search results matching tag: bend

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (243)     Sift Talk (11)     Blogs (16)     Comments (907)   

Russian parents made you learn Piano? Improvise!

ChaosEngine says...

To play Devil's advocate... why do this?

He's essentially playing a bad version of that guitar solo.

I mean, yeah, he's obviously a good musician and I'm guessing from some of his other videos he's a talented pianist (don't know enough about piano to judge).

But there are things you can do on a guitar (slides, bends, harmonics) that are impossible to do on a piano. That doesn't make a guitar better than a piano, just that it has different strengths.

He's (kinda) compensating for the bends using that pitch shifter, but it's a pretty crude version of a guitar bend, and there's no incorporation of the subtleties of how a guitar player changes little things like pick attack.

I am all for people reinterpreting musical pieces on a different instrument, but if you're going to do that, change it for the strengths of your instrument.

But still, upvote for the dog

Multi Headed Nut Wizard

TheFreak says...

First world problems.

"My front yard is full of food and it's too much work to bend over and pick it up!!!!"

Still, very cool engineering.

Aikido - Hiromi Matsuoka

JustSaying says...

Most martial arts are simply too specific for MMA (Teakwondo for example), and Aikido is certainly one of them. That's why many MMA fighters train in Jiu-Jitsu, it's a grabbag of techniques.
Aikido is great with throws, joint-locks and evasive moves but that's mostly it. There's no emphasis on kicking, punching or holding techniques. An Aikido-practitioner won't choke you out, he or she will break your shit. Bend your joints in ways they shouldn't or straight up break your arm. You can't unleash that in a ring where people go to earn money. No matter how many punches you can take, how many throws you can recover from, a broken wrist will end your fight. And then you're out of a job and training until it's healed for a couple of weeks.
Aikido is not flexible enough to be effective and too damaging once it can be used for full effect.
And it does work in real life, it's just the conditions for success are far narrower than with other, more versatile martial arts. That's why Krav Maga works so well in real life, it just goes to what causes the most effect. So a lot of ballskicking. And punching. And Kneeing. All the balls, all the time.

Drachen_Jager said:

Yeah, @ChaosEngine that's true, but it still doesn't work in real life.

Nobody uses Akido in MMA.

Akido is moderately effective when teaching a weak person to fend off stronger, untrained individuals. It's shit if your opponents have been trained.

Also, if I need more proof Akido is shit: Steven Seagal.

I rest my case.

Understanding Comfortably Numb

Antifa Violence Finally Called Out by Media

newtboy says...

Dear Bob.
When I write that antifa are asshats, imbecilic, moronic, and fascists, it means I don't support them. When I write they should be arrested, it means I don't support them. When I write the left should be louder about denouncing them and separating from them, it means I don't support them. When I write I don't support them, it means I don't support them. I know you read all those posts, you replied to each of them with some red herring or another.
Damn, Bob, you're really bending over backwards to ignore my CONSTANT denouncement of antifa so you can try your hardest to deflect from the violent alt right Nazis and KKK you keep defending as peaceful protesters, even as you post video of them shooting and driving into crowds of women and children.

Damn, Bob, you just aren't capable of living in reality. Try it, it's nice here.

Edit: OK, got me. I'm sure you're just trolling out of frustration now. You cannot possibly be that dumb.

bobknight33 said:

@newtboy

Even the media agrees that ANTIFA is off the hook violent Fascist. For Morning Joe to go Anti ANTIFA that saying a lot.

Damn Newt you are on the wrong side gain. BOOM.

You Know it's a Christopher Nolan Film IF...

Kid almost drowning in a public pool, nobody notices

lucky760 says...

Thanks for the link, Eric. That's comforting.

And I'm very glad his monster of a mother was prosecuted.

I'm always reminded of my oldest boy when he was about 2 and we were in the 1.5-foot-deep tiny kiddie pool standing right next to him. He seemingly bent down to touch the drain by his feet, but as his face went into the water he just left it there and didn't move. There was no jumping or waving or losing control; in fact, he was still standing up on his feet, just in a bending-over position with his face in the water and his arms not moving.

I guess his body immediately went into some kind of paralysis when he was probably still breathing in as he stuck his face in the water.

I'll never forget that horror.

eric3579 said:

Kid recovered well
http://goo.gl/CRI1EF

Your Brain on LSD and Acid

shagen454 says...

