Great to hear the back story.

I remember my brother showing me this site at one point, and while I don't remember being instantly taken with it, but you chose your name well, and it stuck with me. I found myself visiting more and more. Now, rarely a day goes by where I don't browse through the sift just to see what's going on and whether there's a pop cultural meme of the moment that I wasn't aware of, a documentary I never heard of, or just the latest trailer to some movie that I wasn't aware they released yet.

You've built a brilliant web site with a great community. I often end up enjoying the comment section more than the videos themselves. It's everything that's good about entertainment on the web, and took something groundbreaking and massive like the creation of Youtube and gave it focus and purpose showing us what's worth our attention without having to -sift- through the pure dregs.

I continue to recommend it to anyone who will listen.

Thanks Dag

I think this product will be for some, but not all. Oh look, I won your little debate.

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:

>> ^spoco2:
>> ^brycewi19:
>> ^spoco2:
'How to get that last mile to your destination?' Um... how about walking?
I mean, this thing is pretty damn cool, but come on people, walking a mile is actually a GOOD thing, not something to be avoided.
All the houses we've bought as a family I've mandated it had to be a 'good walk' away from the nearest train station so I can get me some daily exercise. A couple of kms each way each day does you a world of good. A lot moreso than standing on a powered board would.
Still, if it gets people out of cars, it's a net win.

I would maintain that there a lot of people who are going to work, just getting off the train or bus and still have a mile or two to go who don't necessarily want to be sweating in their work clothes before they get to their job.
My guess is that there are enough people who already showered, did their make-up or whatever, and still want to look good without looking like they just had their second morning workout.

If someone gets sweaty and dishevelled from just walking a mile, then I think they need that walking more than they realise

Or they live in a hot place? Ever walked a mile in NYC in August?

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^brycewi19:
>> ^spoco2:
'How to get that last mile to your destination?' Um... how about walking?
I mean, this thing is pretty damn cool, but come on people, walking a mile is actually a GOOD thing, not something to be avoided.
All the houses we've bought as a family I've mandated it had to be a 'good walk' away from the nearest train station so I can get me some daily exercise. A couple of kms each way each day does you a world of good. A lot moreso than standing on a powered board would.
Still, if it gets people out of cars, it's a net win.

I would maintain that there a lot of people who are going to work, just getting off the train or bus and still have a mile or two to go who don't necessarily want to be sweating in their work clothes before they get to their job.
My guess is that there are enough people who already showered, did their make-up or whatever, and still want to look good without looking like they just had their second morning workout.

If someone gets sweaty and dishevelled from just walking a mile, then I think they need that walking more than they realise

Or they live in a hot place? Ever walked a mile in NYC in August?

>> ^brycewi19:

>> ^spoco2:
'How to get that last mile to your destination?' Um... how about walking?
I mean, this thing is pretty damn cool, but come on people, walking a mile is actually a GOOD thing, not something to be avoided.
All the houses we've bought as a family I've mandated it had to be a 'good walk' away from the nearest train station so I can get me some daily exercise. A couple of kms each way each day does you a world of good. A lot moreso than standing on a powered board would.
Still, if it gets people out of cars, it's a net win.

I would maintain that there a lot of people who are going to work, just getting off the train or bus and still have a mile or two to go who don't necessarily want to be sweating in their work clothes before they get to their job.
My guess is that there are enough people who already showered, did their make-up or whatever, and still want to look good without looking like they just had their second morning workout.


If someone gets sweaty and dishevelled from just walking a mile, then I think they need that walking more than they realise

>> ^spoco2:

'How to get that last mile to your destination?' Um... how about walking?
I mean, this thing is pretty damn cool, but come on people, walking a mile is actually a GOOD thing, not something to be avoided.
All the houses we've bought as a family I've mandated it had to be a 'good walk' away from the nearest train station so I can get me some daily exercise. A couple of kms each way each day does you a world of good. A lot moreso than standing on a powered board would.
Still, if it gets people out of cars, it's a net win.


I would maintain that there a lot of people who are going to work, just getting off the train or bus and still have a mile or two to go who don't necessarily want to be sweating in their work clothes before they get to their job.
My guess is that there are enough people who already showered, did their make-up or whatever, and still want to look good without looking like they just had their second morning workout.

Discovering Higgs Boson = groundbreaking. Seeing Stephen Hawking crack a sly grin = priceless.

