Same thing in 2010:
7.0 hits Haiti: over 100000 deaths
7.1 hits Canterbury, NZ: 0 deaths

Building regulations are a pain in the arse, but they exist for a reason.

Not only do i think this is wrong, but i think it is obviously and patently wrong.

It is demonstrable that a confrontation does not necessarily escalate the longer it goes on for. If you've been taught that in training by someone purporting to be an expert then i despair. I almost feel at a loss for where to begin - i have been in thousands of confrontations that de-escalated due to more time passing allowing both parties to explain or understand better, or for the blood to cool down. I've seen thousands of the same types of confrontation happening to other people. It literally happens all the time; misunderstandings get corrected and the situation de-escalates.

I hope that the brief explanation has betrayed what you really meant. Perhaps you were talking about a specific range of situations with a violent individual.

Or perhaps that's the problem and someone has been training law enforcement this falsehood which effectively encourages you to use the most extreme measure you have to end the conflict more quickly and keep it at a safely low level of escalation. And then you end up with mine- and rocket-resistant urban combat vehicles patrolling the streets, teams of camo'd police holding weapons INCORRECTLY in the presence of civilians on your own streets, and the mowing down of unarmed shoplifters...... all because it's more kind that way? I refute that, and before anyone says the most dangerous words ever spoken 'but we've always done it that way', in a discussion about the ineptitude or otherwise of law enforcement you aren't allowed the premise "law enforcement's methods are and always have been the best way to do things." -- Law enforcement, along with politics, should be the most heavily scrutinised and re-scrutinised systems that exist - because of their unique position to affect people.

I do NOT consider the concern for the safety of a police officer to be greater than the concern for the rights of a citizen; i was under the impression that police were the defence line between citizens and criminals, they put their lives on the line to keep society safe and running. Their job is to ensure we can be citizens, and they are paid to uphold the ideals of the society - freedom, respect for the individual and personal security. I genuinely hope they do so safely, but you don't play with feathers unless you're willing to get your arse tickled, as the saying goes. It is very possible to be safe, respectful and understanding all at the same time in the pursuit of law enforcement. If a person does not have the ability to behave that way they should not be in the job in the same way as someone who finds kids irritating and hit-able shouldn't go into childcare.

Meh, that dude is an idiot with more money than sense. I wouldn't help him either.

Sell your shiny-arse SUV and buy a real 4wd (hint: if the rims are bigger than the tyres, you're doing it wrong)

This is what I don't get. The climate deniers constantly claim that climate change is "ideologically driven" without ever specifying what the gain is.

Let's assume that we do actually live in bizzaro world and that the whole AGW thing is a complete hoax. Somehow 97% of all climate scientists have secreted colluded and messed with the data to create a public alarm over this.

To what end? Have you met any climate scientists? Hint: they're not the ones flying around in private jets. Honestly, if I was a climate scientist and I was going to perpetrate some kind of global fraud, I'd at least want some profit out of it.

Climate change sucks. It is a massive pain in the arse, and no one wants to deal with it. But it's real, it's a thing and we just have to suck it up and deal with it. David Mitchell sums it up nicely. How we deal with it I have no idea.

So basically any time I have vanilla ice cream with 'natural flavouring' there's a good chance I'm eating beaver arse milk?!

I know, right?

Even if it didn't have that as it's central theme, the movie still looks like a pile of arse. It's just the turd on the arse cake.

It seems like the bluetooth ear piece wearers have realized how stupid they look and how shallow walking around like a self important arse is. Now it's down to the 1% d-baggers that still wear them. I predict the same course for this product.

The 'every one will be wearing them in a year' comment is so smug. Really irritating.

I also don't like Ron White who most of my friends think is hysterical. Not sure exactly what it is. Ron and Ricky fall in the arse category, but so do Bill Burr and Larry David in Curb, but I like both of them alot. Congrats on the new token. Fits well with your screen name. Or maybe that's what you've been trying for all along. Clever lad (lass) that Alien Concept

That's almost exactly what I just said 17-18kg in earth terms. Do you think laid on your back you could easily throw a 17kg object 1.5-2m upwards?

He's not doing a push up he's trying to jump upright. Launching nearly 20kg of weight far enough to get to your feet would take some doing that way I'd say. Just lifting 20kg with the arms alone is an effort never mind throwing it which is effectively what's happening here.

This is part of the reason I defaulted to thinking in terms of rocketry as it's not as simple as just someone trying to lift something, they are trying to propel themselves 1-2m upwards with only a thrust from the arms. Much better to wiggle around/push up to get to your knees so one could bring one's legs muscles to bear (made very difficult by hard to bend suit).

Frankly I think it would be a total pain in the arse getting back upright. If it weren't for the suit you could easily push up to your knees and then straighten your legs but the inflation is going to make that very hard work (but doable after a struggle to one knee as other video footage proves).

The alternative however which sparked this whole argument i.e. lay on your front and push off with your arms. That I think would be considerably harder than you are making out. Throwing a 17kg weight with only your arms over 1m in height is not what I'd call effortless.

My old CRT monitor probably weighs about 20kg, it'd take everything I had to throw that over 1m up into the air. Without the power of your thigh muscles and the rigidity of your spine 20kg is quite a lot really.

How high can you "jump" with only your arms? (like those super push-ups where you clap your hands in between to show off) maybe a foot or two if your really really strong? So with the extra weight of a suit and reduced gravity multiplying the result by 6 under lunar gravity, 6feet is probably just about attainable for someone in peak physical shape. But it's defiantly not what I'd call easy!


Re: conspiracies The only one I really take at all seriously any more is the idea that 2001 (esp the book) was perhaps (very) loosely based on actual events. I have time for it simply because of Arthur C. Clarke himself who was going to give an interview (which he rarely does) on Project Camelot of all things but died about 2 weeks before it happened. If you know anything about project camelot you'll know whatever he had to say was going to be mental but then again he was very old and eccentric and plenty other people involved in the space program have "jumped the shark" so to speak. (Edgar Mitchell talks about aliens on a regualr basis, Buzz Aldrin has spoken about monoliths on Phobos, pilots being followed by "Foofighters" in WW2 etc. etc.)

But it's basically wishful thinking on my part, the story and implications are remarkably plausible for what they are but that is all they are. Combined with the whole Jack Parsons/Alastair Crowley connection to the JPL my creative juices start flowing. However the obvious counter argument i.e. that the world is largely run by genuine lunatics is never far from my mind either (look at the whole "men who stare at goats" thing).

I'll listen to anyone and some I'm even prepared to believe on their own terms but I have to defer to actual evidence where it exists (or does not exist). Consequently while I'll listen to someone like John Leer talking about stuff that would seem outlandish even in a science fiction story, people why claim the moon landing was a hoax tend to get the cold shoulder as it's pretty demonstrably not true/hard to believe.

I realise that's kind of backwards but willing suspension of disbelief is a lot easier when there's really no tangible evidence either way. (why I suspect huge incomprehensible delusions like those espoused by many religions get so much traction. It's easier to believe the big lie than the small one)

Jolly entertaining though regardless

@MichaelL

And this calculation exists in complete isolation from the rest of the universe and laws of physics? That was the angle I was coming from and I did explain several times how it was indeed unnecessary and self indulgent of me to do so.

Just because a simple weight/force calculation was all we needed practically didn't mean that the rest of the universe just disappeared. We can just conveniently ignore it.
I didn't because I was A. bored and B. had rocketry on the brain from playing too much KSP.

This is what I meant by not the whole story. Your not wrong but that does not necessarily preclude what I was waffling on about.

Though while were at it if that astronaut and suit weight say 100kg then that'd be 180N of force right? So that's like lifting a 18kg object on earth? I don't know about you but 18kilos would take some shifting for me, especially if I was trying to throw it vertically. Doable but not what I'd call easy. (& naturally throw in the cumbersome suit and its a total pain in the arse)


And goddamit the whole Fosbury flop thing flashed into my head but I dismissed it. Never occurred to me that that extra meter or so would have such a profound effect when you introduce a multiplier like gravity. Great example!

