search results matching tag: blend

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (273)     Sift Talk (14)     Blogs (11)     Comments (572)   

Neural Networks for Character Control

artician says...

Really impressive, but despite the description I'm not sure how this differs from the current, modern approach, beyond using more processing power for the environment assessment and realtime decision-making, weighting and blending. It just seems like a more thorough and complete AI-supported locomotion system.

Racist is what you do, not what you say.

Mordhaus says...

I just want to point out that I posted this video because it reminded me of another classic show from many years ago, All in the Family.

As to my personal opinion, we need to get past words, guys and gals. I am a white male of Italian descent. In my life I have been called a lot of names, by people of all ethnic backgrounds. I have been called a wop, a dago, a greasy (wop/dago), a cracker, whitey, and many other things. As a kid, it definitely hurt sometimes, but I came to understand that it could only hurt me if "I" let the names define me as a person. The N word, the C word, whatever word, only can hurt you if you allow it to do so.

Now treating someone different, directly based on their ethnicity, that is something that needs to be addressed. It will ALWAYS need to be addressed because human nature is to shun differences. In the US, we have problems with racism and sexism, but out of all the countries I can think of, we are blended enough that it is actually (slowly) starting to work out. We definitely aren't the worst, even countries in Europe that pride themselves on being accepting of diversity are flipping their shit right now with the influx of so many strange people (refugees). Countries like Japan and states like Hawaii, that is where you need to visit if you want to see some hardcore cultural racism.

I grew up in the Westboro Baptist Church.

newtboy says...

As I've said, it's contradictory.

Jesus's death was hardly the end....there have been innumerable accomplishments since then, so in my mind it can only mean the final apocalypse.

I agree, the entire old testament seems at odds with Jesus's teachings....unless you interpret murder of infidels as somehow loving them to death. That's why his statements about the laws still being in full effect don't jibe with his teachings of love and acceptance, and no where does he, or God, or any prophet say his death erases God's laws that I find, that's pure conjecture and impious wishful thinking on the part of all those self labeled Christians, no?

If you were correct about that interpretation, ALL the old testament is moot and none of the laws/rules are still in effect, no? But no Christian worships that way that I know of....certainly not the WBC types. It's kind of all or nothing, and it's simply not practiced that way. If God hates fags, he also hates oyster eaters and poly blend wearers just the same, no?

bcglorf said:

That hardly seems the most straight forward reading though as it seems at odds with later advocating love your enemy and all, no?

One of the things that both protestants and catholics have almost always agreed upon was that the line about "will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished" is that everything WAS accomplished, at the latest, with Jesus death. That's the wiki that came up first quickly summarized:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Covenant

I'll not object to vehemently disagreeing with the interpretation, but can you at least acknowledge that centuries of 'christians' under a multitude of different sects have held pretty consistently on the notion that the old testament kill all unbelievers was CONTRARY to Jesus teachings and direction for his would be followers. That doesn't negate plenty of people right up until today(westboro) who still do want to take your more bloody interpretation instead.

Law Student Sent To Ex-Gay Therapy, Puts Counselor to Shame.

newtboy says...

Is not the "immorality" of homosexuality derived from Leviticus, in the Old Testament? (and as I read it, it only speaks about bi-sexuality, laying with a man as you lay with a woman is not the same thing as homosexuality, homosexuality is a man laying with a man as a different, straight man lays with a woman)

If, as research suggests, that's the case, are not those who advocate against homosexuality non-Christians? Didn't Jesus teach that love and acceptance for others supplants all the Old Testament rules?
If not, why do Christians not picket Red Lobster for serving shellfish and Banana Republic for selling blended fabrics, and hold re-education seminars for shrimp and spandex lovers?

How to Cut a Pizza Into 10 Slices

How to Cut a Pizza Into 10 Slices

Bill Burr Doesn’t Have Sympathy For Hillary Clinton

newtboy says...

No. Compromise implies give and take, not a one sided one way capitulation. I think 'both side's (as if there are only two factions) need to work together for common goals, not try to force their agenda down the other's throat. Trump voters need to change, especially the far right ones, same for Clinton voters on the far left. Neither extreme is good for the nation, but centrists are a dying breed. Sanders did reach out and had Republican support.....the DNC fucked us all by fucking him.
I understand the idea that Trump is the lesser evil, if you don't believe anything bad about him and believe he's successful, like most of his supporters. I contend the only evidence they have for that is his worthless word, because he wrote a book about how to get ahead by lying and screwing people over....but they didn't read it.

The pc crowd has damaged the left as much as the Nazis have the right. They both suck, but moderate dems at least fight the pc thugs, not so much on the right.

