What a difference a day makes.

When times are tough never give up. You never know what tomorrow brings.

LYRICS:

Only rapper to be called a thief without stealing
Download an MP3 for free, these people hit the ceiling
I'm just a citizen that's teaching you a lesson
for restricting my freedom of expression
How can ideas be possessions when they're freely replicable?
Hence unapplicable property laws are reprehensible
Didn't Jefferson express his opinion on the matter
when he said inventions shouldn't be given a patent
What happened to that thinking, we're stuck in a pattern
where the people with everything are keeping everything from us who haven't
We want it back, look, fed up of adverts, left and right
begging me to buy til there's nothing left of mine
to spend, never mind, who's next in line to testify
that we need laws like these to protect our rights?
Medicine has never been something I'd ever deprive
especially when a life depends on it to survive
Yeah, it takes an incredible effort to develop them right
but putting wealth over health, I said it's never been right

I'm just a citizen that's teaching you a lesson
for restricting my freedom of expression, and I reckon
if old blues themes hadn't been used by Led Zeppelin
we wouldn't ever have any heavy metal then
the history of music would have never even happened
and amusingly there wouldn't even be a Metallica
to tell us that we should hang on the gallows of law
so we wouldn't even need to have a Gallo Report
Oh and by the way the fricking Gallo's support
is made of signatures which have been apparently forged
This shit is sinister, and cannot be allowed to enforce
so tell your ministers and MEPs of how it's been brought about
Although you'll probably get a shallow retort
because the lobbyists have got a grip around all their balls
If I was boss, I'd tell them get the Hell out the door
because I've had enough of corrupt crooks ramming through laws

I'm just a citizen that's teaching you a lesson
for restricting my freedom of expression
Yes, and deep packet inspection? squeeze that up your rectum
If your postman did that to you you'd be having him sectioned
arrested for meddling in your private affairs
But it's only online, right? so why should we care?
Because digital rights should be applicable right
here in real life, and we're not criminals, right?
So this is just why we'll never give up the fight
to be considered innocent until we kick up and die
Giving internet providers responsibility
for the whims of their subscribers infringes privacy
Before the internet, media was a rarity
but how do you expect it to keep its value without scarcity
And that's what scares me, seeing their cons and schemes
to stop their creaking business model being obsolete
What a robbery they pull off so obviously
Don't give a fuck who it affects as long as it's not me
Well I'll keep making copies, see if they can stop me
They'll have to confiscate my PC and take it off me
See there's no problem with taking my property
for creating some lines of binary, blatant hypocrisy
Afraid to face the controversy relating to what we need
Making a profit off it or breaking monopolies

Ha, we posted the same response to Sagemind, only one minute apart:

http://videosift.com/video/Girls-Suck-at-Video-Games?loadcomm=1#comment-1023225

Welcome to the uphill battle.

In reply to this comment by Tagichatn:
>> ^Sagemind:

I can't agree with this.
Either you are a career person or you are a stay at home parent.
A dedication to the job at hand lets you succeed. No one can be expected to do both and be expected to excel at the same rate as the person who just chooses one. (male or female).
In Canada, yes, Men can get paternity, though most women would never give up their maternity to let them. (Only one parent can claim.) My wife took the maternity rights.
Yes, I was a stay at home dad (for a time) - and it was socially accepted - in fact I was commended!
NO! Woman are not expected to do the most - where do you get that from???
If the spouse isn't pulling their weight, it's a communication/relationship issue - talk to the spouse, don't blame "society" for something you let happen. (male or female)
Most of the (domestic)work falls to who ever is home with the kids, that's the way it is. Someone has to be there at some point. And when the other spouse gets home, they chip in, in equal portions. If they don't, then that says more about the relationship than society. By the way, while one spouse is at home working for the home, the other is out working to pay for it - It's not like they are away from the home avoiding responsibility).
This whole dad goes to work and brings home the bacon while mom stays home with the kids just DOESN'T exist in the real world for the average family. If you believe that, you're kidding yourself. No one can exist on a single income any more. If they can, then it's a privilege for the spouse who gets to spend the time at home with the kids and should thank the other spouse every day for their good fortune. (male or female) !!!
>> ^Tagichatn:
Men have children too, so why do women get picked on? Apparently it's "false logic" according to westy that women can have a full family and a full professional career but it's pretty easy for men. That's because even today, in 2010, women are generally expected to do most, if not all, of the care for the children. Men don't get paternity leave, being a stay at home dad isn't really socially accepted so it falls to the mother to do most of the work. It's not the 50's anymore so women at least have the option of maintaining a career but there's still that belief that the mom does the housework while the dad brings home the money.



