Oh shit! Hey @bobknight33…did you know?
Under 2 months after delivery, in some cases just days after delivery, users are finding out the “stainless steel” skin is less than stainless. They used low quality steel. It rusts immediately.
In one case an owner in LA drove for 2 days and found hundreds of orange pock marks that were the skin rusting.
Owners are even more shocked to find out Tesla says this is owner error, that in the manual it says you must remove anything on the exterior immediately or it will rust…so tree sap, bugs, bird poop, road spray, rain, dust, mud, dirt, fog, fingerprints, etc WILL permanently damage the finish if not removed immediately….yes, you are expected to do a full inspection and wipe down every single day after every drive, and keep your oversized truck indoors or expect rust immediately, and should still expect discoloration as the steel ages.
If you live within 20 miles of the ocean, or somewhere road salt is used, or near salt lake, or somewhere with trees, birds, dust, or rain…or if you ever plan to visit them…cybertruck is absolutely not a good choice.
Tesla knew.

That was quite good.

But man, that 4th issue is a doozy. Learning that "hard work pays off" is difficult when it just really doesn't, at least not anymore. Massive income inequality, zero class mobility, and on and on. We feel like relatively easily replaceable cogs in a relatively pointless machine because WE ARE.

We hear lots of stories about people that manage to buy in, feel like they are doing something important and making a real impact, enjoy some period of good job satisfaction...

...and then all too often, they end up looking like saps when the company that they work for gets bought out by some massive faceless corporation that doesn't value their years of loyal service at all, at which point they get replaced by A) a robot, B) an outsourced sweatshop laborer in a 3rd world country that can be payed a fraction of the local rate, C) a younger and more compliant hire that will inevitably have a massive turnover rate, but who cares because there are plenty more where that came from, or D) the cokehead nephew of the new CEO that needs a job to keep him out of trouble, and hey, might as well keep things in the family, right?

Maybe I'm just a bitter, late Gen-X'er.

I broke my spine in a car wreck 16 years ago. The pain pills (hydrocodone) I was prescribed sapped my resolve, and I was fortunate enough to stop using them before my addiction cemented itself. Glad you're still around and the new meds are working.

Yay, at least you bothered to watch the video.

And yes, No Bullshit's channel is loaded with a lot of biased opinions as he leans significantly to the right. But you'd be hard pressed to argue that, despite this particular video not making the mainstream air, that the coverage has shown the depths both sides have plunged to. Australian coverage has been downright blinkered at this point, there is no violence on the left at all and it's all nazi's killing folks... /eyeroll

So instead, you could look at channels like Sargon's, who, despite being constantly labelled as an alt right dickhead, is generally slightly left of center but who calls out violence where/when ever it happens.

I've seen a lot of shit in burrowing in to this, from a lot of sources on both sides (and people who try to be objective). Objectively, if you show up in black masks with pre-bagged shit, urine, fireworks and glass bottles, weighted sap gloves, bike locks and pepper spray combined with a clear message that it's okay to attack "nazi's" who's crime is expressing their admittedly vile ideology, you're not a good person.

Red shirts vs brown shirts, Wiemar Germany pre-WWII anyone?

You can try to make this about me ('ermagerd, you caused me to downvotes the video'), but you've admitted you didn't even watch the vid. At least I gave it a fair hearing, and while I do certainly admit the videos maker has an agenda, it is still documenting what is going on out there. Turn off the fucking voice track if you're too much of a snowflake to hear commentary you don't agree with, but the footage is damning...

As for Bob, I've been fairly unequivocal in the past about his line of deeply partisan BS and the veiled racism he espouses. As per the Ruins Everything sift up (https://videosift.com/video/Why-Proving-Someone-Wrong-Often-Backfires) atm about arguing and how it generally reinforces opinions, do you think that you two haranguing each other constantly (or even you and I) is going to accomplish anything other than entrenching the other side? \= |

While I have no interest in defending right wingers, the old adage of "defending scoundrels" applies...

You must be fucking kidding Newt... Seriously, have you had your head up your ass over the past year with the various riots and attacks headed up by antifa? The same people that classify anyone who doesn't submit to their orthodoxy as nazi's, then say it's fine to physically assault said nazi's for talking, because talking is literally as dangerous as physical violence? You remember the Battle of Berkley, bikelock guy, moldylocks and her scalp claims/sap gloves/M80's in glass bottles?

But yeah, they're as pure as the driven snow right?!?!? /eyeroll

The communists and the nazi's are only separated by the thinnest of differences, and both prefer to resolve issues with violence rather than conversation. Favouring one over the other is like saying Hitler was better than Stalin (or vice versa). But antifa and other identitarian groups do have to wear responsibility for unifying white nationalists and giving them license. They've spent so long vilifying whiteness that the only surprise here for me is that this sort of thing hasn't happened sooner.

But yeah, way to stand with the Communists Newt. Nice job.

@ChaosEngine
that article was utter shit.

"friend zone" is a term used to shame women?
how can that possibly be considered an even remotely true statement?

she makes a valid point in that women are not binary creatures,and are mutli-faceted,nuanced and complex.well of COURSE they are,but the "friend zone" is from the guys perspective,not a woman's!

do you know why the majority of some men end up in the "friend zone"? or should we just change that term to be more accurate "i am not interested in you because you put all your cards on the table in the first five seconds,so while i think that is sweet,i no longer am curious about you,because i already got you".

you know..the "friend zone",or as chris rock put it "emergency dick,just break glass".

the problem here is that while relationships are a long slog of compromise,negotiation and mutual respect to work towards a common goal.romantic courtships are akin to a game,a playful dance fueled by curiosity,intrigue and of course:lust.

the men who who get relegated to the "friend zone" do not understand this very basic tenant of courtship.they reveal all their cards up front,and while that may be the most honest approach,and one that women have been openly asking for,it ignores that underneath it all,a woman wants romance,mystery and a sense of discovery that will continually peak their interests.

they want to be woo'd,they want courtship and romance.
when a man shows all his cards he takes that way from the woman,and now that she knows she can "have" him.he no longer interests her.

and what the author of this article so callously ignores is that the "friend zone" is not really a friend at all,but a surrogate for a boyfriend.having a bad day?she calls her "friend".feeling bloated and unattractive? has her "friend" come over to make her feel better about herself.needs a date for her company christmas party and doesn't want to go alone? get her "friend" to come along.

so it should not be a surprise that some men find this hurtful and degrading.

but she has a point,the woman owes them nothing.the woman was honest and forthright and it is the man who has put himself in this position.

and let me be clear before i am accused of being a misogynist pig.

some men do the exact same thing,and i am guilty of it myself.

i grew up with three sisters,so i tend to be more aware and sensitive to women's choices,and i respect their space.i have never been one to push myself on any woman.i was never the one to pursue or as this article describes "persistent",because i saw that as a bit "stalky".

so if i was interested in a woman,and that interest was not reciprocated,i shifted to "friend" mode with no issue.to me it was a win-win.ok,so she was not interested in me in that way,but she is super cool,and interesting and now i have a really interesting and intriguing friend.

now here is an interesting thing that happened maybe half of the time.my new friend and i would hang out,go to pubs,clubs,movies and sometimes just make dinner and watch movies.friends right? she was upfront and honest with me that she was not interested in me in that way,and i can respect that.

and then one day she would have her college friend over for dinner (this is a true story btw,one of many).her friend was cute,smart,witty and had a sick sense of humor.yep,i was digging on my friends college friend,and we were flirting up a storm.we were vibing hard,clicking like we knew each other for years.

now what do you think happened?
i bet you can guess.
and you would be right.
my friend,who was honest with me about not being interested,started to get real shitty with me.like offensive shitty and i really did not understand why.it came out of nowhere,and now she was acting like some jealous girlfriend.

so i pull her aside and i am like..what the fuck is wrong with you? you are being an asshole!

you know what she said to me? and i can remember this clear as day "watching my friend flirt with you,and seeing how much she is into you.i began to see you in a different light.i can see how she sees you,and that you are amazing but you are MY steve! not hers!".

and then she tried to kiss me,which was just awkward,because to me? she was in the "friend zone",and had been for over 6 months.i didn't want her that way.the irony here is that she could not handle that,and our friendship dissolved.which just fucking sucks.

this scenario has played out in my life quite a few times.so while anecdotal,i suspect women have had similar experiences.

so the "friend zone' may be considered a woman's thing directed at men,but in reality it is non-gender specific.most likely because woman are pursued more than men,but both men and women can be put in the "friend zone".

so what can we learn from this?
don't be a sap.
have some self respect and do not allow another person to use you for their own well being and sense of self.
if they are not interested? move on.
if they just want to be a friend? then be a friend,but do not expect anything more.if you cannot handle that,then move on.

pining away from a distance in the slim hopes that the focus of your affections will one day change their mind,is just pathetic.

and for fuck sakes,stop blaming that person for your heartache.
you put yourself in that position,and you can pull yourself out.

and the term "friend zone" is not used to shame women,that is just fucking stupid.the "friend zone" is a place that you put yourself in,because of flawed sense of romance,and you allowed yourself to be used for the betterment of another human being.so while you may be hurt and angry,you only have yourself to blame.

respect yourself yo.
/end rant

I will fucking katar you with my rogue (in de realm of whorecraft).

Or maybe I'll just annoy you with random saps and distracts. WHERE AM I NOW?

Still mad I missed them in Oakland in 87-88....and in Hawaii in 87. I was in boarding school in Hawaii, so missed the 87 and 88 Oakland shows, and couldn't leave school for the 87 Hawaii show.

Good stuff, good stuff. I hope I can catch them the next time through California....
06-07 San Jose, CA - SAP Center at San Jose
06-12 Sacramento, CA - Golden 1 Center

The ants will be fine. They use the leaves as mulch to grow fungus that they feed to their larvae. The adult ants feed on leaf sap, so when they cut up the plastic, no sap, no problem.

"Can [They] be so insanely sheltered that they think her 'answers' help her?"

If you piece together all of her statements on a plethora of different topics, it is inescapably obvious that they (!) truly have no connection to anyone or anything outside their bubble. Surrounded by sycophants as the Clintons are, people have wondered, and justifiably so, whether she cares or even knows that she's lying on a regular basis. One might make the case that the entire concept of an objective "truth", connected to reality, has no meaning for them.

Additionally, she really does suck at campaigning. But that's not punishable by extended prison sentences, unlike, I don't know, sending Special Access Program (SAP) info through your own bloody email server.

Lastly, Joe mentions Powell (6:16 onwards). When Colin Powell was SoS, his office was connected to the internal system, but had no connection to the internet or the outside world in general. You can't get shit done that way, not in this day and age. That's why he had additional gear set up to at least send and receive emails. This was done separate from the internal network and, if I remember correctly, his entire staff was not only open about it every step of the way, they applied for and received special permissions before they touched anything.

Clinton didn't give a jar of cold piss about the rules that are meant to safeguard access to sensitive information. It was inconvenient to her, and since the rules and laws only apply to plebs, she and her posse set up their own system.

A whole lot of people have to adhere to tedious rules and procedures, with severe punishment looming just around the corner. One guy was in the press for receiving three years of prison after he placed a document on the wrong desk. So, if the FBI drags out the investigation or even buries it, you can bet your ass that a lot of people at different agencies are going to be fuming. And between the FBI, the NSA and CIA, a lot of people have access to the remaining emails from Clinton's server. That opens Clinton up to blackmail, a lot of it. Can't have a compromised president. Not to mention that someone's going to take the data and just drop it over at WikiLeaks or the Intercept.

Ron Paul was not goofy, but he was a (partially) fringe candidate. The gold standard being his biggest kookiness. But as far as just being loved by libertarians, well, that's what the media sold and that's what some poor saps actually believe.

As more a liberal leaning guy I swapped parties to vote for Paul. His honesty was nice but would have been unverifiable. However, his willingness to buck those he could have been bought by and made president from amazed me. He wasn't a populist except insofar as that his message was against those in power.

But what is most funny is this. Paul didn't do bad in the polls for basically being a 3rd party candidate. In that he smashed Nader and most other 3rd party candidates. Even knowing his defeat, those still willing to show their vote to him was astonishing. Now some would argue that he technically wasn't third party since he ceremoniously went under the Republican brand...but that's about stupid logic there.

Just my opinion, but it depends on what we all mean by "real" fight. There's two ways about it. Either in some kind of ring (i.e. small boundaries) or open terrain (no boundaries).

With boundaries big guys can catch hold of a smaller guy and use their weight and strength (so we need weight classes). Without boundaries there's nothing to stop small guys out running and chipping a bigger guy down over hours/days if necessary sapping their energy. Without the boundary of the room, Connor wouldn't have been caught. That's what i meant by a "real" fight (i.e. to the death), which i think Connor would win.

We have all (well, at least all of us here) become too wise to the propaganda-style approach. It weakens arguments and saps credibility. I'm sure there are many legitimate concerns and good arguments to be made, but watching something like this that treats me like an idiot is more likely to push me in the opposite direction of that intended.

"The high-income tax increase sapped 0.25 percentage points from GDP in 2013, estimates Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics Inc. in West Chester, Pennsylvania."

"Politicians who support tax increases operate under a misconception that there is little real effect, Maloney said.

“A higher tax rate reduces our ability to recapitalize and reduces our ability to expand,” he said. “You keep your forklifts a little longer, you do whatever you can to stretch the dollars you’re left with.”"

"According to Zandi’s estimates, the payroll tax cut subtracted 0.6 percentage points from U.S. economic growth, more than twice the effect of the high-income tax cuts."

“Clearly, taxes affect behavior; they affect some behaviors more than others. What has not been established is that the level of taxes has a clear and important impact on economic growth. And one reason is that this is not a well-posed question. How government activity affects prosperity depends not only on the level of taxes, but also on what the money is used for.”

"Thus, the proper answer to a question as broad as whether tax increases are “positive” or “negative” for growth is: “It depends.”"

Ebola is very destructive to health care systems. It is silly to compare it to other viruses that do not create the panic, fear and lethality of Ebola. Ebola has the potential to get out of control because it takes a very serious toll on health care systems. Once panic is in place, it becomes very difficult to screen patients and process intake. Once a region has just a handful of cases, everyone with a simple fevers thinks they have Ebola and overwhelm the intake system - and ironically, the best place to get Ebola will probably be the waiting room. This virus can very quickly sap the resources of hospital staff, and once a few staff and patients in the waiting room get infected, panic just gets worse. Ebola is very unforgiving to mistakes by health care providers.

The media is quick to make out everyone in Africa as naive and child like. This is a mistake. Many in Africa know all about viruses and how they spread. They suffer greatly by a an absolutely dismal and bankrupt health care system, but I think it would be naive to think of our system as so superior that we would not have the same panic.

Ebola is very serious. It needs to be taken seriously. Anyone that belittles the problem is making the situation much worse.

Just as an FYI, health care workers who are exposed to HIV-infected blood at work have a 0.3% risk of becoming infected. In other words, 3 of every 1,000 such injuries, if untreated, will result in infection. : Source CDC.

Yeah, try that with Ebola.