search results matching tag: compounds

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (84)     Sift Talk (9)     Blogs (5)     Comments (484)   

The Adpocalypse: What it Means

MilkmanDan says...

I agree that NoScript tends to make it a hassle to get basic functionality out of the vast majority of the web. You have to play around with allowing scripts from some domains and not others, on pretty much every page you visit.

...Which is pretty scary, if you think about it. Are all of those cross-site scripts beneficial or even necessary from a user standpoint? Hell no. Users stand to gain nothing from all that crap running. From our perspective, they just increase load times and data usage, often compounded with auto-reloading. We should have control over that stuff in all circumstances, but it becomes absolutely critical in mobile internet where we generally don't have as much processing power AND the vast majority of people have data usage caps.

Basically what I'm saying is, the admitted fact that NoScript tends to make the web unusable is a symptom of a deeper problem with how the web is constructed these days.

If you like the idea of NoScript, but generally find it too high-maintenance, you might want to try Privacy Badger. It requires somewhat less user input with regards to which trackers/scripts get blocked, instead going with defaults based on "trustworthiness" as measured by algorithms from the EFF. Those defaults can be tweaked if you desire, also.

I usually run a Firefox (or Pale Moon) client that is extremely locked down. UBlock Origin, NoScript, Privacy Badger, Self-Destructing Cookies, sometimes Ghostery, etc. I use that as my default browser, and take the time to fine-tune the controls in NoScript, element hiding in uBlock, etc. for sites that I visit regularly.

But frequently, I'll find a link to some article that I want to read and notice that the page content won't load at all since it requires some nonsensical script. In those cases, if I don't want to take the time to fiddle with NoScript etc. permissions, I copy the URL and fire up Chrome in incognito mode, with only uBlock Origin.

Probably not worth the hassle for most people, but I guess I'm kicking and screaming my way into this brave new world.

ChaosEngine said:

Just for the record, I do run ad block plus on chrome.

@00Scud00, I used to run noscript, but it pretty much made the web unusable, or I spent so much time enabling js on certain sites it wasn't worth it.

Impeachara ®

Barrier1 Systems Vehicle Arrestor Net

eric3579 says...

If this vid is an indication then instant deployment makes it very difficult to defeat i would guess. Also probably used in different places then compounds in dangerous areas where you often see cement block barriers. https://youtu.be/AcG4i29frXI

greatgooglymoogly said:

It would be neat to see what they are anchored to. Also, being suspended 3 feet off the ground makes it much easier to defeat than big heavy concrete blocks.

officer Izzo-getting fired for challenging a corrupt system

enoch says...

@newtboy
hey man,thanks for giving him a shot.
this was the first video i ever watched of officer izzo,and i forgot where i even came across him.

maybe facebook?
i dunno,but i have many facebook friends who are cops and corrections officers.so probably.

i really dug how he addressed the disparity of poor neighborhoods,and the working poor to those of more privileged backgrounds.how he,as an officer,is forced to further compound their struggles by:tickets/racial profiling and as he pointed out..arrest arrest arrest.

from what i gather (because i couldn't find the original) he had posted a video that many of his fellow officers had found offensive and controversial.this video appears to be a clarification directed towards his fellow officers who could not understand why he was criticizing his own profession,and therefore criticizing THEM.

it appears he didn't go the "hey guys,i am sorry" but rather doubled down by clarifying what he felt law enforcement SHOULD be and not what it had become.

he blames the command staff,and in many of his videos he repeats that accusation.i remember even here on the sift we had a cop explain that many of the things we were all bitching about,and being offended by,were actually due to the command structure and not the patrol officers themselves.

which has a ring of truth to my ears being ex military.

i love how he directly speaks of how some patrol officers are forced to do unethical and immoral acts,while the command staff ignores those officers with the most facile of justifications:hey,it's legal.

that puts the officer at risk.just like a bad command staff in the military puts the enlisted man at risk.i mean,just look at the suicide stats for todays military..twenty two military men commit suicide daily,and how does the military brass respond?

those men had mental issues.

oh really? EVERY single one of them?
either there is a suicide epidemic or maybe..maaaaaybe...those who are in command,and whose responsibility it is for the well being of their men,are a gaggle of incompetent fuckwads.who do not have the courage nor integrity to own up to their own epic failures as commanders.

listening to officer Izzo,i suspect there are many parallels between military service and law enforcement.

i respect how he states he is doing this for the everyday patrolmen,even the ones who disagree and are criticizing him.

i think it is a good thing to hear a perspective from a man who does the job.to hear that even the cops are going "what the fuck".

anyways,thanks for watching man,i hope others give officer Izzo a chance as well.

