search results matching tag: exponential

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (35)     Sift Talk (3)     Blogs (1)     Comments (420)   

Chris Hedges On F On Fascism In The Age Of Trump (Nov. 2017)

newtboy says...

Bob, I wholeheartedly disagree with your assessments, but it begs the question....if you thought the nation was in such dire straits, why did you so blindly support the bankrupting idiot baby that's made it exponentially worse while creating and reinforcing so many divisions, making it nearly impossible for Americans to work together while also obliterating our international leadership positions?

You now admit he's not qualified to lead (never was), but you put him in the most important position of responsibility and leadership possible....now you want to blame his utter failings on previous administrations, not his constant lies and total ineptitude that you zealously defended and excused!? No sir, blame yourself.

As to the "agenda", those Hollywood values (you know, honesty, inclusion, diversity, freedom to be who you are, personal liberties, anti corporate personhood,...) are shared by a VAST majority of Americans....they are American values.
Why am I not surprised you don't get that?

As to their debasement, that starts with lies...lies like the ones you defend and applaud, like Trump lying about the tax plan because, as you privately said, if he told the truth he couldn't have passed a tax plan that benefits the wealthy like himself immensely and hurts the people who can least afford it while bankrupting the treasury as a set up to kill programs for the poor. You defended that lie privately....are you too ashamed to do so publicly?

bobknight33 said:

...values clearly promoted in Hollywood, and media. Who is really pushing this agenda?


This current state of being is a long time in coming not a POTUS Trump fault.. One can argue Trump is not qualified but this was laid at his feet when he took office.

Dear Satan

shinyblurry says...

I am open to rational answers, but not hokum. Using mythos to prove mythos is no answer.
I've said I'm not open to suspending rationality or sanity, you say that means I won't listen to you....um.....


The entirety of Christianity hinges on one thing; the resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is a historical event and can be investigated that way. Jesus Christ is a real person who lived 2000 years ago in Israel. This isn't mythos and there is good evidence to believe it happened.

How do you know there's no FSM? I've seen exponentially more evidence of his existence than Yahweh's. I've eaten pasta. I absolutely believe in it more than Yahweh, but that's not a high bar.
Edit: How do you know there's no Allah? Odin? Zeus? Mythra? Mot? Cthulhu?


We both know that the fsm is a joke religion invented to mock Christianity.

The scripture tells us that men have worshiped other gods for thousands of years, but that what they worship are demons. So I believe those beings exist, but they aren't what they claim to be. One of Satans primary tools to deceive mankind is false religion. He provides supernatural confirmation of these religions. There is a desire in mans heart to worship God, and it gets corrupted so that man is willing to worship just about anything. In western culture, men idolize money, materialism, carnal lusts, even themselves. Our idols are less obvious but they are still idols.

One more time, my questions were 1.why is God's word so easily misstated, misunderstood, misidentified, misused, confused, and used for evil and hate? (Edit: especially given that properly interpreting it is allegedly the only way to escape eternal torture, seems like a set up.)

Any truth is easily misstated, misunderstood, misidentified, misused, confused, and used for evil and hate. This isn't a phenomenon unique to the scriptures; this is the reality of living in a fallen world. Corrupt men distort truth for their own gain. Look at the political situation in our country; how is what politicians do different from what prosperity preachers do? It really isn't.

The fact is that the gospel is very simple to understand; even a child could understand it, and they do. Gods word is very clear about our need for salvation and how to obtain it. It's man who overcomplicates it, distorts it for gain, or deliberately conceals the truth. Trust in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and believe He was raised from the dead. You don't need to be a theologian to understand that.

2.why is disbelief apparently worse than murder, rape, and slavery and so not covered by Jesus's sin erasing sacrifice and the only sin that's totally unforgivable.

How did you come to the conclusion that Jesus didn't die for unbelief? We all have unbelief that needs forgiveness which we receive by repentance. His atonement is not automatically transferred to everyone; the condition of receiving forgiveness is to believe. If you don't believe you won't receive forgiveness because you failed to meet the condition, not because unbelief is worse than murder necessarily. Dying without forgiveness for your sin is the problem, not that it can't be forgiven, but it can't be forgiven without repentance. It's kind of like this:

Let's say you had cancer and the only cure was in Los Angeles. You had no way to get there but God sent you a car to get you to Los Angeles and get the cure. When it arrived you didn't believe it would take you there so you didn't get in. A short time later you died of cancer.

