You raise some good points. Its a shame your first comment seemed to dismiss this video and possibly feminism. Why people feel the need to 1up the other "team" I've no idea. I suspect it might have something to do with implicit sexism and the feeling that your ingroup is threatened... This isn't a competition, there is room for masculinism and feminism, you don't have to shout over the other to get your points across. Sadly masculinist and sexist are synonymous precisely because people who describe themselves as masculinist seem to spend the greater half of their time attack feminism rather than making any constructive points to support their argument. Like I said, its a shame you soured your examples with your initial reaction.

You're conflating war time attacks with punishment or maybe even justice.

It's not about declaring the people that died deserved to die or not, because we know for a fact we killed 'innocents' by the thousands. People who unquestioningly were good people and did not deserve to die. It's about saying their deaths were an unavoidable consequence of prosecuting a war that was necessary. It's messed up to talk about a 'just' war, and a 'good war' is an oxymoron. Necessary evil is more the idea I'd say. The Japanese military machine was brutally and systematically exterminating everything in it's path, and war was the only way to stop it. We did terribly things to win that war, and the only defense of our committing those acts was preventing and ending worse ones in the future. It's not a clear good thing, it's messy.

Super Mario 3 - NES - Time Attack has been added as a related post - related requested by xxovercastxx.

Based on the segment of http://videosift.com/video/Super-Mario-3-NES-Time-Attack that begins at 8:37.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'super, mario, bros, 3, nes, time, attack' to 'super mario bros 3, nes, time attack, smb3' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^sepatown:

i don't think he makes good points at all. without comparing those pie-charts to the pie-charts of other aid organizations, those percentage splits are meaningless. how does the layman watching the video know if 37% is a lot or not much? is 27% for awareness programs good or bad? who knows? how much of that 27% is essential for boosting their income?
also his problem with the Legacy Scholarship Fun is strange as well, he recognizes that it's a good program but has a problem with $1.1million being spent on 'only' 700-800 kids. once again, without context how do we know if that is bad? 1.1million by 800 kids is like $1400 bucks per kid, per year. that doesn't jump out at me as some insanely unjustifiable figure UNLESS YOU PROVIDE ME WITH CONTEXT which he fails to do, which is interesting because he spends some time attacking the fund for that exact thing.
the only thing more annoying than the people jumping to support this KONY thing by clicking 'like' and then feeling good about themselves are the people jumping just as quickly to the contrarian position and the demonizing this charity because they wanna be in that group that thinks that they're somehow smarter than everyone else because they've read on Reddit or a blog somewhere that Invisible Children's Accountability & Transparency only scored 2/4 on Charity Navigator and therefore must be a scam.


In a 12 minute video he's made some good points but it's clearly a starting point for a debate. He doesn't strike me as a contrarian but someone who's choosing to be reasonably sceptical.

Charities throughout the world too often get a free ride and I would not be surprised if the next big financial scandals are charity-related.

I haven't actually made it through the Kony video. I saw a twitter link with a breathless gushing exhortation to watch it and the first five minutes seemed to follow in that vein. I'd rather a more clear-headed appraisal rather than rushing to frame the subject emotionally.

i don't think he makes good points at all. without comparing those pie-charts to the pie-charts of other aid organizations, those percentage splits are meaningless. how does the layman watching the video know if 37% is a lot or not much? is 27% for awareness programs good or bad? who knows? how much of that 27% is essential for boosting their income?

also his problem with the Legacy Scholarship Fun is strange as well, he recognizes that it's a good program but has a problem with $1.1million being spent on 'only' 700-800 kids. once again, without context how do we know if that is bad? 1.1million by 800 kids is like $1400 bucks per kid, per year. that doesn't jump out at me as some insanely unjustifiable figure UNLESS YOU PROVIDE ME WITH CONTEXT which he fails to do, which is interesting because he spends some time attacking the fund for that exact thing.

the only thing more annoying than the people jumping to support this KONY thing by clicking 'like' and then feeling good about themselves are the people jumping just as quickly to the contrarian position and then demonizing this charity because they wanna be in that group that thinks that they're somehow smarter than everyone else because they've read on Reddit or a blog somewhere that Invisible Children's Accountability & Transparency only scored 2/4 on Charity Navigator and therefore must be a scam.

