@dag, would you remove this hobble please? Apparently QM invoked lies on a video and he very well might've done that because he disagreed with it politically which is a violation of the rules. BUT if that's reason enough to hobble people, then I have a laundry list of members guilty of this the length of War and Peace for you. Lies is invoked nearly every time a Fox News video is posted, and you never see the pitchforks.

His beliefs are fringe on this site. He also says unpopular things. Let's consider that.

This video has been declared a duplicate by the original submitter; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by eric3579.

*dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Laundry-Day

Oh you don't like how they try to use personality tests, GPA, and the infamous "career day" to help kids decide? I'm still not sure what I could stand to do for the rest of my life, and that's mainly because everything they tried to tell me was not helpful and everything you look into is not what people claim it to be.

Which I view as a failing of colleges, since young people are paying money to go into things they only have a very vague notion of and unless their parents or a close relative do the job, no one is going to provide them with straight answers in a vast majority of the time. Assuming they even consider what careers to ask about or what questions to ask about said careers.

I hold it up as proof that colleges at this time are there to get people in and out of programs while milking them for as much as possible, but don't actually take the time to evaluate that their programs provide the building blocks the student would need to follow the job path they THINK they want. The colleges don't care if the students presumptions are wrong.

I also view elementary to high school as bypassing a lot of common knowledge, common sense, life skills, etc things kids should learn. Like electric safety and basic repairs, basic automotive/mechanic/tool usage, cooking/laundry basics, and probably the most important of all nutrition and exercise. You see people on the news having heatstroke and everything else because they don't drink enough fluids or don't realize that not sweating is a really bad thing. Plus proper stretching and all that. I mean I remember them having wood working classes, and it didn't even focus on things you might actually run into that you could repair on your own without having some major equipment.

Education is great, but too many people come out of high school and college with a lot of knowledge, no applicable skills to a field, and almost no rudimentary skills to speak of. And this isn't saying they should be trained for jobs, this is saying they have enough of a common life skill set that they can at least somewhat measure what is required in positions. Right now, everyone claims they can do everything and they really know very little.

But Im with you there on the TNG DNA job matching.....wish we had it. No politics, nepotism, and what not to throw a wrench into everything.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^chilaxe:
@NetRunner 'everyone who qualifies for college should go for free.'
Just what we need, more lazy, talentless graduates with a heart-warming "culture studies" or "environmental studies" degree working for minimum wage at Starbucks.
I have too many friends to count who got useless college degrees and now, ten years later, are still doing nothing with their lives.

So free choice didn't make people lead full and productive lives? Imagine that.
Snark aside, I don't really see why more scholarships would change things. I'm not talking about making college compulsory, I'm talking about taking monetary cost out of the equation when discussing whether you go or not.
Remember that episode of ST:TNG where all the kids on the Enterprise got kidnapped by an alien race, and they did tests on their DNA, and then told them what their career would be and immediately put them to work? They were fun professions too, like musician, sculptor, engineer, etc.
I sometimes think I would've personally preferred that to having to figure out in my teenage years what kind of career would appeal to me, acquire the skills and training required by that career, and then find a job. It seems like our education system should expend a greater effort on that, rather than just presenting kids with ever-larger menus of classes to take and degrees to earn.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Why does he fail to mention that very important factor in this speech? >> ^blankfist:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
I don't disagree with any of it, but he completely ignores indicting Wall Street and the multi national corporations that demand all of these genuinely terrible practices of our government. Ron Paul was completely silent after the Supreme Court made it's Citizens United ruling, giving corporations unlimited influence over our elections. He is afraid of big money too.
Nothing is going to change until we get mad enough and take to the streets to demand real change.

No truth to this. He's against government giving corporate welfare, subsidies and regulating in favor of corporations. What has Obama done to stop the multi national corporations? Aside from giving them heaps of our money, that is.



Does he have to go over a laundry list of his policies for every speech he makes?

>> ^Gallowflak:

>> ^Matthu:
I don't know how you people sleep at night.
I guess it's easy for a lot of you to pretend you don't see what your government is doing in your name.
It's crazy. You're all committing crimes against humanity by proxy.

Comments like this are so fucking obnoxious. Yes, there are serious problems, yes, people have become incredibly apathetic and sociopathic and yes, culture is more and more nihilistic, but how dare you pretend you've the moral authority to indict an entire people for the crimes of their government?


You're absolutely right. I am no moral authority. But I can freely put forth my opinion.

And my opinion is that the vast majority of Americans fucking know better. And if you know what your government is doing, you are morally obligated to get in the streets and scream.

So yes, it ain't my business, and it's probably obnoxious as hell to have an outsider throw your dirty shit stained laundry in your face, but maybe ya'll need to be shamed into some fucking action.

@Gallowflak Not trying to be an asshole, but enough is enough...

Our laundry is done by ninjas??

The cord is painted white to match the trim of the laundry room door. I think that's a nice touch.

>> ^MaxWilder:

The best part is that nobody talks!
And Spock's reaction to his dirty laundry...