Boy Falls off NZ Ski Lift

CrushBug says...

A fall from that height would have injured him quite severely, if he landed directly on the snow below. The snow was packed and he would have had at least 1 if not 2 broken legs, plus a good chance of a compound fracture and the bleeding that comes from that.

New Poll Numbers Have Clinton Far Behind And Falling

ChaosEngine says...

That's the thing, I think they probably are.

I saw a quote the other day that said if Trump wins, "it won't be a great time to be mexican or black or a woman in America, but other than that things will be pretty much the same".

It's 2016. Writing off huge demographics like that shouldn't be an option.

@newtboy, I don't know what you do to affect change in the US. Your political system is awful, your voting system is borderline insane and your judicial apparatus is compounding the problem with some unbelievably short-sighted decision (i.e. Citizens United).

But I do know the answer isn't Trump.

If your house has rot, you don't burn it down. You have to do the hard work of finding the problem areas, scaffolding them to protect the rest of the house, ripping out the problems, replacing them and then insulating so you don't get the problem again.

dannym3141 said:

But maybe the stakes aren't as high for everyone else.

BattleBots - Blacksmith vs. Minotaur

Bruti79 says...

The guy who made Minotaur is also a metalurgist, so he specifically made strong compounds for the drum and the frame. The hammer may have been effective against some bots, but his Mino's composition was just bouncing that hammer off it's frame.

I'm glad this show came back. =)

What Happened Before History? Human Origins in a Nutshell

TheFreak says...

Depends on the food actually. Cooking can make carotenoids more bioavailable, denature oxalates which block the absorption of certain vitamins and minerals, and also form new compounds such as anti-oxidants.

Other foods loose nutrients as they're cooked.

Whatever. Eat what you like and at least you'll be happy.

ChaosEngine said:

It doesn't make it more nutritious per se, but it does mean that your body has to expend less energy digesting it, so you get more nett energy (joules/calories/whatever) from eating cooked food (particularly meat).

Monsanto, America's Monster

newtboy says...

There are hundreds/thousands of farms in my area. I don't think a single one is >1000 acres. Hundreds of families support themselves relatively well on the income they make from the smaller farms. True, you probably can't send 3 children to college on that money, but hardly anyone could these days...that's around $150k a year for 4+ years JUST for their base education. Be real, mom and pop store owners can't afford that either.

EDIT: Oh, I see, the AVERAGE is about 1000 acres....but that includes the 1000000 acre industrial farms. What is the average acreage for a "family farm" (by which I mean it's owned by the single family that lives and works on the land and supports itself on the product of that work)?

EDIT: Actually, there are thousands of 'family farms' in my area that produce more than enough product to send 3 kids to college on >5 acres with no industrialization at all (and many many more that do over use chemicals and have destroyed many of our watersheds with their toxic runoff)....I live in Humboldt county, it's easy to make a ton of money on a tiny 'farm' here...for now.

My idea of what's sustainable or good practice is based on long term personal (>33 years personally growing vegetables using both chemical and natural fertilizers) and multiple multi generational familial experiences (both mine and neighbors) AND all literature on the subject which is unequivocal that over use of chemical fertilizers damages the land and watersheds and requires more and more chemicals and excess water every year to mitigate that compounding soil damage, or leaving the field fallow long enough to wash it clean of excess salts (which then end up in the watershed).
Fertilizers carry salts. With excessive use, salts build up. Salt buildup harms crops and beneficial bacteria. Bacteria are necessary for healthy plant growth. If you and yours don't know that and act accordingly, it's astonishing your family can still farm the same land at all, you've been incredibly lucky. You either don't over use the normal salt laden chemical fertilizers on that land, or you're lying. There's simply no other option.

EDIT: It is possible that you are getting better yields for numerous reasons...."better" crop genes (both larger crops and more resistant to insects, drought, disease, etc.), better/more fertilizers, better/more pesticides, and seeing as you're in Canada, climate change. Warmer weather would absolutely give YOU better yields of almost any crop, that's not true farther South. Better yields does not mean you aren't destroying the land, BTW. It is possible to use chemicals and insane amounts of water to grow on land that's "dead", but it takes more and more chemicals and water to do, and those chemicals don't evaporate into nothing, they run off.
If you are getting better yields every year using the same methods and amounts of additives and growing the exact same crops, I'm incredibly interested in how you pull that off.

