Not sure about the conspiracy tag; we need to stop calling this downfall we're witnessing a conspiracy. As Mr. Chomsky notes, it's just incentives playing out. Calling it a conspiracy is in a way issue simplification and serves to further dis-empower the public by making it seem impossible to stop.

If we're to solve this we need to get together and see it for what it is: an incentive system that is not in the best interest of the people it claims to serve.

I really do wish people would start talking about labor movements, communism, socialism or whatever. Just whatever. I'm so sick of the main dividing political issues being abortion, gay rights and shit that matters but are mute points in getting a real system that works for the people... the fucking working class. If the working class were empowered again you know that it'd vote pro-choice and pro gay marriage. Fuck the media owned by billionares. They are in power and they control the message and they want their conservative fantasy vision to be beheld by everyone so they can plunder every last penny under these bible belters... and you I included in that downfall with them. Fuck Democracy Now... SOCIALISM NOW.

Just imagine two of these roaming the night with a fishing line in between them. Decapitation Bots will be our downfall!

>> ^bareboards2:

He may be registered Independent, but he has been pretty brutal towards Rmoney. He also has been increasingly informing his audience about environmental issues -- always an in-your-face to Republicans.
I would have been surprised to have seen him on the show, based on prior bits.


Isn't that sad? Informing your audience about serious environmental issues that will probably be the downfall of humanity is considered biased? Now a problem that we created is either left or it's right, it's not a problem that everyones concerned about and is working it fix. It's a problem that some people are trying to fix and educate others on, and others are deliberately misinforming and making worse. Great job America.

>> ^brycewi19:

Two things I haven't been a fan of so far, and they're both intentional choices that Moffat has gone with.
1. The movie poster idea. It doesn't have the same feel as the rest of the series and it removes the sense of serial-ness/continuity to the season.
2. The Ponds are not continuous companions. This is a problem to me. It was revealed in the "Waters of Mars" special that the Doctor MUST have a companion to balance out his power - to "humanize" him, so to speak. Having him simply "check in" on them doesn't feel like it honors this previous internal struggle they worked so hard to show in the Doctor's personality in years past.
I understand that these are choices that Moffat has made, and I tremendously respect him as a writer (see: TinTin and Sherlock), but I just don't like the direction these choices have taken this year so far.


I think they have alluded to the fact that it's not a good thing he's been on his own Amy even says "this is what happens when you travel alone too long", and my best guess is that this will be instrumental in their downfall.

>> ^Truckchase:

@ 9:06:
<NitPick>People thing Federal Reserve Issued currency is real money too. It's not any more real than bitcoin; it's just the belief that makes it real. </NitPick>
Other than that, great vid. I'm still working up the guts to ditch FB. It makes me miserable seeing all the surface level BS people's lives are becoming, yet I have a hard time deleting my acct. .... neeeed ... more .... willpower.
Edit: I'm a bit surprised at the reaction here. I guess I'm in the minority (of the vocal) on VS. It would be interesting to see people's reaction to this based on age. I'm old enough to not be "old" (I'd like to think) but to have seen a substantial part of my adult life with and without facebook, and on the whole I think real friendships sustain more harm from these tools than good. The base notion of FB creates an incentive for people to view their own life the the prism of mass consumption which I think really does change behavior in a generally bad way.
That said, I'm not blaming it for the downfall of modern society or anything, just asserting it's a net-negative. If more people deleted their accounts I'm confident we'd be better off overall, and I'm trying to work up the courage to take the lead on that.


The reaction is more to his self righteous, overly inflated, far reaching, conspiratorial nature more so than the 'core' message. If it'd been a video which had a light hearted feel, and pointed out the reams of posts from friends that are just entries into competitions or playing the apps or that sort of crap (of which I've ended up completely blocking people because about 90% of some people's post are just that crap), and that maybe not posting what your dreams were about each night... or you know, just common etiquette, it may have done really well, and probably been posted by people on facebook as a non direct way of telling others 'um, you're being sort of dicks on this thing'.

But no, he tried to insinuate he knows all, and that anyone using facebook is a mindless sheep, and that there is no good to come from it.

Well he can go back to his conspiracy bullshit on his websites and youtube videos and continue to think he knows better than everyone.

And die unhappy having changed nothing.

@ 9:06:

<NitPick>People thing Federal Reserve Issued currency is real money too. It's not any more real than bitcoin; it's just the belief that makes it real. </NitPick>

Other than that, great vid. I'm still working up the guts to ditch FB. It makes me miserable seeing all the surface level BS people's lives are becoming, yet I have a hard time deleting my acct. .... neeeed ... more .... willpower.

