search results matching tag: counterweight

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (4)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (1)     Comments (24)   

Cliff Swing Did Not Go According To Plan

cloudballoon says...

[Guy pushing the swing] Ooops, that didn't go according to plan, but same effect, so meh?

End joke.

Who designed the swing? Even a non-engineer idiot like me see a few major problems (and not counting how solid the foundation it's on). The bump is caused by the swing structured in a rectanglular shape instead of a trapezoid shape looking from the front/back. Then looking from the sides, it's shaped like right triangle " /I " instead of an inverted V triangle, with no counterweight to compensate when the swing is pushed to the open cliff side. And then, of course, seat belts.

That's a EIA incident waiting to happen sooner or later. It's just sheer luck that they aren't dead.

If you had a fear of elevators before...

WaterDweller says...

May not be common knowledge, but elevators actually have a counterweight, that weighs as much as the elevator would when it's filled by a certain number of people, to ease the load on the motor. When there's only one person in the elevator, the motor actually has to work harder when the elevator is on the way down than on the way up, as it has to lift the counterweight.

Volkswagen - Words of the World --- history of the VW

radx says...

The article linked above mentions Röpke and Eucken as champions of free market capitalism, so to speak. Ironically, Bernie Sanders is quite in line with many of Walter Eucken's core ideas. For instance, Eucken declared legal responsibility to be an absolute necessity for competition within a market economy. Meaning that under Eucken's notion of capitalism, US prisons would be filled to the brim with white collar criminals from Wall Street and just about every multinational corporation, including Volkswagen.

Ludwig Erhard, credited by many to be the main figure behind the German "Wirtschaftswunder" (nothing wonderous about it), postulated real wage growth in line with productivity and target inflation as an imperative for a working social market economy. Again, very much in line with Bernie Sanders. Maybe even to the left of Sanders. A 5% increase in productivity and a target inflation of 2% requires a wage increase of 7%, otherwise your economy will starve itself of the demand it requires to absorb its increased production. You can steal it from foreign countries, like Germany's been doing for more than a decade now, but that kind of parasitic behaviour is generally frowned upon. Minimum wage in the US according to Erhard would be what now, $25-$30? So much for Sanders' $15...

Sennholz further mentions the CDU as a counterweight to the SPD. Well, the CDU's "Ahlener Programm" in 1947 declared that both marxism and capitalism failed the German people. In fact, it put significant blame for Germany's descent into fascism at the feet of the capitalistic system and called for a complete restart with focus NOT on the pursuit of profit and power, but the well-being of the people. They called for socialism with Christian responsibility, later watered down and known as social market economy or Rhine capitalism.

As for the economic policies conducted by the occupation forces: German industry, and large corporations in particular, were shackled for the role they played during the war. If you work tens of thousands of slaves to their death, you lose your right to... well, anything. If they had stripped IG Farben, Krupp and the likes down to the very bone, nobody could have complained. No economic liberties for the suppliers behind a genocide.

Next in line, the comparison with Germany's European neighbours. Sennholz wrote that piece in '55, so you can't really blame him for it. Italy had more growth from '58 onwards, France had more growth than its devastated neighbour from '62 onwards. The third Axis power, Japan, had significantly more growth from '58 onwards.

Why did some European and Asian countries grew much more rapidly than the US? Fair Deal? Nope, Bretton-Woods. Semi-fixed exchange rates caused the Deutsche Mark and the Yen to be ridiculously undervalued compared to the Dollar, thus increasing German and Japanese competitiveness at the cost of the US. Stable trade relations created by the semi-fixed exchange rates plus the highly expansive monetary policy in the US – that's what boosted Germany's economy most of all. Sort of like China over the last two decades, except we were needed as a bulwark against the evil, evil Commies, so the US kept going full throttle.

Our glorious policians tried the same policies (Adenauer/Erhard) in East Germany after reunification, even though global conditions were vastly different, and the result is the mess we now have over there. The entire industry was burned to the ground when they set the exchange rate too high, thus completely destroying what little competitiveness remained. Two trillion DM later, still no improvement. A job well done, truly.

