simplicity has been seconded for banination by Lilithia. This account will now be disabled. If you would like to appeal this banination, simplicity, you may contact the administrators.

simplicity has been nominated for banination by chicchorea. This may be due to abuse or violations of the posting guidelines. If this nomination is seconded, the account will be permanently disabled.

Meh.

Looks like they're trying too hard. Part of the appeal of the originals over the prequel trilogy was their simplicity.

I like how the big spaceship bursts into flames... in outer space.

A thousand times better than the crap "redo" ending they gave us.

This is beautiful in its simplicity.

Revolutionize, probably not. Be an improved option over 'regular' internal combustion in (apparently) weight, size and efficiency, maybe. This seems to be a great option for a hybrid. Being smaller and lighter is what you want in an energy efficient vehicle, as is fuel efficiency. Since fossil fueled vehicles will be the norm for the foreseeable future, any step towards making them more efficient is a good thing (although not the end goal, true enough). This seemed to have many advantages of Wankel motors (rotaries) without the efficiency problem due to low compression/incomplete combustion. 14:1 on pump gas is INSANE! My offroad race motor is only 12:1 and it needs trick racing fuel.
Also, as far as simplicity, this had no valves and assorted crap, just inlet and outlet ports (from what I understood anyway) like Wankels. That's a HUGE jump in simplicity, with an entire system eliminated, so there's far less to break/wear out/need tuning. IF manufacturing cost can be reasonable, I see this as a great step forward possibly making hybrids more acceptable to many more people.

I think this is a prime example of why pop music is a lot harder than you might think. It's very simplicity is what makes it so hard to pull off. It's not just marketing and promotion either (though that helps, of course). I could paint a picture that, to me, was indistinguishable from a Pollock or a Rothko, but it wouldn't be great art, and nobody would pay me thousands of dollars for it.

A lot of my professional musician friends who have spent years perfecting their art get real grumpy about the success of pop musicians. They tend to say things like 'I could do that, no problem' and yet they don't, and they certainly would if they really could.

Also, to clarify, I'm not necessarily talking about pop *stars* whose talent tends to be more along the lines of looking cool while singing passably, but the producers and song writers who make the actual music.

With a full face mask though, it's difficult or impossible to equalize pressure, so you won't be able to dive more than a couple meters/yards down.

I'm also sceptic about how easy it really would be to breathe with this thing and if it really holds out water that well. It's also probably difficult to clean/maintain. Often simplicity wins over "innovation".

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.

I can't listen to this song without a tear in my eye. It's just perfect - the simplicity of it, the perfect cyclical structure, the evocative repetition of "long time passing" and "long time ago". And the fact that it sounds hundreds of years old. Perfect.

The assumption you're making is that these kids are the first people to look at changing packaging when they're not. There are some unbelievably clever card packing solutions out there. Just go and buy a large format HP printer and marvel at the way the box fits every component perfectly, its a real work of art. Rather than a simple box packed with polystyrene packaging they use almost exclusively cleverly folded card inserts and boxes to pack their stuff.

That's fine for very precise requirements but for general packing there's a simplicity to a cardboard box that's very useful. They're dead cheap to make, the material cost is tiny so any savings there really aren't going to be great.

It's the universalness of the product that makes it so useful. Everyone knows what to do with a box, and even if you'd never seen on before you could pretty quickly work out what to do. This clever solution they've found in this video is missing that bit. You'd need to print instructions or train people how to use it and then all your economy is gone.

It's a big industry and the box makers have very clever box designers already working for them and already doing incredibly clever things for lots of very large companies. There's no catching up to be done. The only difference between these kids and the real box designers is that the kids have a youtube video to impress people who aren't in the industry.

@Bruti79
im not going to address the entirety of your comment because others have addressed many of those points.

but i do love how you speak with such authority on the human condition.
so exciting.
that we are just " They are a series of chemicals in our brain going off."

brilliant in its simplicity.
could you then explain to me:
1.love
2.consciousness

any explanations would be greatly appreciated.

and @ghark is correct and this has been proven.SCIENCE!
check it:
http://videosift.com/video/Uprooting-the-Leading-Causes-of-Death

Honestly, it's not that all news is bullshit, it's that most (all?) news outlets commit the same fallacious and detrimental information practices as always will happen in any system when experience is posited as "truth".