Yeah, it's been a while for me too. The best one I remember was living off Valencia street in the Mission district of San Francisco. I dropped, went to sleep for a hour and woke up and the floors literally had mist flowing through the apartment like some sort of ethereal fantasy movie. When I went outside the fence was waving/bending in a mesmerizing way and the houses were continually sinking into the ground. I looked at some flowers and they were infinitely growing. The best part was looking in the mirror, it was like one of those youtube videos where someone takes a photo of them-self every day for a year - every second it was like a different photo of myself except very organic watching myself grow old, bald and with a beard and then back to normal, lol. It was fun, but I'd never do it again without some anti-anxiety pills around for the last 6 hours which I found to be fairly annoying. Plus, as Shpongle puts it "LSD? Do DMT." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3cgNm_f2ow)

Finally, Sean Spicer's Credibility Being Questioned Openly

AHCA: A Republican Response to The Affordable Care Act

Fairbs says...

I'm with you, but it wouldn't work because Socialism is a dirty work in the US even though there are tons of examples such as the military, cops, roads, streetlights, ...

#2 and related is that everything has to be seen under the lens of capitalism which is short for ponzi scheme where a very small number of people at the top get filthy rich while everyone else bends over and pretends that they could be that guy at the top some day.

ChaosEngine said:

Your healthcare system is mental. It's ridiculously complex.

Look, here's how you do healthcare.

Step 1: everyone pays taxes and the government pays for hospitals, doctors, etc.
Step 2: you get sick and said hospitals treat you.

That's it. It's really simple and even if it has some problems, it's still so much better than any of this nonsense.

Alligator Strolls Across Golf Course Carrying a Big Fish

Cavuto: How does it feel to be dismissed, CNN?

bobknight33 says...

I'm not mad..
I'm glad trump is calling out the media. They are hell bend on destroying any republican anyway they can.

12 fake whores 1 month before the election. Really. FAKE NEWS.

That buss tape as bad as it was would not have been aired if it was against Hillary, Obama, or Bill Clinton. NEVER.

But fire it right up to use against a Republican.

enoch said:

@bobknight33

"You just bent because you you team is finally getting called out for what they are. Biased and fake ."

have you met me?
or is your account used by multiple people,and this particular bob is one i have never engaged?

reread my comment.
GO..i'll wait.

notice anything?
that maybe i accused CNN of the very same partisan fuckery as FOX?

this is just a house negro who sold his integrity years ago for his own personal gain.who pretended faux outrage in order to appeal to the politically unsophisticated so he can buy a BIG house,and drive an expensive car and rub shoulders with the powerful.

but bob,you view things in such a binary and limited way that if i
criticize an opinion pundit,a cable celebrity,who makes his cookies by undermining journalism and promoting propaganda,and just happens to work at FOX.then i MUST,therefore,be rooting for the other "team".

there is no fucking TEAM bob.
there is simply the truth,and those who whore themselves for personal gain,while fucking the rest of us over.
neil cavuto is a dirty little whore slut.

does this mean that everyone on FOX is like slutty cavuto?
of course not.shep smith does some good work.
and the very same accusations can be leveled at CNN,or MSNBC,or CNBC.

the majority of cable news have all adopted the FOX model,because it makes money.a LOT of money,and as long as they are populated by dirty little whores like cavuto.who are willing to sell their integrity for safety and financial security.the amercian people will always suffer those fuckheads selfish hubris.

one of the greatest things to come out of this surreal and absurd election cycle is that the american people have begun to "get it".they have come to the slow (and infuriating to me) realization that cable news is not news at all.it is propaganda.it is opinion by way of presenting as "news".

and ALL the big players are guilty.
they all have their own celebrity demagogues.
pushing their own agendas to their own little,easily manipulated fiefdoms.

so stop projecting bob.
i have no interest is self righteous moralizing predicated on inadequate information and even worse politics.

i KNOW who the real enemy is,and cable news is the mechanism in which they spread their divisive and warped ideologies.

you appear to continue to buy into their bullshit.
that this is somehow a right vs left,or dem vs repub.
american liberals are not the problem.
american conservatives are not the problem.

no...bob...

the two party duopoly,the two party dictatorship.
THAT is the problem.
this is about power vs powerlessness.

and little whores like cavuto do NOT serve you!
he,and his ilk,serve power.

it is time for you to choose a side bob.
which side on you on?

*edit:oh shit,just realized you were talking to newtboy.
my bad bob.../chuckles...
sighs..guess i was looking to scrap a bit.
bad enoch..baaad.

Canada lynx absolutely loves being brushed!