So what was the reason you died? It was your unbelief that stopped you receiving the cure, but it was your cancer that killed you. In the same way it is your unbelief that keeps you from coming to Jesus Christ for forgiveness, so you will die in your sin.

I am interested in and open to an actual answer to either or both if you have one. It won't make me believe, but it might help me understand those who do a little better.

I'm happy to answer your questions newtboy..I just didn't want it to turn into another internet argument. I appreciate your candor

newtboy said:

I am open to rational answers, but not hokum. Using mythos to prove mythos is no answer.
I've said I'm not open to suspending rationality or sanity, you say that means I won't listen to you....um.....

I offered precise questions in hope of precise answers, but got off topic rambling and accusations I won't listen. Understand why I don't respect that?

First, that's not an answer at all or even addressing my questions, it's a misdirection question.
Second, I don't know, but I'm 100% sure there's been zero credible evidence of it that I've ever heard of, as are you, and that it's a totally incredible story which require extraordinary evidence.

How do you know there's no FSM? I've seen exponentially more evidence of his existence than Yahweh's. I've eaten pasta. I absolutely believe in it more than Yahweh, but that's not a high bar.
Edit: How do you know there's no Allah? Odin? Zeus? Mythra? Mot? Cthulhu?

One more time, my questions were 1.why is God's word so easily misstated, misunderstood, misidentified, misused, confused, and used for evil and hate? (Edit: especially given that properly interpreting it is allegedly the only way to escape eternal torture, seems like a set up.) 2.why is disbelief apparently worse than murder, rape, and slavery and so not covered by Jesus's sin erasing sacrifice and the only sin that's totally unforgivable.
I am interested in and open to an actual answer to either or both if you have one. It won't make me believe, but it might help me understand those who do a little better.

Dear Satan

newtboy says...

I am open to rational answers, but not hokum. Using mythos to prove mythos is no answer.
I've said I'm not open to suspending rationality or sanity, you say that means I won't listen to you....um.....

I offered precise questions in hope of precise answers, but got off topic rambling and accusations I won't listen. Understand why I don't respect that?

First, that's not an answer at all or even addressing my questions, it's a misdirection question.
Second, I don't know, but I'm 100% sure there's been zero credible evidence of it that I've ever heard of, as are you, and that it's a totally incredible story which require extraordinary evidence.

How do you know there's no FSM? I've seen exponentially more evidence of his existence than Yahweh's. I've eaten pasta. I absolutely believe in it more than Yahweh, but that's not a high bar.
Edit: How do you know there's no Allah? Odin? Zeus? Mythra? Mot? Cthulhu?

One more time, my questions were 1.why is God's word so easily misstated, misunderstood, misidentified, misused, confused, and used for evil and hate? (Edit: especially given that properly interpreting it is allegedly the only way to escape eternal torture, seems like a set up.) 2.why is disbelief apparently worse than murder, rape, and slavery and so not covered by Jesus's sin erasing sacrifice and the only sin that's totally unforgivable.
I am interested in and open to an actual answer to either or both if you have one. It won't make me believe, but it might help me understand those who do a little better.

shinyblurry said:

I'm not avoiding your questions, it's just that we've discussed the same kinds of questions many times and you're not really opening to listening, as you've just said. I'd be happy to answer the most pressing one for you, though.

How do you know there isn't a Heaven or Hell?

The Truth About Jerusalem

newtboy says...

Perhaps it was, perhaps it wasn't, but now it's unequivocal that we aren't working for peace, we are working for Israel, and finding a solution that's acceptable is exponentially harder, especially since no one trusts us to keep our word anymore and we can't mediate.

This gave Israel their biggest wish (besides all Palestinians just evaporating) and offered the Palestinians nothing but a nice "Fuck you", stay off our holy land. For that concession, we got nothing, zip, nada. Great mediating...give one side what they want, then pretend mediation doesn't work. What a negotiator, the best ever. Fuck.

Can anyone honestly tell me that in their wildest dreams this somehow advances the peace process? That's like Miss America thinking she won't be oogled while changing by the pageant owner in her dressing room level naivete.

bcglorf said:

The video rant is over the top, but so is the reaction to moving the embassy to Jerusalem.

Saying something like "there goes the peace process" is just bizarre.

Can anyone honestly tell me that in our wildest dreams a future two state solution with Jerusalem split down the middle was EVER going to happen? That's like a Miss America speech level naivety.

Why We Constantly Avoid Talking About Gun Control

newtboy says...

