Burden or gridlock. Those are subjective terms that connote a desire to catch up. Catching up helps no one involved in law enforcement.

They terms you should look for are "Artifacts and metrics".

Every department must spend more than it did last year. This year's funding is what it is because of what was spent last year. Next year's funding depends on what will be spent this year.

A lack of funding leads to downsizing and furloughs. Best way to secure funding for next year is to spend this year.

Money has colours. You get different charge codes for different actions.
Some charge codes are considered low pri / overhead. Others are considered necessary. If you're charging mostly overhead, and very little necessary, you have bad metrics. If you charge mostly towards necessary and little to overhead, you have good metrics.

Police have to arrest/charge people to look productive. That generates metrics showing that police are needed. If they can make sure to spend at least as much money on enforcement this year as last year, their jobs are secured. A department that's mostly sitting around, is a department that is not critical, and can get a budgetary cut.
So long as police are employed, they will find people to arrest/charge/ticket/whatever. Even if they have to stretch for it.

The same situation applies in court. Prosecutors are looking to maximize their convictions metrics. Their job is to get people convicted. It's not that they /want/ to convict people. That's simply how they charge their time, and how they get good metrics.

Judges don't necessarily care how a case goes. They simply want to charge as much time to judging as possible.

Actually "catching up" serves the interests of no one. And it's not that people are sitting down saying "Hey, how can I make myself look necessary". Some people do, sure. But most people are simply thinking "I gotta stay/look busy".

The "system" takes care of getting things to run amok.
Everyone stays busy so they can charge productive looking time codes, so they don't get scolded by management or downsized.
Departments spend all their allocated money so they don't get under funded.
Analytically, it looks like they are saturated, so they get more funding, and bring on more people.
The new people need to stay busy, and the cycle repeats.
The beast grows.

In effect, burden and gridlock are the food that keeps the beast fed.

This isn't simply a law enforcement issue. It's how government works. Every program makes it a goal to spend all of their funding, and look as busy as possible. No one wants to be cut, and looking like you're not busy is an easy way to be 'it' when there is a cut.

Rememer : All money is spent on payroll.
You don't pay the earth for anything.
If you buy materials, that's simply paying the payroll for the material supplier.
The entire cost of anything, is the total cost of all employees.
The only way to ever reduce costs, is to reduce how much someone makes.
Either by cutting the amount paid, or by cutting jobs.
Every year there's talk of reigning in government spending.
That means that every year, there's talk of cutting jobs.

TBH, newtboy, I don't know your background, or how much experience you have around government crap. I donno if this all sounds like a joke, but it really is this stupid.

-scheherazade

Well done, that cat!
We have reached saturation point for "girls playing ukulele" videos.

I love it when people claim that content providers just refuse to find new ways to get paid...out of sheer laziness. While apparently not having any suggestions as to how to do so themselves.

Virtually the entire internet is nothing -but- experiments in alternative means of monetization. The fact is that there really aren't many options. You can sell access directly (via subscriptions, micro-transactions or some such), or you can sell advertising. Neither of which appear to be sustainable strategies; as soon as the content is made available to a few (or before), it'll be stolen and distributed for free, and advertising has been getting less and less profitable for a decade (since about the time the market got saturated, and there were no newbies left to click on the ads).

You really can't sell "support" contracts to content. I suppose you could sell crappy merchandise, like action figures and plushies, but that's wanting content creators to do something other than creating content to be able to pay the bills. Not a good trade-off, IMO.

Note, I don't have any answer either, but I'm not about to lay "a large part of the problem" on the content creators.They have -every- incentive to solve the problem...unlike the consumers, who have plenty of incentives to -be- the problem.

