Tags for this video have been changed from 'Liam Neeson, Ricky Gervais, list' to 'Liam Neeson, Ricky Gervais, Stephen Merchant, Warwick Davies, list' - edited by alien_concept

>> ^cito:

that's not a deleted scene
that is Stephen Merchant and Ricky Gervais with Karl Pilkington and this recording is from their XFM radio days.
I have the entire XFM Ricky Gervais shows downloaded and remember this one
http://www.pilkipedia.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Xfm_Shows

they aired from 2001 to 2005 on XFM, before the Ricky Gervais Podcast started.
someone took the audio and overdubbed it onto a Portal 2 video.


I was pretty sure it wasn't, thanks for knowing

that's not a deleted scene

that is Stephen Merchant and Ricky Gervais with Karl Pilkington and this recording is from their XFM radio days.

I have the entire XFM Ricky Gervais shows downloaded and remember this one

http://www.pilkipedia.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Xfm_Shows


they aired from 2001 to 2005 on XFM, before the Ricky Gervais Podcast started.

someone took the audio and overdubbed it onto a Portal 2 video.

It costs money to do a credit/debit card transaction. In most cases, this charge is eaten by the merchant. The cost of doing the service have not decreased. In fact, they are going up. The bank has to have systems in place to receive the transaction, record it, log it, verify it, and process it. That takes computers, databases, and networks - all of which have to work quickly and with very few mistakes. That doesn't come cheap. Not to meantion all the audits they constantly undergo as a matter of federal law.

Some brag about credit unions. No offense - but that's like comparing apples to t-bone steak. Credit unions and banks are treated very differently. CUs don't get hit with a fraction of the regulations, taxes, fees, and audits that even small banks do. That's why a CU can afford to run at lower profit margins. It isn't that the credit union is 'nicer'. Banks are treated like a pro baseball team. Credit unions are treated like a 3-year old T-ball team.

Why the change all of a sudden? Well, you can thank (as usual) your Federal government. Obama is putting a cap on how much banks can charge merchants for transactions. I think Obama's "theory" (as usual based on the assumption banks are evil) is that merchants will no longer have to 'pass on' this hidden cost to consumers. As usual, he assumes the banks will just shrug and start coughing up billions of dollars to do transactions for free. He's an idiot.

Banks will charge consumers directly for transaction fees now - or (as BoA is doing) they will charge a yearly fee for the priveledge of a debit card. Congratulations - you've discovered The Law of Unintended Consequences! You can't legislate morality. People will or won't do the right thing on their own. Likewise, you can't legislate 'fairness'. If you think a business is unfair, then don't go there. That is how you punish a business. Relying on legislation just creates an environment of 'whack-a-mole' uncertainty.

This is what introduced Gervais and Merchant to me. Best way to get to know 'em!

>> ^Shepppard:

Alright, is it sad that I want to see his kitchen now?


Me too! He must have very little storage under his work surfaces, and can't easily reach up to overhead cupboards either.

I'd definitely go with Stephen Merchant's height if forced to make the decision (I'm quite happy with how I am).

I am oversimplifying things a bit here, but here's how I see it.

========================================================================

I am a merchant with a peach orchard, and I want to sell the best peaches to the market.

You are a farmer who knows how to grow peach trees, and pick all the peaches and throw them in a basket.

I hired you to make best peaches to sell to the market. But lately I've been getting some bad batches. Most are excellent peaches, but some were too tart. I address the issue and tell you that some of the batches were bad.

You, the farmer, tell me that all your batches are of excellent quality, and the batch you have today is all excellent. So I, as a merchant, pay you for your work and sell the peaches at the market. Again, some good peaches, and a few bad ones. Now word is going around that people who eat my peaches get stomach aches. Nobody wants to buy peaches from me anymore.

I goto you and tell you that I want the best quality peaches. Farmer says there's nothing he can do about it because peaches all look the same to him, and he just picks them from a tree and throw it in the basket.

I, as a merchant, want quality control. So I now hire a professional picker who can tell the difference between good peaches from bad ones when he picks them from the trees.

You, as a farmer, is upset because I've now hired this extra person into the farm who takes away from our profit margin. But I, as a merchant, tell you that we have to keep quality control if we want to keep our customers. Otherwise, I will have to stop doing business with you and find another peach farmer.

You are upset because I am intruding your rights into your job and expertise. I am upset because you refuse to control the quality of your peaches. And I am forced to impose quality control because you are not doing your part of the job as the producer.

=============================================

This is how I see the situation. The community must actively differentiate themselves from these bad seeds instead of hiding them and defending them. By doing so, you are protecting the very thing that are out to hurt you. If you fail to differentiate yourself, then we have no choice to take all of those involved with the same assumption. The community may argue that these people are crazy and these radicals have nothing to do with them. And yet, these radicals are still within their community. Nobody within the community is willing to fish them out, because they see it as turning their backs on their own kind.

And there lies the irony. The community may say they are different, and yet they still won't fish out the bad guys within the community, treating them as part of their family. It is the community's responsibility to look after its members, including keeping quality control. By refusing to keep control, you are avoiding responsibility. And someone else, whether you like it or not, will have to take up the duty.


I've made a detailed comment here: http://videosift.com/video/NYPD-is-Morphing-into-the-CIA#comment-1279011

If you disagree with what I've just said, feel free to read the extra comments and then respond.

I'm sure that's a HUGE consolation to the other 40 people that lost their jobs.>> ^rychan:

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Wal-mart... crazy rant about how it kills your neighbors...
I've never quite understood this argument. Wal-Mart doesn't kill local businesses. It rearranges them and then creates more jobs. Every Wal-Mart that goes up has about 10 restaurants, 2 car dealerships, 1 Gamestop, a couple book stores, and a bunch of other ancillary businesses sprout up literally overnight right next to it once it opens. These places employ - that's right - your neighbors. It has been demonstrably proven over and over again that Wal-Marts increase employment and revenue in the communities they enter. Do they shake up the environment and force local shops to change it up? Of course. But for every guy that curses Wal-Mart because he had to close his Mom & Pop, there are 20 other guys who are cheering Wal-Mart as they take showers in new business money.

I agree that it's a crazy rant, but I'll take it further. Any argument about making or killing jobs is a crazy rant.
Our goal, as a society, is to reduce the number of jobs needed in stupid stuff (like retail), so that we can put more of our collective resources into things that actually improve us as a society (research, education, health care).
If a WalMart meets the retail needs of a community with 40 jobs instead of 80 independent merchants, FANTASTIC. That means we all get to spend less money on equipping and feeding ourselves, and more money on schools and space programs. If you went out of business because a WalMart showed up, your job was not adding enough value to the product to be worthwhile. Sorry, the free market has spoken. But don't worry, we haven't reduced the productive output of the human race, this just means that we have more resources to spend on science instead of mom and pop shoe stores.
So stop bragging about your stupid government project "creating hundreds of jobs". Anyone can create make-work jobs. The only job the government should be creating are those that directly serve the public good and that can't be financed on an individual scale. Basic research falls into this category. So does policing and homeland security, although I think we've gone way overboard on security spending.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Wal-mart... crazy rant about how it kills your neighbors...
I've never quite understood this argument. Wal-Mart doesn't kill local businesses. It rearranges them and then creates more jobs. Every Wal-Mart that goes up has about 10 restaurants, 2 car dealerships, 1 Gamestop, a couple book stores, and a bunch of other ancillary businesses sprout up literally overnight right next to it once it opens. These places employ - that's right - your neighbors. It has been demonstrably proven over and over again that Wal-Marts increase employment and revenue in the communities they enter. Do they shake up the environment and force local shops to change it up? Of course. But for every guy that curses Wal-Mart because he had to close his Mom & Pop, there are 20 other guys who are cheering Wal-Mart as they take showers in new business money.


I agree that it's a crazy rant, but I'll take it further. Any argument about making or killing jobs is a crazy rant.

Our goal, as a society, is to reduce the number of jobs needed in stupid stuff (like retail), so that we can put more of our collective resources into things that actually improve us as a society (research, education, health care).

If a WalMart meets the retail needs of a community with 40 jobs instead of 80 independent merchants, FANTASTIC. That means we all get to spend less money on equipping and feeding ourselves, and spend more money on schools and space programs. If you went out of business because a WalMart showed up, your job was not adding enough value to the product to be worthwhile. Sorry, the free market has spoken. But don't worry, we haven't reduced the productive output of the human race, this just means that we have more resources to spend on science instead of mom and pop shoe stores.

So stop bragging about your stupid government project "creating hundreds of jobs". Anyone can create make-work jobs. The only job the government should be creating are those that directly serve the public good and that can't be financed on an individual scale. Basic research falls into this category. So does policing and homeland security, although I think we've gone way overboard on security spending.

Is this what is going to lead to a real police state? Security cameras in the hands of government instead of just civilians?

I can see the merchants insisting on a camera system downtown and an increased police presence.

The shadow side of cheap media -- in the hands of folks with good intentions, good is done. In the hands of folks with bad intentions, bad is done.

http://www.philebrity.com/2011/06/27/the-way-we-live-now-flash-mob-robberies-flash-mobberies/

Clockwork Orange, my god it reads like Clockwork Orange.

IDIOTS! GLaDOS is a psychopathic computer! She is the villain! You have to team up with her for a while to fight a common enemy, but she never stops being cruel and manipulative. The reaction from these parents is EXACTLY the reason the taunting about adoption is in the game! In the scene shown, Wheatley is trying to copy GLaDOS' style of mockery and fails.

Holy crap, I can't believe they have played the game and don't get this point. The bad guys say things to try to upset you! Are they supposed to be polite while they try to kill you? Concerned about your feelings and shy away from potentially touchy subjects??

This is one of my favorite games of all time, and it really pisses me off to see it being mis-interpreted like this. Apparently none of these people understand character creation.

I have a suggestion. If there is something about your life that somebody might poke fun at and make you all insulted, then don't leave the house. Don't play any video games. Don't watch any TV. Don't read any books. Just sit alone in your safe little room where nobody will ever hurt you with their painful, painful words.

Sigh.

Also, westy, I thought Steve Merchant's performance was superb. I don't know him as an actor, so maybe he has the same style in everything he does, which I see might get annoying. Also I'm an American, for whatever that's worth. Not sure how that changes how we view his performance. He's supposed to be a fairly dumb AI. I think he nailed it. You're not going to get the cleverness of Monty Python or Pratchett in a character like that. Of course the GLaDOS character has much wittier comments. She's smart. And evil.

>> ^ponceleon:

OH FFS. Just let it go. It is one of the most well-written games in quite some time. Should we ban Cinderella? She was adopted and it was a nightmare. Grow some fucking skin and enough with the fake fucking outrage over NOTHING.


most of the doilog makes the game feel like some wana-be pixar film .

Steve merchants voice is one of the most damaging things to the game and the exsperance. I guess if your american you will perceive his voice differently but at a minimum they could have put a bit of distortion on it so it didn't sound like a voice actor in your ear for half the game allso they should have made is speaking far less formulaic ( granted how he talks in this is all he is capable of as an actor)

As for Steve merchants lines in terms of writing to me it felt like I had some kids nurator from some cheep kids cg film following me around , when you have a character like that you really need the writing to be done by monty python , duglus adems or maybe terry Pratchett.

The glados character however is good and most of her lines are decent and fit the game well.

As for this whole adopted news story its just retarded the news anchers and tv produces should just be em brassed by how pore there reporting is.

No surprise, except for what Steven Merchant would say rather than Karl this time around...to me atleast...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'ricky gervais show, stephen merchant, karl pilkington, sat nav, lost, diversion' to 'ricky gervais show, stephen merchant, karl pilkington, sat nav, gps, lost, diversion' - edited by calvados

Aww come on, putting each other down is a staple of British comedy. It's all in good fun.

>> ^spoco2:

>> ^kymbos:
I have tried watching these a dozen times. Each time I just see two guys bullying someone who doesn't appear to be bothered by it.

Yeah, I do love Gervais and Merchant, but these have always seemed unnecessarily cruel, and I get shirty with them when Karl is actually making a good point.