>> ^spoco2:

@rychan My response is mostly due to you saying that you water that much of the year as if it's low. If that is considered low in the States then that's terrible. And they're electrical sprinkler too... 2 and a half hours of watering every morning is a HUGE amount of water, that's just insane.
Do you catch public transport to work? I live about 30Km from work, and walk to the station and then train in.


We get plenty of rain here -- our groundwater levels aren't dropping, our lakes aren't draining. The water I use on my lawn isn't washing away with any chemicals (it's not washing away at all -- I don't overwater). I don't see what your objection is to drawing the water out of the ground instead of building a basin for it, other than the increased electrical demands. But as I said, I don't think those electrical demands are ridiculous.

There is no public transit near my house.

>> ^blankfist
:

@NetRunner, so what human rights are these? Riding on a privately owned bus is a human right now? If she can't get a ride from a racist white man's bus company then she loses her human dignity? This is a bit of a stretch.

Actually, it's the law. From the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

TITLE II--INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST DISCRIMINATION IN PLACES OF PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION
SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

You can read the rest yourself for the exhaustive description of a "public accommodation", but the short summary is that it includes any privately owned public space for engaging in commerce, including buses, lunch counters, hotels, restaurants, etc.
>> ^blankfist
:

Let's bring it back to what really happened in the real world that you and me live in. Rosa Parks' rights were violated by the government. She was forced to pay for the same public transit system which in return treated her unfairly.
The racist, private bus owner is a straw man.


The way you phrase this, it's like you think "the government" was some foreign entity imposing racial discrimination on the South without one lick of support amongst the population. The real story is that after 1964 you had government imposing integration on an unwilling (white) population, and there seem to be at least a few who're still mad about it.

Do you really think there was no one in the South in the 1960's who owned private businesses who refused to serve people on the basis of their skin color?

Since you're hung up on the public/private thing, how about Woolworth's lunch counters? Totally private, totally discriminatory.

Whose rights got violated there, and by who? The Woolworth's owner by the people who wouldn't leave when asked?

@NetRunner, so what human rights are these? Riding on a privately owned bus is a human right now? If she can't get a ride from a racist white man's bus company then she loses her human dignity? This is a bit of a stretch.

Let's bring it back to what really happened in the real world that you and me live in. Rosa Parks' rights were violated by the government. She was forced to pay for the same public transit system which in return treated her unfairly.

The racist, private bus owner is a straw man.

@NetRunner:

Genius, that was a public transit system.

One of my crazy friends put "Smiling on public transit for no reason" somewhere on his OKCupid profile. Hell if I know which section he put it in. I'm Really Good At, maybe?

@NetRunner, you have to understand also, I'm completely in favor of people having living wages and benefits. I think too often businesses take advantage of their workers. So we're in agreement. We're just not in agreement how we arrive there.

Unfortunately with the amount of protectionism currently in place so many industries are forcing entrepreneurs out by making it difficult to compete against those companies already rooted in the industry (strict regulations, licensing, permits, taxes, and so on), and as a result competing is too expensive so the number of workers go up while the number of job creators goes down. Soon we'll all be working for Corporations.

That's what people like me want to stop. We won't change this trajectory by going down the same path we've been going down for the last hundred years. We have to face the facts that politicians are more willing to give attention to those with deep pockets than those with barely two nickels to rub together. The rich will always prevail within a human government, and no amount of legislation will change that. It hasn't in the past, and it won't in the future.

Just in case you require examples of protectionism that stifles competition, I have a great many. The recent banking coup is a good place to start. A lot of small and midlevel banks closed after the bailouts (WaMu! Fucking WaMu closed!), so now the big banks no longer have to compete against hundreds of banks. This was by design.

After prohibition the government forced a three tiered system onto the alcohol industry which keeps the two major beer manufacturers on top while the smaller brewers are being edged out. On even smaller levels, a lot of small businesses use government to keep new competitors out by pushing licensing and other expensive requirements onto new businesses. This happens often for hair salons, florists, casket manufacturing, and just about every small business industry in America. NY public transit union recently sought legal injunctions against local businessmen who offer cheap minivan rides throughout the city for much less than what the Metro can offer.

Lastly, look at the film industry. It's a mess. The unions and corporations have made it extremely difficult for independent filmmakers to shoot a film and have it distributed (though the internet is changing things a bit). And the cost of production in Los Angeles is through the roof, because of union fees, permit costs, etc. If you choose to use union actors for a non-union film you could face a pricey lawsuit. And not to mention how difficult it is for those who want to join the unions, with catch 22 rules like, "You must work 200 hours on a union film set to be admitted into the union, but you can't work on a union film shoot unless you're in the union." Funny how people still manage to get in.

She's been drinking. She should have driven a car home instead of taking public transit!

Pasted below are Roman's responses to our Roast Quiz. The RoastMASTER's commentary appears in parentheses.