>> ^SDGundamX:

He wasn't arrested for animal abuse, he was arrested for "willfully teasing a police K-9" which is an misdemeanor offense in Mason County (see this WSJ law blog). The reason for the law should be obvious--unlike your normal house pet, these dogs are actually trained to bite people and if you get them agitated enough they may attack without command and not respond to an officer's orders to stop biting.
From this web site on the behavioral nature of police dogs:
No matter how well-trained in suspect apprehension a police dog might be, all police dogs can easily make behavioral mistakes, such as attacking at the wrong time, attacking out of context, attacking a suspect when not commanded to do so, and failing to stop an attack after being commanded to do so by the handler. Because of the behavioral nature of aggressive responding in dogs, and despite the extensive training most police service dogs have been subjected to prior to being deployed in the field, they will make behavioral mistakes, thereby causing injury to a victim that was uncalled for or far beyond what was probably needed.
Teasing the dog increases the likelihood of that happening. The drunken dumbass who was barking at the dog was putting people at risk and got arrested for it. I love the 1st amendment but I have absolutely no problem with these charges sticking. First amendment rights don't mean you can say whatever you want to say whenever you want to say it. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater just for lulz and you can't intentionally agitate police dogs into a frothing rage.
I love how Judge Napolitano apparently made a snap judgment himself about the situation without bothering to look at the facts of the case (as reported in the WSJ link above). Upvoted to promote yet more awareness of the stupidity that airs on Fox News.


I agree with everything you said, except the part where you said stuff about the law. While there could be a case for civilly responsible for acts of speech (suing), the constitution on clear on criminal charges. I have been in a movie theater when a false alarm of the real system went off, we didn't send the alarm maker to jail...double standard. Two people were injured in that false alarm of the alarm system. It is pretty dubious to just start arbitrarily dissecting speech, even more so when no one was ACTUALLY harmed. We have enough problems and we take time to legislate theoretical ones, great. That is the only reason drugs are still illegal, because of all the theoretical stuff that could happen. Let real crime be punished, and let fake crime fall away as dodging a bullet.

</lunch rant>

He wasn't arrested for animal abuse, he was arrested for "willfully teasing a police K-9" which is an misdemeanor offense in Mason County (see this WSJ law blog). The reason for the law should be obvious--unlike your normal house pet, these dogs are actually trained to bite people and if you get them agitated enough they may attack without command and not respond to an officer's orders to stop biting.

From this web site on the behavioral nature of police dogs:

No matter how well-trained in suspect apprehension a police dog might be, all police dogs can easily make behavioral mistakes, such as attacking at the wrong time, attacking out of context, attacking a suspect when not commanded to do so, and failing to stop an attack after being commanded to do so by the handler. Because of the behavioral nature of aggressive responding in dogs, and despite the extensive training most police service dogs have been subjected to prior to being deployed in the field, they will make behavioral mistakes, thereby causing injury to a victim that was uncalled for or far beyond what was probably needed.

Teasing the dog increases the likelihood of that happening. The drunken dumbass who was barking at the dog was putting people at risk and got arrested for it. I love the 1st amendment but I have absolutely no problem with these charges sticking. First amendment rights don't mean you can say whatever you want to say whenever you want to say it. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater just for lulz and you can't intentionally agitate police dogs into a frothing rage.

I love how Judge Napolitano apparently made a snap judgment himself about the situation without bothering to look at the facts of the case (as reported in the WSJ link above). Upvoted to promote yet more awareness of the stupidity that airs on Fox News.

The system may be flawed, but it will not work at all if people can simply "opt-out" and stay within the borders. Hence the "work with it or leave it" policy. If you want to help change the current system so that it will grow in the direction you prefer, then by all means do so. However, if you are advocating a complete dissolution of the system in favor of anarchy, then I will be the first to stand against you.

