Looks like a recruiting video for a grass hockey team...

Ok, in the interest of fairness I did some further research on this issue.

He was fined a total of 42,000 dollars. This does not count his accrued court and legal fees which are estimated to be around 100,000 dollars at this time. I won't bother converting that to USD, but he is going to be out of pocket 142k as a ballpark figure.

This is the joke:

“Everyone said he sucked, but I defended him,” Ward says. “They said he was terrible, but I was like, ‘He’s dying but he’s living a dream, leave him alone.’ ” The niceties end when Ward figures out Gabriel isn’t actually dying. “He’s unkillable! I saw him at the water park, and I tried to drown him, but I couldn’t. Then I went on the Internet to figure out what was wrong with him, and you know what it was? He’s ugly, goddammit!”

That is all. He was making a joke that he thought the kid was being given a 'make a wish' type thing because he was dying, but that he was just ugly.

I listened to it and it wasn't really funny. However, it wasn't 142k worth of court costs and damages either. The kid, disability or not, is now a public figure and should not be protected from jokes at his expense. The fact that a comedian called him ugly does not mean he should get 42k in recompense because it made him feel bad. Fuck, if I got 42k every time someone called me ugly in jest, I wouldn't be posting here. I'd be on a damn Yacht in the Mediterranean.

People say hurtful things. How many people looked at this kid and made fun of him when he was trying to sing the Canadian anthem at a Hockey game? Does he deserve 42k from each of them?

One of the talks I listened to as part of this research brought up a salient point. The commission that was created to address hurtful speech has clearly ran out of 'real' hate speech to go after. To save their jobs, they need to start going after the next level of 'hate speech'. Where better to look than blue comedians?

This brings me back to my original point. If you create an organization and give it power to control what people say through punitive measures, it may work great when your group is in power. You will probably have no issue with it, as long as it goes after speech you dislike. But, no group is in power forever and organizations don't just disappear when a new group of leaders come into power. Suddenly you might really come to regret your choice to create that organization, especially when they decide it is 'YOUR' words that need to be penalized.

That said, my only dog in this fight is that I think it is idiotic to limit what people can say. They don't stop saying it, they just stop saying it around people they don't trust. This sows the seeds of dissension and the harvest is never a good one.

The hockey puck glow was a bit weird, but actually pretty good for a few scenarios:

It is rather difficult for people who haven't seen much hockey to follow the puck. As you watch more of the sport, you figure out cues that help you track it, but I think that is a legitimate barrier that presents some difficulty in getting new fans of the sport. I think the blue glow helped a lot with that; would be nice if individual viewers could opt in our out of it on the fly. That would have been impossible (or prohibitively expensive) before, but with streaming video looking like the future rather than set channels it will be more workable.

When the puck travels close to the boards on the near side of the rink, it gets obscured and out of sight. The blue glow clipped right through that, so you could still figure out where the puck was. If two or more players were in a scrum for a puck stuck along the boards, you could see if it was moving and therefore know if a ref/linesman was going to whistle the play dead. That was quite a handy feature also.

Overall, the implementation / resolution of the puck highlighting in hockey was a bit non ideal, but it did have some real upsides. I don't think it deserved *quite* as much flak as it got...

They used something this (except with infra red paint (Im guessing infra red light absorbing paint)) to change advertising on the boards for the "world cup of hockey" this year and it was still annoying - anything that moves that should not be moving is very visible.

Hockey is much better on TV in HD than it was a couple of years ago so I understand what FOX were after, but it sure did not work. It must be the camera panning much faster in hockey that makes this kind of trick difficult to pull off well.

You can see in that little clip the Hockey implementation was distractingly poor, the blue glow wasn't properly centered and the red streak was drawn on top of players in the foreground, it was all just way too bright and unnatural looking.

Plus I'm guessing is it's actually kind of fun as a hockey viewer to keep your eye on the puck and try to follow it. That's not really the case with the first down marker.

Funny how this works so well for football yet is so incredibly annoying for hockey.

It's a beautiful place that's given us some amazing science, culture, and social advances.

All those things happened because we're the beautiful, figurative melting pot. Unfortunately, Trump is in the process of turning the US into a pot of homogenized white shit.

Sports is a perfect microcosm. We're good at so many sports because we choose people from the countries that excel at that particular sport. Kenyans for running. Eastern European or Canadian hockey players. Dominican baseball players.

I really dislike making sweeping generalizations, but I think the simple folks that voted for Trump never have and never will contribute anything culturally, scientifically, or socially.

Unless that culture is backwards and hate-filled.

Its really a Europe vs America comparison so Canada gets to be american. Sort of like the "north american" ice hockey team.

alcom says...
@kingmob The right-wing conspiracy of convenience says that the data has been adjusted to heighten the urgency and panic and perpetuate their scientific fraud. This is a misunderstanding of flux adjustments that used to be made to climate models in the 90's and early in the 00's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model#Flux_buffering

Recent improvements in modelling equations mean that they no longer rely on flux adjustments, but hearing that they had to made adjustments at all sounds sketch.