Anyway, if anything, Bernie Sanders' program is closer to post-war German social market economic principles than to the East-German bastard of socialism, state capitalism and planned economy imposed by an autocratic system. However, even that messed up system produced significantly less poverty, both in quality and quantity, than the current US corporatocracy. No homelessness, no starvation, proper healthcare for everyone – reality in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). And despite the fact that they were used as cheap labour for western corporations, no less. My first Ikea shelf was produced by our oppressed brothers and sisters in the East. The Wall "protected" the West from cheap labour while letting goods pass right through – splendid membrane, that one.

PS: Since that article was written in '55, I have to mention one of my city's most famous citizens: Otto Brenner. He was elected head of the IG Metal, this country's most influential trade union, in 1956 after having shared the office since 1952. The policies he fought for, and pushed through, during his 16 years in charge of the union are very much in line with what Sanders is campaigning for.

RT-putin on isreal-iran and relations with america

coolhund says...

I never said to rely on Putin or RT solely. I just tried to explain that ignoring him and RT because of stupid reasons like that is not very wise, because the west isnt much better. You have to see all the sides to make a proper judgement.

A, B and C are irrelevant. Ownership is irrelevant because the western media is also "owned" by people with an agenda. But even between those different people there is a common agenda. You can see that in Germanys media right now very well. They are outright lying collectively to the people just to stay politically correct.

Reputation also is irrelevant because objectivity > reputation.

Funding is also irrelevant, as you said yourself. You can see it very well that it doesnt change much where they get their money from. The agenda matters. Also very well observable lately.

Putin first and foremost is a counterweight. He makes the western mistakes more obvious. He also has very good points when defending his own countries actions. Even the homosexual ones, if you ever listened to him on that topic. Yes, as a political leader he is of course manipulating, but he makes much more sense, actually uses facts and doesnt nearly lie as much as any politician I have ever seen.
You of course need to have and acknowledge those facts to realize that. But you made it clear that you arent. Comparing Russias imperialism with Americas shows just how much. Its pretty much clear the USA was involved in that coup detat once again. Now imagine how the USA would have reacted if Russia did that in Canada or Mexico. Or imagine how the USA would react to being completely surrounded by Russian military bases, having decades of history of destabilizing and overthrowing countries and whole regions, breaking and ignoring international law, even threatening the country where the international court sits to never dare to bring one of their before their court and then Russia claiming that the USA is the aggressor.

Actually Russia has long been very passive about the eastern expansion of NATO and they forgave that bleeding out of Russia towards the west in the 90s. Something like that happening at their doorstep actually justifies much MUCH harsher reactions, but they didnt use them. Instead they actually took another (hypocritical) slap in the face rather passively and silently with those sanctions.

Syria... I am surprised you even bring that up, because thats just stupid to use that for your argument. Syria has been a long ally of Russia and they asked for help after the US and NATO started bombing their infrastructure instead of ISIS. The war in Syria is even more obviously an externally funded war, not a civil war, while in the Ukraine you can actually see parts of a civil war, it started like that, because those people didnt want the new government. Also again mostly due to America and their support of other totalitarian regimes in that region.
You should read this:
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/05/31/holes-in-the-neocons-syrian-story/

RedSky said:

1 - Well let me deconstruct that a bit. Presumably you rely on news, how can you rely on any of it to be trustworthy? Several ways obviously, I would say the main are (A) Ownership, (B) Reputation and (C) Funding.

A - Ownership - RT (and it's web of shadowy news sites pretending to be local) are owned by the Kremlin or clearly Kremlin linked oligarchs. Their incentives should be clear, promote the Putin narrative. When all independent TV news has been shuttered within Russia or taken over, you would expect these outfits to be heavily biased towards propaganda. I would similarly have to be suspect of outfits like Voice of America (US government funded). Corporate news sources have their own incentives. I happen to like the Economist but I'm mindful of its ownership involving the Rothschild family and Eric Schmidt (Google) being on the board for example. After all, every news outfit is owned by someone.

B - Reputation - This is the main one to me. You can say what you will about Western media, but there is a cultural expectation among its people and its reporters of the freedom to report newsworthy stories. There are obviously biases and those form part of the news source's reputation. We know TV news tend to be short on fact and sensationalist. Equally, we know Fox News to be right wing. We inevitably find these things out because no matter how much a news owner might want to control its message, freedom of speech sees the reputation leak out. We have reports (regarding Fox for example) that memos go out to use specific language like "Climategate" or we have controversies such as when photos of NYT reporters were photoshopped with yellow teeth.

C - Funding - Advertising vs Subscription, but that's not really relevant here.

My main point is, relying on Putin directly or any of his web of 'news' to get information about Russia or America is particularly silly. We know their ownership, reputation and thereby incentives. Or any state backed news. For corporate news, ultimately any bias from ownership, reputation or say government influence will leak out.

2 - I don't see him as any more politically effective or intelligent than necessarily any other major leader. If I've expressed anything here it should be that what Putin says is just as calculated and manipulative as any politician. Just because it has a veneer of 'speaking truth to power' or recounts some truths does not mean it is true in its entirety. Bluster and waging wars is politically popular in Russia, he is simply playing to a different audience. I would say any notion that he is more 'objective' is farcical. After all the kind of imperialism that he decries of America is the exact kind he's engaged in in Ukraine and now Syria!

RT-putin on isreal-iran and relations with america

RedSky says...

@Asmo

On your comment:

The CIA's role in the 1953 Iran ouster is generally exaggerated. Several things - (1) by 1953, the Islamic clergy supported Mossadeq's ouster, something they have been suppressing ever since in inflating their anti-US stance (2) by the time of his ouster he also lacked the support of either his parliament or the people, (3) prior to it that year, he deposed his disapproving parliament with a clearly fraudulent 99% of the vote in a national referendum, (4) strictly speaking Iran was still a monarchy and the shah deposed his PM legally under the constitution, something that Mossadeq refused to abide by.

Did the UK put economic pressure on Iran when it threatened to nationalize its oil and usurp its remnants of imperialism? Sure. Did the UK then convince Eisenhower to mount a political and propaganda campaign against Mossadeq? Sure. Was that instrumental in fomenting a popular uprising of the parliament, the clergy and large portions of the 20m general population against him? Probably not.

Also I listened to it. Really, it's a meandering, probably scripted (the parts where he feigns surprise at the questioning is particularly humorous) that tries to generalize US actions, some of which were obviously harmful and support his argument. Putting Stalin in a positive light relative to the willingness of the US to use the bomb is, amusing? I'm not sure what to call it.

That the US needs a common threat to unite against holds some grains of truth in the present day but is really part of a wider narrative by Putin to construct the US as imperalist and domineering when by all accounts since the end of the Cold War, excluding GWB's term, it has been pulling back. It hardly needed to invent Iran's covert nuclear ambitions in the early 2000s, NK's saber rattling or China's stakes on the South China Sea islands.

Modern US foreign policy largely relies on reciprocation. The US provides a military alliance and counterweight to China's military for small SE Asian nations at a hefty cost to itself, and presumably gets various trade concession and voting support in various international agencies. The key word being reciprocation, something that Russia could learn a fair bit from in its own foreign policy.

I Am Bradley Manning

coolhund says...

Why? Because of their role model status for many people? So the government, biased media and other corrupt people can indoctrinate people by spewing out bullshit for decades, effectively producing blind drones, but celebrities are not allowed to act as a (albeit very weak) counterweight?

Yogi said:

As much as I support Bradley Manning I have to say this. Shut the Fuck Up Celebrities!

Ayn Rand on Johnny Carson (part one)

CaptainPlanet says...

very cool sift. Here's a little essay suggesting certain problems with Rand's philosophy
https://sites.google.com/site/ilyashambatwritings/errors-of-ayn-rand

its a little heavy handed, but a good counterweight to this piece. I think Ayn Rand is a great example of how brilliant philosophy does not translate into good politics - allow our philosophy to direct our science and our science to direct our lives, one tempered by the other, that's how to progress as a species. The sanctification of ideas is a dirty game, one i think Rand is guilty of playing a bit too much of.
</rant>

Incredible Balance!!!

BicycleRepairMan says...