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

1000 acre farms do not count as "family farms" in my eyes, even if they are owned by a single family.

Your entitled to that opinion, but you are also flat wrong. If you want to support a family of 2 or 3 children and do something as outrageous as send them off for post secondary education it isn't happening by running a subsistence farm. I'm in Manitoba, Canada and we've got about 20 thousand farms and the average size is right around 1000 acres. Those guys are in exactly the same financial class as the mom and pop corner convenience stores. They've got about the same money for raising their families and retire with about the same kind of savings. I really don't care whether you agree with me on that or not, it is a reality of farming today.

BUT....overuse of equipment either over packs the soil, making it produce far less, or over plows the soil, making it run off and blow away (see the dust bowl).
...
No, actually overproducing on a piece of land like that makes it unusable quickly and new farm land is needed to replace it while it recuperates (if it ever can). Chemical fertilizers add salts that kill beneficial bacteria, "killing" the soil, sometimes permanently. producing double or triple the amount of food on the same land is beneficial in the extreme short term, and disastrous in the barely long term.


I've got family that's been farming this same land for better then 100 years and still getting better yields per acre ever year. Your idea's about what is sustainable or good practice is disconnected from reality.

The Friend Zone

entr0py says...

True I think most friendzone complaints come from guys who are just faking friendship for the prospect of future boning. Those guys are already assholes, and blaming the woman for not falling for their bait and switch scam only compounds their assholery.

Though to be a little more sympathetic, lots of relationships start from friendships. And knowing when you've been placed permanently in the friend category can save you some embarrassment. You don't need to be resentful about her decision to care about it.

Imagoamin said:

The friend zone casually explained:

Just because you like someone doesn't mean they're required to like you back and someone not constantly considering how you want to fuck them doesn't mean you're being slighted.

How is "the friend zone" even still a thing? Jesus.

Magic Mushrooms May Cure Depression

shagen454 says...

I'd disagree with, " Of course, cocaine, amphetamines, benzodiazepines, alcohol and opiates also "cure" depression. So it's pretty complicated in practice."

Tryptamines have been known to combat depression when used correctly for a long time. They are non-addictive, you can't overdose and the positive effects are long lasting - due to experiencing what some call experiencing the "divine"- where the positive changes take place.

The false judgements of society are to blame for the misinformed perception of these compounds - when used responsibly.

AeroMechanical said:

I believe there could be something to this. I've heard the same thing about other hallucinogens in previous studies (though that was years ago, and nothing came of it). It's interesting stuff, I'd guess sort of like a chemical electroshock therapy. From the detailed explanation I got from a very, very close friend who used hallucinogens in his younger years, there definitely did seem to be an effect sort of like throwing the reset switch in the brain that lasted for a good while after the trip itself was over.

Of course, cocaine, amphetamines, benzodiazepines, alcohol and opiates also "cure" depression. So it's pretty complicated in practice.

The limits of how far humanity can ever travel - Kurzgesagt

newtboy says...

What I can find said at 1g acceleration it will take just over 1 year (ship time, slightly longer to outside observers) to reach the speed of light.

That's 46 miles per second per megaparsec (roughly 3.2 million light years) not for the whole universe.

The local group is over 3 megaparsecs across....I can't find how far the nearest group is, but it's likely >thousands of megaparsecs away, meaning if it's just 1000 away, that's 46000mps (miles per second) added to a trip that would already take 3200000000years at the speed of light. 31,536,000 seconds per year X >46000mps= >14506560000000 extra miles per year X 3200000000years =>4.6420992e+21miles, or >789606940 light years, or >263 megaparsecs of expansion during the 1000 megaparsec trip (if I did the math right, and that's not compounded by the second as it should be, that would make those numbers far larger). This means if we only ever get to 1/4 light speed, expansion already is faster than we'll ever go, and every day there's more space to expand, so it's expanding faster.

Even if we somehow managed light speed and the excessively long trip, after well over 4 billion years at light speed, we would have long since ceased to be human and evolved into something else ....and that's the closest groups, farther away is already well out of reach even at full light speed.

EDIT: about the wormhole thing, 'could' means they haven't ruled it out yet, not that we do, or ever will have the ability, or even that physics allows it.

SDGundamX said:

If I'm doing the math correctly, the universe is expanding at around 46 miles per second, which is around 165,000 mph. Is there some reason why humans could not overcome this speed limit? It doesn't seem that exceptionally fast (no where near as fast as the speed of light), and if you accelerate slowly to it, like over several days or weeks, the g-forces involved wouldn't be that extreme, would they? The video didn't really explain why we could never go fast enough to overcome the expansion rate.