Edit: I'm a bit surprised at the reaction here. I guess I'm in the minority (of the vocal) on VS. It would be interesting to see people's reaction to this based on age. I'm old enough to not be "old" (I'd like to think) but to have seen a substantial part of my adult life with and without facebook, and on the whole I think real friendships sustain more harm from these tools than good. The base notion of FB creates an incentive for people to view their own life the the prism of mass consumption which I think really does change behavior in a generally bad way.

That said, I'm not blaming it for the downfall of modern society or anything, just asserting it's a net-negative. If more people deleted their accounts I'm confident we'd be better off overall, and I'm trying to work up the courage to take the lead on that.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 10 Badge!

No, that was my own assessment of the movement, and it seems to have borne out. What is the OWS movement doing today beyond vandalism and petty thuggery?





Yes, there were some good points made, and a whole lot of bad ones as well. They spoke as one cacophony and it is that lack of coherency or cohesive strategy (as well as a terrible image problem) that ultimately led to their downfall. Even the founders of the movement agree:

"But even Adbusters, the 'culture-jamming' magazine that help spawn the original Wall Street occupation, says that things have changed dramatically for the movement. "Our movement is living through a painful rebirth..." began its frontpage essay this week, and then quoted a Zuccoti park regular who declared, "We are facing a nauseating poverty of ideas.”"

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/06/07

From crowds of 15k to 75 people, it seems to be all over but the shouting

Occupy Wall Street: Dead in 213 Days

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/10552

>> ^messenger:

>> ^shinyblurry:
...this is a movement without any cohesive message or objective..."
http://www.prosebeforehos.com/wordpress/wp
-content/uploads/2011/10/no-message-occupy-wall-street.png
http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-cdn.
com/files/2011/11/ows-message-murdoch-e1322660861906.jpg
I know you're not a lib, but have you really swallowed that Fox media message?

This little guy will remember this and when the chimps rise up, our intrepid camera man will be as much to blame for our downfall as James Franco.

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

It's true - it does kind of look like ass with all of the ads splooged all over the page. After six years though - I've come to a conclusion: There's us, and there's them. There are the people we love who are the Sifters that find their way here - and there are the holipoli that rummage through our droppings as we forge a trail into the future.

That's a terrible way to think about site visitors - I know. Maybe it will be our eventual downfall - but have you seen the top 10 Google search terms that lead people to VideoSift? Here we go, for the past 30 days in descending order of popularity:


rape videos
rape video
hunger games trailer
rape scene
rape
irreversible
irreversible rape scene
rape scenes
inside vagina

There's our non-logged-in audience and it's kind of depressing. Google is 45% of our traffic. Fuck them. I'm a little happier about things that go nuts on Facebook for no apparent reason. Log out and look at the facebook comments on this moderately upvoted page. http://videosift.com/video/How-Belly-Dancers-Flip-Coins

So VideoSift is two worlds, the beautiful community where we live and make content and the other VideoSift that actually supports the site and pays the server bills.

There's an adage going around the Internet that if you aren't paying for a product or service ... you are the product or service. See Gmail for a good example of that. You are the product that's being offered to advertisers when you use Gmail. I hope that we have sidestepped that a little bit. It's true, that the content that we all create here does become a product that we offer to advertisers ... at least there is the option of Charter membership and at least we try and keep the ad saturation cordoned off to the non-logged in area.

What about reactors that can't melt down? What about Ford Pintos that exploded when you hit them from the rear, that isn't a story of why all cars are dangerous, only Ford Pintos. What about a plane lands on a city and kills thousands, or the super dome and 10s of thousands? What if what if what if. 50 million people is a little showing of being irrationality scared. Even in the worst designed reactor incident in history, it wasn't as bad as that. If you looked closely, as well, the chart shows that nuclear has historically been safer that solar and wind (and hydro if you include the Banqiao Dam incident).

With that said, I do wish to see old light water reactor technology phased out and new, walk away safe reactors phased in. Engineered safety is less preferred than intrinsic safety that many of the new reactors have. Also, lets not forget, most of the navy is nuclear...meaning they feel safe enough to be in war time situations with current reactors, so engineered safety can indeed be very safe.