They aren't islamaphobes for discussing that question, they are islamaphobes for saying only Islam makes violent extremists.
Transphobes for pronoun use...just dumb to me.
Homophobes for obeying a priest that said to hate them, or attack them, or deny their humanity....absolutely....especially since they must cherry pick what's ok and what's not to justify their hatred but excuse similar sins they commit (shellfish, blended fabrics, both just like homosexuality, all three from the old testament, so not for Christians anyway).

The war on Xmas is bullshit. I've never once seen a real person upset in the least over merry Xmas....unless it's displayed on public property, that's unacceptable for any religion.

I really think the outrage over pc thugs is a red herring. If you don't live on a liberal campus, you'll probably never meet one. I live in liberal hippy paradise and I haven't. What they want is nuts, but who cares, Nazis want a Nazi state, which is nuts and anti American, who cares, it won't happen.
Maybe I'm wrong and pc has taken over, but I don't see it outside of South Park.

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

You said:Stop.

Glad we might be getting somewhere .

I agree on not forgiving the blatantly racist factions. I've said the same thing of ISIS, jihadists and their ilk. They and guys like Richard Spencer remain the mortal enemies of civilization. We never accept them or their ideas, if they want peace or cooperation, they are the ones that need to change.

I do still fear that for all practical purposes your position, and seemingly that of the democrats and protesters out in force, is little different from writing off everyone that voted Trump. If the expectation is that Trump voters need to be the ones that swallow all the change or make all the compromises then the difference doesn't matter. If you want to get people to vote your ticket or candidate, you've got to be the ones reaching out. Demanding the prospective voters come apologetically to your party isn't drawing them in, it's driving them away.

Neil Mcdonald from CBC I think summed up where a lot of Trump voters came to the conclusion that Hillary was no lesser evil:
You can bet they're listening closely every year at Halloween, when progressives reliably denounce as racist anyone allowing their children to dress up as a member of any other culture. Like, say, sending a little girl out dressed as Mulan.

Or when they're denounced as Islamophobes for even discussing the question of why so many people who commit mass murder of innocents do it in the name of Allah. Or as transphobes for using the pronouns "he" or "she" without explicit permission. Or as homophobes for obeying their priest or imam. Or as some sort of uninclusive-o-phobe for uttering the phrase "Merry Christmas."

There are millions of people out there who aren't terribly interested in a lecture about the difference between "cisnormative" and "heteronormative," and how both words supposedly describe something shameful.

Mark Steyn - Radical Islam and "the Basket of Deplorables"

newtboy says...

The right of today is absolutely radicalized. The last 8 years proved it.

The debate may not be settled, but the science and facts are....there are just many who refuse to accept it, but they have neither science or fact on their side.

Eating shrimp is a sin. Wearing a cotton poly blend is a sin. No where in the bible is there a chart saying one sin is worse than another.
EDIT: It actually says- "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.", which read closely means being bisexual is the abomination, not homosexuality.....BUT that's only for Jews, because Christians generally have the view that the New Covenant supersedes (i.e., replaces) the Old Testament's ritual laws, which includes many of the rules in Leviticus. Christians therefore have usually not observed Leviticus' rules, they only use them to attack others for behavior that makes them uncomfortable.


I don't think they've said you can't spout your hate, only that they'll challenge it...you have said they should not be allowed to be gay and married.

If government policy was a living wage for any job, the poor wouldn't stay poor and wouldn't need the handouts and programs you hate.

God and his son have failed miserably to elevate man....no wonder they want to be left out of the conversation.

bobknight33 said:

The right is not radical. It is the left that is intolerable.

Global warming debate is not settled.
Gay marriage is a sin,
so is divorce, adultery and a lot of other stuff.

An you call me a homophobe ? really. SIN IS SIN
Each will be judged.

You argument is silly.. If I speak up about being gay I am repressing others.. When Gays demand I am to be silent I am begin repressed. The only difference is that I stand in the right.

The right does not want to screw the poor. We want all to succeed. But the poor stay poor by government policies, mostly created by the Democrats. Poor people are enslaved by these policies, that what what pisses off Republicans.


You would be wise not to cast GOD into the failings of man.. After all that is why he sent his SON.

Husband doesn't speak to Wife for 23 Years

shagen454 says...

I feel like this is the result of a downward spiral. It could be the result of so many psychological or inter-personal issues blending together until the repetition of the behavior became ingrained. It is very strange that no one said anything about it but some families are... different.

I was in a relationship once where neither my girlfriend of 7 years or I spoke to each-other for 2 months... we still lived in the same apartment and slept in the same bed. Like I am saying, for me it was an amalgamation of many issues in the relationship emerging around the same time along with having a stressful job that took the brunt of my time & energy and just not wanting to deal with our issues; I went silent, like constant anxiety. Eventually, we broke it off for both of our mental sanity's even though we were still in love with each-other, I doubt we could have lasted 20+ years like that though lol....

