While it would be cool, it would be rather difficult to execute.
Weight is a huge deal in these things, and adding weapons would detract from speed.
Altered reality would be very cool with an OSD, but I think that may be a little ways away yet.
Now bumping and grinding happens all the time. Multiple times I've seen quads come up from under another quad and send it spinning.
Most of the times pilots have trouble even finishing the maximum number of laps they can get before they crash. Hell a good number never make it through lap one. Also the crashes never look good through the goggles. An outside view is best. I've see quads hit a pole and shoot 150 feet in the air, spinning the whole way, only to explode in pieces when the hit about 100 yards down range. It was awesome. But from the goggles it just looked like you were inside a spinning top (A blur).

@radx @enoch @eric3579

For one thing, give the executive or legislative power over the printing press in a crisis and they will not willingly give that power up and end up abusing it. For another, if you're simply printing money to spend then you depreciate and inflate your currency commensurately, at least in the long term. Relying heavily on this is the kind of thing that Venezuela does. There's a reason that governments instead take on their fiscal spending as debt. On that I would say, I've also become much more skeptical of fiscal stimulus in general but particularly in corrections or recessions. I'm okay with automatic stabilizers (unemployment benefits, the largely limitless kind with strings attached we have here in Australia) but not so much direct fiscal stimulus.

The fundamental issue to me is large, even extremely large fiscal spending will not affect business confidence levels of economic conditions. There is some fiscal multiplier effects (the multiple of the effect on national income over the spending injection by the government) but the worse economic conditions are, the lower this will be. Also, yes with say infrastructure spending, you're creating immediate jobs. Problem is these are in no way permanent jobs and simply pushes the can down the road on them finding new employment. Better to provide unemployment benefits and training to get them into a more permanent job faster.

Also large bouts of spending (again to use infrastructure as an example) tends to be hugely wasteful. Good projects require appraisals, consultation and careful planning. The notion of handfuls of 'shovel ready' projects is a political myth. You can instead span it out but then you don't get the mooted fiscal boost. In fact I would argue infrastructure spending is never appropriate as fiscal stimulus. It should be in a constant, planned process of improvement irrespective of business cycles or downturns. The US stimulus under Obama was largely long term spending projects like this as giveaways to the states. There is little evidence it eased the recovery or altered behaviour though. Many states simply enacted the same civic projects they would have otherwise and used this money instead of issuing debt like they would have otherwise - effectively they saved on interest.

So what are the alternatives then? The government here in Australia also heavily spent on roads, home subsidies and schools but notably also gave all income earners a cash deposit of AUD $300-950. The latter is probably the closest you can get to a pure fiscal stimulus - immediately cash to spend, injected not into banks than might save it but given particularly to low / medium income earners most likely to spend it. Again what we saw is that it hardly altered consumer / household behaviour. Many saved it, many spent it on large one off purchases (e.g. TVs, in which case most of that value was transferred overseas). So we gave a dollop of cash as stimulus to the global economy of which Australia is a drop in the ocean. Basically my attitude is, if you maintain good infrastructure, effective education systems, adequate but efficient regulation, reasonable tax rates, and importantly competitive markets, the best way to get through a crisis is to let the market stabilize by itself. Provide assistance and retraining to workers who lose their jobs by all means, but don't expect government spending to be some kind of savior.

I agree on the inflation aspect of your post. There were certainly no shortage of self-declared monetarists buying up gold in anticipation of high inflation, but as you say dollops of cash in the economy are meaningless if they are idle and the economy under capacity. The question now with unemployment in the US at 5.5% whether capacity is finally pushing LRAS levels. Probably not, participation rate is low and falling, and the unemployment rate is woefully underrepresenting forced part timers. Also as you mention the dip in oil will temper prices on the input cost side. The Fed certainly seems to think so and has started tightening rates but as so much commentary in the investing world is saying, this may turn out to be a mistake and they may end up having to reverse course.

I would argue that automation still isn't the job killer #1. Plain old political decisions, such as sound finance, deficit hawkery, and austerity lead by a mile in this category. Neither is being addressed properly, but I find it hard to focus on the employment effects of automation when the Eurozone, for instance, runs at >10% unemployment strictly due to policies enacted by (non-)elected officials. We don't need technology to cause mass unemployment, humans can do that all on their own.