It's great that in your relationship things were shared and done equally but how many times do I have to say this? Anecdotes don't matter! My mom was a stay at home mom so therefore 1950's housewives are clearly widespread! Anyway, that's not even my argument. I readily admit that 2 income households have come to dominate but my point is that the 1950's style of thinking still dominates. Even in 2 income households where both parents work and should therefore split the load of housework and childcare, women still are expected
to do the majority of the housework.

You said you've never seen women working for less. I can't speak for Canada but this is from the US Census: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/censusandstatistics/a/paygapgrows.htm
From a related study based on the census, "Even accounting for factors such as occupation, industry, race, marital status and job tenure, reports the GAO, working women today earn an average of 80 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts."

Too bad not every women works with you, otherwise they would totally be equal and it wouldn't be a problem!

2 income homes are not equal either. Women do more work and men have more leisure time on average. Here's a survey done by the New York times: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/15labor.html

You can post about your personal experiences all day but your experiences are not everyone elses. This is a societal problem, anecdotes don't tell the full story.

>> ^Sagemind:

I can't agree with this.
Either you are a career person or you are a stay at home parent.
A dedication to the job at hand lets you succeed. No one can be expected to do both and be expected to excel at the same rate as the person who just chooses one. (male or female).
In Canada, yes, Men can get paternity, though most women would never give up their maternity to let them. (Only one parent can claim.) My wife took the maternity rights.
Yes, I was a stay at home dad (for a time) - and it was socially accepted - in fact I was commended!
NO! Woman are not expected to do the most - where do you get that from???
If the spouse isn't pulling their weight, it's a communication/relationship issue - talk to the spouse, don't blame "society" for something you let happen. (male or female)
Most of the (domestic)work falls to who ever is home with the kids, that's the way it is. Someone has to be there at some point. And when the other spouse gets home, they chip in, in equal portions. If they don't, then that says more about the relationship than society. By the way, while one spouse is at home working for the home, the other is out working to pay for it - It's not like they are away from the home avoiding responsibility).
This whole dad goes to work and brings home the bacon while mom stays home with the kids just DOESN'T exist in the real world for the average family. If you believe that, you're kidding yourself. No one can exist on a single income any more. If they can, then it's a privilege for the spouse who gets to spend the time at home with the kids and should thank the other spouse every day for their good fortune. (male or female) !!!
>> ^Tagichatn:
Men have children too, so why do women get picked on? Apparently it's "false logic" according to westy that women can have a full family and a full professional career but it's pretty easy for men. That's because even today, in 2010, women are generally expected to do most, if not all, of the care for the children. Men don't get paternity leave, being a stay at home dad isn't really socially accepted so it falls to the mother to do most of the work. It's not the 50's anymore so women at least have the option of maintaining a career but there's still that belief that the mom does the housework while the dad brings home the money.



It's great that in your relationship things were shared and done equally but how many times do I have to say this? Anecdotes don't matter! My mom was a stay at home mom so therefore 1950's housewives are clearly widespread! Anyway, that's not even my argument. I readily admit that 2 income households have come to dominate but my point is that the 1950's style of thinking still dominates. Even in 2 income households where both parents work and should therefore split the load of housework and childcare, women still are expected
to do the majority of the housework.

