search results matching tag: binary

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (46)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (2)     Comments (273)   

Pete Buttigieg Perfectly Articulates Republican Behavior

newtboy says...

You know that’s not true. Democrats and independents have 48 seats, not 60(the number needed to pass any law now). Manchin and Senema are Republicans, not Democrats, and vote as such. That means there’s no chance of getting anything meaningful passed with the Republican platform being “don’t let the democrats get anything done”.

Solution to…what? Answer to….what? You can’t even form a cogent accusation.

What are utter lies and bs? Your attempts to attack Democrats?

Who says “trans community….”… what? Which is fine …how? Are you ok? Did you smoke crack recently? Meth?

You say YES to indoctrination of everyone with born again MAGA evangelical Christian doctrines and MAGA insanity, you liar. You people want prayers in preschools, bibles in schools, bans on non binary genders, bans on discussing any non “pure” monogamous heterosexual sexuality, bans on interracial relationships, and probably a ban on any mention of any other religion through high school….and you think that’s not indoctrination.

Right, because screaming insane ridiculousness at full rant like a raving crackhead (sometimes WITH a raving crackhead!) is what makes a leader. 🤦‍♂️
Pete’s been in leadership positions repeatedly…including as an officer in Afghanistan.
Now Trump, he’s never led anything that didn’t fall apart or go bankrupt or get closed for fraud while he led it….and is a blatant draft dodger.

Yelling isn’t leading. Dividing isn’t leading. Throwing tantrums isn’t leading. Attempting coups isn’t leading.

bobknight33 said:

Democrats have all the control. Where are their solution?
And Biden and his party answer is?????????????

Utter lies and BS.

You say trans community which is fine.

but we say no to indoctrination.




Pete will never be POTUS - soft spoken but not leadership material.

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

newtboy says...

Using people as a wedge is upsetting. I wish the right would stop, but their platform is based on mutual hatred of the “other”, so ostracism is a main tool for them.
Trying to secure the rights of Americans to compete in publicly funded sports is not creating a wedge, it’s being a civic American where tolerance and inclusion of those different from you is a cornerstone of our national identity.

No, that’s not common sense. It’s a red herring you would use to deny non binary people the right to participate. As I showed, divisions based on biological “sex” lead to men (biological women) like the boxer above fighting against girls. Is that more “fair”? Hardly.

Yes, trans people follow those rules, and must be hormone supplement free for years before being allowed to compete in most arenas. Non trans people have access to the same supplements, and also need to stop them before they can compete professionally. People naturally have different levels of hormones, we don’t force them to suppress or enhance them to compete, nor do we exclude those with medical needs for supplemented hormones…unless they’re trans. Red herring.

What genitalia you have has no bearing on your performance in sports, unless there are competitive orgies I’m unaware of.

One or two trans athletes being outstanding proves the point that there isn’t a noticeable advantage….otherwise every sport would be dominated by trans athletes….and that’s simply not the case. I bet statistical analysis would show trans athletes are not better, but worse on average than their non altered counterparts for many reasons.

Funny how denying a group their rights to participate (or exist?) in your eyes is “equality” and equitable.

Edit: How do you feel about hormone testing to decide which group you compete in? Too much testosterone, or not enough estrogen, compete with the “Ts”,…below the line on testosterone, or above the line on estrogen, compete with the “Es”. Or how about just separate by body mass index? Now is the problem solved? Do you concede that now the debate is settled? LMFAHS!!

In your biased, ignorant little mind it’s settled, not the real world where facts override your ignorant feelings and misconceptions and people’s rights to participate in publicly sponsored competition aren’t over ridden by ignorance and thinly veiled hatred.

🤦‍♂️

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

1. Given how few people are affected, I'd love to see way less coverage of trans-sports as a wedge issue to rally political bases

2. Failing that, isn't it clearly 100% common sense that the Men's and Women's sports divisions are NOT divisions applied based upon gender but instead upon biological sex, and as such should always have been a non-issue.

