search results matching tag: sphere

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (117)     Sift Talk (5)     Blogs (10)     Comments (344)   

CrushBug (Member Profile)

siftbot says...

Congratulations! Your comment on How to turn a sphere inside out has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

How to turn a sphere inside out

nanrod says...

"Is this it, is this a sphere turning inside out? You bet!" No, no it isn't, it's just a poorly done animation that demonstrates nothing.

blacklotus90 (Member Profile)

New Poll Numbers Have Clinton Far Behind And Falling

dannym3141 says...

My general point was that it doesn't matter if they are better off. For example, the degree to which they are better off might not be significant to them and their life. Or they might know even know they would be better off because their life doesn't include unbiased news sources. Or they see the leaked emails as proof that whilst she SAYS things that benefit you, once you vote for her she will do what she likes. Or whatever other worries people might have - only they know and no one in the political sphere seems to care.

The less you have, the less you have to lose, the less involved you are with the system, coupled with access to education and all the rest (especially in America). You are convinced they'd be better off, but they are not and therein lies the problem. Things like the email leak make it a lot harder to convince them of your point of view.

If your house has rot and every time you ask to have it fixed, your landlady holds it together with spit and tape, eventually you've got a shit house that isn't any better than living outside and putting a match to the whole thing is the only way it's going to be rebuilt.

It depends on your perspective on whether the house is already fucked or not, doesn't it? You might live in one of the nice rooms, but someone else further down the ladder is basically living outside.

You only have to look at the way inequality has risen over the past few decades to see how desperate some people are. You can see how someone sleeping in their car, going to a foodbank and coping with mental illness might not see much urgency in choosing between Trump or Hillary.

ChaosEngine said:

That's the thing, I think they probably are.

Seeing A Song: Painting What She Hears

The Most Satisfying Video Ever Made

moonsammy says...

The metal snowflake is highly unsatisfying, as it ended just a second too early. And what was with that weird melty chair and the sphere? That was just confusing.

Putin Tells Everyone Exactly Who Created ISIS

RedSky says...

As I said in that thread, I don't see an incentive for the US to intervene. This isn't the Cold War battle over spheres of influence, neither does oil have the same geopolitical relevance. Despite the conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Libya, none has led to a spike in oil prices? Instead it's fallen precipitously. Why, because the US being the swing shale oil producer has capped world prices.

Meanwhile I listed the reasons for Russia to intervene, none of which you have challenged or refuted. TOWs have by all accounts been supplied by the Saudis. I don't think Russia is attempting to destabilize Syria, but they do wish to prop up Assad. Bombing has conveniently been primarily of non-ISIS rebels since they challenge the regime more directly than ISIS which is being bombed already.

Syria includes a litany of rebel groups some as radical as ISIS. From what I have read it is suspected that both the Syrian army and al-Nusra/ISIS used various chemical weapons. The Syrian army has undoubtedly dropped barrel bombs, weapons designed to create indiscriminate collateral damage to civilians just like chemical weapons, it is entirely consistent that they would have also tried using chemical weapons which is practical terms are no less likely to be deadly to civilians or likely to incite terror. There are by all accounts >5,000 different rebel groups in Syria. That you would ascribe them all as wanting chaos would suggest you've been fed a narrative.

A Cold War MAD mindset makes little sense today. Russian bombing of western Europe in some kind of hypothetical retaliation against the US makes no sense in this day and age. In any case it was scrapped because of Putin's paranoia.

coolhund said:

To think that the USA has for once not used proxies to deliver weapons, is, to put it mildly, insane. They had training camps since the beginning in Jordan. Same as the UK and France. There were huge old stockpiles of weapons in the Balkan for example. They somehow found their way to Syria into FSA hands, even though Saudis, Qataris, and Turkish mainly supported Al Nusra and IS. TOWs found their way to those extremists. Actually the USA sent those officially.

Of course Russia has its own interests there, but its not destabilization. That alone is reason enough to support them instead of the USA and their lackeys and boot lickers.

It has never been proven that Assad used chemical weapons. The investigators couldnt even find good indications for it. But that the extremists used chemical weapons in other cases was later confirmed. Funnily there wasnt such a huge fuss about it. Hmmm... wonder why.
The extremists also made it clear from the beginning that they dont want a successor from the current leader. They want power. They want a Sunni regime.

You then saying the ABM shield is only directed at Iran is ridiculous to say the least. MAD has its reason and saved us from otherwise certain global nuclear war quite a few times in the past. A shield like that can circumvent MAD, which is a wet dream of the neocons, always has been. Thats why the USA left the ABM treaty, NOT Russia.

Sad to see you didnt read the link (or ignored it) I linked you before. Instead you keep spewing out lies.

Putin Tells Everyone Exactly Who Created ISIS

dag says...

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I would agree with that. Russia does seem to be maintaining its cold war "sphere of influence" strategy against NATO in trying to maintain a buffer zone. It doesn't seem to make sense in this era, but Putin is an old KGB hand - and I'm sure that's still how he thinks.