You said you've never seen women working for less. I can't speak for Canada but this is from the US Census: http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/censusandstatistics/a/paygapgrows.htm
From a related study based on the census, "Even accounting for factors such as occupation, industry, race, marital status and job tenure, reports the GAO, working women today earn an average of 80 cents for every dollar earned by their male counterparts."

Too bad not every women works with you, otherwise they would totally be equal and it wouldn't be a problem!

2 income homes are not equal either. Women do more work and men have more leisure time on average. Here's a survey done by the New York times: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/15labor.html

You can post about your personal experiences all day but your experiences are not everyone elses. This is a societal problem, anecdotes don't tell the full story.

I can't agree with this.
Either you are a career person or you are a stay at home parent.
A dedication to the job at hand lets you succeed. No one can be expected to do both and be expected to excel at the same rate as the person who just chooses one. (male or female).

In Canada, yes, Men can get paternity, though most women would never give up their maternity to let them. (Only one parent can claim.) My wife took the maternity rights.

Yes, I was a stay at home dad (for a time) - and it was socially accepted - in fact I was commended!

NO! Woman are not expected to do the most - where do you get that from???
If the spouse isn't pulling their weight, it's a communication/relationship issue - talk to the spouse, don't blame "society" for something you let happen. (male or female)

Most of the (domestic)work falls to who ever is home with the kids, that's the way it is. Someone has to be there at some point. And when the other spouse gets home, they chip in, in equal portions. If they don't, then that says more about the relationship than society. By the way, while one spouse is at home working for the home, the other is out working to pay for it - It's not like they are away from the home avoiding responsibility).

This whole dad goes to work and brings home the bacon while mom stays home with the kids just DOESN'T exist in the real world for the average family. If you believe that, you're kidding yourself. No one can exist on a single income any more. If they can, then it's a privilege for the spouse who gets to spend the time at home with the kids and should thank the other spouse every day for their good fortune. (male or female) !!!

>> ^Tagichatn:

Men have children too, so why do women get picked on? Apparently it's "false logic" according to westy that women can have a full family and a full professional career but it's pretty easy for men. That's because even today, in 2010, women are generally expected to do most, if not all, of the care for the children. Men don't get paternity leave, being a stay at home dad isn't really socially accepted so it falls to the mother to do most of the work. It's not the 50's anymore so women at least have the option of maintaining a career but there's still that belief that the mom does the housework while the dad brings home the money.

>> ^gwiz665:

shakes fist
Ounce makes no sense
Pounds make no sense
Miles make no sense
AM/PM is stupid
Fahrenheit makes no sense - 32F is the freezing point, wtf?
It is colloquially adopted everywhere EXCEPT certain third world countries and the US... goddamit, get with the program!


The value of a social safety net is also casually accepted everywhere except certain third world countries and the US.

We're different, and we're arrogant, and we're attached to old and outdated notions, even though we're arguably the youngest 1st world nation.

I agree, none of those measurements make sense, but they're familiar, and we're pig-headed enough as a society that we'll probably never give up on them entirely.

At best, we'll probably keep the words, and just make them equivalent to metrics (e.g. 1 mile = 1km, 1 gallon = 1 liter, etc.).

Blanks, I have to hand it to you, you never give up the fight. And with all the Statist weenies out there, (y)our work shall never be done.

So a fighter can fall down a few times, and it's ok, but if his head wobbles a bit on his neck, then he's done? I just don't get boxing.

However, I can really appreciate the "never give up" attitude this video portrays. Thanks for the sift.

>> ^MycroftHomlz:

Any time a fighter shows his neck like that the referee has to stop the fight.