My real name is Roman Novak. I'm from Europe, Slovenia (we don't know what cheetos are), but I'll try to answer your stupid questions as best as I can.

1.What do you, do most of the day when you are not lounging, but not on the computer?
Roman: Mostly I do nothing or as little as possible. I watch tv shows, movies, read books and smoke weed. When I become bored of that I go outside and get drunk at a pub. In the summertime I ride mountain bikes. I don't like winter or winter sports much

2.Who are you more fond of?
A..Mother
B.McDonalds
C.Beer
D.Technical Assistance
E. Dairy Products
F.All of the above
G.None (kill them all)
Roman: Kill'em all, leave the beer.

3. How many pairs of shoes as opposed to matching undergarments.... boxers or briefs
Roman: weird question. (editor: no shit, what were you thinking Choggie?) I'd say 1 shoe for 10 underpants. there

4.mac or pc?
Roman: pc. or at least hackintosh

5. Who’s your guru?
Roman: I don't have guru's, but there are a few people I love and would buy beer for them. mostly writers I like, movie directors, scientists and people who make me laugh.

6.Bush or No Bush?
Roman: I don't care

7.sprinkles, gravy, or cherry on top?
Roman: gravy ( Ass gravy, of course)

8.tits, ass, or legs.
Roman: face first, gotta be cute. tits are not a priority, but a fine ass is a must. also, i hate fankles

9.supine or prostrate?
Roman: i sleep on my back if that's what u mean (It’s not, but whatever. You have to cut the guy a little slack for his ESL handicap)

10. cat, dog or other
Roman: dog, i guess. not really a pet person

11. Car, bike, public transit, walking or motorcycle?
Roman: bike first, then car (I don't own one for past 3-4 years now)

12.time, newsweek or USNews and World Report?
Roman: i get my news from Stephen Colbert (like every good Videosifter)

13.beer preference?
Roman: Laško (slovenian), Heineken

14.Religion: Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, Atheist,Agnostic,Jedi?
Roman: no religion (Again, like everybody here at Videosift)

15.Ever arrested?
Roman: not actually arrested, I was charged a couple of times, most were drug related, couple of fights, and theft once - which I was innocent of and proved it in court, too. (I guess the definition of “arrested” is different in Slovenia than in North America)

16.cheetos: crunchy or puffs?
Roman: crunchy

17.dog or cat person?
Roman: look at 10 (holy double post, batman!)

18.bangs, balding or rug?
Roman: bangs

19.five most cherished possessions
Roman: possesions ... my bike, i guess. my computer. I'm not really attached to material things (+ I don't have many so it's kinda meaningless question for me) and mementos don't do much for me either. every few years I throw ever4ything away and start over

20.clean shaven, beard, goatee or moustache
Roman: beard (it only tickles for a little while)

21. Desert Island albums?
Roman: hard to decide. something jazzy, definetly (sic)

22. Pro gay marriage, or agin?
Roman: do whatever the fuck you want, is my motto. just don't piss on other people

23. Communicable diseases... be honest
Roman: never ever. besides, I hardly have sex any more except with myself (no wonder he fits in so well here, plus he gives amazing backrubs)

I'm not judging anyone for watching this video for its trainwreck-of-humanity fascination value. I get it... but I'd personally have to agree with peggedbea's sentiment, and I totally understand longde's viewpoint as well. This video is just pure sadness.

Let me illustrate: The following is a straight cut-n-pasted sampling of the "commentary" straight off the recent YouTube thread:
====================================================================

Richieidx
fuck you swagga bitch, you grew the size of a babys nut nig

chinqlinq89 (1 minute ago)
FUCK NIGGERS

AHWorldtour3945 (1 minute ago)
the nigger choose the wrong man and got his ass kicked by Santa

emurami (1 minute ago)
BRING DA AMBER LAMP?!

bakewon (1 minute ago)
black bitch in the yellow shirt eating watermelon pieces out of a bag

cmiller871989 (1 minute ago)
Ja'Rule uses public transit?????????

janrepo1 (2 minutes ago)
Kill all niggers.You go Grandpa.!!!

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

I agree that it would be great for rental cars or people new to an area. Not sure why it has to be a robot, though. What if I wanted to make use of a variation of the technology that would aid walking, biking and using public transit? I wouldn't want to lug it around. Perhaps they could add legs and it could walk around with you and carry your stuff. That would be innovative.

>> ^asynchronice:
Is skateboarding seriously illegal anywhere in San Francisco ? If so, that's ridiculous.


