Tag Search for "calibration"

says...

*ban7.0
James Victoru
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2aWWC9FeIA

*related= videosift.com/video/How-to-Buy-Instagram-Followers
*ban6.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQH8boModUo

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Cyprus-company-formation
*ban5.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4egM_uTRsEU

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Best-hcg-Drop
*ban4.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxkJGyZMiFA

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Top-Work-From-Home
*ban3.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_bpI9r7R0k

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Cartier-Calibre-de-Cartier-Watches
*ban2.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG5lfUoqxfc

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Cartier-tank-MC
* ban1.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xfm_hnDYva8

Mordhaus

says...

It doesn't work like that. What you end up with is something akin to Australia's gun laws, which 'technically' still allow certain people to own guns, realistically most won't or can't

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), circuit loaded firearms. shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles including semi automatic, and paintball gun. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm. [AKA, you have to prove you have a reason to own these weapons. Newsflash, the majority of police will automatically deny you. Oh yeah, for a PAINTBALL gun as well.]

Category B: Centrefire rifles including bolt action, pump action, circuit loaded, and lever action (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. [Same as Cat A, must have a 'genuine reason' to own one, be registered, have a fee, ton of other limitations, so basically hard to own]

Category C: Pump-action or self-loading shotguns having a magazine capacity of 5 or fewer rounds and semi automatic rimfire rifles. [Only Primary producers, farm workers, firearm dealers, firearm safety officers, collectors and clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.]

Category D: Self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns have a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds. [Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies, occupational shooters and primary producers in some states. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.]

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. [This class is available to target shooters and certain security guards whose job requires possession of a firearm. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 6 months using club handguns, after which they may apply for a permit. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a paid-up member of an approved pistol club. Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38 or 9mm calibre or less and magazines may hold a maximum of 10 rounds. Participants in certain "approved" pistol competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is approved for 9mm/.38/.357 sig, handguns that meet the IPSC rules, larger calibres such as .45 were approved for IPSC handgun shooting contests in Australia in 2014. Barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94") long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72") for semi-automatic pistols unless the pistols are clearly ISSF target pistols; magazines are restricted to 10 rounds.]

Category R/E: Restricted weapons, such as machine guns, rocket launchers, full automatic self loading rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, howitzers and other artillery weapons [Obviously this class is right out...]

You can own some muzzleloading weapons without restrictions, although percussion cap pistols are restricted. In addition to these minor rules, all guns must be secured in a safe or other similar location, all must be fully registered so that the government knows the location of every single weapon/owner, and you can't sell them to another person, only to a dealer or the law to be destroyed.

After a few years of de-fanging and getting the citizens used to not having weapons, the Australian government and law enforcement routinely quietly hold gun buybacks to persuade more people to give up their weapons. They also do amnesty turn ins now and then.

So, that is the AMAZING suite of laws Australia put in place to stop mass shootings. Forgive me if, when combined, those type of laws would basically neuter the 2nd amendment. We've already neutered the 1st with 'hate speech' and the ability to sue over getting your feelings hurt. The 4th has been steadily under attack, because GOOD citizens shouldn't mind if the government rummages through everything you own or do. We haven't messed with the 5th amendment too much, so we could look at that next, maybe allow torture of everyone for confessions.

I'm getting tired of listing points, so let me just say this. I am incredibly sorry that people died, they shouldn't have and it is an utter shame. However, we are already fighting on a daily basis to keep a facsimile of the rights that were fought for when we built this country. Watering them down further only helps our government tighten the bonds of enslavement upon us. I can't agree with that.

kir_mokum

said:

no single regulation is going to stop the shootings but a collection of regulations/laws/policies can definitely help and the right collection of regulations/laws/policies could very well stop these shootings. doing nothing or repealing regulations/laws/policies is clearly not working and those policy makers should have been able to figure that out by the time the thought had finished running through their minds.

transmorpher says...

Ok I'll try to divide up my wall text a bit better this time

I totally acknowledge that people in the past, and even in present day, some people have to live a certain way in order to survive, but for the vast majority of people that doesn't apply.