That would be a horrible way to cheat, since the heavier the feather is, the heavier the entire thing will be, every stick has to be heavier and/or longer to counterweight all the previous sticks. Someone more clever than me needs to work out the formula, which is hard, since he places every stick off-center for the proper leverage. But bottom line is, that if the feather was heavy, he would have 3 problems: Combined weight, length of sticks increasing and/or large, clumpy counterweights on each stick, making them hard to manuver.

The one "cheat" I can see him using, is tiny markings on each stick, indicating where they should be placed for ideal balance. However this means that hes either a)done lots of math to work that out or b) done hundreds of attemps, or , perhaps most likely c) both.

No matter how you look at it, this is both impressive and beautiful on so many levels.

LiquidDrift said:

Sweet act, never seen anything quite like that.

I do wonder if he added weight to the feather; wouldn't be hard to stick something in the shaft of it. Great showmanship though, could have done it with a little twig, but a feather is way more interesting and gives the crowd something to focus on.

A Crane Lifting a Crane, Lifting a Crane, Lifting a Crane

The Armless Drummer

jonny says...

Thought this was something about Rick Allen at first. This kid's even better. How the hell does he accomplish multiple strikes on a stroke without fingers???? The rig on his right arm doesn't look like much more than a velcro strap (actually, it looks like a jogger's ipod strap). I suppose it could have a counterweight or something. But still - it doesn't look like it should be possible.

The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained

kceaton1 says...

I just like how they throw in gerrymandering at the end. They tried to do this in Utah last year to keep democratic winners at a minimum.

If you wish to know why: Salt Lake City, it's northern neighbor city, Ogden, and the city that had most of the Olympic events, Park City, all vote democratic. However, the farther south of Salt lake City the more republicans you find. The only reason they vote Republican is for some reason we've yet to figure out in the main valley is why they vote Republican. These are typically good 'ol church going or listening to Rush/Beck type people and have a LARGE tendency of group-think and block voting.

In other words we always get screwed over (even in the suburbs) by this demographic. It's the same demographic that screwed over California on prop 8. The block or: "your religion wants you to vote this way" (which I see as a huge state versus religion debate that should be brought up) works VERY well. It's very tiring to watch it happen in EVERY election, but people are getting smarter as the cities, specifically, along the Wasatch Front (the western edge of the Rocky Mountains end in a huge corridor that runs N/S from southern Idaho to Southern Utah--close to Las Vegas) that are natural valleys that form every 40-70 miles and end with the mountain ranges on both sides "cutting off" the metropolitan areas forming about six major areas, and then some cities off to the east of the mountains (not many, some of them are: Moab, Tooele, Price, Vernal, etc...). Most of the populace lives in this area and it distinctly follows I-15 which runs straight into Los Angeles.

Strangely enough the more people that live in more urban type environments with lots of people, these people tend to have a democratic or atleast a very moderate republican stance. The smaller cities ALL vote republican. In other words, Salt Lake City is held hostage by Utah's small cities and developing cities along the I-15 corridor or cities that are not located next to I-15 and of course Utah County, just south of Salt Lake City or Salt Lake County (which has many cities, Provo being the biggest; but more importantly it has BYU; hence it's almost inane voting standard).

The politicians wish to divide Salt Lake County into an area unable to vote democratically as they would group us with just enough "typical republican voters" as to make our votes worthless. This got shot down last year, but I have no idea about this year. With our new law passed I can't even look to see if they're trying to do this--which is probably why they wanted to do this anyway.

Lots of these politicians were going to get kicked out in the next election cycle, some did. But, they got replaced by a worse setup: Tea Party or Glenn Beck followers that hide behind the all magical (R). The populace loving their block voting voted these idiots right in and of course the laws this year are inane. Mike Lee would be an example of this.

It should also be known that the LDS/Mormon church owns quite a bit of media in and around this area (the biggest is called Deseret, but there are a few more). The reach of this media reaches a lot of areas in the Intermountain West or Intermountain Region (which is HUGE): Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, California, Oregon, Idaho and Washington--there may be more, but the largest stronghold is Wyoming, Utah, California (around the Sierra Nevada and north), and Idaho. KSL (at KSL.com) is the LDS churches right arm in Utah and in the regions I listed above; it's also the churches direct feed to their semi-annual conferences that are followed by members voraciously. Many people consider coming to Utah to see the conferences much like a pilgrimage you see in other religions.