3. I really can't see the issue, if it must be raised, as anything other than a request for special exemptions to be made. Existing competitive sports are divided based on biological sex and most have requirements around usage of drugs, hormones and other performance enhancing substances. We have existing and established testing for both the biological sex and PED requirements. Applying those equally to everyone IS equality.

/s There, now the debates all settled /s

Nationalist Geographic

cloudballoon says...

Isn't it ironic that the greatest country of FREEDOM!!!!!! in the world essentially got a binary system? Either the GOP or the Dem (the rest are more of a protest parties). That's just a tiny bit better than the Chinese's one party system.

The relatively painless solution is to create conditions to make 3-4 mainstream parties a reality. With kingmakers in the mostly centrist positions adapting populists policies that fit the IRL problems of the day instead of ideological lines of the hardline left/right.

Simply put: coalition government.

vil said:

Look for better ways to pick a leader? Find ways to adapt their party policies to suit the day and age? Find actual goals for society to promote instead of just being conservative or ayn rand for the sake of it (or rather for the sake of their own pockets)? Make the rest of the party admit that old, sick, poor and/or non-white people are not expendable. America can be great if you pick the right things to be great at. Not just gloating and bad golf.

Its not impossible. There has to be a liberal, small government movement to counter all those "letter people" who only have demands. It has to come from the bottom and will take a long time.

newtboy (Member Profile)

JiggaJonson says...

Don't mistake me, im not unreasonable. Im sure we probably could find someone who didn't add an asterisk and say "IF no one does anything" as an attempt to get ratings. As someone with extra time on his hands who was watching the news nearly constantly though, I didnt see that.

That said, still don't think the claim holds up. Even if there was halfhazard use of that study as a headline creator at times, he's using it as a justification to say basically that there definitely WERE going to be these deaths, and trump stopped them. That is simply not true. If even one single person decided to wear a mask, those numbers drop.

That and there are degrees of good and bad jobs being done, it's not binary.

Closing down the country? good.
Closing it down earlier? better.
Not restocking the emergency stockpilke when warned? bad
Blaming obama when he is the one who fired the pandemic team? asshole
Funneling money for small business relief into his own company and his son in laws? criminal
Opening too soon? bad
Finally encouraging people to wear masks? okay, but could be better

etc.

------------- also ----------------

my cousin just died
39, 5 kids
she had "fluid on the lungs"
but it's not determined yet the cause
like im saying my mom just called me 1 hour ago
im tryin to find a fucking picture of her on her husband's facebook
but all i can find is shit about not wearing masks and how obama is trying to stop trump from blah blah blah

Did donald trump kill my cousin? absolutely not.
Did he help spread propaganda that encouraged her to not wear a mask and break social distancing because 'MERICA!? yes And he's currently trying to force the RNC to accomodate 50k people in one small space, to boot.

She was 39, 5 kids

newtboy said:

Not only that, it's a worst case scenario based on no one doing a thing over the course of the outbreak if it lasts for years and the medical system is overwhelmed.

As you said, NO CREDIBLE PERSON said it WOULD or even COULD happen in "a few months", or ever in the real world, which was his claim. Only people like Trump intentionally misstating the conclusions to create paper tigers he could slay have said it.

AI Makes an AC/DC Song - Great Balls

Adam Savage Examines Mother Ship Model from Close Encounters

We Believe: The Best Men Can Be - Gillette Ad

bcglorf says...

I was raised to respect other people, regardless of race, gender, creed or religion. I was taught that it was right to not give differential treatment to others because of race and gender, and to reserve differential treatment for other people facing differential circumstance, ability or behaviour. I believe in these as important fundamental values, and I consider those values worth defending.