Taste:
Like most of the senses in the human body, the sense of taste is in a constant state re-calibration. It's highly subjective and easily influenced over mere seconds but also long periods of time. They say it takes 3 weeks to acclimatize from things you crave, from salt to heroin. That's why most healthy eating books tell you go to cold tofurkey (see what I did there ) for 3 weeks. It's all about the brain chemistry. After 3 straight weeks you aren't craving it. (The habit might still be there but, the chemically driven cravings are gone).
Try it yourself by eating an apple before and after some soft drink. First the apple will taste sweet, and after it will taste sour. Or try decreasing salt over a 3 week period, it'll taste bland at first, but if you go back after 3 weeks it'll be way too salty.

Food science:
One of the major things stopping me from not being vegan, was the health concerns, so I read a number of books about plant-based eating.
There is a new book "How Not To Die" by Dr. Michael Greger. If you want scientific proof of a plant based diet this the one stop shop. 500 pages explaining tens of thousands of studies, some going for decades and involving hundreds of thousands of people. I was blown away at the simple fact that so many studies get done. Most of them are interventional studies also, meaning they are able to show cause and effect (unlike observational or corrolational studies, as he explains in the book). 150 pages of this book alone are lists of references to studies. It's pure unbiased science. (It's not a vegan book either in case you are worried about him being biased).

At the risk of spoiling the book - whole foods like apples and broccoli doesn't give you cancer, in fact they go a long way to preventing it, some bean based foods are as effective as chemotherapy, and without the side effects. I thought it sounded it ridiculous, but the science is valid.
Of course you can visit his website he explains all new research almost daily at nutritionfacts.org in 1 or 2 minute videos.
He also has a checklist phone app called Dr.Greger's Daily Dozen.

There are other authors too, most of these ones have recipes too, such as Dr. John McDougall, Dr. Neal Barnard, Dr. Cadwell Esselstyn, Dr. Dean Ornish, Dr Joel Furhman.
Health-wise it's the best thing you can do for yourself. And if like me you thought eating healthy meant salads, you'd be as wrong as I was I haven't had a salad for years. My blood results and vitamin levels are exactly what the books said they would be.

Try it for 3 weeks, but make sure you do it the right way as explained in the books, and you'll be shouting from roof tops about what a change it's made to your life. The other thing is, you get to eat more, and the more you eat it's healthier. What a weird concept in a world where we are constantly being told to calorie count (it doesn't work btw).

Environmental:
I've read a lot about ethics, reason and evidence based thinking, as well as nutrition and health (as a result of my own skepticism). So I could and I enjoy talking about these all day long. On the environmental side of things, I'm not as aware, but there some documentaries such as Earthlings and Cowspiracy which paint a pretty clear picture.
Anyone can do the maths even at a rough level - there are 56 billion animals bred and slaughtered each year. Feeding 56 billion animals (many of which are bigger than people) takes a lot more food than a mere 7 billion. Therefore it must take more crops and land to feed them, not to mention the land the animals occupy themselves, as well as the land they destroy by dump their waste products (feces are toxic in those concentrations, where as plant waste, is just compost)
The other thing is that many of these crops are grown in countries where people are starving, using up the fertile land to feed our livestock instead of the people. How f'd up is that?
It's reasons like that why countries like the Netherlands are asking their people to not eat meat more than 3 meals a week.

Productivity and economics:
Countries like Finland have government assistance to switch farmers from dairy to berry. Because they got sick of being sick:
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/dietary-guidelines-from-dairies-to-berries/

The world won't go vegan overnight, and realistically it will never be 100% vegan (people still smoke after all). There will be more than enough time to transition. And surely you aren't suggesting that we should eat meat and dairy to keep someone employed? I don't want anyone to lose their job, but to do something pointlessly cruel just to keep a person working seems wrong.

Animal industries are also heavily subsidized in many countries, so if they were to stop being subsidized that's money freed up for other projects, such as the ones in Finland.

The last bit:
If you eat a plant based diet, just like the cow you'll never have constipation, thanks to all of the fibre
When it comes to enzymes, humans are lactose intolerant because after the age of 2 the enzyme lactase stops being made by the body (unless you keep drinking it). Humans also don't have another enzyme called uricase (true omnivores, and carnivores do), which is the enzyme used to break down the protein called uric acid. As you might know gout is caused by too much uric acid, forming crystals in your joints.
However humans have a multitude of enzymes for digesting carbohydrate rich foods (plants). And no carbs don't make fat despite what the fitness industry would have you believe (as the books above explain).
Appealing to history as well, when they found fossilized human feces, it contained so much fibre it was obvious that humans ate primarily a plant based diet. (Animal foods don't contain fibre).

