I, chingalera, being of sound mind and tighter than a Mennonite contemplating Hindu dowry, have decided to use my old dilapidated moniker as a blog. I can ramble here just as well as showcasing a slot in exchange for beer money and a gem harder to find is that much more brilliant in proper light, yadda, yadda.

I suppose when I make an entry here there will be some new-and-improved way for me to get the word out about everything fit to scan and wonder why you wasted valuable time otherwise-

OS, this is my first New Year's Blog Entry, through a back door and sure to wax creaking like my joints 'n knuckles.

I labored through a few sentences then caustically scanned some of the rest lighting upon key words until my processes came to an abrupt skid against the inside of my skull....

The reasoning, efficiency, or validity of the TSA is not what the video or its proponents are arguing in this video. They are not arguing for removal or even promoting a more efficient alternative to the scanning bomb-check process for airport security. From best I can gather, (the video is distracted by some hi-jinks) they are solely trying to slow down an already slow system. Playing to the traveler's fears that their naked body could be seen by others and influencing people to go through a time consuming pat down process. Thus causing the process to be less efficient and more inconvenient than it already is. This is not exactly a noble pursuit in my point of view.

Change the system using facts and alternatives (call your congressperson)... not by wasting time and resources of people who can't change anything.

I appreciate them using their constitutional rights and actually being informed about them. However, I think this campaign is a little misguided. The reason for these scans is for efficiency. Scans are useful so the TSA doesn't need spend more money/time/manpower patting down ALL riders. So if you want to be selfish because you're squeamish about someone seeing your junk you can opt out. However, I'll hate you for it because I think those resources would be better put to patting down people who can't go through the more efficient process (people with disabilities) and saving some money for other government services.

So opt out of the full body scan and get groped by a stranger instead. I'm not sure that sounds like freedom to me. I want a third option: get on the plane and take my chances.

Bermas is generally a crazy jackass, but he's mostly on point here. Why is he spouting off marketing buzz to the cops, though? "We're going to be on Alex Jones! We're the most popular alternative news site in the country!" As if the sheriff is going to say, "Fuck, really? We were going to arrest you but if you're going to be on Alex Jones, I guess this is all good."

Thanks for all the sincere thoughts and for helping to assure the Sift is as featurific as it oughta be.

As it's clear the new promote system is definitely unwanted by the vast majority of Sift meatbags and this is a meritocracy after all, it's looking likely we'll end up changing it.

However, I am vehemently against the old style system that pushes all our hot, new content way down below the fold.

That said, here's a proposal:

What if we retain a single promoted video slot at the top of the page (displayed like a normal video in the listing, but labeled as being promoted), that randomly rotates among all the currently promoted videos, 1 video at a time, but evenly, so they all get an equal amount of display time as whatever else is currently promoted?

And we could have a button in this panel that when clicked will load a different promoted video into this slot, which could be used by folks who'd like to scan through to see what else is promoted.

Would this be a good solution? Up-vote this comment for YES and down-vote this comment for NO.

Voting begins in 30 seconds.

P.S. Of course, if you have any other ideas, please share them with the rest of the class.

[Amendment]

The promoted video will be displayed expanded, so the video embed instead of the small thumbnail image will be open by default.

>> ^littledragon_79:

Wait...is VJ trying to scan her?

If only he could. What a Bitch!

Wait...is VJ trying to scan her?

@gorillaman, yeah, woman is longer than the word girl.

It is also a conjunction -- wife of man. From the on-line dictionary: late O.E. wimman (pl. wimmen), lit. "woman-man," alteration of wifman (pl. wifmen), a compound of wif "woman" (see wife) + man "human being" (in Old English used in reference to both sexes; see man (n.)). Cf. Du. vrouwmens "wife," lit. "woman-man."

It does kind of get in the way, doesn't it? That extra syllable and that clunky hidden contraction.

I still think it is mostly about power, though, and your example of "grown man" kind of proves it to me. Why couldn't you say "grown boy"? If boy is the same as man, just as girl is the same as woman? A grown boy is indeed a man, yes? It actually is more accurate than "grown man."

