>> ^chingalera:

...loookit Charlie Watts all boss on the top!! (the rest of em er fucked, WAY-the-fuck-up!)


I had the BIGGEST crush on CW back in the day ... such an interestingly aloof looking character. [I've found that drummers and bass players are the oddest band members as a rule]

...loookit Charlie Watts all boss on the top!! (the rest of em er fucked, WAY-the-fuck-up!)

Your video description has jogged my memory, let me take you back to spring 1981 & at 40,000 watts, this is beyond any shadow of a doubt the LOUDEST piece of live music I have ever heard.

"And The Bands Played On" - (Saxon)

>> ^deathcow:

Where exactly is the line in the sand where killing becomes politically incorrect? Would a yard mounted 5 watt laser that cooked squirrels instantly draw ire?


To hell with being politically correct; I'm setting mine to "cat" and pulling up a lawn chair.

>> ^deathcow:

Where exactly is the line in the sand where killing becomes politically incorrect? Would a yard mounted 5 watt laser that cooked squirrels instantly draw ire?
Ire and applause in equal measure, I'm sure, depending on the audience's opinion of adorable, cuddly, disease-ridden vermin.

Where exactly is the line in the sand where killing becomes politically incorrect? Would a yard mounted 5 watt laser that cooked squirrels instantly draw ire?

The po po in Cali are shell-shocked forever after Watts Riot, Compton's Cafeteria Riot, Sunset Strip curfew riots,the Berkeley riots,the White Night gay riots,the 92'Los Angeles riots(Rodney King),the Staples Center/Championship riot, the 2000' Riots in Santa Cruz~

Anaheim Police, afraid to be added to the list sought to quash a potential mob with rubber bullets and puppy-dogs. Hmmmm....all that got burned was a trash dumpster? Shit man, these folks looked predominately Hispanic which is probably why it never escalated into burning down homes and businesses in the immediate area....Pride of ownership and respect for personal property.

@bmacs27 Mostly the costs, TEGs aren't cheap, so I would wager the low end on the cost scale is about 50 bucks or so for the stove version give or take about 20 bucks. And indeed you are right, improving the state of being for billions is what the cry of energy is about. Costs are important as it dictates how many people we can help via our limited abilities. If we wanted to help ALL of them RIGHT NOW, it would cost 100 billion or so, which isn't a huge sum. But it is only access to 2 Watt/hours. This is very back of the envelope, so there are many other factors, but lets say we used that money instead to buy power plants. Let's even get something fancy, some high tech CCGT plants. They cost about .6 bucks per Watt hour. For 2 billion people consuming 2W/hs of electricity, that is about 4 gigiwatts/H which on our stoves cost us about 100 billion. Now a .5GW CCGT plan will run you about .3 billion per unit, but you only need 2.4 billion in funds to supply that level of electricity. If you spent the same kind of cash on CCGT plants, you would go from 4GW/H to 166GW/H. Basically, you can help 2 orders of magnitude more people if you invested in other technology, or help that same amount that much more. Now, that isn't completely accurate, power infrastructure costs money, but it is money well spent, even if you burn up an entire order of magnitude. It wouldn't hurt if a few thousand people had one of these, but if you wanted to help 2 billion, it would be a huge mistake. The only reason I keep harping on this is because they marketed themselves so heavily as some wide solution for the third world. A good third world solution doesn't always look like a first world solution, so I am not suggesting there is no merit here, but it would help very few people and to a relatively low level compared to other options. Perhaps small progress, though, is a good way to go about it, I can't say. I would guess they would be better off dropping off some steam system that burns wood and let them power their entire houses instead of a cellphone. There is an older paper about using rice husks in developing world in steam engines to generate electricity, and husks have a bit less energy density than wood fiber. They seemed to think it was pretty viable. There are some technical challenges, but I think those are easier to overcome than spending 100billion for 2W/Hs for 2 billion people. But I digress.

>> ^Crosswords:

So basically its, 'look what you an do when you have 100k+ worth of sound equipment'? Its cool, but as far as a feat of human vocal prowess not so much. Reggie Watts is far better in that respect, plus he's got awesome fluffy hair.
Yes, Reggie Watts or Beardyman are more impressive.

So basically its, 'look what you an do when you have 100k+ worth of sound equipment'? Its cool, but as far as a feat of human vocal prowess not so much. Reggie Watts is far better in that respect, plus he's got awesome fluffy hair.

Dayumm. Like Meg Ryan meets Naomi Watts.

@Kofi: Reggie Watts says it best:

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Reggie Watts Rocks Conan. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

Touché on all counts. >> ^Fletch:

>> ^messenger:
Why is this on the TED stage? I saw neither an idea nor anything worth spreading. Mixing beats on the fly is nothing new. The guy's got talent, but again, why is this on TED? I don't think this would even be siftworthy if he weren't standing in front of those big red letters.

The "E" in TED stands for "Entertainment". They often have musicians and other performers. Even the intellectual glitterati can appreciate humor and music once in a while. As far as this particular video not being siftworthy... I liked it. I watched it a couple times. I think he's bloody brilliant, and his videos seem to do well here, but I can also see why he might not be everyone's cup of tea.

In reply to this comment by messenger:
Why is this on the TED stage? I saw neither an idea nor anything worth spreading. Mixing beats on the fly is nothing new. The guy's got talent, but again, why is this on TED? I don't think this would even be siftworthy if he weren't standing in front of those big red letters.


The problem you seem to have with the entire TED thing is that it does not imply a certain "minimum standard". If you think about that concept for a while you will probably start to recognize how damaging that concept can be to "ideas worth spreading".

TED is a show- do not take it for its name or "status" but enjoy the stuff that you find interesting on it. It is an industrial and political plaything- you should be aware of it. There's just as many clever people all around you. But this is the internet. That doesn't diminish the stuff you can draw from it while it lasts.

That being said I understand your sentiment ;-)