This iconic, groundbreaking pre-hip hop song belongs under *africa

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

Also, Children of the Sky was a little disappointing - though I wanted it to be great.>> ^dag:

I tried to get into a couple of Hamilton books but they never clicked for me. The ones I tried seemed to have a weird mix of space opera (which I like) and the occult (not so much).
Though, having just written that, I really do like Allistor Reynolds' books which are just that same kind of mix. go figure.
>> ^NetRunner:
I'm between books right now. My last was Peter F. Hamilton's The Evolutionary Void which is the third book in a trilogy, set in the same universe as Pandora's Star and Judas Unchained. It's not groundbreaking, but it's fun -- space opera stuff, will make a good movie someday.
Next in the queue will be Neal Stephenson's Anathem. Or possibly John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. Or maybe Vernor Vinge's Children of the Sky. They're all sitting on the table nearby, reminding me that I've been neglecting my dead tree media again...

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

I tried to get into a couple of Hamilton books but they never clicked for me. The ones I tried seemed to have a weird mix of space opera (which I like) and the occult (not so much).

Though, having just written that, I really do like Allistor Reynolds' books which are just that same kind of mix. go figure.
>> ^NetRunner:

I'm between books right now. My last was Peter F. Hamilton's The Evolutionary Void which is the third book in a trilogy, set in the same universe as Pandora's Star and Judas Unchained. It's not groundbreaking, but it's fun -- space opera stuff, will make a good movie someday.
Next in the queue will be Neal Stephenson's Anathem. Or possibly John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. Or maybe Vernor Vinge's Children of the Sky. They're all sitting on the table nearby, reminding me that I've been neglecting my dead tree media again...

I'm between books right now. My last was Peter F. Hamilton's The Evolutionary Void which is the third book in a trilogy, set in the same universe as Pandora's Star and Judas Unchained. It's not groundbreaking, but it's fun -- space opera stuff, will make a good movie someday.

Next in the queue will be Neal Stephenson's Anathem. Or possibly John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. Or maybe Vernor Vinge's Children of the Sky. They're all sitting on the table nearby, reminding me that I've been neglecting my dead tree media again...

@Morganth

Funny story - This "actual footage" is from a planned "docu-series" that G4TV paid to film, edit, stylize and promote on tv and the internet.

http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/707093/g4-announces-groundbreaking-new-series-bomb-patrol-afghanistan/

Meh, then again. G4 probably just borrowed previously existing footage from the 8 or so conveniently placed camera the U.S. military deploys with every bomb disposal mission..

I guess I stand corrected, most gamers are now grumpy old men pining for the glories of yesteryear.

Fuck me, no wonder they advertize Viagra during X-Play.

I hear what you guys are saying, I just don't feel the same way. I guess part of it is that I don't really get the appeal of first person shooters anymore. I sorta liked 'em back when Doom was a hot name in gaming, and when I was young enough to think Duke Nukem 3D was groundbreaking for its mature themes. The last one I really liked was Half-Life, but that's because it heavily incorporated story elements, not because of the game mechanics (which were far from groundbreaking).

I thought Gears of War was a refreshing change of pace, and IMO presented the first real gameplay innovations we've seen in shooters since Doom. I'm glad there's been a lot of copying of their cover mechanics, since it adds real tactical considerations like cover fire and flanking to firefights. It's not enough to really make me a shooter fan again, but it's enough to keep me from being annoyed at developers for just continually putting new paint on 20-year old game mechanics.

I guess I just generally prefer action-adventure or sandbox games nowadays. Combat shouldn't be 100% of what games are about anymore as far as I'm concerned. If developers still want to make shooting the centerpiece of gameplay, then it should at least require some thought along the way, and force you to change weapons and tactics every now and then so it doesn't get stale.

Reverting back to "classic" shooter mechanics just seems like a step in the wrong direction to me.

Oh, and full disclosure, the only modern shooters I've played are Resistance, Gears, and Halo. Maybe I'm just missing out on something new and unique that everyone knows about from CoD or Battlefield, but from the sound of the reviews, I kinda doubt it.

But massive particles would still be prohibited from traveling faster than the speed of light. It's only the particles with imaginary mass that could travel faster, and they would still fit into the framework of special and general relativity.

Unless we at the same time can show that the neutrinos have non-complex mass. Then it could get really hairy. But I wouldn't bet my house on it.

In reply to this comment by juliovega914:
An exaggeration, yes, but not a terribly big one. Most of the standard theory today is based on the bricks of special and general relativity. For us to have to rethink the laws restricting mass from traveling over the speed of light, we really would need to rethink physics from there all the way back up, which really leaves no physical theories safe all the way back to Newtonian physics. In short, I cant wait to see how this pans out.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
Oh, it would definitely be groundbreaking. One of the biggest discoveries in physics to date. But to say that we would have to restart physics is an exaggeration.

In reply to this comment by juliovega914:
I'm pretty sure negative mass would still result in complex energy, because the Lorentz transformation factor would still be proportional to 1/i or -i. Complex mass, however, would allow for the energy to be real (which has been theorized as being possible), but that introduces a whole new problem of trying to conceptualize complex mass.

And on a side note, the first ever physical observation of nonpostive/nonreal mass would be groundbreaking in its own right.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
The thing is, we don't know the mass of the neutrino. If it has a tachyonic nature, i.e. negative mass squared, it could break Lorentz symmetry while still satisfying Einstein's equations.

>> ^juliovega914:

>> ^Jinx:
>> ^juliovega914:
If this measurement turns out to be true, we basically have to restart physics.

Again, not necessarily. It would be a ground breaking discovery and would certainly raise a lot of questions...but then I did perhaps one of the most brain melting experiments with results that appear to contradict theory and common sense when I was 14 years old. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

No, it would be a HUGE discovery! One of the biggest ever! and it would completely redefine our modern theory!
If a massive particle moves faster than the speed of light, that means the Lorentz factor for calculating the energy of the particle will be complex! (gamma = c/squrt(c^2-v^2), for v>c, gamma is complex). Do any of you have any fucking idea what that means?
(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/veltran.html
for those of you who dont know wtf I am talking about)

An exaggeration, yes, but not a terribly big one. Most of the standard theory today is based on the bricks of special and general relativity. For us to have to rethink the laws restricting mass from traveling over the speed of light, we really would need to rethink physics from there all the way back up, which really leaves no physical theories safe all the way back to Newtonian physics. In short, I cant wait to see how this pans out.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
Oh, it would definitely be groundbreaking. One of the biggest discoveries in physics to date. But to say that we would have to restart physics is an exaggeration.

In reply to this comment by juliovega914:
I'm pretty sure negative mass would still result in complex energy, because the Lorentz transformation factor would still be proportional to 1/i or -i. Complex mass, however, would allow for the energy to be real (which has been theorized as being possible), but that introduces a whole new problem of trying to conceptualize complex mass.

And on a side note, the first ever physical observation of nonpostive/nonreal mass would be groundbreaking in its own right.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
The thing is, we don't know the mass of the neutrino. If it has a tachyonic nature, i.e. negative mass squared, it could break Lorentz symmetry while still satisfying Einstein's equations.

>> ^juliovega914:

>> ^Jinx:
>> ^juliovega914:
If this measurement turns out to be true, we basically have to restart physics.

Again, not necessarily. It would be a ground breaking discovery and would certainly raise a lot of questions...but then I did perhaps one of the most brain melting experiments with results that appear to contradict theory and common sense when I was 14 years old. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

No, it would be a HUGE discovery! One of the biggest ever! and it would completely redefine our modern theory!
If a massive particle moves faster than the speed of light, that means the Lorentz factor for calculating the energy of the particle will be complex! (gamma = c/squrt(c^2-v^2), for v>c, gamma is complex). Do any of you have any fucking idea what that means?
(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/veltran.html for those of you who dont know wtf I am talking about)

Oh, it would definitely be groundbreaking. One of the biggest discoveries in physics to date. But to say that we would have to restart physics is an exaggeration.

In reply to this comment by juliovega914:
I'm pretty sure negative mass would still result in complex energy, because the Lorentz transformation factor would still be proportional to 1/i or -i. Complex mass, however, would allow for the energy to be real (which has been theorized as being possible), but that introduces a whole new problem of trying to conceptualize complex mass.

And on a side note, the first ever physical observation of nonpostive/nonreal mass would be groundbreaking in its own right.

In reply to this comment by Ornthoron:
The thing is, we don't know the mass of the neutrino. If it has a tachyonic nature, i.e. negative mass squared, it could break Lorentz symmetry while still satisfying Einstein's equations.

>> ^juliovega914:

>> ^Jinx:
>> ^juliovega914:
If this measurement turns out to be true, we basically have to restart physics.

Again, not necessarily. It would be a ground breaking discovery and would certainly raise a lot of questions...but then I did perhaps one of the most brain melting experiments with results that appear to contradict theory and common sense when I was 14 years old. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

No, it would be a HUGE discovery! One of the biggest ever! and it would completely redefine our modern theory!
If a massive particle moves faster than the speed of light, that means the Lorentz factor for calculating the energy of the particle will be complex! (gamma = c/squrt(c^2-v^2), for v>c, gamma is complex). Do any of you have any fucking idea what that means?
(http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/veltran.html for those of you who dont know wtf I am talking about)