It looks like an interesting video, but it ends in the middle!

I feel not a mite sorry for these fuckers. Let em burn.

I'm not going to bother looking for it, but there's a Howard Stern clip of Obama voters being asked if they approve of Obama's platform, except they're describing McCain's platform (war in iraq, drilling for oil, etc). The Obama voters remained enthusiastic and even approved of "Obama's" choice of Sarah Palin for VP.

People are ignorant but also usually a mite smarter regarding their own interests. Everyone here has a reason to believe what they do.

返事をビデオで書きました。

In reply to this comment by Sukuraido:
"I just want to dream quietly, quietly, quietly..." umm no. Let's look at this.
"shizuka ni shizuka ni tada shizuka ni yume o mite iru"
First off, 'miru' is in the 'te iru' form. He is now viewing.
Second, 'want' is not even mentioned in the sentence. So, most literally:
"Quietly, quietly, I'm just quietly viewing a dream" (or just quietly dreaming)
Any objections?

"I just want to dream quietly, quietly, quietly..." umm no. Let's look at this.
"shizuka ni shizuka ni tada shizuka ni yume o mite iru"
First off, 'miru' is in the 'te iru' form. He is now viewing.
Second, 'want' is not even mentioned in the sentence. So, most literally:
"Quietly, quietly, I'm just quietly viewing a dream" (or just quietly dreaming)
Any objections?

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

Dyn-o-mite. Thanks for all of your cool contributions JJ.

>> ^gwiz665:
A promiscuous friend of mine went to the doctor and found out she had mites, presumably from having sex with a dude that had sex with a corpse. Good times.


I first heard that urban legend about 10 years ago.

A promiscuous friend of mine went to the doctor and found out she had mites, presumably from having sex with a dude that had sex with a corpse. Good times.

I had one of those comments that didn't survive the great database crash of 3/12/09 for this post.

I think it's the wrong assumption to think that whatever software security systems we can create will be able to contain an "intelligence explosion." The understanding we have of our security systems will, by nature, be less than the understanding that the resulting super-intelligence will have. It's like opening Pandora's Box just a crack to peek inside.

The most powerful forces above Earth's crust have been evolution and intelligence, but intelligence has been limited by evolution and evolution is limited by time. This hypothetical singularity event is essentially removing the limitations of time on the evolution of intelligence in a synthetic environment.

The other wrong assumption taken by many people is the idea that the result of a singularity event will benefit us, or that the resulting super-intelligence created will relate to us on any level. It might relate to us as well as we relate to dust mites. It's naive to think that our intelligence is so great that no future entity can be beyond our comprehension. That's the very definition the singularity--that it is beyond our comprehension. Foolish optimism is pervasive in singularity enthusiasts. Why is it considered a wise move for humanity to risk our survival on an unknown?

What's with the dust Mite?
This is messed up...,

From Wiki: "Scabies is transmitted readily, often throughout an entire household, by skin-to-skin contact with an infected person (e.g. bed partners, schoolmates, daycare), and thus is sometimes classed as a sexually transmitted disease. Spread by clothing, bedding, or towels is a less significant risk, and is almost impossible."

From MedicineNet.com: "It is hard, if not impossible, to catch scabies by shaking hands, hanging your coat next to someone who has it, or even sharing bedclothes that had mites in them the night before. The physical contact required to contract scabies may, however, be sexual, and sexual contact is the most common form of transmission among sexually active young people."

Hand-holding won't do it. If your kids are engaging in skin-to-skin contact with employees at a clothing store, I'd be worried about that much more than them potentially getting bugs.

Also, most kids are healthier than adults. Kids get more exercise and have been exposed to environmental pathogens for a considerably shorter length of time. Children as a general rule have the healthiest immune systems. And your immune system really has nothing to do with bugs burying themselves in your skin. The body can generally kill off the larvae, but not the actual bugs, but that's not an immune system issue.

One problem with the EMF theory is that cell towers have been around for how long? And the recent proliferation is mostly along freeways and big cities. So the recent rapid decline of bee populations could only be related to cell phones if it is based upon the switch to GSM and digital cell phone networks that require more towers that are placed at closer intervals, but ironically lower power. But there could be some truth to 1.8/1.9GHz cell phone towers being a problem, but the 900MHz EMF polution has been around for awhile (two decades?).