Oh, then you do believe in AGW? If not, what's the straw man?
If global warming were the reason I do the things I do, you would be correct, going vegetarian would be a reasonable next step. The thing is I've done all I have done for personal, self centered reasons that benefit me personally, it just so happens that they mostly also benefit the planet. Because I intentionally didn't have children and don't believe in reincarnation, I have little incentive to attempt to save the planet beyond my lifespan. That said, I eat little beef, which is the worst meat to eat, and mostly chicken, the best meat for ecology (except for Iguana tail, a truly sustainable meat product).
CO2 staying at current levels dooms the planet fairly quickly. Raising those levels dooms if faster and more completely. I see little chance that we might actually decrease CO2 production levels, much less turn it to a negative number, which needs to happen if there's any chance in hell of stopping the run-away greenhouse effect. I see it as an issue that's far too late to stop, and can only be minimized at best, and will likely be maximized instead.
It's more like 4 billion that need to reduce their 'footprint', and another 3-4 billion that need to not expand theirs. More to the point, it's about 5 billion that need to not reproduce, while the other 3 billion only have 2 children at most. Not a likely outcome, but what is needed to solve the most pressing issues of the day.
Government is required to incentivize industry to follow suit and reduce their emissions. Without coersion, they'll do what's cheaper every time, and not cleaning up your own mess is always cheaper.
The only 'climate scientists' that are skeptical are the deniers, all others have examined the data and come to the same conclusion, just differing in the levels of change they expect. From what I see, they all underestimate the changes to come and ignore compounding features of the systems.
I'm not sure why you don't see this as a serious conversation, but that's on you.
I have given a scientific commentary. you ignored it and asked the same questions again, claiming they had been ignored. I'll try again....

CO2 saturation and temperature are linked, and have been proven to be so. Human production of CO2 is larger and faster than any natural CO2 rise in known climate history, well over 200000 years and up to hundreds of millions of years depending on what data you consider reasonable and reliable, and it's not only the amount but the rate of change that is greater than any natural climate change ever seen in the data. It's that faster rate of change that's the most dangerous, but the amount that determines the change to come. The system is slow to react, and is only now reacting to last centuries atmospheric changes. That means that even if we stopped CO2 production completely today, the effects will still be felt for centuries to come, and we aren't even slowing the rate at which we raise the amount of CO2 we produce, it's going up faster by the day thanks to those that either deny the problem or ignore it in favor of profit or simplicity. That's why estimates of the future are all lacking in my eyes, they all assume either static or reduced CO2 production, which is not reality.
We're hosed. The only option I see is to become self sufficient and die before the planet does. One more reason to not have children and instead be self sufficient as much as possible and enjoy what's left while you can.

It's been tested and the "best" audiophiles can't hear differences between 14bit and 16bit, nor can they hear differences between 44.khz and ANYTHING higher. In some tests they could use12bit sound with 36khz sampling frequency... The differences they hear are inside their head. Thus the description of improved sound is always "air", "brilliance", "organic" etc.. Don't be fooled by their fancy gear, most of it is for nothing. Cables: i am always willing to bet my months salary on doubleblind tests, 10 000€/m against a coat hanger, no audible differences.. It's all about confirmation bias, you think there's a change and suddenly you hear it.

About MP3s vs PCM:
Here we have audible differences. But. Put on high enough energy, ie turn your amp high enough, suddenly double blind studies can't find which is which. But it can be audible, mp3 is lossy format and even 320kbps can be heard. Not with all material, it's about in the limits of human hearing. Some might hear high end loss, if you're in your twenties. Once you hit 40, everything above 17khz is gone, forever. You will never hear 20k again. And to really notice the difference, you need good gear. Your laptop earphone output most likely won't even output anything past 18khz well and it's dynamic range can be represented with 8bit depth.. It can be just horrible. Fix that with usb box, around 80€: you can take that box anywhere on planet to the most "hifiest" guy out there and he can't hear the difference between his 10000€ A/D converter.. In fact, 5€ A/D converter can produce the same output as 3000€ one... That's not why i said buy a external.. It's more to do with RF and other shielding, protection against the noises a computer makes than A/D conversion quality. Note, i'm talking about audible differences, you can find faults with measuring equipment and 95% of the gear price is about "just to be sure".

