These samples likely came from the Series6000 sound collection, which was and is found in almost every sound studio in the US for film, tv and games.
It's been around since the late 70's and is still in use today, so you'll find similar, familiar samples all over the place going back as far as 40 years!

When your making a video called the science of racism, naming sources and sample sizes makes the facts a lot more digestible.

the real life example were the Nazi hypothermia experiments --the consensus, last I checked, was that the data was not used.

Of course, the truly pointless unethical American study was Tuskegee syphilis progression to dementia sample of African American subjects after there was already a cure for the disease...among other, wildly unethical studies...

I feel angry about the British people placing their poor little babies up on poles during air raids. It's not like they could sample and playback in the 40s.

Congratulations! Your video, Ripley is not a fan of your drum samples., has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 13 Badge!

Your video, Ripley is not a fan of your drum samples., has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think because of the very low quality of he sample there seems to be a separate sound between the brain and storm.
It kind of sounds like 'brainishstorm' to me.

Right now, you need lots of samples from the target. They need to read a bunch of unusual sentences ("The method implies translation, rotation and transformation", that kind of thing), so the risk of someone "stealing" someone's voice is low at the moment.

shiiiit. sure everything is stitched together. that's the modern digital audio workstation (DAW).
What folks don't realize is that Anteres Autotune is THE standard in the studio. Every pop star and song gets their dose.
That, ultra compression on everything and ultra repetition in production, gone are the days of creamy analog bliss by good musicians, performing a well-written song actually written by the artists.
Now everything is done post-production, and Autotune is 'the sound' of today's pop. The writing is done by teams of "producers" who have mastered today's pop sound and format.

And then LAWYERS.
For hip hop, in the 2000's lawyers began suing the shit out of anyone who sampled old stuff. Today, an artist can use samples, but they must PAY quite a bit. So, only artists with labels behind them can AFFORD to sample. Hence, Bruno Mars can sample everything, and steal everything, then autotune the shit out of it. And wha-laa - he's got a super-produced, money-backed hit where his producers just copy the shit out of everyone.
And in the end, Bruno Mars is the P.F. Changs of music - white appropriation all-dressed up, pre-packaged and sold.

Legal, yes. Culturally accepted, not so much, slavery always had cultural opposition by the non ruling class. Natural, WTF?! Show me an example of pure non human slavery (not harems, not parasites) and I'll discuss it.

Granted, I don't know exactly how they measured, but his gene expression is what they measured, not his pure DNA. This goes to my point, that environment determines how your DNA is expressed, so twin studies are flawed from the onset by thinking they begin identical, they don't. They don't even start with identical DNA, just close.

"Genes and the environment", but not pure gene study....at least not like people think. People think twins are carbon copies, so one can be a control to study effects of what they're studying. That's not quite right. Certainly they are useful in genetic studies, but not that way. From before birth, they diverge in how nearly identical DNA is expressed. They might be good for finding what genes/traits need closer scrutiny, but only with large samples.

Grounds for individuals to (privately) discriminate, perhaps, but not (public) businesses....at least not in America. Our national identity is a melting pot of cultures, intolerance for the different is antithetical to that idea.


Gender, nope, you can totally choose that now.
Race, many people change their racial identity...Rachael Dolizal comes to mind....as does the term "passing".
Ethnicity, people pass as ethnic groups they weren't born into, sometimes unknowingly, daily.....again, Dolizal springs to mind.

So, I'll argue that all you mentioned for all intents and purposes are today often the result of free will and not beyond the control of every individual, but a full grasp of brain chemistry and design and well understood methods to change them are well beyond our current knowledge, so their behaviors and actions are, in part, out of their control and not the result of free will but of brain construction.....now what?