I have irrational fears as well, I hate to fly even though I know statistically it is safer than driving. I would suggest that your fear of nuclear is of the same nature. The only way you can kill millions of people with current or future nuclear technology is with bombs, not reactors. The only way reactors can "explode" is from a steam explosion or a hydrogen explosion...so about as bad as a fuel plant exploding, most likely several orders of magnitude less. IE, reactors explode chemically, not via fission, making no more or less dangerous that that other kinds of tech, with the exception of the fission byproducts. The good thing about most of the new nuclear tech is the fuel burn up rates are very very high, meaning there is less fuel involved in most cases.

At any rate, don't take my word for it, there is lots of data out there to look over. For my part, I think nuclear is the cleanest, safest bet for energy needs. I submit that nuclear is only scary because of it was first developed as a fearsome weapon. But the even more fearsome weapon are thermonuclear weapons, which are actually fusion/fission hybrid bombs. I would imagine for whatever reason you aren't super scared of fusion, and would wager that if thermonuclear bombs were called fusion bombs, the world at large would have a different mindset towards it...irrationally.

But I leave you with the facts, nuclear has been the leading sources of clean power which has also caused the least amount of deaths than other technologies. There are many factors in that, including massively engineered safety that continues to improve, as well as highly trained crews that watch over them. Coal miners die all the time, pipelines explode, oil platforms explode, people fall off roofs, or fall off wind farm towers, or get electrocuted...but none of these deaths cause the downfall of those technologies. Nuclear still has more drama in our minds, so plays out much differently when something goes wrong, which isn't very often ( 6 fatal occurrences since 1961) .

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html


I'm sorry are you comparing death rates between Coal and Nuclear Reactors? What if there's a meltdown or a terrorist attack and suddenly there's 50,000,000 people dead? It only takes one reactor outside of LA to do catastrophic damage you cannot compare the two NOW when we don't have a Fuckton of Reactors near population centers.
Comparing the two at this point in time is just ridiculous, the numbers are so skewed it's not even funny.

>> ^criticalthud:

This is one big reason:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=afghanistan-holds-enormous-bounty-of-rare-earths
rare earth.


I knew they has some sort of exploitable resource,but didn't know what. Usually its Oil,but that is nearly as good: some neccessity for keeping industry going and profits up.If America wants to be the New Rome and spread Pax Americana across the world,then they should follow the Roman idea through and kick back some of those spoils of war back to the homeland where all the cannon fodder comes from. Who will buy all this crap we import from China if noone has jobs? Greed will be their downfall,that and an embaressing short sightedness that hopefully won't doom the rest of us along with them.

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

Never had a problem with these but capital/ Capitol are my downfall

Actually the failures in "socialist Europe" are down to capitalists fucking things up. OTOH places like Norway which has essentially nationalised it's oil industry are actually doing well.

Of course you're going to blame "capitalists" for socialism's downfall, what choice do you have? Norway? Great example! The were smart enough to stay OUT of the EU. However, in 30 years, when the oil runs low...

As for your Obama quote, I don't actually think you have read it correctly because it doesn't even remotely support your position, not that you've ever let reality intrude on your juvenile little rants.

The quote is quite apt. A king decides who may and who may not prosper in his kingdom. A US President daring to decide the same? TYRANNY.

And Marx? You remind me of Zapp Brannigan: we don't know anything about them, so we can only assume they stand for everything we don't stand for!


Everything I've written about marx is accurate. Please point to some real-world examples of free, prosperous marxist nations.


>> ^ChaosEngine:

Actually the failures in "socialist Europe" are down to capitalists fucking things up. OTOH places like Norway which has essentially nationalised it's oil industry are actually doing well.
As for your Obama quote, I don't actually think you have read it correctly because it doesn't even remotely support your position, not that you've ever let reality intrude on your juvenile little rants.
And Marx? You remind me of Zapp Brannigan: we don't know anything about them, so we can only assume they stand for everything we don't stand for!
>> ^quantumushroom:
Not overly interested in whether my comrades here think I sufficiently understand marx, he's the left's savior, not mine. Not only was marx a lousy human being and horrible in his personal handling of money, he thought the profit motive could be stripped from the system and it would work just as well.
Then we get this from His Earness:
“You don’t have some inherent right just to–-you know, get a certain amount of profit."
Words more befitting the late, ungreat kim ill-dong
Is 3.5 years of this idiot's failures not enough for ya? You need 4 more? Hey, Siftberals, take a peek at socialist Europe, broke as a joke and falling apart. THIS is the crap you want for the US?
Anyone-But-His-Earness 2012