He drifts in and out of vocal character and his facial expressions need serious work, but damn funny jokes! I thoroughly enjoyed Walken Vader breaking the fourth wall on the Han/Greedo controversy. If he analyzed each syllable and practiced some more, I bet he could be a master of the Walken side of the Force.

I found one thing extremely interesting in *2* separate interviews with Assange when he was asked whether or not there was any Russian involvement -- including the one with Hannity shown early in the video here:

Hannity: Did Russia give you this information? Or anyone associated with Russia?
Assange: Our source is not a state party.

Very close to verbatim that exchange appeared in a print interview a week or two ago. The resulting headlines: "Assange denies Russian Involvement in the Leaks", etc.

But look at that answer. It is very carefully worded, but it doesn't directly answer the question. "Our source is not a state party" doesn't rule out that the source is Russian. It sort of rules out a source with known associations with the government (of Russia or anywhere else), but it could be an independent / private individual at face value that got the information from state parties.

I find it odd that nobody (as far as I've seen) has brought up that carefully worded answer, when it stuck out like a sore thumb to me the first time I saw it in print.


That being said, I 100% agree with Greenwald when he suggests that accusations are not proof. And the CIA and other agencies have a massive track record of shady dealings done in the name of "national security", as defined by whoever is in charge. Taking them at their word seems pretty hopelessly naive at this point.


But beyond all of that, I honestly don't care who did the hacking and what their motivations were. The government seems happy to record and analyze everything we say and do, and to claim that people like Edward Snowden are traitors for simply telling us about it. Well, get used to some of your own goddamn medicine. If you are running for public office, you should expect that your rights to privacy are going to be challenged much more strongly than those of Joe Average. You're a person of interest -- for pretty legitimate reasons.

Assume that absolutely everything you've ever said on the record (and lots OFF the record) is going to be gone over with a fine-toothed comb. If you've got any skeletons in your closet, expect that there is a good chance they will get exposed. And probably at the worst possible time.

What should both parties take away from this? Gee, it might be a good idea to choose candidates that can stand up to at least a basic level of scrutiny. Backing slimy weasels that look great and charismatic after a quick once-over might come back to bite you in the ass.

videosift.com is advertising 2600:3c00::f03c:91ff:fe70:f3af as its IPv6 address. However, that address is not listening on 443. So either don't advertise IPv6 or enable ssl on it.

Additionally, your current configuration supports SSLv3 protocol, which is old and insecure and should be disabled. And some other sub-optimal settings.
Check out https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=videosift.com
Consider updating your OpenSSL library and configuring nginx as shown at https://cipherli.st/

And please make sure you have some sort of automated way to renew letsencrypt cert since it's only for 3 months.

I almost agree, except for the timing part and the public disclosure of yet to be read 'evidence' in an open investigation which appears to be purely politically motivated.
What about the fact that they've had these emails for weeks, if not longer, but waited until it would have maximum effect on the election to inform congress (and therefore the public), against the direction of the D.O.J. that warned against notifying congress of this mid investigation 'development' (which likely is nothing more than normal work emails to her assistant, something that could be determined in a single hour if they just READ them), or the fact that they insist they can't tell if there's anything improper before the election, creating this false question about her criminality.
What about the public disclosure of yet to be analyzed evidence that likely is nothing, but the disclosure without analysis reopens a question in the minds of many voters, a question that's been answered repeatedly by numerous thorough investigations with no criminal act found by any of them?
To me, the timing and abnormal public disclosures of non-information are clearly politically motivated efforts by the FBI director to harm her candidacy, something that's undeniably wrong and a horrific precedent to set.

@newtboy
There's also absolutely no measure of the aquifer itself, how it moves, mixes, flows, etc. The system is mostly unmapped.

Fortunately that's not entirely true. If you go check out the wiki article, it has a lot of links on a lot of mapping that has been done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floridan_aquifer#Hydrology_and_Geology
Most relevant to trying to analyze things, the graphic below is a mapping of the normal water flow within the aquifer based off of testing from about 1,500 different locations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floridan_aquifer#/media/File:Estimated_transmissivity_of_the_Floridan_aquifer_sytem.png

The Mosaic leak occurred somewhere inland from Tampa as close as I can find, if you can narrow that down it'd help. On the map that looks like good news though because that region shows upwards of 100,000 m^3 of water flow per day. So very good mixing for the quantity of leak being discussed if it falls there.

And you didn't address the orange problem.
That's because there isn't one. Radon doesn't work like lead or mercury, it's a gas and doesn't build up in irrigation or the food chain. It bleeds off very fast, irrigation systems bleed it almost instantly into the atmosphere. In animals and meat bags like us, the references I've found suggest the average time from consumption to release is about an hour so we don't hold onto Radon long. Again reason for optimism imo.

