..yay verily dagmar, and some folks willingly pay to pass for your pet-project's site sake have myself in the past-One gracious being paid my way for six months having seen with an uncanny innate ability the value and grace with which I navigate the world...I thank you sincerely for the consulting fees already paid to myself and on my behalf....The fact that you and everyone playing suffer my tyranny is more than enough recompense

*edit>>Dude!!...check with a family member? Consult one who has bothered to do the work on your own genealogy? You've got a racist past my friend and if not, you're from some other, fucking planet. I would be willing to guess that it's a certainty you yourself have a bitch somewhere in your immediate family. (better?)

WOW! < Sarcasm intended
chides user on spelling
follows with insult
rewinds history of user's past input to hold them accountable when argument fails to satisfy ego

Who's the troll whose shit don't stank? *edit (your bullshit is stacked just as high as anyone else)

I always discriminate against asshole, especially when i recognize the asshole in myself....It's called daily self-correction, and it's a full-time fucking job.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

The irony of you as an American trash talking the Japanese for irradiating the Pacific is hilarious - and sad.

But seriously - racist comments like this get you an official warning. Please consult the guidelines if you need guidance.

Hi eric, all is well thanks! Actually making videos for my work at an environmental consultancy agency nowadays
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNBpH5mgAgw&hd=1

I'm sorry to say Reddit kind of pulled me away from videosift. Hope you're doing well too!

Cheers, unmet friend. Socking down a shot of Mexican brandy in your honor. Gonna chase it with some vino of indiscriminate origins.

Salute! May happiness be yours, now.

(shudder...good stuff....)

I consulted the "I Ching" today. It told me, and I quote:

"What unnecessary melancholy! You put your imagination and your soul aside and say: 'Look how sad I am!' This is what closes the way. It has no value whatsoever."

A gorilla can't very well buy the book of I Ching a drink, so I am at a loss as to how to pay my compliments.

Hope you're happy. Healthy. Not necessarily in that order.

Above all else...thanks for thinking of me.

You poured a little water on this cactus I call a heart.

It will sustain me....

And I owe you one.

My little brother is a magic consultant for TV shows. He's a behind the scenes magician who designs tricks for performers and helps them with the performance aspects.

I don't ask him how stuff is done as it rather spoils things and there's no point. What he has told be though is that most people would be absolutely amazed at the lengths a magician will go to to get a trick to work. Also the simpler a trick is the more likely it is to work.

So, there's probably very little in the way of trick here.

You sir clearly do not fully understand the nature of entropy (and nor does about 95% of the human race so you can be forgiven there).

You have however stumbled into making a genuinely worthwhile point here (though I must state I think for completely the wrong reasons).

The idea that the universe inevitably moves towards a complete "heat death" is I think incorrect, it fails to account for the effect of ever increasing complexity within the closed systems the universe produces (i.e. evolution which applies as much cosmically as it does to organic life on earth).

If the universe remained with no more complexity than it currently has then yes everything would eventually "burn out" and spread the energy of the universe so thinly that everything would cease to work (if only on a space-time level).

But the nature of the universe does not remain static, it creates ever more complex and actuated systems dialectically. Energies>Particles>Compounds>Nebulae>Stars>Planets>Organisms>Unconsciousness>Consciousness>???>God! (not intended to be an exhaustive list it's purely for illustration)

Evolution does trump entropy IMHO but this is largely because the actual laws of entropy are crazy complicated to understand and most people (including to some extent myself) don;t fully understand the subtleties of how it really works.

If nothing else; to say that the whole universe eventually enters a state of complete entropy assumes that every complex closed system that does or ever will exist will eventually break down. This is far from a forgone conclusion, we alone as evolving conscious creatures are capable of developing means to circumvent or even prevent this. Let alone what other wonders we have yet to observe or the universe has yet to manifest!

In conclusion: The Universe evolves until it reaches God (or dies trying ). God does not then create the universe but rather commits suicide (what else is God to do? Eternity is a very long time for someone that already knows and has done everything...). Process repeats ad infinitum.


Makes a lot more sense that way around don't you think? (and no ancient books of dubious origin need ever be consulted to derive it either)

Saying God created the universe only leaves you with more questions which by their very nature cannot be answered. We would have to be God itself to ever answer them, so we are left with a judgement call. No logical certainty, only faith.

This way around we can by pure rationalism and empiricism arrive at an explanation of how the universe might evolve God via ever increasing complexity of consciousness and actualisation (true post-humans alone would be like demi-gods, it's not a huge leap to keep taking this idea further)

Further to that Ontological mathematics (that is to say "really real mathematics") can assess a framework to understand how the universe itself came to be (we can arguably go pre-big bang with this but that's always going to be a controversial idea here).

^ Now I might be wrong about some or even all of that but it is at least a reductive argument. Using God as an explanation for anything without first explaining God is always going to be a circular argument. If your going to use circular logic you can prove basically anything you feel like!

"God is dead!"

Unfortunately things aren't so simple.

My understanding is that the land in question is traditional Native land which was never surrendered to Canada.

Rulings by the Supreme Court of Canada and lower courts have established a duty to consult and accommodate aboriginal people when development is considered on their land, even non-reserve traditional lands. This was either not done, or wasn't successful.

There is also some suspicion that one of the individuals who set fire to the police cruisers is an RCMP informant. But I haven't found satisfactory evidence of that yet. If true, it would not be the first instance of police provocateurs infiltrating protests in Canada.