If you want a good sound, first, treat your room. Dampen it, shape it.. If you spent 10k on stereo and 0 on acoustics, you will not have a good sound no matter what you do. Spend the same amount on acoustics than what you do on you equipment, room makes a lot more differences than gear. Next comes speakers, they are the worst link in the chain by a large margin. Quality costs, still wouldn't go to extremes here either, the changes are again "just to be sure", not always audible.. Then amps, beefy, low noise, A/B. You don't need to spend a huge lot of money but some. Then cables.. Take the 50€ version instead of 300€ or 3000€. Build quality and connectors, durability. Those are the reason to buy more expensive than 5€. Not because of sound quality.. There will always be group of people that will swear they can hear the differences, that's bullcrap. Human ear CAN NOT detect any chances, even meters are having a REALLY hard time getting any changes. You need to either amp up the signal to saturation point, or use frequencies in the Mhz ranges, thousands of times higher than what media needs to get any changes between cheapest crap and high end scams.

Audiophiles can't be convinced they are wrong, they are suffering from the same thing antivax people do: give them facts, they will be even more convinced they are right.

this should be common knowledge and totally non-controversial.
but in my country people are so saturated by materialism and actually judge their own value by their ability to purchase and how much money they make.

and they wonder why they need medications to:ease their anxiety,"balance" their brain chemicals,help them sleep,help them stay awake and alert.

i deal with this on a weekly basis and it has been getting worse.
normal people spending so much energy to project this so-called "perfect' life,when the reality is they are broken and disillusioned.

it is not an easy thing to tell someone that the life they had been leading was a lie and not the reality they may have actually wanted for themselves.

that they had become slaves to a system that sought only to extract value from them,while reciprocating nothing in return.

freeing people from the invisible chains that bind them is a process that takes time.i am not always successful but it can be done and it is a worthy challenge.

while i appreciated the words in this talk i have to admit it has made me a tad sad....this should be common knowledge.

my country has terminal spiritual cancer....
im going to go watch some cartoons now,or have a good cry...

I haven't seen it quite like this, they say that's clay in the description there. I was expecting when they dug into it that water would start pooling in the hole...kinda weird.


But I've been on job sites where the ground looks damp at most and the more you drive, walk, whatever over it the water just starts to pump up to the surface and it becomes a total mess. It's why you try not to park machinery anywhere near where you're clearing because you might come back to a machine that once it moves will literally be stuck in something like quick sand.

What I've always been told is that when you prepare a site for something like a walking/driving surface, you have to consider the size and weight of things driving across it. And you install stone in an appropriate size and depth to create ......sort of a locked together surface where all the edges of the rocks form kind of a linked bridge that provides stability over the dirt below it. So the final asphalt/concrete won't break apart because of too much sub-surface movement. And the stone also allows water to drain away into the subsurface or from under the asphalt/concrete so it won't freeze and bust the ground from below.


So I think what the description is saying is that this ground has reached some kind of perfect saturation point. Probably once it takes in so much water it probably fills the clay and the pool structure below it, and then the water has to flow elsewhere.

This show blows away today's craptastic reality show saturated cable channels. Praise Lord Krondor!

@Trancecoach

I think Jigga's making the argument on the collective level. Yes, we can all use self control to limit portion sizes.

But collectively, where the multimillion dollar funding of fast food marketing departments is geared towards incentivising larger portions as a method of eking out more profit from their saturated (excuse the pun) market size, it's quite likely that average calorie consumption goes up on the whole.

That doesn't excuse taking responsibility for your actions, and certainly you could tackle it with education campaigns rather than regulation or bans, but there's certainly a relationship here between incentives and national health.

dzonny n' poolcleaner, here's another vote just for you two and some unsolicited insight as to perhaps why this vid isn't enjoying some stellar erection err..ascension: Star Wars fans as advanced in age as those depicted here well, they're dying-off or have moved-on. The fond childhood memories of epic cinematic outer-space masturbation have given-way to the worries and trials of a civilization saturated with entertainment, regurgitate art and culture, and the concerns of real-world issues like, "My children will never experience the thrill of cinema like I did because all the fucking movie theaters are either closed, or packed with 16 pieces of cinematic crap that costs way too much for a poor-quality product. Oh that and the demise of language and culture, as the world is turned into a single amalgamate of herd-like automatons.