As promised, the most promising results when polling google scholar:

"Genetic and Environmental Influences on Sexual Orientation and Its Correlates in an Australian Twin Sample"

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/J_Bailey2/publication/12572213_Genetics_and_Environmental_Influences_on_Sexual_Orientation_and_Its_Correlates_in_
an_Australian_Twin_Sample/links/0deec518bc0435c0cd000000.pdf

Probably one of the better studies, it breaks down orientation to a scale versus straight binary, though the results are then statistical correlations and my stats classes are too long ago for me to work that back into something resembling my claims above.

"Sexual Orientation in a U.S. National Sample
of Twin and Nontwin Sibling Pairs"
http://ioa126.medsch.wisc.edu/findings/pdfs/47.pdf

19 identical twins in the study with at least one twin with non-hetro orientation, within those 19 pairs, 6 showed concordance. So 6 of 19 identical twins sharing orientation, 13 of 19 not. This supports my statement above that in studies identical twins more often than not don't share homosexual orientation. This study also lists the statistical correlation of this result as 0.68, the previous studies statistical correlation was lower at 0.51(1.0 would be perfect correlation). If I'm reading the statistics remotely right, the above study then is similarly in keeping with my statement.

"Homosexual Orientation in Twins: A Report on 61 Pairs and Three Triplet Sets"
http://hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1993-homosexual-orientation-in-twins.html

Smaller sample size and different polling methodology, specifically sought out respondents of non hetro orientation. Shows a higher correlation, 25 of 38 identical twins being concordant. That's 66% concordance so opposite of my claim that more often than not they are discordant.


Running out of time here to post results. If you keep digging though it's more of the same, identical twins don't come close to showing 100% correlation, highest study of the samples I've pulled is 66%, and it's by far the highest. This is in contrast to race and gender, where you fully expect 100/100 identical twins to match.

wiki link to Foley Sound

I was going to say; I wonder if it is a continuation of old radio show sound design, and it is!

I think there will always be a place for it just like the acoustic piano. There are too many variables and our subconscious is too in tune with sound that a digital sample will ever be enough to trick us. MAYBE they will get there but I can always hear when they use digital instruments in music.

So, they want full representation, but not to have to follow the full federal laws (any pay full federal taxes).

Last year was the first time (in 5 votes since 1967) that they have clearly voted for statehood, however, there was record low voter turnout (23%) due to the party supporting keeping territory status boycotting the election (and IMO not being done in an election year), and possibly skewing the results.

2017-
97% voted yes, to statehood with only 23% turnout (78% turnout in the 2012 election).
A poll done in 2017 found that only 52% supported statehood (Although in my opinion, it was a very small sample size at 966 people)

It is trending toward statehood, but so far, it is not even clear that Puerto Ricans want it.

I believe I am impartial as I really don't care one way or the other, but this video feels like it is only telling half of a sob story, but it is a mess.

I feel, in 2020, they need a measure that ask 1 question: statehood, colony, or independent. Last time they asked it that way was 1993.

This song by Colourbox has a lot of samples from this trailer.

@ChaosEngine

I forgot to acknowledge your comments about judging people by their looks.

I didn't mean to say that these women are dumb or unqualified. I have no idea.

I know really good looking people who struggle because they are typecast a certain way or are treated differently in uncomfortable ways because of their beauty.

It can warp you, extreme beauty, the way you can be dismissed as facade only, or lionized when you haven't actually done anything.

I really admire people who find a way to navigate their looks and are able to come fully into themselves.

That is a true statement for any challenge in life -- beauty, ugliness, shortness, alopecia, baldness, dwarfism. I'm looking at you, Peter Dinklage. You are a rock star.

It defies logic to think that this group of women is just a random sample. I didn't need to do any research to know this company ignores competent, talented women with gun skills and normal looks for women who are glossy. Are the beautiful women also talented with gun skills? Doesn't matter. Because I am already creeped out.

Creeped out isn't the best word. I am really enjoying saying it though. Gitaigo: Onomatopoeia that describes states of being, not sounds

I won't remember it, but what a great word.