@messenger sorry but I'm walking away from you now because you mentioned Hitler killing jews, I'm not stepping into that minefield, you know how emotional sifters get trigger happy downvoting taboo subjects.

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

I think it was actually our problem in the end - and affected all Firefox installs - pretty sure Lucky has fixed it now.
In reply to this comment by Deano:
I have to admit I think it's more to do with running the minefield version of Firefox. Gone back to 3.6 for the time being and it all seems reliable now.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Hmm. Really? Try logging on and off and restarting the browser?
In reply to this comment by Deano:
I'm not seeing the comments on videos anymore @dag

I have to admit I think it's more to do with running the minefield version of Firefox. Gone back to 3.6 for the time being and it all seems reliable now.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Hmm. Really? Try logging on and off and restarting the browser?
In reply to this comment by Deano:
I'm not seeing the comments on videos anymore @dag

@dag ah just updated my Minefield version of Firefox and now they are back.

>> ^kymbos:
I actually didn't get the Diana joke. Why the mine field?
Otherwise, shame the comment thread degenerated into who can be the bigger twat.


Google 'Diana Minefield'.

looks fun, but man, what a spoiler minefield

^ Skinhead Ku Klux Klan cracker.

Don't get mad, that'd be racist too.

Nyah nyah.

This meme of accusing the people offended by racially charged phrases of being racist themselves is getting really fucking old.

I blame the right wing moron-squad, but they didn't invent it, I'm sure the racist Dixicrats did the same thing, back before they all became Republicans.

We're all humans, and we all know that words can hurt and offend and anger people. Nader knows what kind of a minefield he was walking into using the phrase "Uncle Tom" within 40 miles of Obama's name, and Fox gave him just what he was hoping to get: attention from someone.

We all have a skin color, and we're all part of a history that includes horrible, hateful acts committed by one race against another. It's not racism to wince when someone jabs at that still-healing wound, it's human.

Good humans don't jab at painful wounds like that. Bad humans defend the people who do.

Jumpgate: Evolution > the crap that is Eve Online

In reply to this comment by Shepppard:
I laughed at this, because it's true. The only truly GOOD feature about that game is the fact that you can pay for the monthly subscription with in-game currency.

Other then that, the controls are horrible because its not just point and click..its point, click to bring up the menu, select sub-catagory of the menu, select distance at which to stop at object, go.

Not only that, but the game itself was frustrating, as you see the exciting world of mining to get money, you don't get ore every hit..which is acceptable, but when you don't get ore after 5 minutes, that's a problem, and made worse by the fact that every time I tried to fly to a damn minefield, my ship would stop like 500km short, and i'd have to fly normally the rest of the way there, unable to warp.

I laughed at this, because it's true. The only truly GOOD feature about that game is the fact that you can pay for the monthly subscription with in-game currency.

Other then that, the controls are horrible because its not just point and click..its point, click to bring up the menu, select sub-catagory of the menu, select distance at which to stop at object, go.

Not only that, but the game itself was frustrating, as you see the exciting world of mining to get money, you don't get ore every hit..which is acceptable, but when you don't get ore after 5 minutes, that's a problem, and made worse by the fact that every time I tried to fly to a damn minefield, my ship would stop like 500km short, and i'd have to fly normally the rest of the way there, unable to warp.

I'm a flash playa. I flash hot chicks.

And yes this has happened to me as well. I'm using Minefield 3.0b5.

From http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/camp-campaign

Are you shocked yet? Relax, the camp is fake, but the campaign is real.

Last week YouTube popped up a new video for Camp Okutta, a children’s adventure camp just outside of Toronto. It opens with a promising young camp counselor, with a group of scared kids…

The counselor throws a stone onto a patch of grass. Nothing happens. He throws another. A mine explodes. The video is scary, at first you think it could be a real camp.

Fortunately, the camp does not exist.

Canoe.ca says “A Canadian charity is hoping to bring home the plight of war-affected children with a provocative new campaign that asks Canadians to picture their own children shooting AK-47s and walking across minefields.”

At the end, the video directs viewers to the camp’s website, which goes into more detail about what campers will experience. Children who are homesick or afraid are fed amphetamines and a “rudimentary mixture of cocaine and gunpowder.” On good days, they eat plain rice or scraps of food left behind by the camp’s leaders.

The campaign is meant to draw attention to the estimated 250,000 child soldiers worldwide, War Child Canada founder Samantha Nutt said. “What we were trying to do was to really bring the issue home to North Americans in a new and creative way that would ask the question, ‘If this was a Canadian context and these were Canadian kids, what would our reaction be?”’ she said.

“We accept it as part of life in other parts of the world, and yet it is totally abhorrent and totally unacceptable.”

Nutt described the YouTube video and Camp Okutta website as “100 per cent based in reality,” from the images of children detonating mines, to the use of AK-47s, which are considered the weapon of choice for child soldiers because “they’re lightweight and so easy to use,” she said.