These things always interest me, because I have such a high form of self health anxiety that I am constantly analyzing myself. I see this, and it is the same with diabetics who are functional but unaware anything is wrong when going into low sugar shock, and I cannot imagine this ever happening to me. If the slightest thing was off, my brain would be all over myself.

I don't drink much because of this, if I get even a little drunk my brain starts spending an enormous amount of concentration to correct for the impairment. Its for the best I guess.

Absolutely the officer should be charged. I think it's a huge disservice to everybody that these things are so often dealt with behind closed doors. It breeds contempt and distrust, and it eliminates an important opportunity for the public to understand some of the issues inherent in policing, and it seems to let horrible crimes go largely unaddressed.

But 'triple cuffed' can only mean a daisy chain of cuffs. Nothing else makes any sense, and to do so means that they are making some kind of attempt to accommodate the comfort of the individual during the cuffing. Or do you think it means having 3 sets of hand cuffs individually applied to your wrists? Come on... Doesn't excuse the cuffing of the guy, obviously, but thinking that triple cuffing is some heinous extreme version of cuffing is absurd.

You acknowledge that he had bad aim, and that the majority of shots missed the intended target, whichever target that was. You acknowledge that poor leadership, training, and protocol may have contributed to this outcome, but then you make the leap that because these this incompetency, it must have been intentional. It simply doesn't follow. You might ask them to be held responsible, but it doesn't mean it was the intent.

Saying 'I don't know' in the immediate aftermath of a charged situation where you are just coming to realize you made a huge mistake and nearly killed an innocent seems reasonable. It does not mean 'I meant to kill you and missed." It seems to indicate a state of confusion or shock.

I heard absolutely no reference to any time frame, or them preventing medical assistance for more than 15 minutes. I'll just remain agnostic on that angle.

I'm no lawyer, but I would have thought that intent combined with action was the very core of attempted murder. Murder is all about intent, and attempted is all about action. Attempted manslaughter of some degree seems the most realistic charge to make, but that's up to people that better know the law, and are willing to spend hundreds of hours analyzing the situation.

A huge problem with the system is the way that justice is delayed for so long (assuming it is ever meted out). People want instant karma, immediate redress for wrongs committed. People see something, get heated, and feel that a strong reaction is called for in the moment. The system on the other hand is meant to be about dispassionate discussion of the details of the situation, and can take a long time to play out. This is a big part of why it seems so reprehensible when it's carried out behind closed doors; it looks like it's being swept under the carpet. Similarly this is why media coverage over sensationalizes crime. But that's a discussion for another day.

Anyways, I've already typed too much about this I think.

I think we can agree that in the early ages of Islam it was very promising. Math, medicine, etc, all came from there.
That doesnt change how its interpreted today, and they even say themselves publicly that the Hadithes are more important than the Koran, because they show Muslims how to live Islam, yet they dont live after the things you mentioned for example. And honestly, I find the Hadithes much worse than the Koran, but both together make it very logical how Muslims act.
I never understood it before. For example I tried to make friends with a lot of them, even my dentist was one, but I never got really close to them. They never let me. Until I realized how disrespectful and insulting they talk about me and other "unbelievers", after I learned some Turkish and Arab words. And even still then for a long time after I thought "Its just these guys", but more and more experience with others, analyzing how they treat not only me, but all these "unbelievers" and ultimately the study of those writings was like a revelation. I was shocked, to put it mildly. It all fits together. Everything.

The warplane is designed to kill, but who is it killing - is it killing an evil dictator in order to save innocents? It might be on a peace keeping mission to discourage any killing. If it the warplane is killing only people who would otherwise be killing the innocent, then it's a tool used for good, it's saving more lives than it's taking, and more importantly it's saving lives that are more important to maintaining a civilized society.
I'd even say that it would be less moral to not build the warplane and let innocents die through inaction, when the consequences are well known.

Even further down the chain, killing isn't inherently bad, there are plenty justifiable reasons to kill someone.

It's the same with veganism -making choices which are less harmful, not necessarily perfect.


Non smokers are definitely way better people than smokers. Especially given that 2nd and even 3rd hand smoke causes cancer. Even if smoking only harmed the smoker, it's still a strange idea to be harming yourself. Perhaps they lack the appreciation of how lucky they are to be alive. I mean the odds of being born are like winning the lotto, let alone being born healthy, being born in this day and age, in a civilized country, being born to the dominate species, being born on the only planet that seems to have developed life. Some people have rough starts to life, but harming themselves isn't going to make it better, just shorter.


I agree that everyone is capable of making good moral stances, you've obviously drawn the line somewhere (otherwise you'd be going all Genghis Khan on everyone). But where the line is drawn is tends to be influenced a lot by misleading information and lack of information. And that makes it very hard to make logically sound choices. It's even harder when in order to understand the real impact means having to watch footage of animal cruelty. Most people find it confronting and uncomfortable at best, so it's easier to put it away, not think about it and continue consuming.

I know most people are moral, but if they don't act on it, it doesn't mean much to the puppies being strayed in the eyes with chemicals, or to the piglets being slammed into the concrete floor for the crime of being born male.


Regardless of how you categorize it, analyze it, or philosophize it, this always remains true: Animals feel and respond to pain, they will do their best to avoid suffering, and they have a will to live.

Yeah. And.... that many women on the council? And a woman with her own comedy show analyzing current events?

It gives me the warm tingles!

Thanks for the promote.

Nice! Didn't think someone would be analyzing/commenting on intros. I don't typically pay too much attention to intros, but I thought this one really creative and aesthetically pleasing.

Not to mention really setting the mood for the show itself.

What's the difference between a pet pig and a livestock pig though?
They both want blankets and cookies. Or at the very least neither of them wants to stand in a tiny metal and concrete cage and be pumped full of antibiotics, hormones and god knows what else for their short miserable lives. Neither of them want to be bruised because they have only enough room to face one direction their entire lives. Neither of them want their testicles ripped out without anesthetic while they are piglets. Neither of them want to be beaten when they don't eat.

Also, despite what the marketing people say, humans are not omnivores, everything healthwise and physiologically suggests we are somewhere between herbivores and frugivores. It's also backed up historically too by analyzing fossilized poop!

Here is a quite simplified chart, but I think it does a pretty good point of showing how far away we are from typical mammalian omnivores http://www.whale.to/c/10013268_676368449097110_1949968139_n.jpg

I'm not having a go at you, but I just hope you aren't acting according to a few labels that some organisation has set.

And I know they could be testing me
The data might be wrong
A preplanned concocted recipe
And played up all along
But at least my graphs are beautiful
With sigma 5.1
This I know
This I know

They told me don't worry about it
Analyze the chirp and
No more
They told me be careful
And doubt it
But I've seen a merger
Of black hole-ole-ole-oles!

LIGO feels when space is rippling through
With a wave of
Gravitation

LIGO feels when space is rippling due
To a tensor
Perturbation

Vacuum sealed interferometer
An L 5-mile long
Split a laser, bounce 300 times
Compare the distance gone
One built in Louisiana and one more in Washington
That's LIGO
Yeah LIGO

A Billion lightyear journey
To cover
Then it hit the Fabry-Perot
Lengthening one leg then
The other
Making fringes dance on
The dio- o- o- ode!

LIGO feels when space is rippling through
With a wave of
Gravitation

LIGO feels when space is rippling due
To a tensor
Perturbation

LIGO feels that space is rippling through
From an ancient
Amalgamation

LIGO feels that space because it's crew
Gave it seismic
Isolation

This event's power is
Enormous
Fifty universes
Of suns
We had indirect clues
Before this
All you GR haters
You were wrong -ong -ong

LIGO feels when space is rippling through
With a wave of
Gravitation

LIGO feels when space is rippling due
To a tensor
Perturbation

LIGO feels that space is rippling through
Can you feel the
Excitation?

LIGO's view of space is rippling through
Our collective
Imagination

Sadly, it's only after leaving the positions of power that people seem to realize this is true, that you are required to analyze orders and to refuse those that are illegal (and question those that are unreasonable or appear illegal).
In practice, questioning orders is a good way to end up in military prison.
Also, most fear losing their position of power far more than they fear being caught following illegal orders. Few if any have ever been prosecuted.
It's for this reason that we have the crimes exposed by Manning and Snowden, up to and including mass murders, torture, illegal indefinite detention, etc. , that have never been prosecuted, but those who exposed the illegal orders and acts have been prosecuted, whistleblower protection laws be damned.
It's pretty disingenuous for this man to say that Trump's illegal orders would be questioned and ignored when all the illegal orders he received during his tenure were followed without question.

EDIT: Interesting, I just found out he's publicly supported by the KKK, and American National SuperPac, founded by a consortium of white terror groups, but he claims to not know who they are. Reports out of Super Tuesday states Minnesota and Vermont have revealed there are recorded calls telling voters Trump will stop the “gradual genocide against the white race” and to not vote for Marco Rubio because he’s “Cuban.”
Trump has yet to disavow any of these terrorist racial groups, but has accepted money from them. That should certainly disqualify him from holding high public office and really should have him on the terrorist watch list, he's associated with and accepts fudging from well know, active terrorist groups.

I thought it was a fun movie that didnt require analyzing. No fully logical conclusions and if there was I rather enjoy the mystery more than the leaps and bounds required to solve this puzzle.

It was a movie that was, in the end, either dream or reality. The movie could be symbolically regarded as a box and thus we can say that as long as the movie is always just a movie (remaining in the box), the ending will be both real and a dream (alive and dead). If the movie could be made manifest as reality to experience and fully acknowledge the truth, we could make a conclusion. But as long as it is still just a movie, the truth can never be determined and thus both possibilities are true. Or Shrodinger's Film.