>> ^spoco2:
Funny that this should come out of the country who leads the world in ridiculous
a) protecting children from all and any harm they could ever, possibly do to themselves (don't let them play with ANYTHING that could in ANY conceivable way hurt them)
&
b) sue the shit out of anyone you possibly can if anything goes wrong, shift blame, refuse to accept that you had any fault in your mistakes.
Let your children experience things, let them make mistakes, let them learn to cope and grow from said mistakes, do NOT teach them to blame all and sundry if something doesn't go right. If something bad happens, learn from it and move on, don't try and make a profit from it.
F ck people's attitudes are depressingly self centered these days


Funny that your response to a harmless inspirational video was to get angry.

>> ^nibiyabi:
I really needed to see this video. . . . Thank you.


Creepy. I was about to post this again. @_@

This video has been declared a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by demon_ix.

^ Pwnd. Let's see if Siftbot lets me dupeof when I'm the duper...

*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/Famous-Failures-and-why-you-should-never-give-up

>> ^demon_ix:
^ Can you find others? I searched quite a bit before posting, and couldn't find any...


http://www.videosift.com/video/Famous-Failures-and-why-you-should-never-give-up

Sorry dude.

Excellently informative post. Thank you.

Sometimes we're vulnerable to accepting one side of a debate unquestioningly without hearing the other side, which is how many people seem to be approaching Reza Aslan's argument.

In reply to this comment by burdturgler:
Was good until around 4:20 but after that Reza is full of shit on many counts.

- It is complete speculation on his part that there is no nuclear weapon ambition or program in Iran. He mentions the IAEA in 2003 but in 2003 the IAEA said the following:

"it is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with respect to the reporting of nuclear material and its processing and use, as well as the declaration of facilities where such material has been processed and stored." (PDF)

Meaning the nuclear material could be stored anywhere and processed for anything. They don't know.

- Saying that the U.S. has taken all military options off the table regarding Iran is complete bullshit. Never happened.

- The C.I.A. has never said that Iran is "many many many years away" from having a nuclear weapon. Regardless, how did the CIA discover that India had nukes? Anyone? They caught them when they were just a year away right? No, the CIA and the rest of Earth found out because India detonated one. Making the argument that Iran isn't pursuing nukes based on the fact that they say so is foolish.

-Israel has nukes. They have had them for decades. To say they are threatening Iran with them is ridiculous. Israel has made no demands from Iran other than to recognize that it is a sovereign nation. The weapons are a deterrent against Iran and the other nations in the region which have said in no uncertain terms that Israel, as a nation state, should not exist.

- Just because some person ("Benny Morris" who is a hero of the Palestinians) wrote an article for the NY Times, does not make it the policy that Israel will launch a nuclear first strike against Iran. That person does not speak for the government of Israel. He doesn't determine the foreign policy of any nation. He does not control or affect in any way Israel's nuclear launch capability. In other words, it's bullshit.

-It has never been the policy of Israel to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike upon anyone unless they were themselves threatened by nukes. That is U.S. policy also. That doesn't mean you can't have a scenario where you strike first. Some people just refuse to understand this. They can not have an enemy on their doorstep that has vowed their destruction to obtain the weapons and strategy needed to carry that threat out. It's just that simple. We didn't allow the missiles in Cuba for the very same reason. Iran needs to dial back it's rhetoric and hate speech and get more in line with the international cooperation and dialog that it's people wants. The type of dialog we all need. Open handed Vs. clenched fist. But that isn't happening and now we see that elections there to make it happen have no meaning.

The hard line psychos in charge of Iran, not the people in general, view Israel as an abomination. They "should be wiped off the face of the map". I've seen this translated as "vanish from time" and several other iterations but however you want to play out the semantics of the translation of that quote from Ahmadinejad the end result is the same. He is echoing and fomenting the sentiment of his supporters .. Israel as a state should not exist. These are the same people who say the Holocaust never happened. Now I've seen some bad comments here, including someone wishing all Christians would die, but I hope most rational people can see this isn't just a religious point of view, it's a wish for genocide. They teach their children that Israeli's are less than human. They are pigs and it is good to slaughter them.