Knee jerk?! As if this wasn't beyond the 500th mass shooting in under 2 years, 1516 in 1735 days.
That's a total bullshit position, along with "this isn't the time" arguments. When mass shootings happen daily, pretending we must wait for a shooting free month, season, year before we can rationally tackle the issue is asinine. We can't make it 1/2 week without 3.
I agree, all those things you mention factor into the issue, but the easiest, simplest, most effective tool, proven effective in multiple cases, is gun control, and it is the best return for your investment, as it's by far the cheapest. (I own guns).
People intent on mass murder may not be deterred, but they are absolutely, unequivocally hindered by regulations from causing exponentially more damage. It's just retarded that some people don't grasp that fact and instead continue to advocate for fewer regulations....as if he wouldn't have purchased a Vulcan cannon if he could have.

CaptainObvious said:

My post was in the context of mass murder and gun regulation. Blaming the gun, fearing the tool and having a knee jerk response to do 'something' to avoid something like this - I think leads to initiatives that just will not have any true effect unless we examine everything at play here. People get very frustrated and want solutions right away. Gun regulation is an easy out. But in the end, what really needs to be looked at is mental health issues, poverty issues, resource access issues, venue security and education for more returns on your investment. People intent on mass murder are just not going to be deterred or hindered by regulations.

Vox explains bump stocks

newtboy says...

I don't believe for one second that you could keep up that rate for a full minute, much less over 10. If you take the time it takes to aim a 300 yard shot accurately, you're talking 10-12 shots per minute.
Shooting with your finger at maximum speed is always far less accurate and slower than full auto with the same gun. You have to prove it to me that I'm wrong, because that's simple logic. Full auto is a more stable rate, so easier to adapt to, and doesn't require you to vibrate one hand, shaking the gun, dividing your attention, and tiring you out.
It's silly to imply the full auto functionality didn't exponentially raise the number both wounded and killed. Without the crowd, it might have made less difference. With the crowd, absolutely not imo.

harlequinn said:

I shoot regularly (often multiple times per week). My lazy firing rate has splits (time between shots) of approximately 0.2 seconds. I can do that for a long time (many minutes before I slow done). That is a rate of 300 rounds per minute. My fast splits are approximately 0.12 seconds. I can't do that for very long (probably one magazine). That is a rate of 600 rounds per minute.

An AR-15 on full auto fires at approximately 600 rounds per minute - twice what I can do on semi-auto. Using a competitive shooter as an example, and taking into account magazine changes (which with training are done much quicker than any of the operators in AR-15 to failure tests I've seen), and assuming lazy splits of 0.30 seconds, a competitive shooter can probably fire at a faster rate per minute than a novice can on full auto (i.e. well more than the approximately 150 rounds per minute a novice shooter achieves when taking into account magazine changes).

The thing is, it is well known in military and firearm enthusiast circles that the massive reduction in accuracy when shooting on full auto does not give the perceived payoff. You have much less control when firing a fully automatic firearm. You hit your target less often. Semi auto plus aiming = hits on target. At the range he was shooting (300 to 350 meters), the same lunatic deciding to aim his firearm would have resulted in less wounding and more fatalities.

Any ex-military here? Chime in.

Cassini Burns into Saturn After Grand Finale

newtboy says...

*quality *science
Nova had a good episode on Cassini last night, just in time for the farewell.
Thanks Cassini, you've taught us much in your short lifetime, and expanded where we might look for E.T. life exponentially, removing the self imposed goldilocks limits. Good job.
*doublepromote learning one final lesson with it's death plunge

John Oliver - Joe Arpaio

newtboy says...

Jesus Fucking Christ...he was convicted by judges of violating a legal judicial order and the constitution...not by Obama of being an old white guy. You drank more Trump coolaid, but this cup has made you thoroughly un-American.

Is that really what you call the best sheriff...someone who unapologetically violates the law and constitution at every turn, who abuses not only the convicted (still evil and illegal, btw) but also the merely accused in a jail he himself bragged was a concentration camp. That's how he treats American citizens who've not been convicted of a thing....and it's how he deserves to spend the remainder of his life.

If I held you (or your daughter) in a 145 deg tent, feeding you rotten balogne, offering no medical treatment while hoping you die of heat stroke, you would call me a terrorist, but because Joe violated mostly Hispanics (not even Mexicans, mostly legal Hispanic Americans) you call him the best sheriff...and you still tell yourself you aren't racist.

He cost his county well over $140 million in settlements for his victims, with hundreds of millions more in the courts still being litigated. The number of deaths in his jail are exponentially higher than the norm, with most going uninvestigated and fewer (none) being prosecuted (they just pay off the family a few million taxpayer dollars and move on to the next victim).

