@ghark

1 - I'm not sure which swipe of Chris Hedges you are referring to. If it is in regard to the Moral Landscape I can only comment that Hedges takes every opportunity to inject himself into the spotlight. Having read the Moral Landscape I can say that the ideas Harris presents CAN be challenged by legitimate thinkers, of which Hedges is not.


Hedges game has been to misrepresent Harris' point of view as written in End of Faith. I would go so far as to call Hedges an all out liar. See my post in this thread:


2 - Where here is Sam blindly racist? He states that acts of terror are more likely to be carried out by young Muslim men than by 5 year old girls or grandmothers.

If I said that black athletes are more likely to be basketball players and white athletes are more likely to be baseball players would that make me racist? Because in terms of professional sports that simply IS the case. Note I am not saying WHY that is the case - I am simply saying it is and the statistics prove it.

As I have said before Sam is not racist, but he is honest about who is most likely to have some bad ideas and he does not like bad ideas.

3. Sam is not a pacifist but he is not a warmonger either. As I listened to the entirety of the interview I noted he had a very nuanced idea of when war, or physical violence of any kind, is justified.

One last link regarding Hedges:
Here

He's not even that smart. From YT:

"The goldfish is fine, but our economy isn't. Are you Sick yet?"

Yes, yes sir, I am sick. I'm sick of giving money to save the economy, so I'm going to click the "Donate" button and give Herman Cain money to save the economy.

If you haven't seen the website yet, it's a joke. It's 1½ pages in Times New Roman.>> ^Kofi:

"Now, if I torture a fish in my ad then it will create controversy and I will be back in the spotlight. Lets do it"

"Now, if I torture a fish in my ad then it will create controversy and I will be back in the spotlight. Lets do it"

>> ^dag:

This is one group that will be happy when the spotlight of media scrutiny swings the other way - but the damage may already be too great.


One can only hope. If even half of their donations move to more cost-effective charities, cancer victims will be the real winners. And administrative overhead of 60-70% is utterly absurd, making it pretty obvious what their -real- purpose is.

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

This is one group that will be happy when the spotlight of media scrutiny swings the other way - but the damage may already be too great.

Your taste is bad and you should feel bad!
>> ^JiggaJonson:

Sorry to dissapoint @gwizz665, but after some sifting through emo-cult-movie-whore reviews I did find a few people who agree with me:
"Danny Elfman has done some fabulous stuff in his time: Edward Scissorhands, Batman etc. But when his songs were thrown into the spotlight as they were here, they sadly failed on so many levels."
"It is so difficult to get through and you'll find yourself checking you watch several times throughout."
"I saw The Nightmare Before Christmas when it opened. I had just started college. The hype hadn’t started yet, and I still thought it stunk. The music is awful and it’s just plain boring. I was recently shocked to learn that it’s only an hour and a half long. It seemed so much longer."
http://listverse.com/2008/08/25/top-10-overrated-movies/

Sorry to dissapoint @gwizz665, but after some sifting through emo-cult-movie-whore reviews I did find a few people who agree with me:

"Danny Elfman has done some fabulous stuff in his time: Edward Scissorhands, Batman etc. But when his songs were thrown into the spotlight as they were here, they sadly failed on so many levels."

"It is so difficult to get through and you'll find yourself checking you watch several times throughout."

"I saw The Nightmare Before Christmas when it opened. I had just started college. The hype hadn’t started yet, and I still thought it stunk. The music is awful and it’s just plain boring. I was recently shocked to learn that it’s only an hour and a half long. It seemed so much longer."

http://listverse.com/2008/08/25/top-10-overrated-movies/

I think they should have kept the setting more contemporary. The whole "cultural mainstays of yesteryear in modern fish out of water situations" is a comedic dead-horse to me. I mean, Snooky, really?

I also sort of get annoyed when they take things from the past and stick them in a clearly 'current time' setting. My overall preference is for a movie to be designed in such a way as to be relatively 'timeless'. When you make a movie in such a way that it constantly spotlights a subject or idea from a very specific modern time period then it becomes VERY obvious and then the show becomes dated very quickly as time goes on. The end result is that a good movie that would have otherwise been a 'classic' ends up seeming very cheesy. I think the Stooges movie would have been better off avoiding that kind of thing. Just have the Stooges there, keep the setting vague and non-specific in terms of its period, and let the hijinks ensue.

That being said - I loved seeing Snookie get poked in the eyes... Give her a few triple-slaps while you're at it, Moe.