Also, I thought most theortical physicists like Stephen Hawking believe that in the future technology could advance enough to allow us bend space-time and hence travel "faster than the speed of light" without actually travelling faster than the speed of light, basically like folding a piece of paper and sticking a pin through both sides. When you lay the paper down flat, the two holes will seem quite far away from each other, but when you fold the paper, the holes are right next to each other. Our current understanding of physics doesn't rule out the possibility (at least from a mathematical perspective) although generating the energy necessary to perform such a feat would of course be problematic.

Three Teen Girls Drowned as Cops Stand By and Do Nothing

newtboy says...

OK, 2 things we do know for certain....
1)they came out publicly claiming that "deputies took off their belts and tried to rush into the water to save the girls." but "didn't get far".
2) we know they didn't enter the water at all, and made absolutely zero attempt to save the screaming girls (unless you count loitering around until the screaming stopped before considering even calling for a tractor as some kind of attempt to save them...I don't).

Had #1 been true and the officers had actually had trouble reaching the car, or getting the girls out, fine. It was in no way true, though. In fact, we hear them discussing the screaming girls and waiting around until "they're done" before even considering any action.

You are welcome to your own opinion about that, but TRYING to save people from drowning is one of the things we pay first responders to do. When they completely, intentionally, and unequivocally shirk that duty (and the lie is proof that they knew it was wrong), and people die, that's murder...they have a DUTY to try. When they lie about it in an official capacity, that should be compounding special circumstances and get them a needle.

Jinx said:

As I said, I don't know what happened, but yeah, this "murderous pigs chase teenagers into 4ft of water and drown them" thing seems a tad extreme. I'm not saying that it isn't possible they are culpable in some way, I just can't make any determination about it from this dashcam/audio alone.

And yeah, if they were my family I probably would think differently about it - but then if they were family I wouldn't be allowed to sit on the jury, so, yah.

Bernie Sanders Polling Surge - Seth Meyers

Lawdeedaw says...

I guess the question is then are we going to be like the grasshopper or the ant? Will we prepare for the eventuality that automation and political corruptness (based on the demands of cheap employment pools and the money they receive from corporations desperate to keep that status quo) will merge together for the perfect storm? My problem is the attrition has been slow, just compounding the problem...

radx said:

I would argue that automation still isn't the job killer #1. Plain old political decisions, such as sound finance, deficit hawkery, and austerity lead by a mile in this category. Neither is being addressed properly, but I find it hard to focus on the employment effects of automation when the Eurozone, for instance, runs at >10% unemployment strictly due to policies enacted by (non-)elected officials. We don't need technology to cause mass unemployment, humans can do that all on their own.

Additionally, even the amount of work available is a matter of perspective. Within the current system, the number of jobs with a decent salary is already dwarfed by the number of people looking for one. The amount of work to be done, on the other hand, is not.

Case in point: our (read: German) national railroad company is short-staffed by about 80.000-100.000 people, last I checked; our healthcare system is short-staffed by at least 200.000 people, probably a lot more; law enforcement is short by about 50.000; education is short by at least 20.000. Let's not even talk about infrastructure or ecological maintenance/regeneration. These are not open positions though, because nobody is willing/able to pay the bill.

So while I agree that we should be discussing how to deal with technological change, a more pressing matter is either to alter the system or to at least take back control over the vast sums of dead currency floating around in the financial nirvana or on Stephen Schwarzman's bank accounts. First stop: full employment. Then, gradually, guaranteed basic income when automation does, in fact, cause mass unemployment.

Finally, I don't think automation will do as quick as sweep as some presume. The quality of software in commercial machines is quite absymal in many cases, since it was written in the normal fashion: do it now, do it quickly, here's five bucks. Efficiency improvements generally come at the price of QA, and it shows. Europe's most modern railway control center is nearby, and it never went online -- Bombardier cut corners and never had the proper railway expertise to begin with. Meanwhile, the center build in '53 is working just fine, and so are the switches put in place when Wilhelm II was running the show.

Edit: That said, I'm thrilled to see mind-numbing labour being replaced by machines. Can't happen quickly enough.

Oregon Occupiers Rummage Through Paiute Artifacts

newtboy says...

Why are they not being arrested as they leave the compound? It seems easy to arrest anyone leaving the scene, or trying to enter. They'll leave when the dildos run out.

enoch said:

.... so how would YOU propose to deal with the situation in oregon?



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