You really have to be shoving you head even farther up your own ass to even give Arpaio and Trump the benefit of a doubt at this point...he's gleefully admitted all his crimes as if they aren't illegal, and Trump made him right, violating the constitution and thumbing your nose at the court orders is perfectly fine in Trump's America, so long as you support him.

Jesus Fucknig Christ, bob. Next you'll be supporting Trump's pardon of Sheik Muhammad and other Daesh fighters...who were also the victims of an "Obama witch hunt".

You claimed to hate Obama because you've been convinced by drug addled blowhards (Limbaugh, Jones) that he subverted our rule of law to fit his agenda...yet here you are cheerleading Trump and Arpaio uncontrovertibly doing exactly that. Just because you agree with this particular agenda (subverting the constitution to forcefully eject illegal immigrants of one specific nationality) doesn't change the act you claim to hate, subversion of our constitution, laws, and government.

bobknight33 said:

Arpaio's mom told him hill never be a great singer So he became a Americas best sheriff.

Trump just reversing Obama's witch hunt of this man.

"I wore a Mars space suit and it was exhausting".

newtboy says...

For space, fabric suits seem fine, but planetary exploration is a dirty, rough business. I don't understand why they aren't thinking more along the lines of a newt suit. Yes, much heavier, but it would last exponentially longer and be exponentially safer.

Liberal Redneck - Virginia is for Lovers, not Nazis

newtboy says...

Jesus fucking Christ, learn to read.
I clearly said someone just giving lip service, as in someone just using words but not following through with actions, should not be met with violence.
An ACTIVE Nazi, as in someone physically enacting those words, making physical efforts to preform some genocide, or in the act of actually attacking a black, jew, hispanic, homo, cuck, libtard, etc, (not just calling them names, but attacking) yes, resist their violence with exponentially more violence from every direction without hesitation or empathy.

You aren't putting words in my mouth, buy you are 100% backwards in your interpretation of what I thought was clearly written.
I was raised to believe you are allowed to be as wrong and stupid as you like in America, but your right to swing your fist ends firmly at my nose and that line, once crossed, enables a righteous and crippling response without qualm.

Asmo said:

So basically you support violence in response to words?

Is there really anything else to say at this point? I'm not putting words in to your mouth, right??

YIKES!

Payback says...

Any section of track looks warped from a low and almost parallel angle.


...but that's fucked up. There's over an inch of deflection between ties at rest. There's so much movement with the passing rolling stock that metal fatigue must be increasing exponentially.

Pres. Trump Tweets Vid of Himself Physically Attacking CNN

newtboy says...

Oh Bob....what drivel you post.....

Memes of violence against someone you (the president) have called an enemy of the American people, posted shortly after a congressman violently attacks one of them and tries to lie about it (thank goodness for audio) are absolutely intended to be inciting violence.

Releasing the name of a person who has been creating such memes is not doxing, especially by a reporter, it's what they do....and CNN didn't try to intimidate anyone, he acted on his own without prompting. He even released a statement denying that CNN had attempted to threaten or harass him.

Ending your video by calling someone/a group an enemy of Americans is exponentially worse than CNN NOT releasing the name of the person creating memes depicting violence against them...even though they've also been labeled enemies of America by the president, who retweeted the meme.

I just hope reporters start carrying guns, and the next macho douchbag representative that physically attacks one gets 3 to the dome instead of a little public shaming (and pats on the back by his party). (Edit: Ok, not really, but one in the foot maybe?)

bobknight33 said:

How CNN threatened to dox the WWE Trump meme creator

Unboxing The $3000 Bluetooth Speaker

jmd says...

#1 bluetooth uses a slight offshoot of mpeg2 audio compression which gets worse because you are most likely recompressing something already compressed with mpeg and that makes things even worse. This is the strength of AptX, it is an audio compression designed to not get exponentially worse when dealing with mpeg compressed audio. THAT SAID! Anyone know what phone he is using? The GOLD phantom supports AptX, so if he uses a samsung/htc/lg phone he would have been using AptX.

#2 speaker construction, it is an overblown Flip3 with radiators on the side. The radiators are designed to capture the back pressure of speakers and convert it into more audible sound waves, very good at saving the low frequencies and directing them back at the listener. The problem is it is a secondary uncontrolled speaker. This means your sound balance can go out of wack. Perfect for a $79 portable speaker, not ideal for a $3000 home theater setup. Also the speaker appears to be..mono? so you need 2 of them for stereo?