The reasons why you wouldn't want a whale to eat krill for you is:
1. Food is a packaged deal - there is nothing harmful in something like a potato. But feed a lot of potatoes to a pig, and eat the pig, you're getting some of the nutrients of a potato, but also heaps of stuff you're body doesn't need from the pig, like cholesterol, saturated fat, sulfur and methionine containing amino acids etc And no fibre. (low fibre means constipation and higher rates of colon cancer).
2. Your body's health is also dependent on the bacteria living inside you. (fun fact, most the weight of your poop is bacteria!) The bacteria inside you needs certain types of food to live. If you eat meat, you're starving your micro-organisms, and the less good bacteria you have, the less they produce certain chemicals and nutrients , and you get a knock on effect. The fewer the good bacteria also makes room for bad bacteria which make chemicals you don't want.
Coincidentally, if you eat 3 potatoes for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, you have all the protein you need - it worked for Matt Damon on Mars right?

dannym3141

said:

@transmorpher

It's a little difficult to 'debate' your comment, because the points that you address to me are numbered but don't reference to specific parts of my post. That's probably my fault as i was releasing frustration haphazardly and sarcastically, and that sarcasm wasn't aimed at you. All i can do is try and sum up whether i think we agree or disagree overall.

Essentially everything is a question of 'taste', even for you. There's no escaping our nature, most of us don't drink our own piss, many of us won't swallow our own blood, almost all of us have a flavour that we can't abide because we were fed it as a child. So yes, our decisions are defined by taste. But taste is decided by the food that is available to people, within reasonable distance of their house, at a price they find affordable according to the society around them, from a range of food that is decided by society around them. Your average person does not have the luxury to walk around a high street supermarket selecting the most humane and delicious foods. People get what they can afford, what they understand, what they can prepare and what is available. Our ancestors ate chicken because of necessity of their own kind, their children are exposed to chicken through no fault of their own, fast forward a few generations, and thus chicken becomes an affordable, accessible staple. Can we reach a compromise here? It may not be necessary for chickens to die to feed the human race, but it may be necessary for some people to eat chicken today because of their particular life.

I don't like the use of the phrase 'if i can do it, i know anyone can'. I think it's a mistake to deal in certainties, especially pertaining to lifestyles that you can't possibly know about without having lived them. Are you one of the many homeless people accepting chicken soup from a stranger because it's nourishing, cheap and easy for a stranger to buy, and keeps you warm on the streets? Are you a single mother with coeliac disease, a grumpy teenager and picky toddler who has 20 minutes to get to the supermarket and get something cooking? Or one of the millions using foodbanks in the UK (to our shame) now? I don't think you're willfully turning a blind eye to those people, i'm not tugging heart strings to do you a disservice. Maybe you're just fortunate you not only have the choice, but you have such choice that you can't imagine a life without it. I won't budge an inch on this one, you can't know what people have to do, and we have to accept life is not ideal.

And within that idealism and choice problem we can include illnesses that once again in IDEAL situations could survive without dead animals, nevertheless find it necessary to eat what they can identify and feel safe with.

Yes, those damn gluten hipsters drive me round the bend but only because they make people think that a LITTLE gluten is ok, it makes people take the problem less seriously (see Tumblr feminism... JOKE).

I agree that we must look at what action we can take now - and that is why i keep reminding you that we are not in an ideal world. If the veganism argument is to succeed then you must suggest a reasonable pathway to go from how we are now to whatever situation you would prefer. My "ideal farm" description was just me demonstrating the problem - that you need to show us your blueprint for how we start again without killing animals and feeding everyone we have.