With that ugliness behind me, I will say, it is fun to watch Chris when he has a guest who isn't intimidated, but I don't see where he was "schooled" here. Reza is being naive at best. Iran knows what it's doing. It can't let itself be perceived as the weaker nation. Acquiescing to mandates and sanctions. They want to be a super power. They want to be at the table like India and Pakistan. They know they are close and have decades of work behind them (not in front of them) and will never give up until they have the same strength that is possessed by their perceived aggressors.

There won't be any dialog to stem the tide of a nuclear Iran with the current regime in power.

Does anyone honestly think a nuclear armed Iran is a viable option for world stability and peace?

Was good until around 4:20 but after that Reza is full of shit on many counts.

- It is complete speculation on his part that there is no nuclear weapon ambition or program in Iran. He mentions the IAEA in 2003 but in 2003 the IAEA said the following:

"it is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with respect to the reporting of nuclear material and its processing and use, as well as the declaration of facilities where such material has been processed and stored." (PDF)

Meaning the nuclear material could be stored anywhere and processed for anything. They don't know.

- Saying that the U.S. has taken all military options off the table regarding Iran is complete bullshit. Never happened.

- The C.I.A. has never said that Iran is "many many many years away" from having a nuclear weapon. Regardless, how did the CIA discover that India had nukes? Anyone? They caught them when they were just a year away right? No, the CIA and the rest of Earth found out because India detonated one. Making the argument that Iran isn't pursuing nukes based on the fact that they say so is foolish.

-Israel has nukes. They have had them for decades. To say they are threatening Iran with them is ridiculous. Israel has made no demands from Iran other than to recognize that it is a sovereign nation. The weapons are a deterrent against Iran and the other nations in the region which have said in no uncertain terms that Israel, as a nation state, should not exist.

- Just because some person ("Benny Morris" who is a hero of the Palestinians) wrote an article for the NY Times, does not make it the policy that Israel will launch a nuclear first strike against Iran. That person does not speak for the government of Israel. He doesn't determine the foreign policy of any nation. He does not control or affect in any way Israel's nuclear launch capability. In other words, it's bullshit.

-It has never been the policy of Israel to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike upon anyone unless they were themselves threatened by nukes. That is U.S. policy also. That doesn't mean you can't have a scenario where you strike first. Some people just refuse to understand this. They can not have an enemy on their doorstep that has vowed their destruction to obtain the weapons and strategy needed to carry that threat out. It's just that simple. We didn't allow the missiles in Cuba for the very same reason. Iran needs to dial back it's rhetoric and hate speech and get more in line with the international cooperation and dialog that it's people wants. The type of dialog we all need. Open handed Vs. clenched fist. But that isn't happening and now we see that elections there to make it happen have no meaning.

The hard line psychos in charge of Iran, not the people in general, view Israel as an abomination. They "should be wiped off the face of the map". I've seen this translated as "vanish from time" and several other iterations but however you want to play out the semantics of the translation of that quote from Ahmadinejad the end result is the same. He is echoing and fomenting the sentiment of his supporters .. Israel as a state should not exist. These are the same people who say the Holocaust never happened. Now I've seen some bad comments here, including someone wishing all Christians would die, but I hope most rational people can see this isn't just a religious point of view, it's a wish for genocide. They teach their children that Israeli's are less than human. They are pigs and it is good to slaughter them.

With that ugliness behind me, I will say, it is fun to watch Chris when he has a guest who isn't intimidated, but I don't see where he was "schooled" here. Reza is being naive at best. Iran knows what it's doing. It can't let itself be perceived as the weaker nation. Acquiescing to mandates and sanctions. They want to be a super power. They want to be at the table like India and Pakistan. They know they are close and have decades of work behind them (not in front of them) and will never give up until they have the same strength that is possessed by their perceived aggressors.

There won't be any dialog to stem the tide of a nuclear Iran with the current regime in power.

Does anyone honestly think a nuclear armed Iran is a viable option for world stability and peace?