I can't wait until the day where the world comes to its senses and gives a big "F off" to charging stations and use the swapping battery tech that some manufacturers in China is trying to implement. It'll be as easy and quick as what we do filling up a tank now. Maybe even faster and you don't even have to get off your car with the advent of robotics.



https://www.wired.com/story/china-ev-infrastructure-charging/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-24/battery-swapping-for-evs-is-big-in-china-here-s-how-it-works?leadSource=uverify%20wall

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a33670482/nio-swappable-batteries-lease/

It's amazing to us now, in this era of technology, that back around the advent of high-speed communications that would ever be considered news.

1) Definitely - but without a market improvements fall flat and dont stick. Ancient people had a lot of good ideas but overall progress was really slow and retrograded often until.. well until capitalism became a thing. Abolishing serfdom, general civil rights, separation of church from state and the fall of absolutism made the Iphone possible.

2) No, that is my point. People "discover" things all the time, some of these things are deemed useful by the general public and capitalism provides the tools to finance production and distribution (the profit part is optional - it is entirely legal to sell your invention for any price or indeed give it away for free).

So to get to the original point capitalism did not discover or design the Iphone but it certainly MADE the Iphone.

3) Not impossible but incredibly slow. Generations lived out their entire lives without perceptible changes in their environments prior to the onslaught of capitalism and the industrial revolution. The advent of science from the renaissance onwards was OK, but only once factories and transport infrastructure became a thing did living conditions start to change for everyone.

A big problem with free markets is that they are never really "free". A theoretical free market implies too many things that dont ever happen in real life, like everyone having all relevant information and being able to make a good decision. People just dont do that IRL.

Also not everything can be solved by free markets because you cant just let your neighbors die poor because the market says they deserve it. However the Iphone is really not something the state should subsidize. I understand that it paid for some of the technology that went into designing it. But true socialism would have to make sure everyone could afford one, and would design a cheap bad phone to fit the need.

"In the summer of 1935, C.J. "Johnny" Baker and H. Muir staked the original 21 "Giant" claims for Bear Exploration Company. The claims were on Great Slave Lake's Back Bay and along what is now the historic Ingraham Trail.

By 1937, Yellowknife Gold Mines Ltd. acquired Burwash's assets. From these, the subsidiary Giant Yellowknife Gold Mines Ltd was created. The company fell on hard times and by 1940, operations eventually came to a standstill. Frobisher Explorations took over the site in 1943. However, the advent of World War II halted the operation once again. Gold was not a priority in times of war, and there was a shortage of men to work the site.

Soon after the war ended, Giant Mine officially opened, and production moved into full swing. The first gold brick was poured on June 3, 1948.

From May to December 1948, the mine produced 8,152 ounces of gold from 49,985 tonnes of ore. With the nearby Con Mine also operating, Yellowknife was experiencing the rapid growth associated with a booming mining industry.

Those original claims would lead to the production of seven million ounces of gold and one of the longest continuous gold mining operations in Canadian mining history; however, they also led to a legacy of contamination."

http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100027388/1100100027390

That's funny. Not referring to your shit joke but your poor ability in making it. Lol. Yeah, not me, or my dog.

Fantomas pointed out the location before I did (hello fellow Australian!).

BTW, I used to be a paramedic. I've scrapped lots of people up off of the road (alive and dead) from this sort of small driver error. This is just one of the reasons I'm happy about the advent of driverless cars.

Is road safety funny to you?

I can't understand the "assault rifle" thing. It's already illegal to have a fully automatic without a special license, and any semi-auto gun fires one bullet per trigger pull. What difference does it make what the gun looks like if they all work the same?

Gee, there's a surprise...mo guns=mo gun problems. Who knew?

The "they protect us from our government" argument has been ridiculous since the advent of mechanized warfare. Your rifle can't stop their F-16. Just ask the Syrians.

It's not the cash that the NRA spends lobbying that their power comes from, it's the willingness of their members to jump when they say "jump". Their political power comes from the ability to push politicians out of power through voting, not cash.

The AR-15 is a red herring. My Ruger .22 can shoot well over 45 rounds per minute, as can almost any semi-auto rifle. It's the clip size that makes a difference. If you have to reload after every 10 shots, you simply can't shoot 45 rounds in a minute. I just don't get the outrage over guns that OPERATE exactly the same as nearly all other guns. Either these people simply don't understand guns at all, or they're total liars and they're trying to 'trick' us into banning all semi-auto firearms.

They are almost always relieved or suspended, at least while the investigation is in process. Once the initial furor blows over, they are either quietly put back on duty or sometimes fired. Since most departments don't bother to blacklist them, they will simply find another place to be a cop.

Just like the two cops who killed the kid with the fake airsoft gun (Tamir Rice) both had prior incidents that, in any normal job would have prevented them from working in that field ever again. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Tamir_Rice and read the background of the officers. Both had incidents that should have made them unsuitable for duty, but they both were able to continue working and then were let off the hook by a grand jury after the shoo...murder of Rice. Since they were acquitted, the wonderful police unions mean they get to stay cops.

Now you tell me another field of employment that gets away with this. You might say the military, but generally if you screw up badly they will make you go away. There might be a cover up, but you are going to be kicked out, court martialed, or put in a dead end place where you will never advance out of nor have authority to make any important decisions. Politics is close, but if you aren't super high up in the food chain you will pay for it as well. Police, though, they will walk 99% of the time. Even the officer who shot the teen here in Austin that was wandering around naked and threatening people, he was only fired and this town is one of the most liberal towns in the USA. We've already established that a lot of police forces don't even bother checking with previous employers, so I expect he will be able to go someplace else and be a cop again.

The most fun thing? This has been going on for decades, hell, probably a couple of centuries. Only since the advent of video recording technology that was easily portable have we been shown the true nature of the beast. But, and forgive me as I can't find the exact quote, someone said something along the lines of that the majority of the public will forget anything in six weeks. Over and over we seem to prove that as we keep letting these people get away with impunity.

I liked the video too, but when he got to this part of the explanation, I wondered why I never heard it before.

Also remember that Einstein came up with special theory of relativity without the advent of quantum mechanics (btw, he didn't like Q.M. and couldn't believe that "God rolls the dice", and was later proven wrong (decades after he died though)).

You can easily tune a piano in just temperement (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_intonation), but for one key only - it would sound rubbish in all other keys (some more than others), and thus you wouldn't be able to change keys during the song. The advent of equal temperement meant that you can change the key as you play, which is a major advantage.

Tuning a piano in equal temperement is to tune each string "absolutely", each being slightly off. If you want a just intonation in all keys absolutely in many different keys at once, you'd have to change the tuning or the strings every time you change the key during the song.

The problem is not a lack of technology, the problem is rather that it is a mathematical impossibility.

Hey! I'm a piano tuner by trade! Awesome to see this on the sift!

Check out this website if you want to delve deeper into this stuff: http://www.rollingball.com/TemperamentsFrames.htm

Essentially, back in the day, each key (talking Cmajor/Cminor, Dmajor/Dminor, etc.) had intervals that were tuned a little differently and so each key had it's own character and the more sharps and flats the key had the crazier it sounded (and the less it was used!). Under the section "Key Color" it shows you what kind of character the key had be it sad or happy. pretty interesting stuff!

Not until the advent of piano analysis was equal temperament possible. So in equal temperament every key is acceptable to play in albeit all slightly out of tune.

This further goes into why barbershop harmony (or all acapella music, really) is so interesting because it and its overtones are not bound by any temperament.

The suffragettes weren't feminists. If you want to honour the beginnings of the modern push for sex equality, then you owe your allegiance to such thinkers as John Locke, Jeremy Bentham and JS Mill - none of whom was a feminist. The entire first wave of feminism is a revisionist fiction.

This is on a par with the hideous christian impulse to annex and purloin all good behaviour into itself - "christian driver", "do the christian thing", "christian decency". So too, feminism appropriates every historical social advance in order to declare that, axiomatically, all female freedom ultimately derives from its doctrine, without which women would be slaves of the constantly threatening patriarchy.

In reality feminism is a phenomenon of the sixties - that's the nineteen sixties - with roots stretching back no more than a decade or two; which did a substantial amount of useful work in spite of its many aesthetic and ideological flaws, and which has now essentially petered out to be supplanted by, god help us, the advent of the filthy third wave and its hordes of ranting SJWs.

They also considered ducking and covering and building bomb shelters in one's backyard an adequate deterrent to atomic fallout before the advent of not believing everything you hear and see on television or what you're told in school.

Not too much has changed...

No Jigga, you are wrong as well. The people who filmed this wish only to expose the rampant encroachment of the police into every aspect of civil society. The advent of technology in the hands of most people and the increasing awareness of the growing police state worldwide is one of the many stopgaps to a bleak future of decreased human rights and control of humanity by a small majority of agenda-oriented tyrants.

As far as police 'turning into' shitbag assholes? NO. Again you are wrong and completely clueless as tho the psychological profiling that goes on in the process towards someone becoming a 'law enforcement' dickbag.

Alpha types with low intellect and questionable imprint and socialization. Many come from abusive homes or generations of law enforcement. Many in the U.S. are members of or are sympathetic to, the clan and other such organizations or fraternities. MOST are racist, sexist, etc. Many police, were they not accepted into academies of sanctioned thugs would become criminals. Some were very close to becoming gang members, petty criminals, etc.

They dredge from the damaged-goods of society to fill their ranks, and this only gets worse as people like you, and others detached from what really goes on, continue to come the defense of force as a means to control society.

Cops definitely don't need any help form a deluded general public to grow in ranks or develop new and improved ways to exercise force as an arm of those who would control society to their ends.

I can do this all fucking day long, and there will still be the voices of insipid dullards who have by choice, drunk the Kool Aide of "give a fuck as long as I have my MTV."

If you'd have a " bad attitude too if someone was heckling me for my entire career," chances are good you'd make an excellent state thug or sympathizer to the cause of safety over freedom.

Your argument is pathetic and week.

I never argued that one side was "good" but then again, I despise moral abstracts such as good and evil because they simply are not accurate, quantifiable descriptions, and are often used to manipulate emotions.

One side is harmful...the other side is less harmful.

If you can come up with a better system, more power to you, but when you have a situation like this, you don't throw out the whole system, you get rid of the part of it that is causing the most harm and re-evaluate

Even though I think parties should be abolished, you can't stop people from peaceably assembling and picking people that they support. All you can do is stop officially recognizing them and disband any organization like the DNC/RNC or any lobbying group as lobbying needs to be abolished as well. with the advent of the internet and email, ANYONE can communicate with their congressperson easily and get their point across. Lobbying is obsolete as well as corrupt.

We've got to get rid of the private money in our political system

hates the very idea of compromise?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


I have to admit I actually liked the Advent Rising game that was written by Card (despite its many flaws) And every once in a while I get the urge to read Ender's Game and his other works, but then I heard nuttery like this and it just kills any interest in his books for me even though his books and his political leanings are two different things.