And on that subject, your suggestions need to be backed by real research, otherwise you don't have any real plan. "It's fair to say there is very little risk" is a nice bit of illustrative language but it is not backed by any fact or figure and so i'm compelled to do my Penn and Teller impression and call bullshit. As of right now, the life expectancy of humans is better than it has ever been. It is up to you to prove that changing the diet of 7 billion people will result in neutrality or improvement of health and longevity. That proof must come in the form of large statistical analyses and thorough science. I don't want to sound like i'm being a dick, but any time you state something like that as a fact or with certainty, it needs to be backed up by something. I'm not nit picking and asking for common knowledge to have a citation, but things like this do:

-- 70% of farmland claim
-- 'fair to say very little risk' claim
-- meat gives you cancer claim - i accept it may have a carcinogenic effect but i'll remind you so does breathing, joss-sticks, broccoli, apples and water
-- 'the impact to the planet would be immense' claim - in what way, and what would be the downsides in terms of economy, productivity, health, animal welfare (where are all the animals going to be sent to retire as of day 1?)
-- etc. etc.

Oh, and a cow might get its protein from plants, but it walks around a field all day eating grass, chewing the cud and having sloppy shits with 4 stomachs and enzymes that i don't have................. I'm a bit puzzled by this one... I probably can't survive on what an alligator or a goldfish eats, but i can survive on parts of an alligator or fish. I can't eat enough krill in a day to keep me going, but i can let a whale do it for me...?

skinnydaddy1 says...

NBA's Response

NBA Response to New York Times Story on Flagrant Fouls and Charlotte Hornets guard Jeremy Lin
April 15, 2016

After reviewing our extensive officiating database, we have found no data that suggests Jeremy Lin is disadvantaged by our officiating staff. NBA referees use a set of criteria (available here) provided by the league office in determining whether a foul should be called flagrant. Following the game, contact that is deemed flagrant by referees and other hard contact (whether called or not) is reviewed by NBA Basketball Operations. As part of that review, Basketball Operations uses that same set of criteria, multiple video angles and enhancements, and its comparable database to calibrate its judgment. When deemed appropriate, a foul can be upgraded or downgraded and applicable penalties can be assessed. While some of the plays in the video involved hard contact, none was subsequently deemed a Flagrant Foul given the full circumstances, angles and comparables from past games.

With respect to the data, over the last three seasons, Mr. Lin ranked 21st among all players in number of drives to the basket with 1,537. While he has not drawn a flagrant foul in that time, neither have other guards known for their driving ability like Reggie Jackson (2,031 drives), Tony Parker (1,974), Tyreke Evans (1,969), Ty Lawson (1,891), Kyrie Irving (1,649) or Victor Oladipo (1,544). Conversely, Mr. Lin has drawn more common fouls on those drives than any of those previously listed players and has drawn fouls at the seventh-highest rate among the 23 players with more than 1,500 drives.

Furthermore, given the infrequency of flagrant fouls (roughly 1 per every 500 foul calls), it is not statistically significant that none of Mr. Lin’s 814 fouls drawn were deemed flagrant.

chicchorea

says...

chicchorea

says...

chicchorea

says...

*ban4.0

Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxkJGyZMiFA

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Top-Work-From-Home
*ban3.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_bpI9r7R0k

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Cartier-Calibre-de-Cartier-Watches
*ban2.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG5lfUoqxfc

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Cartier-tank-MC
* ban1.0
Swisswatches view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xfm_hnDYva8

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Classic-Car-Restoration-NY
vanna gainz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjG9mvO6AKw

*related=
James Victoru
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_M2bqflyDk

chicchorea

says...

chicchorea

says...

chicchorea

says...

Sycraft

says...

While the camera wouldn't get that kind of sound recording, you can easily record a piano like that with close micing. You stick the microphones inside the lid, down near the strings. It gives a very wide, expansive, soundstage. Here is an example of one kind of setup like that.

However it has a downside: It picks up more of the piano's noise, in particular hammer and pedal noise, as well as key noise. Those are the noises you hear, particularly when he starts working the pedals hard.

In terms of his key movements being sync'd to the music, they look sync'd to me. That kind of thing isn't that useful for evaluation because there are too many variables that can affect it:

1) The sync of your system. Your sound system and monitor have a delay to them. Depending on the difference in the delays, things can be a bit out of sync, perhaps noticeably so. Unless you have your system calibrated for it, which isn't likely on a computer.