When I see somebody painting an entire race or gender as the 'same' and as a problem, I get defensive of them. Here's how the commercial portrays men:
"It's been going on far too long... Making the same old excuses"
Entire line of men ALL chanting boys will be boys
"But something finally changed...And there will be no going back"

That isn't just a statement against bad behavior of men, it's a statement that ALL men have been participating in or excusing the bad behavior. At best, the message is urging men as needing to take an especial roll in rooting out violent and sexual harassment. That's identical to the logic of urging menmuslims as needing to take an especial roll in rooting out terrorismviolent and sexual harassment. Albeit, arguably worse in that your religion is at least a choice(trigger non-binary proponents).

BSR said:

If someone gets defensive, then a change HAS taken place.

What do you have that's worth defending?

How thieves steal keyless tech cars

ChaosEngine says...

"I've always wondered myself about keyless tech safety for this exact reason. How can the signal not just be copied and replayed?"

Well, I can't say for certain, but if I was designing it, the signal wouldn't be the same every time. Basically, you would have an algorithm that generates a signal (essentially a large number encoded as a binary stream) based on a seed and the current time.

The seed is unique to the car and the key.

So when you press the button, the key does something like

entryCode = SomeComplexAlgorithm(seed, time())

so the car would do something like

entryRequest = GetSignal()
checkedRequest = SomeComplexAlgorithm(sameSeedAsKey, time())
if (checkedRequest == entryRequest) Unlock()

That's obviously a vast oversimplification (not sure how they'd get around the time sync), but you get the idea.

What surprises me here is not that the car starts, but that it doesn't cut out once it gets out of range of the key. Even a strong relay would only have a short range (1-2km at most?).

John Oliver - Mike Pence

bcglorf says...

As promised, the most promising results when polling google scholar:

"Genetic and Environmental Influences on Sexual Orientation and Its Correlates in an Australian Twin Sample"

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/12572213_Genetics_and_Environmental_Influences_on_Sexual_Orientation_and_Its_Correlates_in_
an_Australian_Twin_Sample/links/0deec518bc0435c0cd000000.pdf

Probably one of the better studies, it breaks down orientation to a scale versus straight binary, though the results are then statistical correlations and my stats classes are too long ago for me to work that back into something resembling my claims above.

"Sexual Orientation in a U.S. National Sample
of Twin and Nontwin Sibling Pairs"
http://ioa126.medsch.wisc.edu/findings/pdfs/47.pdf

19 identical twins in the study with at least one twin with non-hetro orientation, within those 19 pairs, 6 showed concordance. So 6 of 19 identical twins sharing orientation, 13 of 19 not. This supports my statement above that in studies identical twins more often than not don't share homosexual orientation. This study also lists the statistical correlation of this result as 0.68, the previous studies statistical correlation was lower at 0.51(1.0 would be perfect correlation). If I'm reading the statistics remotely right, the above study then is similarly in keeping with my statement.

"Homosexual Orientation in Twins: A Report on 61 Pairs and Three Triplet Sets"
http://hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1993-homosexual-orientation-in-twins.html

Smaller sample size and different polling methodology, specifically sought out respondents of non hetro orientation. Shows a higher correlation, 25 of 38 identical twins being concordant. That's 66% concordance so opposite of my claim that more often than not they are discordant.


Running out of time here to post results. If you keep digging though it's more of the same, identical twins don't come close to showing 100% correlation, highest study of the samples I've pulled is 66%, and it's by far the highest. This is in contrast to race and gender, where you fully expect 100/100 identical twins to match.

Colbert To Trump: 'Doing Nothing Is Cowardice'

scheherazade says...

Only what they mentioned in the news.
20 ish guns.
2 ar15s, 1 with a bump stock.
1 ak pattern rifle (47 claimed, but the news is clueless. Could be a 74, could be an odd variant), possibly with a bump stock.
Then a bunch of other guns, not described.

Yes, full auto varies. I erred on the higher rate side.
A more realistic rate would be 12hz auto, 6hz bump, and 3hz semi.