From the City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors' web site [emphasis mine]:

a) Prohibits skateboarding on any city street at any time, on any sidewalk in any business district at any time, and on any non-business district sidewalk commencing 30 minutes after sunset and ending 30 minutes before sunrise (Traffic Code, Section 100)

b) Prohibits skateboarding "in or about any public transit station (including an outdoor high-level boarding platform), streetcar, cable car, motor coach, trolley coach or other public transit vehicle, including, but not limited to, those stations or vehicles operated by the Bay Area Rapid Transit District" (Traffic Code, Section 128)

c) Prohibits skateboarding in Yerba Buena Gardens, the Japanese Tea Garden, the Arboretum, Conservatory Valley, where it is posted as prohibited, and in South Beach Park or Rincon Park unless otherwise permitted (Park Code Sections 3.05 and 11.02 and Port Code Sections 2.4 and 7.2).

d) Requires skateboarders at skating facilities owned or operated by the City and County to wear helmets, kneepads, and elbow pads (Park Code Section 4.17).

>> ^HollywoodBob:
Factory farming is a necessary evil, there's too many people for us all to raise our own livestock.

Everything's a necessary evil until you decide to change your priorities. Slavery was a necessary evil, unless you were willing to let cotton prices rise. Owning a car is a necessary evil, unless you decide to move to a city with good public transit. Factory farming is a necessary evil, unless you decide that you don't want to eat these products, or at least are willing to pay more for ones that were treated differently.

It's very possible to decide what impact you'll have on the world. But the path of least resistance in America is a pretty destructive one: strewn with slave labor, oil-fueled war casualties, tortured animals, and toxic emissions. You're free to decide that you don't care about some of those things, but you can't call them necessities. You're free to be angrier about unjust wars or farm subsidies than mangled chicks, but it's not a zero sum game. You can go to war protests and call your congressman about the new farm bill and still have plenty of time left over to not buy chicken and eggs on your way home from work.

The problem isn't that it's too hard to change your diet. The problem is that it's too easy not to think about it at all.

Interesting, accurate insights into how uncomfortable public transit can be.
I'm a 'Method B' type dude. It's comfy! No cigars though.

Oh I heard about this, good sift SlipperyPete... oh man... the 4-3 Kennedy. Nice. Also, hilarious *happy public transit hiphop *music.

I think Blankfist may be a little more leftist than he thinks, but then again, I think that's true about most of the country. He's just a fiscal conservative, which I don't consider a bad thing - on the contrary, fiscal conservatives keep liberal thought in check with a firm slap of the checkbook. There needs to be balance, don't get me wrong.

As far as cops supporting Prop 8, I'm not terribly surprised, as I find cops tend to vote as social conservatives. Most cops I know are registered Republicans. I'm a little saddened by their support of the prop.

I think Prop 1A is a good thing to vote yes on, because our public transportation infrastructure here in America is a goddamn joke. I've spent a little time in Europe, and I was amazed at the public transit options they have available. I got off the airplane in Schipol Airport, and went downstairs to catch the train to Haarlam - it was extremely easy to get to where we wanted. My girlfriend has spent some time in Japan and Australia, and learned how to navigate the bus and rail systems they offer quite easily. The bay area has one of the better public transit systems in the US, but even it is lacking compared to what I saw in towns a fraction SF's size in The Netherlands and Germany. The plan would be even better if Sacramento was included in list of major cities hit, but for Sharks fans living in SF and Fresno, this might help them catch a few Hockey games, which would be a neat, albeit somewhat indirect, economic stimulus.

Prop 2 I'm up in the air about. I'd like to think that here in California we have access to the best quality food in the world as it is.

Prop 3 would be nice, but the CA budget is strained pretty far as is. I'd love for the state to be able to afford it.

Prop 4 is something my girlfriend and I have disagreements about. She'd likely vote for it, but I'd of the mind that Doctor/Patient confidentiality needs to be implicitly extended to minors.

Prop 5 is a step in the right direction for drug law reform. Jail is no place for non-violent drug offenders.

Prop 6, the cops are lying outright about this being anything about "safe neighborhoods." A strong "No" from me.

Prop 7 I think I'm going to vote No on as well.

I think I've made my position on 8 pretty clear.

Prop 9 looks pretty bad and unnecessary. Prop 10 looks even worse. Both will be getting "No"s from me.

Prop 11, I'm not so sure about. I'm curious as to why the League of Women Voters are endorsing it (I know they're supposedly Non-partisan, but tend to be socially progressive), but nearly every other progressive organization opposes it. I'd have to review this one a little more, but I'm inclined to vote No.

Prop 12, I'd rather give veterans better educations than better loan rates. Our GI bill as it exists now is a joke, and is in dire need of updating. I think this is the whole "Teach a man to fish" issue, but the prop just wants to give out fish instead of fishing lessons. For every dollar we spent on the WWII-era GI bill, seven dollars came back in taxes from veterans who used their free-ride scholarships to become better educated, then used their educations to get better jobs (increased salaries meant increased incomes to tax, and the ones who started their own companies opened up more taxable revenue streams), which paid for bigger homes (more property tax). We desperately need something comparable for our veterans today. I can't say that giving better home loans to veterans isn't a good thing, I think it is, but I think providing them with a better education after they've served their country would be even better. I'll have to wait and weigh out what I'm gonna do with this one later.