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

The problem with exposing all of the queue a little more is that it's not really curating. It's a rising tide, lifting all boats. We really want to get better at surfacing quality new stuff more effectively. Which is not to say we're bad at it now - we aren't - but we could be better. >> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

^I think finding a way of giving all unsifted videos a little front page visibility would be the easiest way to get more people to watch them. In my experience on this site, a little bit of momentum goes a long way. A video might sit there for a day unnoticed, but you promote it and it shoots to the top 15 in 24 hrs or less. I know dag and lucky were experimenting with some videos on the header above the promotes. This seems like prime real estate for spotlighting unsifted vids. The only downside is that it, in some ways, defeats the purpose of quality control. Some offensive piece of crap could perch itself atop the site and drive away new viewers.
I know buzzfeed has a system where it tracks what you think will go viral, and then gives you a viral accuracy percentage, which works well for a site about 'buzz'. I don't think this is a good idea for our 'quality control'-based site, because it might cause people to be even more fixated on popularity than quality. Then again, maybe not.
Another big problem is music. I find personally that watching clips, lectures, debates, comedy shorts, etc. activates different parts of my brain than listening to music. When I'm in the mood for music, I have no interest in watching videos; when I'm in the mood for watching videos, I have little interest in music. Also, I find similar dichotomies when listening to music itself (soft or loud? Up or down? Populist or sophisticated? Jazz, concert music, hip-hop, rock, indie, world, electronic? Does my brain want to deal with new stuff or just stick with comfort food? Flow is really important to the enjoyment of music.
I'd love to see a part of the site dedicated only to music. Perhaps something where you could post audio clips and playlists. A place where you could get deep in discussion about the art, share, explore and discover new stuff and new ways of thinking about music. Kind of like a more sophisticated, videosift-ised version of lastfm. I know this is probably unrealistic and that the tech might not be there yet, but just throwing it out there for the heck of it.

^I think finding a way of giving all unsifted videos a little front page visibility would be the easiest way to get more people to watch them. In my experience on this site, a little bit of momentum goes a long way. A video might sit there for a day unnoticed, but you promote it and it shoots to the top 15 in 24 hrs or less. I know dag and lucky were experimenting with some videos on the header above the promotes. This seems like prime real estate for spotlighting unsifted vids. The only downside is that it, in some ways, defeats the purpose of quality control. Some offensive piece of crap could perch itself atop the site and drive away new viewers.

I know buzzfeed has a system where it tracks what you think will go viral, and then gives you a viral accuracy percentage, which works well for a site about 'buzz'. I don't think this is a good idea for our 'quality control'-based site, because it might cause people to be even more fixated on popularity than quality. Then again, maybe not.

Another big problem is music. I find personally that watching clips, lectures, debates, comedy shorts, etc. activates different parts of my brain than listening to music. When I'm in the mood for music, I have no interest in watching videos; when I'm in the mood for watching videos, I have little interest in music. Also, I find similar dichotomies when listening to music itself (soft or loud? Up or down? Populist or sophisticated? Jazz, concert music, hip-hop, rock, indie, world, electronic? Does my brain want to deal with new stuff or just stick with comfort food? Flow is really important to the enjoyment of music.

I'd love to see a part of the site dedicated only to music. Perhaps something where you could post audio clips and playlists. A place where you could get deep in discussion about the art, share, explore and discover new stuff and new ways of thinking about music. Kind of like a more sophisticated, videosift-ised version of lastfm. I know this is probably unrealistic and that the tech might not be there yet, but just throwing it out there for the heck of it.

Scarlet-crowned harlot eh? I bet I could get partially through her eye of the needle.. she'd not even feel it...
>> ^hpqp:

>> ^AdrianBlack:
It's ok to reference camel toes if you're female...and a ginger bitch. >> ^Fletch:
Oh great... the inevitable "cute" and base sexual references whenever a video contains an attractive female. You hear her voice and only just kinda see her, yet that's all it takes to massage the man muscle for some of you. And it's not even about her, people. It's about the camel. Yes, the camel. How do you think he feels, his moment in the spotlight waylayed by sophmoric sexual innuendo and ancient memes? To risk injury by running in a manner that is very likely hazardous to camels and other even-toed ungulates just to entertain us, and then see his risk rendered moot by such off-topic and immature comments must be disheartening, to say the least.
After all, he pwn'd that soulless, ginger bitch.


"And again I say unto you, It is easier for a spastic camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a soulless scarlet-crowned harlot to enter into the kingdom of God." Matthew 19:24

It's ok to reference camel toes if you're female...and a ginger bitch. >> ^Fletch:

Oh great... the inevitable "cute" and base sexual references whenever a video contains an attractive female. You hear her voice and only just kinda see her, yet that's all it takes to massage the man muscle for some of you. And it's not even about her, people. It's about the camel. Yes, the camel. How do you think he feels, his moment in the spotlight waylayed by sophmoric sexual innuendo and ancient memes? To risk injury by running in a manner that is very likely hazardous to camels and other even-toed ungulates just to entertain us, and then see his risk rendered moot by such off-topic and immature comments must be disheartening, to say the least.
After all, he pwn'd that soulless, ginger bitch.

Oh great... the inevitable "cute" and base sexual references whenever a video contains an attractive female. You hear her voice and only just kinda see her, yet that's all it takes to massage the man muscle for some of you. And it's not even about her, people. It's about the camel. Yes, the camel. How do you think he feels, his moment in the spotlight waylayed by sophmoric sexual innuendo and ancient memes? To risk injury by running in a manner that is very likely hazardous to camels and other even-toed ungulates just to entertain us, and then see his risk rendered moot by such off-topic and immature comments must be disheartening, to say the least.

After all, he pwn'd that soulless, ginger bitch.






I refuse to use the "sarcasm" button.

>> ^hpqp:

I feel really bad for Carey Mulligan here.


I thought that, but actually I think she might welcome the fact that the spotlight isn't on her. She seems really awkward talking about herself