Maybe the experiment should be simplified.... instead of doing the woman for girl substitution, simplify it to changing every "man" to "boy." Since the words are interchangeable, right? No particular meaning? Both are one syllable so no big whoop if you change them out. If girl and woman are interchangeable, meaning-wise, doesn't logic dictate that boy and man are interchangeable?

So can we change the experiment? Forget girl and woman, just change the word "man" to "boy." I know the word "man" shows up all the time. So there should be plenty of data.

"I'm a Woman. W. O. M. A. N." There's a song lyric for you. I suggest to you that the meaning would be very different if it were "I'm a Girl. G. I. R. L." Certainly the melodies are wildly different for those two songs!

I love that you call women women, by the way. Even though it takes the extra effort. Some of the women you talk to appreciate it, I'm sure.

Just for a laugh, I did this search: http://videosift.com/search?q=girl&t=v&u=&s[]=s&o=&vmin=&vmax=&sh=&l=&n=&b=&submit=Search

Scanned for how "girl" shows up on videos. On the first page, there were a deeply satisfying number of vids that were truly about girls under age 20. I was pleasantly surprised! There were also quite a few of almost naked women labeled as "girls". Which also proves my point about it being about power -- a naked girl is very different from a naked woman, yes?

For the past few hours I've been trying to get the embed codes to fix my dead video and submit a couple of new videos BUT the function is stuck on "loading" [and it never does load]. I get the loading message on my mail page, so I can't access personal messages or comments AND my playlists/history links are stuck on loading as well.

I ran a complete computer scan and restarted my laptop to no avail ... grrrrrr

Stoopid YouTube =o(


Off to bed ... g'day

Question: how did the mapping geologist who loves rocks and built amazing probes that scanned a perfect 3D map of the interior of the ship/base manage to get himself completely lost?

Question: Why did the character dialogue suck so bad?

Question: How does this terribly executed film continue to suck time out of my life? Why won't it just go away?



Note: some questions can be answered by following this helpful link.

>> ^00Scud00:

It's a shame that Microsoft decided to stop bringing Halo to the PC after Halo 2, sure, it wasn't the greatest game series ever made but I still would not mind playing it anyhow.


Microsoft bought out Bungi in the first place and turned what would have been an incredible PC game into the shite that became an Xbox exclusive. Fuck Halo and Microsoft.

>> ^00Scud00:

Oh I'm quite sure there's money to be made in PC games, but I guess Microsoft still thinks they can move more Xboxes with Halo as an exclusive, although I suspect that anyone who really wants to play Halo that badly already owns one by now. Or maybe they're just still mad that the same marketing strategy doesn't work as well with operating systems and that the majority of PC users called Microsoft on their bullshit.
>> ^Deano:
>> ^00Scud00:
It's a shame that Microsoft decided to stop bringing Halo to the PC after Halo 2, sure, it wasn't the greatest game series ever made but I still would not mind playing it anyhow.

No money in the PC game for them. You can't charge for map packs, Spartan Ops, skins etc.



I really think it's more about the DLC issue and secondly assuring the Xbox has at least one killer exclusive game.

They will push to sell way more DLC with Halo 4. Spartan Ops will be chargeable once it beds in.
I'm not sure that Microsoft gives a rats arse about PC gaming. They interest lies in owning the living room.

Your video, Official Halo 4 Launch Trailer 'Scanned' Long Form, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Oh I'm quite sure there's money to be made in PC games, but I guess Microsoft still thinks they can move more Xboxes with Halo as an exclusive, although I suspect that anyone who really wants to play Halo that badly already owns one by now. Or maybe they're just still mad that the same marketing strategy doesn't work as well with operating systems and that the majority of PC users called Microsoft on their bullshit.

>> ^Deano:

>> ^00Scud00:
It's a shame that Microsoft decided to stop bringing Halo to the PC after Halo 2, sure, it wasn't the greatest game series ever made but I still would not mind playing it anyhow.

No money in the PC game for them. You can't charge for map packs, Spartan Ops, skins etc.