You, and others who make similar arguments, keep saying that the power needs to be taken from the police and put in the hands of the people. Are you high? The police *are* the people! I mean, let's break it down for a second. If there was suddenly no police, everyone would be forced by definition to be performing vigilante justice whenever they saw fit. Well, that just causes chaos, because anybody could at any time attack anyone else and claim self defense. A system like that cannot stand, and thus it would be necessary to task neutral parties with judging claims (the courts) and taking evidence and suspects into custody (the police). How the hell else could it be done? You think if there was suddenly no government that everyone would play nice? That's nuts!

If there are flaws with the government, then work to fix them. If there are corrupt police officers, then work to have them brought to justice. Starting over from nothing is completely absurd and would be of no help to anybody, except perhaps those who have the means to form their own police forces (gangs) and start their own little feudal societies based on their own whims.

oh hang on let me preempt and diffuse QM.. he'll like this:

Let me remind you, poopsy, you're the little gremlin who called me out FIRST, so you reap what you sow.

I don't disavow your enthusiasm. The SSD remark was shorthand to suggest that there is no technology or amount of "truth", education, whatever to create a socialist utopia, which will never be real until AI-machines take over, and at which point life won't be worth living anyway.

Transparency is no ultimate solution. It just means we can all look through the bay window of the U.S. Treasury and watch Obamarx and Geithner sneak around wearing black eyemasks as they loot the place. There is already tons of information about this lawless Administration and the incompetence and waste of government at all levels, but without a real media in place to challenge them, it makes little difference. The truth never set anyone free.

Liberty is what allows the toleration of fools, especially the ignorant-of-history, power-hungry fools running the schools, government and Hollywood. The very free market that created all this wealth they want to redistribute, they're not grateful for that, nor for the right to spout off at people too polite to kill them, but as the Big Government noose tightens, these tyrants are going to find out how much Revolution there is in real patriots.

If liberty is in its death throes, moonbats will soon find themselves flopping into mass graves right behind it. The commies always kill the so-called smartest first, teachers and intellectuals and other "big thinkers" are the first to go. Ever read 1984? In some ways, the quarter-aged of this generation are very much like Syme, an over-educated Big Bro Believer who delighted in thinking about the future of Thoughtcrime. His very intelligence made him a target and he got disappeared.

Tubes, you're desperate to have me banned? You don't even see the irony in that: a peace-loving, freedom-liking liberal like yourself demanding voices of opposition be silenced? Is it you're not used to being challenged or having your dogma challenged? I don't fear you or your ideas, I've outgrown them. Don't you know the internets is where everyone doesn't agree with you all the time?

Attacking me on a personal level reveals your immaturity. Either you'll outgrow it or you'll become another Noam Chumpsky, that charming fascist fraud.

--------------------

I'm fed-up with these America-hating pissants. Not their beloved fey, patty ass, NPR, reality-challenged Wimpmerican dream, the REAL America where not everyone has a happy ending and life is risk, and people own and shoot guns, smoke, drink and eat junk food. The Libertarians are right 90% of the time. They're not for anarchy, they're for CHOICE, and they reasonably accept that there are some people who are too stupid to live and no matter what you do FOR them, no matter how many government programs you create, they're just dumb and will kill themselves with bad decisions. Just like they do now in Obamarx' socialist prison.

There are also lots of intelligent people who ruin their lives with ONE bad decision, but that's what FREEDOM is: the freedom to fail and to fuck up. Socialists want a safe, predictable world (that they run). Maybe that works for Europe (dying and turning Muslim) but not for the USA.

The 2008 (P)resident IMO is an affirmative action asshole who sneaks smokes, kisses the asses of tyrants and complains about the price of arugula to his Teleprompter. I'm ashamed of the United States being led by these cowardly pukes. They're not America, they're some marxist kollij professor's wet dream of a sterile, safe America that does nothing, is nothing. There are no pioneers, explorers, daredevils in this bunch. This gang of sniveling bureaucrats would never have the guts to board the Mayflower or drive a covered wagon out West. Fuck 'em.