Only other non-NFA non-bump rapid fire mechanism that I know of is a binary trigger (fires on pull, and on release). Effectively doubles your semi fire rate.

In any case, he only needed 1 gun and spare magazines.
I assume he brought everything not because it was necessary, but because he was planning to die and he had the stuff, so why not use it one last time (not like he'll get another chance).

To be fair, so far, mass shooters have stuck around for the long haul. Escape hasn't been an issue. But sure, in the future it could be.

True, you don't have to be 100% squeaky clean, but the vegas guy so far does look like he was.

As an aside, our felony code is incredibly expansive. People get disqualified from gun ownership over things that most normal people wouldn't even think would be illegal.

There's a stat that some lawyer published : a person typically commits 3 [obscure] felonies per day just going about normal daily activities. You can basically put anyone in jail if you choose to monitor them.

IMO, felonies should be divided into major and minor, with anything non violent being minor, and not disqualifying of gun ownership or right to vote.

Eg. I don't care if someone is running a pot farm. It isn't bothering anyone, it shouldn't even be a crime. But if it's gonna be a felony, at least it should be some lesser felony than it is now.

-scheherazade

newtboy said:

Really? You have a complete inventory of his arsenal, because I haven't seen one. He had many bump stocks.
Full auto what is 20 Hz? Different guns have different rates of fire, and he had many. Different bump stocks also deliver different rates, as do different fingers on different triggers.

When your target is a 15 degree arc, it's fine. For aiming, I agree.

Not in my experience at gun shows is all I'll say about that.

My point, these are legal. The traceability comes in if he had escaped.

You don't have to be squeaky clean, just not banned if you buy legally. There's no check at all for the bump stock or other rapid fire mechanism (there are many).

Ban of the rapid fire mechanisms would have at least forced him to buy them on the black market for far more money...if he could find them at all. That's a step, not a solution.

New Rule: The Lesser of Two Evils

enoch says...

how did this thread steer into climate change waters?
heh...god i love this site,and i love all you fuckers as well!

i don't really understand the rehashing of the election,trump is president.it is a done deal.

which is probably why i am struggling with the hillary diehards.politics is not a binary equation,so stop acting like it IS,and for the love of god stop with the condescension directed at people who did not vote YOUR way.ya'all are acting like we are your wayward dog who just took a giant dump on your carpet.

just LOOK at what you have done! LOOK at it! bad dog..baaaad dog.

@Stormsinger and @MilkmanDan were kind enough to share who they voted for,but they should not be put in a position to defend their vote.their vote,their choice and their right.

you may disagree,and that is fine,but to place all the blame on them,and their "like-minded compatriots" is arrogant,presumptuous and condescending.the reason hillary lost is not simply due to a few small holdouts.there are a myriad of reasons,and in my opinion,hillary should take most of the blame.

and what is this purity test @bareboards2 ?
do you mean a person standing by their principles?
remaining steadfast in their moral values?
showing us all that they would rather lose,than give up one ounce of integrity?

are you seriously criticizing people for holding to their own standards of morality and decency?

politics is not binary,there a many mitigating factors and political affilliation is only one aspect.

i have seen friends who voted for trump,and were extremely vocal about their support in the run up to election day,only to become eerily silent the further we got into trumps presidency.many of these people had voted for obama..TWICE..they wanted change.were desperate for change,and now they are finding out,that change may not be what they were expecting.

because the trump presidency is going to one helluva horror show,but there are also positives to consider.it is not a total loss.

i have the seen the very same people who have ridiculed and berated fundamentalist christians for being ideologically rigid,and philosophically immovable.turn around and express the exact same rigidity,and binary thought processes when it comes to their girl hillary clinton.

i was talking the other day with a man i highly respect and admire,who flippantly and casually called me a racist.
my crime?
i had the audacity to criticize obama.
which he doubled down and accused me of being sexist for not supporting hillary,and being critical of her as well.