RedSky said:

@dag

Depends on what goals you define Russia as wanting to achieve by that intervention.

Politically, intevening in Ukraine was a huge boon for Putin because his domestic media machine spun it into a irredentist initiative of national pride and basically suffocated his domestic political opposition. Diplomatically or economically, Russia has gained little from its intevention in Georgia, Ukraine and now Syria. If anything it has frayed alliances with Central Asian states and raised tensions with former Soviet Eastern European states, many of which have large minority Russian populations.

If the aim was to act as a bulwark to NATO or stem its expansion, he's preciptated the opposite. Countries neighboring Russia have every reason to fear they'll be next. Not that he had anything real to fear from NATO or the previously proposed anti-missile shield which was really proposed against Iran. I would say Putin's basically acting as a petulant child, throwing Russia's military around to reclaim some kind of atavastic relevance on the international stage to distract his people while he sinks the economy into the ground due to his government's corruption and cronyism.

Divers Discover Blob

Higher minimum wage, or guaranteed minimum income?

radx says...

At some point, yes. But for the time being, increases in productivity (automation) are less of a job killer than your everyday policies and ideologies.

Speaking of my own country, the amount of work not being done is enormous, and the aggregate of work not having been done over the last decades is absolutely staggering. The current economic system not only unloaded a great number of burdens onto society, it also never found a way to come up with a way to integrate the aforementioned work. No one is willing to pay for it, so it doesn't get done, period. The most prominent examples would be infrastructure works of all kinds (energy, most of all), ecological restauration and care for the elderly. Our national railroad alone could hire 100,000 people and still be understaffed.

You can have full employment next year, but not if you expect the private sector to provide the jobs within the current system. The public sector could create them, if you use a sovereign, free-floating currency, but ideology doesn't allow for it.

As long as we focus on finding people for a given job, there'll be mass unemployment, no matter what. Reverse the process, create/find jobs for a given people and we might make some headway.

Again, ideology doesn't allow for it. And that's also what made me stop advocating for an unconditional basic income (UBI). The financial details of it can be a nightmare, yes, and it would be a break with a social welfare system that survived two world wars. But the deal breaker for me was politics.

A UBI would mean taking the boot of the peasants' necks. Liberty and (some) equality made real. Love it.
But look at how vicious the Greeks are attacked these days, not just by the elite, but by our fellow worker bees. They're not just burying the last bit of European solidarity in Greece, they're unloading all their frustrations onto the schmucks who had very little to begin with. It's despicable. And it indicates to me that any attempt to introduce a system that would take from people the need to work would unleash unimaginable hatred from the usual suspects. And significant portions of the public would go along with it, given how easy it already is to channel their frustrations towards "welfare queens" and "moochers".

So yeah, a UBI would be lovely. Finally some liberty, finally more negotiating power for the worker (can decline any job offer without repression). But the shit would need to hit the fan hard before there can be any room within the political sphere for it.

Stormsinger said:

Given the increasing capabilities of automation, it seems quite obvious that full employment will never again be seen. Given that, a guaranteed basic income is the only way to stave off a violent revolution by those who have been abandoned by the system.

Red Hot Ball of Nickel vs. Paper.

siftbot says...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Burning, sphere, of, Nickel, it burns, ow thats hot, hot, hot' to 'Burning, sphere, of, Nickel, it burns, ow thats hot, hot, hot, RHNB' - edited by blutruth

The Ingenious Design of the Aluminum Beverage Can

Drachen_Jager says...

I think "ingenious" is over-selling it.

"Hey, let's make a can for drinks."

"What shape?"

"Well, people drink out of glasses... and cans are already almost that exact same shape which has been working great for decades. So let's make it the same f^$%ing shape as people already use, WTF other shape would we possibly even consider, you moron!"

"Umm, a sphere?"

watch uranium emit radiation

kceaton1 says...

Yeah watching it long enough, especially due to the lingering affect of the "smoke" left behind, you can tell that little gem definitely has some very concrete numbers. Since it looks like a slowly revolving sphere of undulating waves (with the smoke). All thanks to the frequency of the radiation and what it emits.

If you look at the beginning you'll notice that the Uranium is clear and has a blue crystal look to it (though it is a metal). As the video slowly moves forward, it gets darker and darker, eventually it turns into Uranium Oxide. Or it looks like that to me, if so then they probably used water to create the reaction.

What If Humans Disappeared?

gorillaman says...

If humans disappeared then nothing. An empty world with nothing happening and no-one to see it. A void sphere expanding out from our solar system at the speed of light with the last of our transmissions, in every direction and forever.

Unless and until sophonce appears again. Then the lights come on and the universe can see itself.

Homeworld : Remastered trailer

gorillaman says...

I never finished Homeworld, great as it was. There's one mission where you have to destroy some technological doohickey that's surrounded by a vast sphere of hundreds of enemy ships. So obviously I ignore the doohickey and spend hours and hours capturing every single one of them. At the start of the next mission my now enormous fleet can't deploy properly and the game crashes every time.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon