search results matching tag: initiation

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (582)     Sift Talk (77)     Blogs (28)     Comments (1000)   

Why Should You Read James Joyce's "Ulysses"

LukinStone says...

I took a Joyce Major Authors class in college (about 15 yrs ago). We read Dubliners and Portrait in their entirety, and probably about 40% of Ulysses and excerpts from Finnegan's Wake.

For some literature, you really need to do homework to appreciate fully. You'll miss a ton if you don't know history and current events that people were generally aware of at the time. And, even when you do that work, sometimes you still won't get it all - which is how I see Finnegan's Wake.

My experience reading (some) Ulysses was great, but it depended on the professor who would assign a chapter for homework and then spend the entire class going through it with us. We were Lit majors, so we knew The Odyssey, but some references were completely over our heads. Like, Bloom is humming advertising jingles throughout the book - and these weave together with other literature references, sometimes making a joke about popular culture, sometimes taking a swipe at literature/history. I got maybe 10% of the significance during my initial, solo reading.

My mid-term paper was a super close reading of one small section (I think it is in chapter 4) where Bloom is in the tub, contemplating how his dick and balls look like a lily pad as they are floating in front of him in the tub.

A Strange History of confederate monuments in the South

oblio70 says...

Defeated people seldom remain "in their place". I think this is true on a macro-scale as well as individually. "Occupation" is usually the remedy, as either the victor moves in & sets up shop, or you get Johnny to "get a job". The later invites screams of "police state" which has always been a dog whistle to most Americans.

I think the solution initially would have been very ugly and still be dealt with. You just cannot make people change the way they think...at least not yet.

Why We Constantly Avoid Talking About Gun Control

CaptainObvious says...

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.

newtboy said:

Yep. Not allowing people to buy missiles, bombs, high explosives, and weaponized machines has no effect either. Of course not, it's ridiculous to blame the tool that makes mass murder simple and easy.
Good plan. No single simple solution could completely solve the problem, so it's better to do nothing at all. That's how we deal with all dangerous products, right?

Colbert To Trump: 'Doing Nothing Is Cowardice'

scheherazade says...

He didn't have full auto, he used a bump fire stock.
Full auto fires around 20hz. Well practiced bump firing is around 10hz. Well practiced semi auto pull is around 6hz.

Bump firing also sprays so bad it's not aimable beyond a few feet distance. The gun community is even more surprised than other people, most considered the bump stock as a joke doo dad for making noise and wasting money.





All vendors, even at a gun show, must do background checks.

All private sellers, regardless of where (at home, gun show, on the street, wherever), are not required to do checks - but are in practice held liable for subsequent gun crimes if they can't prove they had no idea the buyer was shady.

There is absolutely nothing special about gun shows. The gun show loophole is an entirely imaginary issue (I explained this earlier).




A traceable gun is just as capable of shooting a person as an untraceable gun.



Yes, anyone can put together that arsenal.
Especially anyone with a squeaky clean record who qualifies to be a gun owner no matter what the restriction - like the Vegas shooter.

Hence why *nothing proposed* would have had *any impact* on the Vegas events, short of confiscation raids nation wide and capital punishment for possession.





The reply was to : "You are more likely to be killed by a criminal if you have a gun than if you don't."

I have two interpretations of that chart

1) (my initial thought)
Assault understood as the legal meaning (brandishing, threatening, not necessarily killing).
Discharge understood as firing.
This is what the original math was based on.
But yes, it seems senseless because how can you die to brandishing?

You are correct regarding the "per year".
The original math does include the mistake of thinking it was cause of death, not per year chance of death.
That alters the result from 350'000 lifetimes for a 50/50 chance, down to 350'000 years for a 50/50 chance. AKA 4600 lifetimes worth of years for a 50/50 chance in the next year.

2) (your [likely correct] thought)
Assault understood as being fired upon.
Discharge understood as accidental (what else could it mean?)
This variant is computed below.
However, this challenges conventional assertion, because the common assertion is that accidents kill more than intentional. Maybe that assertion is crap.

1/24974 as caused by assault
That's a 99.995995835669095859694081845119% chance of dying by a cause OTHER than firearms.
Which requires around 17'000 trials for the chance of the next death to be 50% by firearm.
I.E. 99.995995835669095859694081845119% ^ 17'000 = 50.625%, or about 50/50.
AKA 226 lifetimes worth of years to have a 50/50 chance of death by firearm in the next year.

Referring to the study I linked earlier :
http://service.prerender.io/http://polstats.com/?_escaped_fragment_=/life#!/life
#2 version has a similar death chance to the polstats link, so the #2 variant is likely the appropriate understanding (not my initial understanding).

-schehearzade

newtboy said:

Common sense is not anti gun.
There clearly aren't laws enough. Anyone could put together the arsenal of full auto weapons he had, untraceable if from a gun show, legally, and repeat this. Felons, psychotics, terrorists, libtards, anyone. This is definitely a case of intentional neglect, make no mistake. Congress knows about these devices, they've fought to keep them legal. This hole in the law was by design.

You totally misread or intentionally misrepresent your own dumb, misleading blaze.com chart which separates all different firearm deaths into "firearm discharge, firearm assault, intentional self harm (by firearm) , and accident" Even using their highly suspect numbers and singling out only death by firearm assault, it's 24974/1 , not the 350000/1 that you claim ....and that's total odds of dying by firearm assault per year, not odds that, if you die, it will be by firearms. Math...it's a thing.

Clever Racoon

Aikido - Hiromi Matsuoka

ChaosEngine says...

So cards on the table: I am a 4th Dan student of Aikido.

I had initially written a long response explaining why I disagree with you, but I realised I don't really care and you're unlikely to change your opinion.

Each martial art (traditional, modern, boxing, HEMA, whatever) offers something different to its practitioners. If you enjoy it, keep doing it.

I'd probably get destroyed by a competent MMA fighter, but I don't do Aikido to win MMA matches.

Can I defend myself on the street? Dunno... haven't been in a fight in decades, and don't intend to either.

Do I still enjoy Aikido? Fuck yeah.

Drachen_Jager said:

Yeah, @ChaosEngine that's true, but it still doesn't work in real life.

Nobody uses Akido in MMA.

Akido is moderately effective when teaching a weak person to fend off stronger, untrained individuals. It's shit if your opponents have been trained.

Also, if I need more proof Akido is shit: Steven Seagal.

I rest my case.

Can You Spot The Bicycle In This Video?

RFlagg says...

For those wondering how she gets back down from such a situation, here's a longer video of her doing the trick (different place). Small warning, it is a bit loud, and there appears to be no volume on Instagram videos... https://www.instagram.com/p/BSzMisgFLcg/?taken-by=violalovescycling
I saw her initially in GIF form on UNBGBBIIVCHIDCTIICBG "Upvoted Not Because Girl, But Because It Is Very Cool; However, I Do Concede That I Initially Clicked Because Girl"
https://www.reddit.com/r/UNBGBBIIVCHIDCTIICBG/

Really That Good - TRANSFORMERS: THE MOVIE (1986)

Phreezdryd says...

*length=48:47

Edit: Not sure why I bothered to nitpick this, and now notice the video initially shows 48:48, but almost instantly changes after starting to 48:47. Some kind of split second discrepancy?

How the deadliest aviation accident in history was avoided

oritteropo says...

Fortunately they were already doing a go-around by the time ATC noticed, a few seconds later would have been a disaster. Their minimum altitude was reported as 18m, which is a bit under a metre above the tail height of a Boeing 787-9.

They do have those alarms, but it was initially reported this plane was too far off course from R28R to trigger them and part of the investigation will be whether they were even operating at the time.

A major contributing factor for this incident was that the second runway, 28L, was closed and lights off at the time of the incident. As a result, the FAA has changed San Francisco landing procedures no longer permitting visual approach when an adjacent parallel runway is closed - https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/faa-changes-san-francisco-landing-procedures-after-a-440380/

eric3579 said:

Amazes me when he got the go around command. He was already over the second airplane from what this video shows. i'm surprised air traffic control doesn't have an alarm if airplanes are approaching improperly. Also curious to know if any changes have been made to insure this type thing can't happen again.

Arnold Schwarzenegger Has A Blunt Message For Nazis

bobknight33 says...

Trump did condemn, unlike Arnold's dad.

Truth and facts but left out that his dad was a Nazi.

His dad decided not to beat the loud and angry voices of the Nazi with louder more reasonable voices. His dad just joined them.

Military career[edit]
Schwarzenegger had served in the Austrian Army from 1930 to 1937, achieving the rank of section commander and in 1937 he became a police officer. After enlisting in the Wehrmacht in November 1939, he was a Hauptfeldwebel (Master Sergeant) of the Feldgendarmerie, which were military police units. He served in Poland, France, Belgium, Ukraine, Lithuania and Russia. His unit was Feldgendarmerie-Abteilung 521 (mot.), which was part of Panzer Group 4. Wounded in action in Russia on 22 August 1942, he had the Iron Cross First and Second Classes for bravery, the Eastern Front Medal or the Wound Badge. Schwarzenegger appears to have received much medical attention. Initially, he was treated in the military hospital in Łódź, but according to the records he also suffered recurring bouts of malaria, which led to his discharge in February, 1944.

Trump Negates His Condemnation Of Nazis, Both Sides Guilty

RFlagg says...

Problem of course is his followers, Fox and the far right will praise him for his "measured" response, and waiting... of course he has far more harsh words for the CEOs leaving his photo-op, than he does for Nazis... and doesn't have a measured response if its Muslims, then all Muslims are to blame, but some Nazi runs over a woman, then he blames both sides.
Fuck Trump.
Fuck his supporters.
Fuck Nazis, the KKK, and White Supremacists. There is no such thing as a good person in any of those groups. There's no excuse for these groups, and they now feel emboldened by Trump, and his initial refusal to be harsh with them... now after his statements, they remind him he won because of them, and he tones his message down.
And we know why he toned his message down against the white supremacists, because he's a puppet of Bannon. The fears over Bannon leaving will likely never happen, as until Trump grows an actual pair, he won't stand up to Bannon, because he knows the only people who's really on his side are the white supremacists, and if he turned on them, even Fox's love and fawning over him wouldn't save him.

The 7th Guest: Official Trailer

ForgedReality says...

Yeah. More than once I think. It was a long ass time ago, but I remember the end involves you leaving the mansion, amid happy-ish music and a bright sunny day, and being picked up by your driver who ends up being this undead skeleton dude or something.

The game I'm really enjoying right now is Prey (2017). OMG so good. I saw some let's plays of it and initially it felt underwhelming, but the game is so immersive and non-linear, with a great story and evolving game world... It's not so much a horror game, but it has tension and some jump-scares here and there. I feel like it's got some gameplay similarities to Alone in the Dark 1, oddly enough, despite being completely and entirely different.

ant said:

What was amazing was the outdated polygon graphics, MIDI music, etc. that still scared us. I remember having a hard time in the attic. Its controls and camera views drove me crazy! Haha. I never actually got far too in the full game. Did you finish it?

Officer Brandishing Weapon On ATV Motorist In North Pole

Jinx says...

Unless I am mistaken he has no right to stop and detain them. I agree that it seems unlikely that race played a role in the initial altercation (and who knows after that...) but really I think he was in the wrong the moment he grabbed the ATV. If he had a problem with the way they were driving the right thing to do would be to allow the Police to do their jobs and not pretend to be one instead.

bobknight33 said:

Yea hes down have the right to stop them and yell at them for running up and and down the street.

If you had hooligans running up and down you street on ATVs then yes stop them ant talk to them and indicate your position of dislike.

Color has nothing to do with it . To you everything is raciest. A white man walking a black dog is raciest. lighten up.

There should not be charges against walker ( atv rider) but against Brower ( want to be cop)

Baby Driver -- Opening Scene (Amazing car chase)

Reduce Crime AND Save Money: Treat Addiction ...

C-note says...

The War on Black people / War on drugs satisfies the needs of too many americans who profit and wish to continue the implementation of New Jim Crow. Portugal's Drug Decriminalization Policy worked, but private prisons, drug treatment centers, police departments, DEA and a host of other entrenched institutions would be laying off 100's of thousands of employees the moment real legalization and treatment initiatives become standard nationwide. Simply put the cure is a profit and job killer and the free market can't have that.



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