Payback said:

Sulking might just be what they're calling it. It might be pathological, like hoarding. 23 years, I'd think it was mental illness, not just being a dick. Also, if it just took telling him he's an ass to stop it, why'd no one say bugger all for 23 fricking years?

If not mental illness, complete bullshit. I vote for the latter.

Silver Swan Clockwork Automaton, with mechanical water

Products that promise "detox" are a sham. Yes, all of them.

transmorpher says...

The reason why none of those supplements and things work is because it's usually just one ingredient, and the body doesn't know what to do with a single ingredient.

The body is expecting a particular set of ingredients in fairly specific amounts in order to make use of the "active ingredient".

Luckily for us, the specific sets of ingredients are prepackaged perfectly in fruits, vegetables, spices, legumes, tubers and grains.

So eat your whole-foods - just chop, blend and spice it all however you like - whatever it takes that you eat them as a staple

Flaming Buttho

Babymech says...

And perhaps more unexpectedly: “Starbucks is a place where these types frequent and a lot of body fluids are exchanged there. But the thing that I was not aware of is that there has been information that has been released… what Starbucks was doing, is they were taking specimens of male semen, and they were putting it in the blends of their lattes. Now, this is the absolute truth.”

makach said:

two weeks later: "I thought this prostitute was a woman"

Election Fraud Lawsuit? Is This Real?

LiquidDrift says...

Lol, nothing in this video is convincing, certainly not the 'anchor', or the lawyer making the fraud claims.

I'll trust Nate Silver over some idiot shouting on the internet, here's his take:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/new-york-primary-presidential-election-2016/

"If Clinton significantly outperforms exit polls showing a close race tonight and wins by a fairly comfortable margin instead, will it be part of a broader pattern? Not really. We’ve been keeping track of how Clinton’s and Sanders’s actual results have compared to initial exit polls, and the differences have been pretty random over the course of the campaign.

With that said, sometimes a candidate whose supporters are more enthusiastic can be overrated by exit polls because of response bias — this was sometimes an issue for Obama during the 2008 campaign, and it’s plausible we could see something parallel happening with Sanders. Furthermore, pre-election polls showed a wider lead for Clinton than the exit polls did, and it’s usually worth taking a blend of exit polls and pre-election polls even when you have exit polls in hand."

The Simpsons - YOU'RE NEXT

shang says...

The director of the movie "You're Next" applauded this 'homage'.

So wonderful


The Simpsons’ couch gag has become a great place for innovative filmmakers and artists to show off their take on the iconic nuclear family and the many denizens of Springfield. From the creators of Rick And Morty, to Don Hertzfeldt, Guillermo Del Toro, John K., and many others, all have left their individual stamp on the opening of the classic show and its opening segment. Now another artist has thrown his hat in the ring, albeit unofficially, with a gruesome blending of The Simpsons with Adam Wingard’s film You’re Next.

Lee Hardcastle is an experienced stop-motion animator that has applied his craft to a segment in The ABCs Of Death, a mash-up of Frozen and The Thing, and even a music video for the group Gunship. Now Hardcastle has brought that same off-kilter horror sensibility to his proposed couch gag for Springfield’s first family with a possibly NSFW-ish (due to clay violence and gore) and fairly disturbing short. Hardcastle’s couch gag opens serenely enough before devolving into a home invasion pastiche just like You’re Next—much to the appreciation and applause of Adam Wingard himself. It’s unclear although unlikely that Fox will actually use this couch gag on screen, but maybe it will help boost Hardcastle’s chances for crafting a Treehouse Of Horror intro/segment.



His channel is awesome, his mashup of Disney's Frozen with John Carpenter's The Thing, absolute masterpiece.

Penn & Teller - Can They Split a Bullet With a Butter Knife

Jinx says...

I'd hazard that it doesn't make much difference how thick the sword is as long as it has a reasonable edge angle made of something harder than the bullet. I'd contest that Katanas aren't good for cutting (weight of blade + curve), but yeah, the whole mythos about them being extraordinarily more sharp than other swords is bullshit. I've read that the reason for blending high-carbon steel with softer steel was more a matter of scarcity of high-carbon steel than deliberate design.

Xaielao said:

My thought exactly jimnms.

Just about any well made sword could do what that sword did, in fact probably do it better because samurai swords are so thick on the end they aren't that great for cutting, let alone piercing, no matter how sharp they are.

It's just that samurai swords (called that because they were a symbol of the class, but rarely ever used in actual battle) has this mythical air about it. But they aren't actually that great a sword.



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