Agreed!

The best part is that nobody talks!

And Spock's reaction to his dirty laundry...

Wireless power has the ability to change the game for technology. You could have technology embedded into anything with relative ease. You could have smart walls, cloths, food containers, towels, a truly endless laundry list of applications. "Beam" power isn't exactly there yet, but a step in that direction.

Using a member's name in a character assassination is NOT OK
Using a member's name in connection to personal information is NOT recommended.

Using a member's name in conjunction with an event sounds OK to me.
A user-name is just a user-name, they are publicly used on the site. The users are a huge part of what makes this site what it is. I really don't think it's possible to have a Wiki without usine member names.

I agree with use of a member's user-name as long as it is for historical reasons. The Wiki absolutely should not be a place to air one's dirty laundry or continue into a soap opera. We also don't want people to use the Wiki to gather personal info so profiles don't belong in the Wiki - We have profiles for that already.

-Yes, keep a list of Sift-ups, locations and joining members
-Yes, Let us know who had a hand in the milestones of the site
-Yes, Keep a list of the channels and who manages them

I was wondering how long it would take before the false equivalence fallacy entered the discussion.

The left has been taking flak for the rather obvious hypocrisy. It is no surprise that thinking orders have gone out to give the faithful masses a thought to grasp for when confronted by reason...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1/9/934662/-This-is-the-problem-with-the-promotion-of-false-equivalencies

"The problem with false equivalencies is that while there is overblown rhetoric on both sides, the amount and intensity is much worse on the right than the left. To indicate otherwise is not only disingenuous but it is dishonest and harmful."

I shall venture a guess that the above quote waxes eloquent in the ears of the average neolib. The statement is easy to make, but as with many baseless accusations it lacks substance and proof. I will then formally make the request for fair, scholarly evidence to support this argument. If the right is indeed far greater in "amount and intensity" compared to the left, then there must be some sort of dataset that proves the assertion in a neutral, non-partisan way.

But I'll save you the time, because no such research exists. Instead, what we have are laundry lists of isolated examples - extremes on both sides - which in no way represent the thought or speech of the majority. There is no proof that the right is greater in "amount and intensity" while the left meekly suffers in quietude. I've seen pages as long as my right arm of examples of 'right wing hate'. I've also seen pages as long as my left arm with examples of 'left wing hate'. Any perception of truth to the argument is based entirely on OPINIONS - not facts. The argument is patently false, and the fallacy exists because of personal bias alone.

What I think we are seeing is a case of mass hypersensitivity to opposing bias. People love to find isolated, eggregious cases and pretend that they are typical of entire groups. The left's hate of the Tea party is a good example. Bias magnifies the words you hate, and muffles the stuff you like.

So when people on the left hear Bush, Cheney, Bachman, Palin, Rush, Beck, Hannity, or Fox say something stupid it is instantly trumpeted as 'hate filled rhetoric' that is 'dominating the political discourse'. It isn't really, but they think it is because they disagree with it.

The very same people are able to blythely gloss over the exact same kind of rhetoric coming from ABC, CBS, NBC, AP, Rueters, NYT, CDS, USA Today, CNN, PBS, MSNBC, KOS, Beast, HuffPo, Maher, Olbermann, Kurtz, Maddow, Obama, Pelosi, Frank, Greyson, Sharpton, and MANY others. How are they able to achieve such staggeringly obvious cognitive dissonance? Easy. They AGREE with them. A nice thick layer of bias makes it all better.

The Videosift itself 10 to 1 favors left leaning links over right. All the above resources are filled to the literal brim with examples of 'left wing hate'. Just like the examples on the right of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, or Sean Hannity are filled with examples of 'right wing hate'. There is no difference in quantity or intensity. The only difference exists in the minds of people too blinkered by their own bias to see or hear accurately.

So I reject your inaccurate usage of the False equivalance fallacy. Such fallacies only exist when there is not actual equivalence. The angry rhetoric of the right that is being bemoaned is factually being duplicated on the left. Actual equivalence. And I - unlike others - am not attempting to use the existence of offensive rhetoric on one side as a club to censor the opinions of another.

and i will add that scientists, while doing some amazing things, also routinely kill people.
pcb's, bovine growth hormone, nuclear radiation, nuclear bombs, bio-warfare, missile technology, ddt, malathion, agent orange, you name it, scientists, in the name of profit, have compiled a laundry list of chemicals, compounds, and weapons that accidentally or purposely kill people.
Western medicine, in their wisdom, also routinely kill people. it's called "iatrogenic death" - or, death by doctor. One of the most common ways to die.
Monsanto exists to make a profit... period.

His monotonous voice made me think about doing laundry 10 seconds into the video. Plus, if you're not following the larger discussion, if you're not familiar with the people involved (like "Behe"), if you basically have no context to put this into, you can't help but ask yourself the same question you've asked yourself time and time again during lectures at university or presentations at work:

What the fuck is he talking about?

I understood his argument after restarting the video and slapping myself in the face, twice. Like the content, don't like the presentation.