I personally think you might be able to blame Nextel as my hunch is their bands would be more harmful to bees.

Also the bee colony problem happens in rural places, but that could be an argument for why high power cell towers are used. What makes the whole argument stupid is that TV broadcasts are much stronger, so until I see a study claiming a specific EM frequency that is a problem, then I'll assume virus, mite, etc. (Now birds and butterflies on the other hand...)

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
This is a corporately funded PR campaign that preys on ignorance. There is no 'debate' in science, only peer reviewed research. If this guy wants to prove his point, why is he ranting on FAUX NEWS. Get thee to the laboratory.


There most certainly is debate in science. At least HALF of science is debate. In fact, I would go so far as to say that most of science is debate. It's not the sort you see in "debate club" though of course. The purpose of peer review is to identify DATA that is legitimate, and arguments that are not ludicrous. However, HALF of every paper published (give or take) is the "discussion" section, that is, the section where the scientist(s) discuss their thoughts on the data, how it pertains to the field as a whole, if it supports the current opinion of the field on the question at hand, and what ought to be done next to help resolve the argument. Therefore, MANY papers contain data and discussions that express debate against the current hypothesis the field is operating upon. I spent upper-level graduate course on debate in science. We would choose a controversial topic, find papers that oppose each others' conclusions, compare the arguments and data and propose what ought to be done to resolve the debate. In some cases, we would study historical arguments of the same sort where in fact, someone DID resolve the debate with an elegant experiment or two and everyone was like "ahhhhhh, righto old chap, bravo."

Global warming is under such debate in science at the moment. The advice of the field in general right now is to play it safe and attempt to reduce emittions. This is decent advice in general regardless of global warming's cause, so the field feels like it is giving good advice.

On the 30000 scientists and 9000 Ph.D.s The reason why this is still significant is that scientists in general are scientists... that and the fact that many of these people ARE in fact reputable climatologists). They are trained to think in a certain way and to research questions such as this exhaustively. It may seem elitist, but scientists think of things differently than most people do and we approach debates in a different way. Scientists have a unique perspective on debated topics for which evidence and analysis is available. In other words, having a Ph.D. in biochemistry does not mean you have no understanding of ocean CO2 levels, global temperature trends, solar cycles, ice cores, and atmospheric temperature dynamics. In fact, a biochemist has the chemistry background to understand that when a liquid is warmed, it cannot dissolve as much gas (CO2 in this case) and therefore emits that which it can no longer dissolve... like when your Coke gets warm, it gets flat... your Coke was cold to keep the saturation level of CO2 in it as high as possible. This is one of the major arguments of human-made global warming skeptics. In addition to the image Irishman posted (which is excellent data to understand), when the oceans warm, they emit such a staggering amount of CO2, it makes humanity look like the mite on the back of the mite on the back of the mite.

On top of this, the VAST MAJORITY of science on this topic is Academic, i.e. independent of external influence such as gov't or corporate shenanigans. Academic research is funded to academic scientists, by panels of academic scientists. Corporations and government stooges are not part of the equation. The entire purpose of this system is to eliminate corruption. It was designed by scientists for the sake of honest science. Fraud and data manipulation is detectable by peers and is punishable by complete, permanent career destruction, revocation of all funding, and in many cases, criminal investigation and prosecution. Fudging data means, GTFO and don't expect a kind recommendation letter for McDonalds.

Aemaeth I'm with you on this one, to a large degree anyway.

Painkiller was a game where I played the demo when it first came out and thought it to be the best darn thing since they learnt how to make bread thinner than a loaf. I waited until it was a $9 bargain bin title (also gave me ample ability to upgrade my then pathetic machine to play it properly) and then began playing it with much gusto.

It does indeed have insanely different levels with no real link between them, and that keeps things interesting, but yeah, eventually... I can't remember how many levels in... I became a mite bored, and I have yet to actually finish it, probably never will.

Doesn't help that the cinematics are SO DARN BAD.

And for those that didn't know, the Gears Of War PC port was done by People can Fly... so there you go.

But yeah, something insanely satisfying about sticking an enemy to the wall with a wooden post, or freezing then shattering their body into a million pieces.

Fun times

Fun times

13. Those ass-tarded chain comments. You know, "if you dont post this 12 timez you mite die or sumthig" Pain in the ass.

Looks a mite uncomfortable to wear to a Halloween party. Would make holding drinks and socializing difficult.