After the first night the video had 5,000 viewers and is since up to over 20,000. Shows you just how well viral marketing works these days.

Unfortunately it seems that there are too many active environmentalists that rely on sensationalism rather then research and common sense.

What's interesting to me is a tour I took of a wind farm. There were the remains of dead birds littering the place. When I asked about it they said that the rapidly spinning blades were like a minefield for birds trying to navigate the area and that after a while they learned to avoid the power field.

Either that or they killed all the birds in the area. What gets me is that people (myself included) don't take into account the effect that environmentalism has on the environment. For instance in some cases it's more harmful to the environment to recycle then it is to throw away garbage.

Fair enough. If not the big C, then what faith do you follow?


In reply to this comment by MINK:
ahh, now you said the word "christianity". different thing.

don't worry, i am not in any way flustered, it just sounds like that because discussing on the internet is quite clumsy.

it's anyway interesting to do it, but you don't really get anywhere.

so i am not angry or bitter, maybe more like tired.

you started this with "not to be rude" so i think you knew it was touchy territory! it's just so hard because neither of us know each other.




In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Wooah! Easy there, MINK. I didn't attack you, let alone argue with you. I'm not trying to beat you down, prove you wrong or change your mind. This is just a regular ole conversation, so pull yourself together.

First of all, I didn't state or imply that Christianity was blissful ignorance, that came purely from your own imagination. The fact that those thoughts are hovering around your brainpan is probably significant.

I agree that language isn't sufficient to fully explain the euphoria of love, hate, fear, sadness, religion, music, dance, psychedelics, etc...... but that doesn't mean you should shut down communication altogether.

I'm not sure what the source of your anger and bitterness is (over-exposure to political propaganda would be my guess?) but having to trudge through your emotional minefield is no fun.

Take a deep breath and relax.....

We're not required to have all the answers....

It's OK to say 'I don't know'.....

There's room enough for everyone's ideas....

PAX

In reply to this comment by MINK:
defensive because you attacked, with your "isn't faith basically happy stupidity" argument.

faith isn't meaningless, your question was meaningless, or at least cannot be responded to meaningfully, because there's no way to describe faith satisfactorily to someone who's already decided it is happy stupidity.

Words are not good enough to debate this topic. They only work for science, not for feelings, emotions, spiritual concepts, music, love.

So if you are arguing science vs faith by using words, the science guys have a big advantage and the stuff the faith guys say sounds meaningless.

Anyway... interesting video here:
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Science-of-Remote-Viewers-959

the second half is more interesting.

I am pretty sure science will catch up with god one day and find out that prayer and karma and belief and faith are tangible and important, and scientists will come up with new words for stuff that used to be "impossible" or "unscientific".

So i think we get closer to "proving" faith is sensible rather than "disproving" it as irrational and stupid.

Hope that makes some kinda sense, even though the meanings of the words are not exactly what i think.

Your attitude to the world changes your experience of the world. Having faith in something good can improve your experience of the world. Having faith in existing science is stupid because it will change. Having faith in the scientific method to one day discover everything is not stupid, i think the scientific method is ok. You just need to remember that we might only be 2% of the way on the journey of science, but theology and philosophy uncovered some powerful basic truths a long long time ago.




In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Why so defensive? I wasn't going to whack you over the head with your answer. Is faith meaningless?



In reply to this comment by MINK:
that question is either loaded or meaningless.

Faith from a scientific standpoint is weak. Science from a faithful standpoint is weak.

Is that quantum enough for you?

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
What does faith mean to you?

In reply to this comment by MINK:
some people have a willful lack of understanding of faith.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
/\ Not to be rude, but isn't faith - by its very definition - a willful lack of understanding.

In reply to this comment by MINK:
this dude rawks. notice how he has more confidence in his lack of understanding than they have in their faith.

b...b...b...but the bible was inspired by the holy spirit... or sumtin... so... you're like wrong i guess...!

ahh, now you said the word "christianity". different thing.

don't worry, i am not in any way flustered, it just sounds like that because discussing on the internet is quite clumsy.

it's anyway interesting to do it, but you don't really get anywhere.

so i am not angry or bitter, maybe more like tired.

you started this with "not to be rude" so i think you knew it was touchy territory! it's just so hard because neither of us know each other.




In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Wooah! Easy there, MINK. I didn't attack you, let alone argue with you. I'm not trying to beat you down, prove you wrong or change your mind. This is just a regular ole conversation, so pull yourself together.

First of all, I didn't state or imply that Christianity was blissful ignorance, that came purely from your own imagination. The fact that those thoughts are hovering around your brainpan is probably significant.

I agree that language isn't sufficient to fully explain the euphoria of love, hate, fear, sadness, religion, music, dance, psychedelics, etc...... but that doesn't mean you should shut down communication altogether.

I'm not sure what the source of your anger and bitterness is (over-exposure to political propaganda would be my guess?) but having to trudge through your emotional minefield is no fun.

Take a deep breath and relax.....

We're not required to have all the answers....

It's OK to say 'I don't know'.....

There's room enough for everyone's ideas....

PAX

In reply to this comment by MINK:
defensive because you attacked, with your "isn't faith basically happy stupidity" argument.

faith isn't meaningless, your question was meaningless, or at least cannot be responded to meaningfully, because there's no way to describe faith satisfactorily to someone who's already decided it is happy stupidity.

Words are not good enough to debate this topic. They only work for science, not for feelings, emotions, spiritual concepts, music, love.

So if you are arguing science vs faith by using words, the science guys have a big advantage and the stuff the faith guys say sounds meaningless.

Anyway... interesting video here:
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Science-of-Remote-Viewers-959

the second half is more interesting.

I am pretty sure science will catch up with god one day and find out that prayer and karma and belief and faith are tangible and important, and scientists will come up with new words for stuff that used to be "impossible" or "unscientific".

So i think we get closer to "proving" faith is sensible rather than "disproving" it as irrational and stupid.

Hope that makes some kinda sense, even though the meanings of the words are not exactly what i think.

Your attitude to the world changes your experience of the world. Having faith in something good can improve your experience of the world. Having faith in existing science is stupid because it will change. Having faith in the scientific method to one day discover everything is not stupid, i think the scientific method is ok. You just need to remember that we might only be 2% of the way on the journey of science, but theology and philosophy uncovered some powerful basic truths a long long time ago.




In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Why so defensive? I wasn't going to whack you over the head with your answer. Is faith meaningless?



In reply to this comment by MINK:
that question is either loaded or meaningless.

Faith from a scientific standpoint is weak. Science from a faithful standpoint is weak.

Is that quantum enough for you?

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
What does faith mean to you?

In reply to this comment by MINK:
some people have a willful lack of understanding of faith.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
/\ Not to be rude, but isn't faith - by its very definition - a willful lack of understanding.

In reply to this comment by MINK:
this dude rawks. notice how he has more confidence in his lack of understanding than they have in their faith.

b...b...b...but the bible was inspired by the holy spirit... or sumtin... so... you're like wrong i guess...!

Wooah! Easy there, MINK. I didn't attack you, let alone argue with you. I'm not trying to beat you down, prove you wrong or change your mind. This is just a regular ole conversation, so pull yourself together.

First of all, I didn't state or imply that Christianity was blissful ignorance, that came purely from your own imagination. The fact that those thoughts are hovering around your brainpan is probably significant.

I agree that language isn't sufficient to fully explain the euphoria of love, hate, fear, sadness, religion, music, dance, psychedelics, etc...... but that doesn't mean you should shut down communication altogether.

I'm not sure what the source of your anger and bitterness is (over-exposure to political propaganda would be my guess?) but having to trudge through your emotional minefield is no fun.

Take a deep breath and relax.....

We're not required to have all the answers....

It's OK to say 'I don't know'.....

There's room enough for everyone's ideas....

PAX

In reply to this comment by MINK:
defensive because you attacked, with your "isn't faith basically happy stupidity" argument.

faith isn't meaningless, your question was meaningless, or at least cannot be responded to meaningfully, because there's no way to describe faith satisfactorily to someone who's already decided it is happy stupidity.

Words are not good enough to debate this topic. They only work for science, not for feelings, emotions, spiritual concepts, music, love.

So if you are arguing science vs faith by using words, the science guys have a big advantage and the stuff the faith guys say sounds meaningless.

Anyway... interesting video here:
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Science-of-Remote-Viewers-959

the second half is more interesting.

I am pretty sure science will catch up with god one day and find out that prayer and karma and belief and faith are tangible and important, and scientists will come up with new words for stuff that used to be "impossible" or "unscientific".

So i think we get closer to "proving" faith is sensible rather than "disproving" it as irrational and stupid.

Hope that makes some kinda sense, even though the meanings of the words are not exactly what i think.

Your attitude to the world changes your experience of the world. Having faith in something good can improve your experience of the world. Having faith in existing science is stupid because it will change. Having faith in the scientific method to one day discover everything is not stupid, i think the scientific method is ok. You just need to remember that we might only be 2% of the way on the journey of science, but theology and philosophy uncovered some powerful basic truths a long long time ago.




In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
Why so defensive? I wasn't going to whack you over the head with your answer. Is faith meaningless?



In reply to this comment by MINK:
that question is either loaded or meaningless.

Faith from a scientific standpoint is weak. Science from a faithful standpoint is weak.

Is that quantum enough for you?

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
What does faith mean to you?

In reply to this comment by MINK:
some people have a willful lack of understanding of faith.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
/\ Not to be rude, but isn't faith - by its very definition - a willful lack of understanding.

In reply to this comment by MINK:
this dude rawks. notice how he has more confidence in his lack of understanding than they have in their faith.

b...b...b...but the bible was inspired by the holy spirit... or sumtin... so... you're like wrong i guess...!