2) Problems in the A/V sync in production. Something like this would probably be recorded with two devices: A hand held camera, and a dedicated recorder. The audio from the recorder would then need to be sync'd manually with the video. Depending on how accurate that is done, there can be some desync.

3) Sync issues in the video. I'm sure you've seen plenty of videos online with sync issues, various problems in encoding and streaming can cause them.

Not saying that this is real for sure, I don't know, just that I don't see or hear anything inconsistent.

Retroboy says...

Such high-calibre writing!

AeroMechanical says...

I do wonder if maybe they failed to calibrate it. Presumably it's barometric altitude, and the ground level could be well above sea level. Numerous airplanes have been lost to that same mistake.

newtboy

said:

I thought it was even better that he checked it over and over, I counted 5 times, as if he kept second guessing it and had to re-re-re-re-verify he was actually on the ground.

CreamK

says...

What they meant by this is to use all power available. They got 100l of fuel to go full 1½h race. The fuel flow is limited to 100l/h. That means they need to use around 67l/h on average, this of course decreases during braking and is almost at max during acceleration. Also energy recovery and the release of that energy has some leeway to be used in different ratios, it is limited to 33s per lap. How that energy is divided, is up to the team.. So they will have the full boost of 160hp from ERS and full 100l/h fuel flow when using "push to pass" button but it's nowhere near the common definition of that function. Traditional push to pass is high boost, on 2014 F1 it means few percentages of power. The correct term would be "overtake mode".

RBR infringed fuel flow rule and no other team had been even warned, FIA has guidelines that teams should calibrate with enough margins to void minor differences between sensors. RBR refused to do this and counted on FIA not counting that marginal change. FIA had stated pre-season that in no case there will be extra fuel flow allowed, it's almost zero tolerance policy.

They've done this before, made a marginal rule infringement and got away with Charlie Whitings slap on the wrist:"change it to the next race".. Their camera mountings is already one of those little things that is technically legal and at the same is not.. It all depends if the TV crews can find a suitable camera. If they say "no", the rules are clear: they need unobstructed view.. That small hole hardly allow high quality picture, the only lens that could even remotely suffice is fisheye lens with a mask: it is not their standard equipment.. RBR most likely will have to change those too (imho, so should merc camera pods and mclaren parachutes too). Compare that to Williams 360 camera pod and it's pretty clear what FIA means by "enough room to fit camera" means.

Last year they had holes on the floor in monaco: ruling was, change them to the next race.. Then there was the TC scandal, RBR used illegal engine mappings.. They used them last year too when there was a ban of feeding fuel to exhaust during zero throttle to feed the blown diffuser: RBR chuckled and used them anyway.. They still have the duct inside the nose, it violates the intention of the rule but is legal technically. Of course the severity of the punishment is a clear sign: FIA just showed that no more of that bullshit, RBR has to start respecting rules.

oritteropo

said:

Are you sure? The radio call to Bottas was "use your push to pass button"!

RBR have appealed, and claim that the sensor was wrong (and reckon they can prove it). That could go either way in the final wash-up.

Yogi

says...

I am a huge fan of community and I think this was soo freaking amazing it made the rest of the episode lower on the volume for me. I mean this left a huge gaping asshole in my soul after watching this I didn't know how to calibrate for the rest of the episode. If this came at the end I think I would've just taken my own life.

VideoSift

/Learn

5.0

search results matching tag: `calibration`

Apple Watch Band - HERMES Edition

Samantha Bee on Orlando - Again? Again.

If Meat Eaters Acted Like Vegans

Jeremy Lin is a Victim of Repeated Uncalled Flagrant Fouls

How to Buy Instagram Followers

Cyprus company formation

Best hcg Drop

Cartier tank MC

Do you want the best online sales

Top Work From Home

Bad/Smooth Criminal Piano Mash-up With Exceptional Skill

Iron Sky: The Coming Race - JESUS IS BACK!

Skydiving Altitude Awareness Fail, Double Cypres Fire

Transforming Formula One: 2014 Rules Explained by Red Bull

Community - Dean Pelton's Rap (Episode Highlight)

Send this Article to a Friend

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon

search results matching tag: calibration

Member Login

Sign Up

Account Recovery

search results matching tag: `calibration`