how is this NOT ideological rigidity?
that to critically examine two prominent public figures automatically equates to:racism and sexism.

this is the metric that i see so many hillary supporters use when dealing with someone that they may disagree.this is a cheap,ill thought and ultimately WEAK counter to valid criticisms.

at what point do hillary supporters stop labeling other people the most vile of terms,simply because they did not step into line with THEIR thinking,and begin to examine the very REAL problems that both the hillary campaign,and the DNC,created for themselves?

or is everybody simply a racist and sexist?
that's it..no discussion.

this is akin to the fundamentalist christian labeling anybody who disagrees with their religion,or has brought up solid criticisms,as being an agent of satan.

" i do not like what you are saying about hillary,so therefore you must be a sexist".

the easiest,and most human,thing we do when faced with information and/or criticism that is in direct opposition to our long held beliefs.is to demonize the person making those claims,and therefore silence any further disruption to our own subjective belief system.

so when i talk about "insulated bubbles",and "echo chambers".that right there is what i am referring to,and it is dangerous.

i refuse to judge anybody on how they voted.they had their reasons,and i may even disagree with those reasons,but they have a right to their vote and who am i to judge them?

rehashing the election,or assigning blame based on ideological differences,accomplishes nothing.the REAL work starts now.trump is in office,and he is gearing up to be an unmitigated disaster.

so get involved.head to your next town hall meeting and speak your piece.start to connect with the political movements in your area and start to put pressure on your local representative.

i think we can all agree that trump is awful on so many levels,but to witness the american people become so politically engaged,so politically active,more active than they have been in decades.it really is inspiring,and all this is due to trump.

if hillary had won,would we see the same kind of newly energized,and politically active public?

i don't think so.

so let us stop with the rehashing.
stop with the blaming.
and get off our asses,step outside our own little,insulated echo chamber and start to engage.

don't know how to step outside your own bubble?
there is an app for that:
https://videosift.com/video/it-is-time-to-pop-your-social-media-echo-chamber-bubble

*oh,and even though i may have alluded to who i voted for.let me state clearly that i voted for hillary.i stick by my dislike of the "lesser of two evils" but come on...trump in the white house?

yeeesh....

The Friendzone As A Horror Movie

enoch says...

@ChaosEngine
that article was utter shit.

"friend zone" is a term used to shame women?
how can that possibly be considered an even remotely true statement?

she makes a valid point in that women are not binary creatures,and are mutli-faceted,nuanced and complex.well of COURSE they are,but the "friend zone" is from the guys perspective,not a woman's!

do you know why the majority of some men end up in the "friend zone"? or should we just change that term to be more accurate "i am not interested in you because you put all your cards on the table in the first five seconds,so while i think that is sweet,i no longer am curious about you,because i already got you".

you know..the "friend zone",or as chris rock put it "emergency dick,just break glass".

the problem here is that while relationships are a long slog of compromise,negotiation and mutual respect to work towards a common goal.romantic courtships are akin to a game,a playful dance fueled by curiosity,intrigue and of course:lust.

the men who who get relegated to the "friend zone" do not understand this very basic tenant of courtship.they reveal all their cards up front,and while that may be the most honest approach,and one that women have been openly asking for,it ignores that underneath it all,a woman wants romance,mystery and a sense of discovery that will continually peak their interests.

they want to be woo'd,they want courtship and romance.
when a man shows all his cards he takes that way from the woman,and now that she knows she can "have" him.he no longer interests her.

and what the author of this article so callously ignores is that the "friend zone" is not really a friend at all,but a surrogate for a boyfriend.having a bad day?she calls her "friend".feeling bloated and unattractive? has her "friend" come over to make her feel better about herself.needs a date for her company christmas party and doesn't want to go alone? get her "friend" to come along.

so it should not be a surprise that some men find this hurtful and degrading.