In the business world we are almost always working to change our perspective on how data flows and how best to store and distribute info; setting our educational bias aside when need be. One particular failed practice that does NOT get enough high level analyzing due to the nature of the bias in which the problem itself creates: Information siloing.

In this case, we have the American people silo'd (and if we don't have them silo'd, we actively seek to silo these "undecided" minds) as either liberal D or conservative R. Once you're silo'd, you now have the ability to be fed limited information, based upon limited experience, as the Truth. This is called a hook. A hook is exactly what you think it means and is not bad of itself, because hooks exist in all systems for better or for worse. Otherwise birds of a feather would not flock together. (They flock together because of hooks in their code and the world aka science around them which helps facilitate that hook.)

Now that the hook is in, we have separate news organizations that cater to the data bias you signed up for. You're a human with a blank slate, so don't you dare argue that your opinion is anything but inconsistent, even after education; because you assume that the patterns of existence taught as theoretical and scientifically posited "truth" scale in a reality based upon butterfly flaps of causation. Just accept it: You are fallible and the defects are inherent at every step of our civilization. (Algorithms of usefulness to engineers are only useful if they lessen the load on the user, otherwise we'd all be typing 1s and 0s; so the logic of simplicity suggests our systems are fucked and holding to them is an anarchy unto itself, where ultimate complexity becomes entropy -- LESSEN THE COMPLEXITY. That should be a rule for all government and economy.)

Liberals claim they cater to all sides and conservatives complain that if it wasn't for Fox, there would be no objectivity in the news. This further complicates the matter, but is itself a red herring because it's an argument that essentially says "YOU MUST GET YOUR NEWS FROM A MAJOR NETWORK." If you actually believe that these media giants are the end all be all to gaining information from the "truest" perspective possible, you are a dummy and you need to WAKE UP.

If you never made a thought pattern along these lines, you also need to wake up but I'm not mad at you. Information that deviates from a human's factory defaults (early family and life experiences in the form of fear induced bias) is difficult to objectively analyze. I fault you not, but your call to awaken is noted and will be remembered at the end of all (if you believe in any sort of karmic ending, Christians included). If you don't believe this, then your inability to rule the boundaries of your mind in the present is damning enough. Fuck you. And fuck your offspring. Subjective fear consume thee as your desperate and once nurturing stride for survival is abstracted into selfish, power seeking nihilism.

Information siloing creates tribal knowledge (which is information held by a select group, and then touted as negative patterns like nationalism and corporate thuggery), and tribal knowledge creates boundaries based upon a skewed perception of what the truth is; which in turn, creates subjective and often intangible competition within a system that should be making strides to improve its process via iteration.

MUD SLING AWAY. Or join me in narrowing the argument to its lowest common denominators and then objectively analyzing the system, starting at a generic starting point and building up to a truer understanding.

No, they were right to hang up on him (though perhaps shouldn't have taken his call). I just see this sort of thing a lot. The existence or non-existence of god is perhaps one of the most fascinating debates there can be (and it's not so simple provided you're not trying to argue for the existence of some specific god, and it involving a lot of interesting physics and metaphysics), but these sorts of internet things always seem to wind up with a dumb christian saying "because the bible/god/whatever says so..." and a dumb atheist, well, even trying to engage in that sort of debate.

True, I shouldn't really fault these particular presenters because I didn't see the rest of their show, and there are various social/political issues that could be discussed at this level of simplicity, but it seem quite a bit like many others I've seen: the athiests believe what they believe and the christians believe what they believe, and trying to have arguments about beliefs is pretty pointless and brings out the uglier, intolerant sides in each.

Cool video, useless idea. The beauty of current tire design is the simplicity. They have one moving part, they are cheap to make and if you buy good tires they exceed the acceleration and braking forces that any average car produces.

I think that the propagation of humor, be it high brow or low brow is of the utmost importance to humanity. Without this in our lives you must question the relevancy of personal existance. This poll represents the simplicity of a smile. If you don't like you are free to not vote, but please do not make this a sift policy issue. It's not that important.