Wyoming and Idaho, as they do not have major news/media stations (or atleast in the past they didn't-this is still true for western Wyoming), KSL fills that void, as the church and the members have more than enough money to make this a very far reaching media outlet for the Intermountain West/Region. KSL plays it's role well when it comes to group-think and spreading the ideas created by the church and even LDS politicians, along with the churches run newspaper "Deseret News"; with the "satanic" or democratic/moderately conservative and more level headed news publication provided by "The Salt Lake Tribune" which is a very good newspaper. Even if you're a republican and not LDS, you'll find it to be a good source for news for anyone that isn't a "Republican Mormon"; they are very centrist in their opinions and provide a VERY MUCH needed counterweight in the region. KSL tends to follow Deseret News or likewise, Deseret News follows KSL--obviously following the LDS churches thoughts and opinions on subjects. Though they tend to do fine as long as they're ONLY reporting the news, like a breaking story...

Anything that has time to become an op-ed becomes an obvious religiously slanted opinion and more annoyingly, lately (the last decade or so), it has a politically charged republican view. Recently some Tea Party views have crept in. The LDS church doesn't seem to like or hate the tea party and I've never heard an opinion making their stance on that issue official at any level; but, at the same time I know a lot of Mormons that love Glenn Beck and Rush, so that situation to me seems "fuzzy" at best. As the church has never reprimanded Glenn Beck (as far as I know). If I said some of the same things that Glenn Beck has, would most certainly be incurring a disfellowship or even a excommunication. I'm an atheist, so if I made that known I'd certainly get the excommunication. But, you may need to go to the meeting to see that happen; which I wouldn't--I'd have to ask someone more "in the know" to get an idea what would happen as even when I was a Mormon no one ever talked about these meetings, they were taboo. Anyway...

Typically the Intermountain West or Intermountain Region is the "Mountain States or the Sierra Nevada, Cascades, and the Rocky Mountains" and the "Great Basin or Intermontane Plateaus and Colorado Plateau". Which is VERY large.

So that is my experience with church vs. state and the members of said faith trying to hoodwink others by using gerrymandering or other unscrupulous ways to change the vote in their favor. These people should be the excommunicated ones... But, since they aren't it makes me think MUCH less of the LDS church (but, since Proposition 8 I've had little faith that they were anything, but another religion trying to force people to see things there way--there is no middle ground). So if you live in "The Intermountain West", which is a huge region, make sure you find out who is behind your media. You may be surprised.

I think that should cover everything I wanted to say.

Skyscrapers dancing a boogie in Tokyo during earthquake

A very small trebuchet that tosses tiny pies at bugs

GenjiKilpatrick says...

http://videosift.com/video/Millimeters-Matter

Trebuchets, Ballistas, Mangonels and Onagers are all catapults..

However, a trebuchet works by using the energy of a raised counterweight to throw the projectile. i.e. they're powered by gravity.

Tho, since the device in this ad gets its power from those springs on either side..

Its design is closer to a torsion catapult like a Mangonel or Onager.

Generically referred to as just "a catapult".

[cause the only real difference is: Onagers use a sling. Mangonels use a spoon or basket.]

Sorry for nerdin' out.. I used to be reeeally into that sorta stuff. = P

Russian Tetris v. Contra Chips Commercial

Shooting clay pigeons... with a BOW. Awesome!

Sagemind says...

I still target shoot my 80 lb Re-curve longbow regularly, And both my kids have their own bows and love it.

I honed my skills on Grouse and Squirrels (Yes I ate them - Tastes like chicken). I was never as good as this guy though, I generally missed more than I hit.
My biggest setback was that I valued my arrows. Missing got expensive as we would spend hours sometimes trying to find the arrows afterwards, many we never did find. Which makes you a little afraid sometimes to pull it back all the way when shooting up into a tree!

I use finger protection and a wrist guard but that's it, no sites, no counterweights etc. just a bow, a string and an arrow!



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