Yea, sorry, you can buy speakers that are not much bigger than this, hell you can buy a SET of front facing speakers and a good sub for $3000 and do better.

New Rule: The Lesser of Two Evils

MilkmanDan says...

I appreciate your argument, but I don't share your alarm.

Displaced by sea level rise (which would be a gradual thing, but I agree very serious), combined with droughts/floods might potentially fall under "decimation". But only, I think, to the historical definition of 10% dead. Include wars resulting from territory and resource squabbles (should that count as fallout of climate change?), and it could be (much) worse. But still not on a 4-year timescale.

Second, if we're already "way past the tipping point", it logically follows that blame for that can't really be laid on Trump. His policies can certainly make things worse, but I think that 4 years of terrible climate policy in ONE country on Earth (granted, a country with a lot of influence) simply aren't going to be catastrophically, drastically worse than 4 years of magically ideal climate policy (even in a hypothetical scenario where Nader or Stein or Clinton or whatever ideal person was president and could dictate perfect climate policy without being filtered by congress).


So to answer your question, basically no, I don't think that "raising our emission levels exponentially while advocating closed borders will have an irreversible negative effect on the planet and humanity."

One, "exponentially" is an exaggeration. US emissions under Trump won't be an order of magnitude higher than they were under Obama, or would have been under Clinton. In the range of 10% to 50% higher seems well possible, but 100% higher (double) would be next to impossible. Worse, yes. Exponentially worse, no.

Two, "irreversible" is a word I would hesitate to use because it carries an implication that there is some magic bullet to immediately fix things. If a plague wiped humanity off the face of the Earth tomorrow, it would take some time for climate to adjust to pre-industrial levels. Like you said, it might take 25-50 years before things even could start getting better. But eventually, it could be mostly like we were never here. Some things about climate would never be the same, but in broad terms, things could get back to "normal" eventually.

On the other hand, if the plague wipes us all out on the last day of Trump's 4 years in office, it might take longer for that adjustment to happen. But not by a comparatively massive margin. So that's why I dislike "irreversible"; depending on what timescale you are referencing things are either already irreversible, or pretty close to a statistical wash (what's another 4 years in a recovery timeline of 250 years, or 100 in 10000?), or not worth worrying about at all (on a geological timescale that doesn't care 2 cents about things like species extinctions). Does that make sense?

Finally, "negative effect on the planet and humanity" is something that I totally agree with. And that negative effect will be real and significant. But I don't think that the walking disaster that is Trump will make things inescapably, horrifically worse. Not enough worse that it makes a persuasive argument to me that I should have voted for Clinton (again, I didn't vote for Trump, but I didn't vote for Clinton either).

I dunno. Maybe I'm a cockeyed optimist.

newtboy said:

Consider the problems the world is having absorbing <5million Syrians....now multiply that refugee number by 100 to include those displaced by sea level rise, exceptional drought or flooding, and loss of historic water supplies like glaciers, and assume every country is having internal problems for the same reasons. How do you solve that issue, which is inescapable and already happening world wide? Consider that privately, climate scientists will tell you we are way past the tipping point already, we can't avoid worsening the serious climate issues we already have, because the atmosphere is quite slow to react, so even if we cut emissions to zero tomorrow, we've got 25-50 years of things getting hotter and more acidic before it could get better.
Now, with those two related issues already beyond a tipping point, you don't think raising our emission levels exponentially while advocating closed borders will have an irreversible negative effect on the planet and humanity? I agree, his administration alone won't doom us all, but they may make the pending doom far more inescapable in just 4 years, and exacerbate the associated problems horrifically.

New Rule: The Lesser of Two Evils

newtboy says...

Consider the problems the world is having absorbing <5million Syrians....now multiply that refugee number by 100 to include those displaced by sea level rise, exceptional drought or flooding, and loss of historic water supplies like glaciers, and assume every country is having internal problems for the same reasons. How do you solve that issue, which is inescapable and already happening world wide?
Consider that privately, climate scientists will tell you we are way past the tipping point already, we can't avoid worsening the serious climate issues we already have, because the atmosphere is quite slow to react, so even if we cut emissions to zero tomorrow, we've got 25-50 years of things getting hotter and more acidic before it could get better.
Now, with those two related issues already beyond a tipping point, you don't think raising our emission levels exponentially while advocating closed borders will have an irreversible negative effect on the planet and humanity? I agree, his administration alone won't doom us all, but they may make the pending doom far more inescapable in just 4 years, and exacerbate the associated problems horrifically.



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