The libertarian and his cousin the conservative are NOT anarchists. They demand what the Constitution created: a limited government that is answerable to its own laws and to the people, and a federal government with power checked by the power of the States. Perfection doesn't exist.

Enjoy your safe, timid and guaranteed brief time running the show, moonbats. Your America is not the real America.

I'll be waiting for a reboot of the present unsustainable Lie that has replaced liberty. The Russians could only bear 80 years of bullshit. May America put up with only 3 more.

i agree with endall,shamanism is not a new thing.it has been used over the centuries to change our perceptions of reality.humans are limited in their ability to perceive actual reality,we have 5 senses which are our only connection to the physical universe.to say we KNOW conclusively just because our 5 senses tell us so is inaccurate.the brain is the decipherer of these senses,and it is wholly subjective,predicated on our experiences,knowledge and yes...our ego.which is just a construct of who we think we are,not in actuality who we may be.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Perceiving-Reality-A-useful-philosophy
i also agree with tsquire1,but i have to give this guy credit for asking the ultimate questions:who am i really?why am i here?for what purpose do i serve?
are these not questions we all ask?
this video is this mans answer,condensed im guessing,takes courage to throw it out there for people to appreciate,or many times..attack.people tend to get very defensive when you point to their firmly held beliefs and say "i think your subjective reality is incorrect".

SG,

You've misunderstood. Your criteria for disliking something may be rational or irrational. Disliking something doesn't make you irrational.

On Country

You don't like 'modern' country, but you do like country, which means you haven't written off an entire genre of music (I'm not judging, it's just an observation).

I happen to agree with you on country, but there is some decent stuff out there if you look for it. If you don't already know Abigail Washburn, then she is soon to be one of your favorites. Other acts to look for are Old Crow Medicine Show, Wilco and Nickel Creek. None of it but the AW stuff really stack up to Patsy Cline or Johnny Cash, but it's a helluva lot better than the drivel on the radio.

In general, music on commercial radio is horrible.

Jazz and Hip-Hop

Jazz and Hip-hop are actually more similar than you think.

-They both use the same types of rhythmic syncopations. This point is made clearly by an excellent mashup of an Eminem song and an old piano rag. The track is called 'Snookered' by a DJ named Freelance Hairdresser. You can follow these syncopations from ragtime to Dixie Jazz, to Swing, Rock, Bop, Soul, Funk, and eventually Hip-Hop.

-The co-opting of popular tunes is also shared between the two genres. Rappers are much maligned for their use of samples and get little credit for the creative ways in which they reconstruct the source material. Jazzer's would also co-opt the popular standards of the day, tweaking the harmonies/ melodies and adding their own improvisational ideas.

-Both types of music place a large emphasis on improvisation. In Hip-Hop it's called freestyle.

-Like Hip-Hop, Jazz was an outlet for a culture largely shut out of the mainstream. Both styles of music were marginalized, maligned and generally considered lewd, crude and disgusting.

-Jazz was eventually co-opted and accepted by whites, which is happening as we speak in the hip hop world. This isn't a bad thing, as white folks had/have some nice things to add.

Finally, I must say that your characterization of Hip-hop as negative is as bad a generalization as saying all Christians are as lame as Pat Robertson. There is plenty of positive Hip-Hop out there. I'd suggest MeShell Ndegeocello, Eryka Badhu, Outkast and M.I.A. for starters.

The media spends much time attacking Hip-Hip, and buying into media distortions don't make you a racist.

The racism I speak of is subtle and internalized. If you were to recognize this racism in yourself, it would evaporate instantly upon recognition. I'm not trying to brand anyone with a scarlet R, this is just a plea for folks to be introspective and constantly in a state of self improvement.

We are all a product of our time, and although things are getting better, we have a long way to go before we are free from racism/sexism/classism/homophobia to name a few isms (and one phobia). If it exists in culture, it exists in you too.