Additionally, even the amount of work available is a matter of perspective. Within the current system, the number of jobs with a decent salary is already dwarfed by the number of people looking for one. The amount of work to be done, on the other hand, is not.

Case in point: our (read: German) national railroad company is short-staffed by about 80.000-100.000 people, last I checked; our healthcare system is short-staffed by at least 200.000 people, probably a lot more; law enforcement is short by about 50.000; education is short by at least 20.000. Let's not even talk about infrastructure or ecological maintenance/regeneration. These are not open positions though, because nobody is willing/able to pay the bill.

So while I agree that we should be discussing how to deal with technological change, a more pressing matter is either to alter the system or to at least take back control over the vast sums of dead currency floating around in the financial nirvana or on Stephen Schwarzman's bank accounts. First stop: full employment. Then, gradually, guaranteed basic income when automation does, in fact, cause mass unemployment.

Finally, I don't think automation will do as quick as sweep as some presume. The quality of software in commercial machines is quite absymal in many cases, since it was written in the normal fashion: do it now, do it quickly, here's five bucks. Efficiency improvements generally come at the price of QA, and it shows. Europe's most modern railway control center is nearby, and it never went online -- Bombardier cut corners and never had the proper railway expertise to begin with. Meanwhile, the center build in '53 is working just fine, and so are the switches put in place when Wilhelm II was running the show.

Edit: That said, I'm thrilled to see mind-numbing labour being replaced by machines. Can't happen quickly enough.

Interesting.
I'll be consistent and say yes, it's "fair" that she lost her job, as it's clear that her employers have an often stated interest in her reproductive system and firm rules on how it may or may not be altered, as a part of their faith, and properly following that faith is essential for being a good teacher...in their eyes. That means that having artificial insemination makes her a bad roll model, and being a near perfect roll model is a major part of the job.
EDIT: I wonder who ratted her out? She DID have a right to keep her personal medical information private, and those with access have a legal obligation to keep it private as well, so she DID get ratted on.

Also interesting was your comment/position there, which seemed to mirror mine here. In part, you said....
" Freedom cuts both ways, you're free to do what you want..but if you don't act within some semblance of societal norms and what is considered decent, no one is going to want to be around you or work with you. "
The business not wanting to work with him is what happened here, but now you seem to take issue with that, and you take serious issue with others boycotting the company (which didn't actually happen here, but you've been complaining that it did) while back then you seemed to be celebrating it. What changed besides the reason someone lost their job?

http://www.livescience.com/16287-mushrooms-alter-personality-long-term.html

interesting read.
they are finally researching the therapeutic benefits of psychedelics.
so when newt talks about possible permanent damage,this is what i think he is referring.

*quality Tweaks [and thank YOU @eric3579]

In doing so did you change any settings that might prohibit the PP video from playing on my homepage?

Altered mind is befuddled.

She's quite good.

It's essentially a popular music competition. Opera does not fall into that category anymore. An entirely unfortunate turn of events really. So no surprise that the other two don't think they can do anything with her.

The original movie version was sung without digital alteration, but the on screen actress was miming.

The original song, Il dolce suono, from the opera Lucia di Lammermoor, is much nicer without the pop ending from the movie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLJHmtQo_kQ

Do you know if we can alter a vimeo embed to start the video at a particular point?

Wow, what dribbly b-ball.

By this logic, you and your alter ego lantern shouldn't have any rights on Videosift.

Out of hundreds of accounts, there are only like 5 of you that consistently say..

Ignorant, bigoted, racist, jingoistic bullshit that added absolutely NOTHING to the discussion.

The majority of us should just petition Lucky or Dag to revoke your privileges and replaced that nice fat "P" next to your username.

But instead of probie.. it would stand for something more appropriate for you..

Prickface.. perhaps.

p.s. -
sound out the big words and double check if you get confused

@947bis - that nearly brought a tear to my eye and explains EXACTLY why i was disappointed with Fallout 3. Or better to say, disappointed that it was given the label of Fallout instead of something like "Post Apocalyptic RPG".