Plus this song has been parodied so many times as to become nauseating.

But I'm just a cynical bitch so give it some time....more SWG's will come out to play after I remind everyone how much the franchise SUCKS DONKEY BALLS!

If you check this guy's YT channel, he's mashed mostly European cinema with jazz from the post-bop, pre-progressive era, some French music-A lot of these films interest me for the simple pleasure of seeing European cars, furniture, clothing, etc., from the 60s-Saturation from American cinema notwithstanding, WAY more style and class in Europe.

ALL-wingjob media needs semantics and critical-thinking lessons with a view to righteous, unfiltered, dissemination of information.

The "with us right now is a panel of agenda-motivated fuckheads disguised as experts' scenario that exist today and is represented in some of the most, traditionally-voted-for-on-band-wagon-drugs on THIS site, can dry-hump a spruce tree.

But this won't happen. The purpose by design of media is to saturate your minds with diversion after 'I-feel-passionate-about-this-subject' bullshit, is nothing but their usurping your mind to involve yourself in shit that matters-not in the grand scheme of the ass-raping you.

Maybe I've been playing these games for so damn long that my brain is rather saturated with graphics, but to be honest, if it wasn't side by side, I wouldn't have even noticed a bloody difference.

It's the same on the PC when folks go on and on about how much better a game looks with graphics set to ultra compared to medium -- as soon as any action starts on screen, any difference in looks goes straight out the window.

The combination of fast-paced gameplay and high-quality visuals just doesn't work for me. My brain can't hack it anymore. BF3/4 look absolutely staggering as long as I'm not playing myself, but once I take control, it looks just like BF2:BC.

Here's a bigger picture of mandatory " health insurance" , one that resembles another failed institution's successes and failures through extortion with the goal of diverting capitol to private coffers.

Fuck birth control, I don't feed myself as influenced by the corporate media machine's saturation diet of shit food but the majority of unhealthy, overweight, drones in sector EVERYWHERE do-The bulk of health care expenses in the U.S. are squandered on correcting or marginally forestalling the inevitable cascading failures associated with these poor diet habits fostered by the machine. The SAME machine owns the insurance companies, the medical establishment, down the fucking line.

Chicago 1921-1923- New York, Boston, hell pick a city on the east coast.
The mafia invented it, gangster fucks perfected it, it continues under the guise of the Affordable (fuck you, I have my own insurance) Care Act.

If people, were not such fucking imbeciles, they'd see through the simple veil of graft and extortion these suited, elected (joke) criminals use to continue to divert attention away from the obvious criminality of their ruse.

Get me started on eating healthy and the lack of availability and inaccessibility of the healthiest of raw materials...of how staple crops have been hijacked and genetically coded with ONE goal preeminent: To increase the profits of the monopolies that control the food supply.

The fastest way to fix the problem of affordable health care, is to fix the broken habits of dumb-ass humans who allow themselves to be bent-over and ass-fucked into thinking they need insurance AT ALL!

Teach people that their diets are being being systematically and fundamentally altered to keep them in this loop and the insurance companies and the cunts who make the laws that benefit them, will collapse under the weight of their own, orchestrated illusion.

They stay that way in all proceeding pictures? Or just the long exposure ones?

I would assume the latter, cosmic rays slow down and lose quite a bit of their energy by the time they hit us down here on the ground....exposure to one in space though will certainly kill a pixel for good.

Saturation of light sensitive photodiodes (ill call them PD's henceforth) (essentially what the CCD is PACKED with) causes damage over time. You can just over-saturate the PD, to the point of damage (usually around 3dBm above its rated saturation point), and it will bounce back ok. The sensitivity of the pixel will be harmed dependant on the time and the level above saturation it was exposed at.

You can see a similar phenomenon in video footage of nuclear reactor survey footage from drones, or....stupid people that are way too close....where the reactors have a nasty event.