but she has a point,the woman owes them nothing.the woman was honest and forthright and it is the man who has put himself in this position.

and let me be clear before i am accused of being a misogynist pig.

some men do the exact same thing,and i am guilty of it myself.

i grew up with three sisters,so i tend to be more aware and sensitive to women's choices,and i respect their space.i have never been one to push myself on any woman.i was never the one to pursue or as this article describes "persistent",because i saw that as a bit "stalky".

so if i was interested in a woman,and that interest was not reciprocated,i shifted to "friend" mode with no issue.to me it was a win-win.ok,so she was not interested in me in that way,but she is super cool,and interesting and now i have a really interesting and intriguing friend.

now here is an interesting thing that happened maybe half of the time.my new friend and i would hang out,go to pubs,clubs,movies and sometimes just make dinner and watch movies.friends right? she was upfront and honest with me that she was not interested in me in that way,and i can respect that.

and then one day she would have her college friend over for dinner (this is a true story btw,one of many).her friend was cute,smart,witty and had a sick sense of humor.yep,i was digging on my friends college friend,and we were flirting up a storm.we were vibing hard,clicking like we knew each other for years.

now what do you think happened?
i bet you can guess.
and you would be right.
my friend,who was honest with me about not being interested,started to get real shitty with me.like offensive shitty and i really did not understand why.it came out of nowhere,and now she was acting like some jealous girlfriend.

so i pull her aside and i am like..what the fuck is wrong with you? you are being an asshole!

you know what she said to me? and i can remember this clear as day "watching my friend flirt with you,and seeing how much she is into you.i began to see you in a different light.i can see how she sees you,and that you are amazing but you are MY steve! not hers!".

and then she tried to kiss me,which was just awkward,because to me? she was in the "friend zone",and had been for over 6 months.i didn't want her that way.the irony here is that she could not handle that,and our friendship dissolved.which just fucking sucks.

this scenario has played out in my life quite a few times.so while anecdotal,i suspect women have had similar experiences.

so the "friend zone' may be considered a woman's thing directed at men,but in reality it is non-gender specific.most likely because woman are pursued more than men,but both men and women can be put in the "friend zone".

so what can we learn from this?
don't be a sap.
have some self respect and do not allow another person to use you for their own well being and sense of self.
if they are not interested? move on.
if they just want to be a friend? then be a friend,but do not expect anything more.if you cannot handle that,then move on.

pining away from a distance in the slim hopes that the focus of your affections will one day change their mind,is just pathetic.

and for fuck sakes,stop blaming that person for your heartache.
you put yourself in that position,and you can pull yourself out.

and the term "friend zone" is not used to shame women,that is just fucking stupid.the "friend zone" is a place that you put yourself in,because of flawed sense of romance,and you allowed yourself to be used for the betterment of another human being.so while you may be hurt and angry,you only have yourself to blame.

respect yourself yo.
/end rant

Man Addressing Entitled Woman Who Cuts The Line

bareboards2 says...

I did have an instinctive aversion to the title -- it felt like it would be a woman hating clip and I watched with trepidation.

Turns out it was nothing to do with gender. But the woman-hating site saw it as such.

We gotta get away from this binary crap. We are all people being good or bad or opportunistic or childish.

binary system soul friends

Rex Murphy | Free speech on campus

Phreezdryd says...

Bill C-16 adds "gender identity or expression" to the list of things protected by anti-discrimination law under the Canadian Human Rights Code.

The transsexual and gender non-binary communities are insisting that not using their preferred pronouns qualifies as discrimination, and therefore now punishable under this amendment.

Dr. Peterson argues that forcing people through the law to use pronouns created by this minority resembles how fascist ideologies of the past have functioned. A bad precedent to set, and not how natural societal mechanisms of language adoption function. He also seems to object to the long list of made up pronouns the gender-fluid types are insisting on.

One example of language adoption I ran across, without going into detail, was the creation and use of "Ms."



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