Had to laugh at the "Preorder Daft Punks New Album" banner ad at the bottom. Google knows funny.

"Rattle myself daft into it" - that's a masturbation euphemism I've not heard!

Well as the guy says, each to his own. You could say the same about american football, the constant breaks, the changing teams, the fact its called football when they mostly use hands and dont use a ball... I have no doubt gaelic football would cause the same apathy in some individuals. However to say this video is representative of the game is just, well, daft. Firmly tongue in cheek.

To be fair I think skinnydaddy1 is referring to the way she asks the dog to come to her for a treat and then doesn't give the treat to the dog. I think he's overreacting, calling her a mean bitch is probably a bit much. But it's a pretty daft thing to do if you want the dog to keep trusting you and working for treats.

Tron: Legacy has a beautiful soundtrack. Daft Punk are great.

>> ^TheSluiceGate:

If you want a quick hit of visual awesome go to 57 minutes and watch it for a bit.
However can a film made by 2 of the most successful dance musicians of all time be considered obscure?


I had never heard of it or the fact that they also make movies...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'dance, robot, female, soluchidancer, daft pubk' to 'dance, robot, female, soluchidancer, daft punk' - edited by hpqp

I don't know what to say except again that it's pretty obvious you don't know the first thing about eating disorders.
How exactly does the American obesity problem equals the "normalization" of it? That's like saying the normalization of Ebola is a problem in Africa.

I'll give you this much, your idea of dealing with a problem is definitely an effective one.
Making a person super self-conscious about their physical appearance is a very effective way of having them change it. The problem here is that you to understand that effective doesn't necessarily equal good/positive.
Your idea of the proper way to deal with these issues is a scary one, more so for the fact you don't even realize what the implications of it are.


>> ^scannex:

>> ^NinjaInHeat:
Take a second to think about how TV "role models" usually look (or people "in the public eye" as scannex puts it).
What planet have you been living on where the "normalization of obesity" has become a problem?

>> ^scannex:
The normalization of obesity is a problem.



Oh, I don't know... how about this planet? Where the USA is the fattest developed country in the world?
Your text to link...
So yes... "F cking seriously".
You must be daft if you cannot discern between healthy weight, a supermodel and someone who is obese. Being underweight is dangerous as well, and you drawing the conclusion as to that is what we are after is silly.
This was a private letter SHE made public. You say that the opinion is that she is too fat to be on TV. Not the case, and not the suggestion of the letter. This PRIVATE letter was a plea to this woman's sensibilities in fashion less sugarcoated than she is used to.

>> ^NinjaInHeat:

Take a second to think about how TV "role models" usually look (or people "in the public eye" as scannex puts it).
What planet have you been living on where the "normalization of obesity" has become a problem?


>> ^scannex:
The normalization of obesity is a problem.




Oh, I don't know... how about this planet? Where the USA is the fattest developed country in the world?
Your text to link...

So yes... "F**cking seriously".
You must be daft if you cannot discern between healthy weight, a supermodel and someone who is obese. Being underweight is dangerous as well, and you drawing the conclusion as to that is what we are after is silly.
This was a private letter SHE made public. You say that the opinion is that she is too fat to be on TV. Not the case, and not the suggestion of the letter. This PRIVATE letter was a plea to this woman's sensibilities in fashion less sugarcoated than she is used to.

When ever life gets you down Mr's brown, and life seems hard or tough, and people are stupid, obnoxious or daft, and you feel that you've had quite eno-ho-ho-hough...

>> ^nach0s:

The end part (conversation with an old woman) played during/after the credits on S2/E5 of his show Louie. It was awesome--she played an absent-minded relative who he took his daughters to visit. She kept casually saying really racist things and was generally daft and awkward. It was great to see the actress's real personality in the credits. Props to Louie for including it.


She was the most interesting old lady I really liked that Louie included that because I could've listened to her all day. Sometimes the best part of a Louie episode to me is watching that last bit after I've watched the episode, Louie is really doing everything right with his show, and I'm so grateful we have it and will continue to have it.

The end part (conversation with an old woman) played during/after the credits on S2/E5 of his show Louie. It was awesome--she played an absent-minded relative who he took his daughters to visit. She kept casually saying really racist things and was generally daft and awkward. It was great to see the actress's real personality in the credits. Props to Louie for including it.

@rbar First you state that free markets don't work, then you say most systems are not true free markets. So, how did you realize they don't work if apparently we don't have them anywhere?

My guess is that you rushed to conclude they don't work when, usually, more prosperity is experienced where there is most economic freedom?

Assuming workplace mobility is sluggish as you claim, ever considered that maybe it's not something inherent? Maybe it's policy that makes it sluggish. Worker's rights are designed to help the employed, but what most don't see is that they do so at the unseen expense of the unemployed, those looking for jobs, and the employers. Ever considered that maybe that's what's getting in the way of hiring and firing people more easily (i.e., more mobility)?

A free market wouldn't have worker rights guaranteed by government. The terms of job contracts would be freely negotiated between employers and employees/unions.

Unions are, more often than not, involved with government, how do you think worker's rights came to be? That's the threat they represent to economic freedom, the same way a cartel would be a threat if it corrupted authorities to obtain undeserved privileges at the unseen expense of competing businesses and consumers.

There is nothing daft about defending economic freedom, just as there was nothing daft about defending freedom of expression back when no country in the world would allow it. Today we all know and enjoy freedom of expression thanks to our open-minded ancestors who cared enough to fight for it.

Defending free market policies today is a little daft. It is quite clear that leaving equality or mutual interest to the free market doesnt work in the majority of cases. To put it simply, in theory it all sounds great, but in reality most systems are not true free markets. For instance, there usually is little to no competition keeping the wages at "almost the same level as the value of the production". This is due to sluggishness of workplace mobility. People dont want to change jobs and do so rarely. There are plenty of reasons for that such as economic downturn (less jobs), lack of knowledge or courage to change, geographical limitations and in general the hassle of finding a new job which in all cases is a major hurdle. Also, companies set wages at similar levels as other companies, preferably below them, not above. They can do this exactly due to the sluggishness of mobility. This means that wage increases grow much slower than production value, and will over time stay more and more behind.

Last but not least, wages and worker rights are usually fought over not by government but by unions, which are specifically not government-based. Naming the weakness of politics doesnt change that having no protection is also not good.

As always it is best to walk the middle road here. Free market economics has its moments to be sure but it needs to be tempered by intelligent social rules. If you take a look at the "best" countries in the world to live in, various studies show that for instance the Nordics are extremely loved, and they all have free market economies tempered by social policies.

You are absolutely right, NDT. Of course the original Enterprise is the greatest starship of all time. You'd have to be daft not to know that. Now sit down and shut up, attention whore!