3D Printing Stainless Steel with Giant Robot Arms

newtboy says...

Flux core would remove any slight oxidation between deposits on a continuous weld, or a media blast nozzle in front of the weld zone.
I agree with you if they intend to use it for load bearing structures, but it wouldn't be difficult. Just a loose seal around the work area and positive gas flow keeping oxygen out, problem solved.
The downside I see is cost. It's expensive to 'make metal' with a mig....or any welder. Electrodes/wire aren't cheap, and then there's the electricity. Bending or milling sheets, castings, or blocks is almost always going to be cheaper. This will be useful for designs that require complex interior shapes impossible to do conventionally, but not much else, imo.

Payback said:

There has to be a downside to weld-additive construction. They'd have to do this in a vacuum or inert gas filled chamber to avoid oxidisation between layers.

I know you can't weld aluminium like this. Aluminium Oxide has a much higher melting point than aluminium, which is the main point of failure with aluminium welding.

First: Do No Harm. Second: Do No Pussy Stuff. | Full Frontal

harlequinn says...

Ahh, so you were lying. You did have time.

From your response it's clear you don't know much about medicine.

"If you don't provide all the services required of a hospital, you don't get to call yourself a fucking hospital. "

No. You do get to call yourself a hospital. Most hospitals don't offer all medical services. Even major hospitals. You don't get to choose what is and isn't a hospital.

"There's a big bloody difference between "not equipped" and "unwilling"."

Sort of. It's a chicken and egg situation that has an order to it.

Most private hospitals are unwilling to provide non-profit services and are therefore not equipped to provide them. You won't find hospitals with the skills (i.e. doctors and nurses able to perform the procedure) and equipment (which is almost always purpose specific in medicine) and not the willingness to do the procedure. Catholic hospitals won't have either of those necessary requirements for most of the disputed procedures.

"And it's a bit fucking rich to bring up false equivalencies when you just compared unavailability of potential life-saving medical treatment to someone whinging over not getting a big mac at kfc."

No, mine was an appropriate analogy in regards to asking for a service or product that a company does not provide. In this case a Big Mac at KFC.

'"Really? They "articulate the truth"... as I said before, this is self-evidently complete and utter fucking bullshit.'

I can't say it's bullshit, but it is irrelevant.

'Yes, "inconvenient" is exactly the right word for a woman who is probably in the middle of the worst day of her life.
I mean, she might end up "inconveniently" dead, but hey, we wouldn't want to stop catholics telling other people how to live, would we?'

You're wrong. It is only an inconvenience. It sucks to be transferred to a different hospital but in general it has no adverse medical outcome on the patient. If the patient is critical the hospital will do what they can (which will be limited because they don't have the skills or equipment for that service) before transferring the patient. Just like one thousand and one other non-life-threatening and life-threatening procedures that most hospitals don't treat. Leaving the patient in place at that hospital carries a higher adverse risk than transferring them to an appropriate facility.

'And here we come to strawman of all strawmen. The problem is NOT that a woman needs a "direct abortion", it's that she may a surgical procedure that kills the child inadvertently. And this isn't theoretical, women have died from this.'

Not a strawman. You've given one example in a tabloid paper of a single woman who died from septacaemia, a week after a procedure. Unless you can show a conclusive coroner's report showing that the delay in removing the foetus (i.e. waiting until it was dead) was the cause, and not the 1000% more likely cause of infection during or after the surgery, then you don't even have that one example. And this sort of sepsis is just as likely from doing the same procedure with a live foetus. The procedure is pretty much the same. And even with one example, that's not statistically relevant. Do you have a study published in a reputable medical journal?

"The fundamental point is that religion has no place in medicine. If a patient wishes to refuse certain treatments because of their beliefs, well, they're an idiot, but it's their choice to be an idiot."

These hospitals have a mission statement based on their beliefs but they are practicing state of the art medicine. Based on their beliefs they don't offer all services , but this is no different than any other small hospital who limits their services. There are no statistically relevant adverse medical outcomes for anyone from this situation.

"But a hospital doesn't get to refuse treatment based on some bronze-age belief. If the treatment is legal in its jurisdiction and they have the capability to provide it, they must provide it. Businesses should not be allowed to refuse service on religious grounds ("I am religiously opposed to treating gay people or blacks!!")"

You're confusing you're belief of "shouldn't" with "doesn't". They can and should limit their services to what they want to offer as a hospital. The same as every public hospital does. And no, if the procedure is legal they do not have to provide it. This is true for public and private hospitals.

