when Republican representatives said publicly in interviews that they have no obligation to be truthful with the American people, and he applauds it and repeats their lies with glee.

Edit: in general I agree that dispassionate fact based replies with references are better at convincing people than derision, there are exceptions, and there are those who are unconvinceable and disinterested in facts that don't support their lies. How long are you capable of rebutting them with just fact and references when they are smug, snide, insulting, dangerous, and seriously delusional if not just purely dishonest?

Rebuttal?

Showerhead levitates

Doctor wears six face masks to debunk lack of oxygen myth

cloudballoon says...

For the alt-fact conspiracy believing nincompoops, I'm afraid this video is not good enough to convince them. They'll dispute the heck out of the video as a "fake setup."

I can think of:

1) Need to zoom out more so the sensor is clearly shown to be attached to the monitor at all time

2) no cutting out frames (speed up segments are OK?),

3) show the effect on the indicator's ### by not having the sensor attached to the finger (e.g. drops down to 00 or Error), and,

4) show the number by holding the breath (nostrils pinched & mouth closed) for an extended time to see it drops significantly as verification.

Home office fail underwear man hits the wall.

SFOGuy says...

I have been made aware of someone Zoom conferencing in their bedroom when their wife walked out naked after a shower and then hit the floor when she realized that the entire office was on the call.

And--on Wednesday, some one on a call I was on turned off their video and then---went, LOUDLY, to the bathroom and flushed the toilet.
lol

No one called them out.

ulysses1904 said:

Looks staged to me but I have ICS (Internet Cynicism Syndrome). Maybe she actually did fill half her webcam frame with the room behind her and he just sauntered in to fill that empty space. And maybe his slapstick staggering after running into the wall was real.

Forest Swords - Crow

Lawyer's Reaction to Carnage at Lafayette Square

BSR says...

I'm sure this guy has a lot good things to say but I can't handle the constant zoom in and zoom out after just about every friggin' sentence he speaks. It's like a cameraman trying to validate his own existence. Very annoying. I'd rather read the text version if there is one.

Bear cub climbs mountain to reunite with mama bear

helicopter dick

GOP Says Trump Was Joking as Damning Ukraine Texts Emerge

newtboy says...

So you didn't look? It's clear in the photo, and there are plenty of zoomed in versions that are unambiguous. Google image it.

Because being a speed addict explains all the other bat shit crazy shit he's done, and the 3am rambling rage tweeting, the manic paranoia, the inability to form a cogent thought, inappropriate anger, stubbornness, etc. It's not a bit trivial imo. It could be a great reason to insist on random drug testing for presidents.

There's also multiple recent reports that one of his doctors from the 89's-90's was convicted of overprescribing speed to his patients...a Dr feel good. The hippy doctor admitted he was a front, not his main doctor, and admitted he didn't write the medical opinion of Trump's health he produced, Trump did.

wtfcaniuse said:

Again, the drawer was chock full of Sudafed how? Why would you even comment on the possibility of him misusing Sudafed? Even if it was true it's trivial compared to other shit he's done.

Area 51 Raid:What happens, legally speaking? Real Law Review

BSR says...

I'm getting a reading of 16% joking. New batteries maybe?

The zoom-in, zoom-out between paragraphs is really annoying. Can't finish watching it.

That and he has a big nose.

newtboy said:

Millennials, don't listen to him. Just go, be aggressive, don't take "freeze or we'll shoot" for an answer. We need something to thin out your numbers and raise the collective IQ of America.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon