Your video, 6/Six Amazing Pop-Up Paper Sculptures, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Comply....this is not a solution for the citizens, it's a solution for the officers. People clearly complying have been shot, on camera, repeatedly. Remember "hands up, don't shoot"....that was a slogan because so many people were shot while their hands were up complying. It sure didn't help the caregiver that was prone with hands outstretched begging them to not shoot at the totally harmless mentally challenged man child seated and playing with a truck, but they still did shoot repeatedly, hitting the prone caregiver.

Also, just comply means just allow them to violate your rights, claiming you can recapture your violated rights with no effort by suing...WTF?!? You have a right to know why you're being arrested. You have a right to not answer them when they scream at you. You have a right to carry cash without it being stolen. You have a right to insist on your rights not being violated in the first place. You do not have to allow them to violate you in the hopes that you can prove they did it....prove it against their lies, their fellow officers lies, the prosecutors bias, the judges bias, the evidence disappearing, the harassment from them and other cops, and while fighting the bogus charges that pop up when you file your lawsuit.

The police do act as judge, jury, and executioner many times....that's why people hate cops, not because they are confused about what judges are for. It's because cops so often abuse their authority and/or lie and in the process completely destroy multiple lives (both those they charge and family/bystanders) with impunity, immunity, derision, and zero empathy, then they usually blame their victims for not 'just complying'.
I'm already really beginning to dislike this asshat.

Just let them violate you to death and then sue them, huh? When those 2-3-4 officers all lie, hide evidence, and retaliate against anyone who contradicts their lies (including other cops), that 'remedy' rarely wins in court without incontrovertible evidence proving they all lied, incontrovertible evidence that the cops didn't know about to hide or destroy...and it can't unviolate you or restore lost time, sanity, or life.
...and yes, because they overwhelmingly stand behind those proven to have violated rights and worse, they all get painted with that brush until that changes. The blue wall is responsible for those "good" cops being painted as "bad", not the citizens who's trust has been so often violated. When you stand with a thug and support and protect them, you are one.

No quotas? OK, now this guy has moved from bad advice that benefits only the cops, not the citizen, to ridiculous self serving bold faced lies. It's been clearly, incontrovertibly, repeatedly proven and unashamedly admitted by uncountable officers and their supervisors in hundreds if not thousands of jurisdictions, most cops do have quotas.

BTW, that's EX officer Izzo....thank goodness.

The little white panel that pops up should really have an elegantly stenciled middle finger on it.

You know, politics happen even when the presidential election is not happening. Start small and make this much noise in your local government -- you can actually have a voice there.

And fuck Jill Stein for the same reason. Start small. Gain traction in the local governments. Don't just pop up your head every 4 years and say, "Hey! See! I'm a 3rd party candidate!"

Go to city council meetings. Find a candidate for governor or mayor that you like and help them out both financially and with your feet and mouth.

That's how we got here. We wait 4 years until we decide to get political, as though that's the only time to do so. Even if Trump gets elected (which is seeming more and more plausible every week) that doesn't mean you have to stop making noise.

I want to see *one* major US sport take a real hardline approach and make all the others look bad.

What if, for example, the NHL started a new and more rigorous doping testing program. Frequent random tests, and if you ever test positive (with verified results), you forfeit the rest your contract, all of your records / statistics are invalidated, and you are never allowed to play for the league again. Teams would still be charged with the salary cap hit from any of their players who test positive, so they would be encouraged to enforce the system also.

Just think about how that could be marketed for any sport that had the guts to initiate it. Put up images of Barry Bonds and insult MLB for allowing his (and other dopers) records and statistics to stand. Then fade out and pop up with "But here in the {NHL / NFL / NBA / whatever}, cheaters NEVER WIN."

I think that would generate a lot of interest / revenue for whatever sport got the ball rolling.

Hmm. It’s an interesting story – it doesn’t seem that it’s 100% the typical patent troll mold, though it’s obviously still a shitty tale of bullshit patent litigation tactics. It looks like Pappas had his original idea and filed for a patent in 2000, basically trying to create a way to monetize the ad hoc markets that pop up whenever people are in line or reserving places for entertainment (probably based on his own restaurant experience). He filed a single, very broad, multiregion patent on this, and launched a company and online platform around it in 2008 (OptionIt) to provide an online service for trading ticket reservations / places in line. Braxton had a similar but more clearly defined idea in 2011, and filed his own patent.

Like I said – I don’t like this idea, I wish it hadn’t been granted patent protection, and I’m happy if it never reaches the market. However, for all that, I think Pappas original idea was a bit more inventive. Back in 2000 we didn’t have an app economy, and we hadn’t gotten used to these kinds of ad hoc, internet-facilitated temporary market places. When Braxton came up with it, it was pretty dull.

Either way, once Pappas started his business, I guess he instructed his law firm to handle litigation as aggressively as possible, which is fairly standard practice, and which is the unfortunate behavior described in the video. After losing the original suit and then losing the Rule 11 motion, they argued like aggressive assholes in mediation, and got Braxton to back down. I think their threat was fairly hollow – he says that they threatened him with their ‘patent portfolio,’ but this is the only patent family I can find for OptionIt / Smart Option.

I’m not sure I would call this a textbook case of patent trolling – usually patent trolls file or acquire patents for the sole purpose of extorting legitimate businesses, but here it looks like Pappas was actually trying to make a go of this (shitty) app idea, but used intimidation to try to protect that idea. It’s one shitty business trying to intimidate another upstart shitty business, and the courts ruling against the first party. On the whole we all lose – OptionIt wins the mediation through shitty intimidation, and Braxton’s shitty patent gets added to Spangenberg’s portfolio of shitty troll assets to keep the cycle going.

That video explains exactly why in the end, voting for the lesser of two evils leads to the greater. Without a third party popping up from time to time forcing parties to realign nothing will ever change. The same two parties keep swapping power. The spoiler effect is a necessary sacrifice, required to effect change in a first past the post system.

Ideally our senators would implement voting reform and end first past the post. Not likely to happen if they are all benefiting from the current system.

I am the opposite of underwhelmed.
It does harken back to the classics.

Goodbye autoaim.

Now another generation of Doom clones can pop up.

But I have seen none of this shit in the game. I get the weapon upgrades. I get the level ups.

Congratulations VideoSifters!

It took several days for a racist troll to pop up. I think that's pretty damn good for any internet community.

FYI, Heffro, I am white and privileged.

Haha holy crap... video sift is broken, these things are popping up in the "just published" view.

Soon we will start seeing signs popping up with a giant color swatch on it and pictures of various clothing and hair styles. They will say "You must be at least this black to wear these clothes or wear your hair in these styles".

What? Helicopters are LESS vulnerable? How do you figure? They're vulnerable to small arms fire from ground troops, unlike a Warthog (unless you have a super sniper around that can do supercomputer type calculations in a fraction of a second and hit it on the fly with a 50 cal. depleted uranium round). They can pop up and down behind cover and do awesome targeting tricks, but in my eyes, for every advantage they have, there's another disadvantage.

But then you hit the nail on the head. Drones do it ALL better, for exponentially less, without putting a highly trained pilot in danger. I think it's just plain dumb to make piloted planes when we have working drone tech. For the current cost of the R&D on this single plane, not including the cost of building a single working F-35, we could have 1.3 million drones (+-, if we make that many, I'm sure we can make them for <$1 million a piece) and own the skies of the entire planet for eternity....or at least until Skynet takes over. Drones are far cheaper to maintain, don't have the G-force limitations human pilots do, can do far more dangerous jobs because we can afford to lose them, etc. We should never make another fighter that has a pilot IMO....maybe not any kind of military fighting plane.
I also love the A-10, but I've never had to fight in one. That cannon though, so satisfying.

Overpriced? Definitely. But turd? no chance. F-35's would be covering other F-35's. In the unlikely case of someone getting in that close. As soon as an enemy plane (somehow magically gets by all defenses and sensors) pops up behind a fellow pilot, they'd be getting shot down by another F-35.

You might have a valid point with the electronic warfare, but it comes with it's own disadvantages. For example as soon as someone starts jamming, they appear hostile (or atleast "unknown")to even their own friendly forces. So it has to be used appropriately. Jamming also only works at certain ranges, and once you are close enough there are ways to get around it.
Jamming also means that you're broadcasting your own position. It definitely makes things harder for the enemy, but it's not a show stopper.

Continuing the sniper analogy. If for some reason the sniper was alone and not part of a combined force, and someone did sneak up on him with a sword then he might be in trouble. Yet do you see snipers being trained with swords in the military? No, because it's so unlikely to happen. But still they carry a knife just in case. As does the F-35. Missiles that shoot almost backwards and a cannon in case sensors fail.


These 40 year old pieces of shit you are talking about are flying at the limits of physics for human pilots by the way

This is the first thought in my head every time this tech pops up in the news.