Because the "hockey-stick" model was an overshoot based on the peak in 1998, deniers tend to either:

a) Argue that the "warming hiatus" between 1998 and 2013 disproves AGW theory. This fallacy disproved itself in the last 2+ years as global surface and ocean temperatures have exceeded the 1998 record year on year.
or:
b) Attempt to discredit scientists arguing that their own funding depends on the alarming data that they publish. Far-right conservatives continue to demonize scientists as a cabal of billionaires working in concert to sway public opinion. If that was true, then the whole hiatus period sure didn't help their cause, but the graph hasn't moved.

This is sound science, and denialism is collapsing under the weight of its own bullshit. At the time of posting, NOAA said that July 2016 also marked the 15th consecutive warmest month on record for the globe. That is the longest stretch of months in a row that a global temperature record has been set in their dataset.

@kingmob The right-wing conspiracy of convenience says that the data has been adjusted to heighten the urgency and panic and perpetuate their scientific fraud. This is a misunderstanding of flux adjustments that used to be made to climate models in the 90's and early in the 00's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_circulation_model#Flux_buffering

Recent improvements in modelling equations mean that they no longer rely on flux adjustments, but hearing that they had to made adjustments at all sounds sketch.

Because the "hockey-stick" model was an overshoot based on the peak in 1998, deniers tend to either:

a) Argue that the "warming hiatus" between 1998 and 2013 disproves AGW theory. This fallacy disproved itself in the last 2+ years as global surface and ocean temperatures have exceeded the 1998 record year on year.
or:
b) Attempt to discredit scientists arguing that their own funding depends on the alarming data that they publish. Far-right conservatives continue to demonize scientists as a cabal of billionaires working in concert to sway public opinion. If that was true, then the whole hiatus period sure didn't help their cause, but the graph hasn't moved.

This is sound science, and denialism is collapsing under the weight of its own bullshit. At the time of posting, NOAA said that July 2016 also marked the 15th consecutive warmest month on record for the globe. That is the longest stretch of months in a row that a global temperature record has been set in their dataset.

It's not IN a vacuum. the pressure is just very low, like a high-altitude jet airliner. The skis the pod runs on aren't even electromagnetic, they use micro jets of compressed air, like an air-hockey table.

As for Thunderfoot, I get he likes debunking things like those retarded snake-oil "smart pavement" people. However, saying Musk is one of them is ignoring what Elon's already accomplished. I can GUARANTEE Elon Musk has dumped more money than Thunderfoot will make in his lifetime in engineers and pure scientists just to see if it was FEASIBLE, let alone possible.

I can see this one from both sides. The potential for litigation -- which could be truly catastrophic for a school / business / private person / whatever -- is real. It's fucking retarded, but it is a real danger.

In the early 2000's, I was living in a trailer park with a buddy while we were going to college. We lived right next to a movie theater that had a nice, huge, paved asphalt parking lot in the back. We used to take roller blades, sticks, and a PVC hockey goal into that lot and play roller hockey after closing time -- like 2AM or so. Nobody there, no parked cars, no property around to damage with errant shots or whatever.

One night we went a bit earlier than usual, and the manager had happened to stay late to close. He saw us as he was driving out and started driving towards us. I figured "well, there goes this spot". He asked us what were were doing, we explained. He asked us if we had asked anybody for permission, and we admitted we hadn't. He asked if we knew that companies sometimes got sued by people who wiped out and broke a leg or whatever, and we said yes.

And then he surprised me. He said "OK, consider this me, the manager, giving you permission to keep on playing here, on these conditions:

1) Never play there if there are parked cars in that part of the lot behind the theater.
2) Come in and ask for permission again if we want to play with more people, or if any other conditions change.
3) Look me in the eye and give me your word as a man that you wouldn't sue me for being an idiot and falling down and breaking your arm or whatever, and shake my hand to seal the bargain."

Awesome theater manager. Not sure if things have gotten enough worse in litigation-crazy USA that he'd be willing to make that same bargain again. But that wouldn't be his fault, it would be an outcome of our crazy legal system.

I know what you mean; at the hockey rink I used to skate at, if you "back spun" a rejected quarter as you put it in, somehow that suddenly made it acceptable.

And Canadian coins enjoyed a period of being, uh, "surrogates" for some US coinage successfully.

Inadvertently, of course---but in those days, a 25% discount if I remember correctly.

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

How about this
http://videosift.com/video/The-Best-Damn-Fan-Made-Hockey-Video-Ever

Professionally i think hes more known for his writing and directing although he does seem to do quite a bit of acting.
http://www.andrewbowserdirector.com/