You seem to be sorely missing this basic vital understanding that all hospitals are limited in capacity and don't offer all services. If you go to the largest hospital near me (one of two major hospitals near me) and need emergency obstetrics, you will be shipped off to the other major hospital. That's how it works. If you go to one of many dozens of smaller private hospitals and ask for a,b, or c and they only offer x, y or z, then you're going to end up going to a different hospital.

The catholic hospital is practicing conscientious objection and passively practicing this (yes, passively, they're happy for you to go elsewhere). You want to force (that's the best word) all medical personal to bend to your will and don't accept worldviews that don't coincide with yours. Bigotry at it's finest.

'("I am religiously opposed to treating gay people or blacks!!")'
FFS: Evidence of hospitals doing this please. Not an individual doctor. Hospitals.

'As you said yourself "If you don't like it, go work somewhere else".'

You're saying "if you don't like my personal rules, then go find a different industry". Democracies a bitch when you don't get what you want. You're going to have to live with the fact that your way is just your opinion and nothing else.

You're getting pretty boring pretty quickly. I doubt I'll bother anymore with you, it's readily apparent that you're not going to learn any time soon.

ChaosEngine said:

FFS, I'm not trying to make an argument. As for watching the video, that wasn't a waste of my time, it was entertaining and informative unlike the article which was desperately trying to excuse an awful situation.

But fine, you want an argument? Let's do this.

"If one doesn't want the very small set of restrictions that go with some (not all) religiously affiliated hospitals, don't go there. One does have a choice."

You have that backwards. If you don't provide all the services required of a hospital, you don't get to call yourself a fucking hospital.

How would you feel if there was a Jehovahs Witness hospital that didn't do blood transfusions? Or a Christian Science hospital that refused to do medical treatment?
Both of those are real world examples where people died.

There's a big bloody difference between "not equipped" and "unwilling". In a local area, there might be several smaller medical facilities, but finding two major care centres across the road from each other is pretty rare.

And it's a bit fucking rich to bring up false equivalencies when you just compared unavailability of potential life-saving medical treatment to someone whinging over not getting a big mac at kfc.

As for the article:

"First, Bee ignores the fact that Catholic teaching on human life and reproduction is a fundamental, longstanding tradition of the Church, passed down from one generation to the next for centuries. "

Irrelevant. Next...

"But Catholic priests, bishops, and cardinals don’t give “reproductive advice”; they articulate the truth about human life and reproductive ethics in accord with Catholic teaching."

Really? They "articulate the truth"... as I said before, this is self-evidently complete and utter fucking bullshit.

"the claim that women will be without care if they are refused service at a Catholic hospital."
Er, even the article acknowledges that Bee understands this point and makes the point that in an emergency situation, you go to the nearest available centre that can treat you.

"This is another straw man. In most cases, when women want a particular reproductive service, they have ample time to locate and attend a non-Catholic hospital. "

Yes, and in most cases, people do. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE FUCKING TALKING ABOUT.

"Even in the few emergency situations — which Bee presents as if they are the vast majority of cases"

No, she really doesn't.

"Though it sometimes might be inconvenient for a woman to travel to a non-Catholic hospital, the inconvenience surely does not outweigh the importance of conscience rights, which demand that Catholic hospitals not be forced to provide procedures that Catholicism deems morally wrong."

Yes, "inconvenient" is exactly the right word for a woman who is probably in the middle of the worst day of her life.
I mean, she might end up "inconveniently" dead, but hey, we wouldn't want to stop catholics telling other people how to live, would we?

"In reality, a direct abortion (in which a doctor intentionally kills a child) is never medically necessary to save a mother’s life. If a woman is having a miscarriage, having her child killed in an abortion will do nothing to improve her health or save her life."

And here we come to strawman of all strawmen. The problem is NOT that a woman needs a "direct abortion", it's that she may a surgical procedure that kills the child inadvertently. And this isn't theoretical, women have died from this.

The fundamental point is that religion has no place in medicine. If a patient wishes to refuse certain treatments because of their beliefs, well, they're an idiot, but it's their choice to be an idiot.

But a hospital doesn't get to refuse treatment based on some bronze-age belief. If the treatment is legal in its jurisdiction and they have the capability to provide it, they must provide it. Businesses should not be allowed to refuse service on religious grounds ("I am religiously opposed to treating gay people or blacks!!")

As you said yourself "If you don't like it, go work somewhere else".



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