Finally, I know I pissed many people off with this thread. It was intended to be light-hearted. I have arrived at these ideas after doing quite a bit of thinking, and didn't bother to fill in the space between A and B. In other words, I blurted out some unconventional, controversial ideas without telling you how I got to them.

Some of got it right away, but apparently others thought I was calling them Klansmen, and apparently others still ACTUALLY ARE KLANMEN (just kidding you know who.)

It probably would have been better to present these ideas as things I've discovered about myself, without forcing anyone to have to take a critical look inside their own soul. Forcing introspection is not polite.

Still, I think this discussion will be rattling around in sifty heads for some time, and at the very least, we've breached that most taboo of American taboos, racism. Maybe we should move on to classism..........

SG,

Oh, and it's so funny to call someone irrational if they dislike something that's somehow tied to a particular culture

You've misunderstood. Your criteria for disliking something may be rational or irrational. Disliking something doesn't make you irrational.

On Country

You don't like 'modern' country, but you do like country, which means you haven't written off an entire genre of music (I'm not judging, it's just an observation).

I happen to agree with you on country, but there is some decent stuff out there if you look for it. If you don't already know Abigail Washburn, then she is soon to be one of your favorites. Other acts to look for are Old Crow Medicine Show, Wilco and Nickel Creek. None of it but the AW stuff really stack up to Patsy Cline or Johnny Cash, but it's a helluva lot better than the drivel on the radio.

In general, music on commercial radio is horrible.

Jazz and Hip-Hop

Jazz and Hip-hop are actually more similar than you think.

-They both use the same types of rhythmic syncopations. This point is made clearly by an excellent mashup of an Eminem song and an old piano rag. The track is called 'Snookered' by a DJ named Freelance Hairdresser. You can follow these syncopations from ragtime to Dixie Jazz, to Swing, Rock, Bop, Soul, Funk, and eventually Hip-Hop.

-The co-opting of popular tunes is also shared between the two genres. Rappers are much maligned for their use of samples and get little credit for the creative ways in which they reconstruct the source material. Jazzer's would also co-opt the popular standards of the day, tweaking the harmonies/ melodies and adding their own improvisational ideas.

-Both types of music place a large emphasis on improvisation. In Hip-Hop it's called freestyle.

-Like Hip-Hop, Jazz was an outlet for a culture largely shut out of the mainstream. Both styles of music were marginalized, maligned and generally considered lewd, crude and disgusting.

-Jazz was eventually co-opted and accepted by whites, which is happening as we speak in the hip hop world. This isn't a bad thing, as white folks had/have some nice things to add.

Finally, I must say that your characterization of Hip-hop as negative is as bad a generalization as saying all Christians are as lame as Pat Robertson. There is plenty of positive Hip-Hop out there. I'd suggest MeShell Ndegeocello, Eryka Badhu, Outkast and M.I.A. for starters.

The media spends much time attacking Hip-Hip, and buying into media distortions don't make you a racist.

The racism I speak of is subtle and internalized. If you were to recognize this racism in yourself, it would evaporate instantly upon recognition. I'm not trying to brand anyone with a scarlet R, this is just a plea for folks to be introspective and constantly in a state of self improvement.

We are all a product of our time, and although things are getting better, we have a long way to go before we are free from racism/sexism/classism/homophobia to name a few isms (and one phobia). If it exists in culture, it exists in you too.

Finally, I know I pissed many people off with this thread. It was intended to be light-hearted. I have arrived at these ideas after doing quite a bit of thinking, and didn't bother to fill in the space between A and B. In other words, I blurted out some unconventional, controversial ideas without telling you how I got to them.

Some of got it right away, but apparently others thought I was calling them Klansmen, and apparently others still ACTUALLY ARE KLANMEN (just kidding you know who.)

It probably would have been better to present these ideas as things I've discovered about myself, without forcing anyone to have to take a critical look inside their own soul. Forcing introspection is not polite.

Still, I think this discussion will be rattling around in sifty heads for some time, and at the very least, we've breached that most taboo of American taboos, racism. Maybe we should move on to classism..........