If there was no welfare of any sort, people would still have to apply at Walmart. People with stomachs to be filled far outnumber jobs that generate an income. And while the population is increasing, the number of jobs -- in the long run -- is actually decreasing.

It was always clear that automation would greatly reduce the number of jobs in manufacturing and agriculture, first and foremost. Given that the latest burst in technology is represented by Google, Apple, FB and Amazon, I'd say the hope of generating jobs through new areas of technology fell flat on its arse -- those four giants are worth a combined $1T, yet employ only 150k, or half as many as GE.

tl;dr

#people >> #jobs, exacerbated by robots/automation and politically suppressed aggregate demand

--------------------------

As for minimum wage being entry level wage: that's the idea, but given the age structure of fast food workers and the number of them who worked the job for years and years, it is merely theoretical in nature. Many people are stuck in it, others are floating in and out of employment at minimum wage level. Asking for a higher wage becomes a futile exercise as long as there's an army of willing replacements on the market. Some corporations try to minimize turn-over by paying above-average wages (Costco, Aldi), but the vast majority engage in a race to the bottom.

If you ask me, all of us deserve food in our stomachs, a roof over our heads. And health insure, while we're at it. The establishment over here used to call it the "revolution tax", because it allows people to retain some level of dignity and prevents them from chopping everyone's heads off with a guillotine. I prefer a considerably more expansive definition of human dignity, but I'm just one of those dirty socialists, so...

Beautiful sea creature, my arse. They're venomous little bastards.

I'd sooner swim with a bunch of great whites than one of those.

I hate jellyfish. They freak me out

You talk like Iran is a person. Last time I checked it was a country which, like most countries contains a diverse mix of beliefs and personalities.

Your not entirely wrong to suggest that Iran is ruled by people who appear to espouse the hard-line apocalyptic interpretation of Islam in much the same way as significant aspects of the US and Israeli ruling classes are into the Zionist/revelations side of Christianity and Judaism.

And for what it's worth a really serious Christian, Muslim or Jew would take that position. Why would you take a half arsed attitude if you truly believe our eternal souls are at stake!!!

But crucially, not everyone is an extremist. In fact most people aren't extremists they are just conformists. Iran is no different and the uprising a few years ago was mostly fuelled by the younger generation rebelling against the oppressive theocracy you are referring to.

There is a purist aspect to all Abrahamist religions that will never be appeased but Iran & by extension Islam is only one of the three pillars (of satan) and much like has happened in the west the rise of free communication via the internet etc. is causing to to start to be outgrown by its people.

In short: there are nutters (such as yourself) on both sides and not every (or even perhaps most) Iranians hate the west just like not all westerners hate Iran. Don't buy into the us vs them propaganda, there is a 3rd side here and its not restricted by nationality or culture, nor does it celebrate death over life. Only knowledge, evolution and temperance


You all seem dangerously delusional far as I can tell. Unless the basic concept of "I might be totally wrong about all this" isn't built into your religion/belief system you can go and get stuffed....(and you will be as a relic/warning to the kids of the future)

Here in Victoria BC we had an arse ride "his mother's" bike at 300kph up through the Thetis Lake area of the Trans Canada Hwy. Video'd himself. They found him. Took his bike. And he totally beat the rap because a cop saw him fly by (across a 4 lane divided highway, passing at a combined rate of 400+kph) and his description over the radio, recorded, didn't match the rider at all.

The reason I bring this up is the particular stretch of road is unsafe at 100kph, let alone 3x that. At least the Autobahn is designed properly.

Paxman is a great political interviewer in general, but his inability to take a non-voter seriously, wildly dismissing some superb points of view, as if somehow vote abstinence means that people can't have a clear concept of what's going on is fucking dumb.

I am so bored of the ancient rhetoric on democracy and voting. It doesn't even mean anything when whoever you vote for is not beholden to their manifesto in any way shape or form. They can and do change their position at any point once in power and what can we do about it? Vote against their decisions? Force them to practice what they preached? Nope! We have to suck it up. Democracy my arse.