FO3 had no subtlety. Sometimes you'd make decisions in Fallout 1&2 that you'd not even realised you'd made. Or chosen a dialogue option that you had no idea would affect how the game played out. There were multiple options to solve "quests" (there was no formal quest log) that would significantly alter the state of the rest of the game - what bases and equipment you had access to, and how you could ultimately finish the game. You could sneak into places, or disguise yourself and walk in, lie your way past NPCs, demolish your way in, then ultimately sabotage their base or fix it for them, ruin a gang's drug and slave trade, have sex with a crime boss's wife (or daughter if you preferred) and rob their safe before sneaking or shooting your way back out - and then the rival family would love you! It's as though the money they saved on not having voice actors for *every* NPC or graphical wizardry was spent on designing interesting, intertwined and thoughtful characters and situations, which were more fulfilling despite being a text only deal.

Fallout had so much character and charm and personality... It was genuinely funny and involved - in every area there would be many storylines that could affect each other directly and change the story, or change your reputation in the wasteland and affect your options elsewhere. FO3 feels cold and dead by comparison. In FO3, the decisions you make give the illusion of depth, when in actual fact only a small number of "decisions" affected the game at all, and even then, the consequences were not surprising or not impactful to the same degree.

God, i wish i could bottle the feeling of playing Fallout 1&2 back in the day.. i wish i could explain it to you young whippersnappers!

What if it's done as a health issue? Shaking hands is a major disease vector, and if altering that social behavior just slightly can help us all stay safer, isn't that worth it?
I only fist bump these days. I'm not quite at Howie Mandel level, but I understand him. I always feel that if I'm going to shake your hand, I might as well go ahead and just give you a hug (and probably a pat on the back too), no?
But maybe that's just weird old me. ;-)

The most poignant comment is asking why everything in america is so sweet.

It's because they put chemically altered sugar in *everything* and most people are completely and hopelessly addicted to it.

The funny thing is, with those increases sugars we've lost a lot of the taste of food. But then again you don't go out to a nation-wide food chain for 'flavor' do you?

While its true i don't think anyone has taken the high minded approach of altering someones name to include an insult fitting their preferred narrative, I'm not certain not sharing your opinion qualifies as being an asshat.

I'm curious, you spoke at length about Sarkeesian's motives and her opinions. I believe i'd heard of her before today, but know very little about her politics or organization.

I find it very strange that someone who, apparently, has such well known view points would be who this woman reached out to for help. And then having not received satisfaction from this complete stranger, who according to you holds her and her profession in very low regard, is completely outraged. I find that very strange.

Personally, i think whats being missed in this is how the media handles it. This apparently happened a few months past, arrests have been made and the prosecution seems to be going forward. I'm somewhat shocked that this incident seems to completely be ignored by the media.

A nun was brutally rapped in India recently and its literally on the front page of ever major news organization in the world. Its a horrifying crime, beyond me to describe.

Another woman, an adult film actress is raped repeatedly in front of her terrorized family and there wasn't even a blip...

replying here to avoid hijacking another thread...but leaving it public in case others might be interested in my reasoning, or yours.

Perhaps at times he has advocated responsible use, but often (like this instance) it's nothing more than 'DMT is what you all need, take some'.

I also agree, some people may benefit from psychedelics...but some may have disastrous experiences that end in death or permanent brain damage, especially when not done with pharmaceutical grade substances (which is never mentioned here). You never know what you have on the black market, video's I've seen of testing being done on drugs bought at 'raves' and concerts showed that well over 50% were not what they were supposed to be, or had dangerous adulterants. Unless you pay for testing, you don't know what you've got (sometimes true even with pharmaceuticals, sadly).

I also see it that way, as proselytizing for a drug that can have life altering effects, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. That always leaves out the dangers and usually any warning on how to be 'safe' at all, which leaves some readers thinking there are no dangers. That's my main issue, if there was a clear warning with each advocating instance, I wouldn't complain (but might still disagree that it's good for all).

My point exactly, people are made differently and what works for one may destroy another. That's why blanketly advocating strong drugs is a problem for me.

I have a healthy respect for psychedelics and their effects, especially one's as strong as DMT, which is why I'm disturbed at the off hand, blanket promotion of taking them without clear warnings included.

Ken Kesey beat you to the cult of acid by what, 47 years or so, at least according to Tom Wolfe. (Electric koolaid acid test)

Sorry, one more detail; the newspaper story. Ferry altered course to port (left) to try and dodge but there was a reef/rocks and she couldn't move much more---
Had to stop and assist the rather clueless sailors.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/northern-beaches/sailboat-hits-queenscliff-ferry-as-end-of-summer-storm-lashes-harbour/story-fngr8hax-12272
44849376