I think that you will find enriched uranium is not plutonium. Also, depleted uranium can't be used to make nuclear weapons explode, so I don't know exactly why you bring it up. To be clear, all nuclear nations main weapons plutonium has been made in a very specific way, a way that is inconstant with power generation. It is exactly because power generation reactor are so costly that they are relatively poor weapons materials creators, the method in which uranium needs to be removed from the neutron flux requires you to shut it down often. It is better to get a small, non-power generation reactor and crank out the plutonium. This is what India did with a small test heavy water reactor (CIRUS reactor). You need a reactor you can quickly turn on and off (and uranium extracted), then chemically reprocess the uranium, let it cool down, then put it back into the reactor. This laborious method is why power generation reactors are poor candidates for weapons material generation and why the current generation of weapons have not been made this way.

IAEA safeguards are important to make sure enrichment centers aren't diverting enriched uranium, sure. Plutonium should also have some safeguards as well, so don't take my words for a lack of concern or action on a world stage, I just believe for most, their concerns are blown way out of proportion to the actual risk.

But to reiterate, the relatively complex process to make weapons ready plutonium is why powered reactors aren't used in for weapons material for any of the worlds nuclear weapons nations, nor have any of the non-nuclear nations which have nuclear power and participate in NPT and IAEA systems been implicated in such actions. If Amory Lovins is the one forming your opinion on this, I would suggest a different source. It is like asking the CATO institute their opinion on climate change. I would consult the IAEA or some respectable international organization known for objective science rather than an anti-nuclear advocate. I, actually, fell for the same supposed expert (Amory Lovins) and was fairly anti-nuclear myself as a result. While there surely is some overlap between weapons technology and reactors, they are separate enough that safeguards can be highly effective. The existence of many nuclear powered states without nuclear weapons gives credence to their abilities. Only those countries who decide not to participate in NPT and IAEA systems have been the players known to developing weapons, most notably North Korea.

IAEA Safeguards: Stemming the Spread of Nuclear Weapons

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Factsheets/English/S1_Safeguards.pdf

I think he is pessimistic is because energy use is also in growth, usually from coal. When you similarly look at CO2 emissions over the past decade, they aren't going down...every year is a new record. Even in IEA's 450 Scenario, "oil, coal and natural gas — remain the dominant energy sources in 2035"...this is a problem.

I can't find a notable environmental group that endorsees nuclear at all. Like the public, most environmental NGOs don't really make a distinction in reactor types. Nuclear is nuclear is nuclear. From friends of the earth to greenpeace, they are all pretty proudly anti-nuclear, with only local chapters of FoE even remotely interested in revisiting their views.

At any rate, I hope you aren't finding me to be combative or argumentative, I am not the best communicator of controversial issues. But I think climate issues are forcing us into a pretty thick walled box which will be hard to breakout of even in the most optimistic technological factors, which is why even if every single concern people have about nuclear is completely justified, waste, weapons, ect, we would most likely still need to build lots and lots of nuclear to even hope to address climate issues...they are that challenging.

The trucking guy, talking about how the apparent problem is that tunnels and bridges get built "without consultation with the industry" is just too funny.
*promote

I also cried, because I loved that show as a little kid when it aired in my country, watching it together with my siblings as we had an amazing adventure along with the characters of the show every single episode. The reason I'm crying now, however, is because:

Unlike the original series, this sequel is produced entirely in France; as a co-joint venture between the French television channel TF1, the Belgian channel La Trois, the French animation company Blue Spirit and Jean Chalopin's company Movie-Plus Group.
The first of the new seasons sees the series move to China. The design of the characters are more or less the same, although some subtle changes have been made to their physical appearances. Jean Chalopin and Bernard Deyries act as creative consultants on the new series, with Chalopin concentrating particularly on the scripts (which are written by Hadrian Soulez-Lariviere from Chalopin's own draft for the sequel) and Deyries focusing particularly on the graphical aspects. New background music is composed by Noam Kaniel.

It's not the same animation, it's not the same writers, it's not the same setting, it's not the same voice actors and it's not the same memorable music. Nothing's the same. It's the same feeling as with the Star Wars prequels if you can believe it, only with less source material. Maybe our children will enjoy this show without having the nostalgic baggage of "The Mysterious Cities of Gold" series; but for me as a fan of what must be 25 years or more, this just looks unwatchable.
Not everything good is made better by making more of it, and especially after a 30 year period of the series being over and done with. I think that the window of opportunity has passed on making another season of this show by a couple of decades, I think the season they're making looks inferior both in content and quality and I think the people who made the series work so well aren't being emulated, making this creation something akin to a stranger wearing a face mask of the show, something which is copying the names but is completely set apart from "The Mysterious Cities of Gold", with no legs of its own to stand on but only a cheap imitation crutch.

It would be important to know the other side.

That said, without knowing the other side, it gets pretty outrageous within the first 4 minutes. Regardless of what the other side is, it's obvious that the administration being consulted is highly prejudice. They are not acting as an impartial party. It is obvious that they are inventing reasons to find fault.

Yep, rebooting The Crow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crow_(film)#Reboot
They have a director and a star signed, with O'Barr on as a consultant, so we'll have to see. They say they are going back to the books... Meh.

The Water World reboot made me laugh.

Bare2boards isn't gonna be happy with this development is all. Are you sure you don't want to consult with him first?

I had 4 Demotivators at my desk 12 years ago:

I put this one up for our $280/hr consultant who managed to make the system less useable, less stable, and/or less maintainable every time he visited.

I put this one and this one up for my boss who routinely threatened to fire everyone or kill everyone when he found out that we were implementing his moronic "vision" to the letter and that it would never work.

Lastly, my person favorite, for the entire MIS department, because everyone's most refined skill was finger-pointing.