...and can we stop with the selfie sticks? The guy asks for a group photo, then stands off to the side while they fumble with that shit stick. Get a real photographer.

Most modern handguns are extremely difficult to fire accidentally. I have no idea what sort of gun it is, but he is definitely absent-mindedly fumbling around with it like an idiot before it goes off. He needs another safety course and also a new gun with better safeties.

edit:

I dunno the backup syntax offhand, but I think it's this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS53OYmHktY

It's also one of many, and I dunno who is ripping off who.

Dude got what he deserved. Fumbling around like a moron and shamed himself on national TV and in front of hundreds of blind Apple fanatics.

Yes, you got a new phone. Woopie fucking do. It's a new fucking phone. Not a premiere to the next Star Wars movie. Is this what people have become now? Just some brainless zombies who don't know jack?

People need to start learning that there's more to a phone than just the dumbass Apple logo imprinted on it.

All below exercised, and the point is lost to so much sophistic treason. The cop get's a glimpse of ego-loss and goes about his merry cop way, and Billy here making a non-violent public statement of laws vs rights is fingered by a paranoid delusional (cop-caller), harassed-with-the-hope-of-a-fumble by a dutiful enforcer/instigator (cop), and the ONLY thing that kept him off the National Terrorist Database was his acumen and legal knowledge...in publicly showcasing his RIGHTS under the LAW, he barely escapes arrest.

The point being, that with increasing frequency, a routine police-encounter because of someone's 'suspicion' may quickly and more often than not, escalate into an innocent citizen being FUCKED into a state-system of the state-sanctioned organized criminal business of keeping people in a state of fear of arrest and incarceration, oh ye clueless dumb-asses who think the world works or should work in some universally, equitable fashion.

Bravo for this Mainer's low-swinging balls and fuck the vortex of the US police forces in retrograde-The entire justice machine is rotten with institutional corruption and overdue for a major douche, or the future of Americas' headed for boots, clubs, and riot shields.

I once tried to sift video of Dick Butkus (6'3", 245lbs, possibly the most feared linebacker ever) grabbing a fumble and then jogging into the end zone from near center field, as offensive tackles bounce harmlessly off his outstretched hand. Sometimes you don't need speed.

I watch her every morning and she fumbles things quite often, however I unfortunately missed this comedy gold.

If Bullock sacrifices herself to save Clooney, that could be a good twist ('bout time too that the lady gets to be the hero).

I know how it's going to happen too (either way). They're going to be floating together in a slightly lower orbit, with rescue a few hundred meters above. One of them is going to push the other one off toward rescue, but dooming themselves to sink lower and burn up in the atmosphere.

I'm sure it will infact be Clooney that saves Bullock, but I can hope. I too was annoyed by Bullock's panicky fumbling. That's not right.

Anyways, I'd love to be proven wrong. I at least hope to see this trailer before some other movie on the big screen. All the best parts for free.

i have been loving your commentary pertaining to the NSA data collection.
i have been fumbling for the right words to express how i see and feel about this whole situation and i fear my ideas are just falling into a giant vat of incomprehensibility.

you and a few others are speaking so much clearer than i.
good work my friend.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, or one of the less-grounded members of this community (you all know who you are!), and I'm not trying to make this out to be the good/bad/evil scenario, i.e. Emperor Palpatine et al. I use "government" as a collective, general term, however I felt it was apt in this context given that people strictly within the government, and maybe lobbyists to an extent, are responsible for these various decisions that have led us to this point.
No, they don't seek power for it's own sake, but the handful of objectives I listed in my last post are a sampling of what might drive an organization to pursue power fervently.

There does seem to exist a greater, definitively single-minded pursuit of lessening the civil rights of US citizens since the turn of the millennium, in an attempt to have more power over them, and while "government" at large generally fumbles over itself when it attempts to get all the parts moving together as one, I believe you can see the broader cooperation happening here. From inclusion of said US Tech companies roles, the nation-wide abuse by the police force, aggression of US border patrol agents, random TSA checkpoints on some state highways, and the statements made by the president and his staff, which only seem to serve to blow off civil concerns with one breath while granting increased power to these same entities with the next.

At this point in a country's history, it seems to me that the only thing that can change the course of an entire nation is decisive action by it's citizens on a scale that would simultaneously qualify as an act that justifies all their overreaches of power. And I don't mean in any way acts of violence, but if there were a 5-million-man-march on the capitol tomorrow to show a mass appeal for reason and demand accountability, I believe it would be used as an example of why the government is pursuing such surveillance to begin with.

Sorry this is long winded, but lastly, I wouldn't feel too bad about Obama's allegedly targeting only foreign individuals. To me that felt like damage control to appease the US populace rather than an affront to foreign nationals. They said the Exact. Same. Thing. about the Patriot Act, and that was being used to arrest US citizens for minor infractions by local law enforcement not 6-months after it was passed. Disgusting.

Yes to the first paragraph quoted below. It would be hard to disagree that this is the result. My own bit was more about the reasons why *some* (not all, or even most) people might get involved in the discussion in the first place, regardless of what those comments actually became in the course of the exchange.

On the second quoted point, have to agree that I did use a bit of hyperbole there. Still, the lady skillfully avoided a direct answer to Wolf's question that was, in my judgement, highly irrelevant to the story. He then asked the question again, forcing the issue. Not normally a problem, except the question was in no way something that added to anything - until her answer trumped the entire interview.

I don't get how needing to know whether a person "thanked God" for not getting killed is worth the nation's time, and it seemed more a cub reporter's fumbling than a CNN's senior anchorperson performing an artful extraction of relevant story elements. Wolf didn't need to go there, and should not have.

He just fumbled his stock answer. Shoulda said, 'our government decided that we need to do this in order to maintain confidence in the European finance sector. A sector that we heavily invested your pension funds in.' - something along those lines anyway.

I'm surprised he couldn't have taken some time to practice the basic skill of spreading the rice and rolling the sushi ahead of time. He was fumbling around with a very basic part of the process.

I'm in no way saying I'm perfect but I've rolled many rolls in my days. It can be tricky the first time, but you pick it up quickly.

All I can say is.......... any burglars fumbling around in the dark opening plastic boxes in his apartment are in for a bit of a shock

So did anyone complain about having 10 vids promoted on the front page? It certainly never bothered me.

Is this a fix for a problem that only dag and lucky had?

I'd like to hear if others were bothered by 10 or so promotes. Anybody?

As for how effective promotes are.... there was a vid in "featured" mode for ELEVEN HOURS and still hadn't gotten 10 votes.

As for wanting us to police it ourselves -- we have to click into the vid to see how long it had been there. We have to decide if 2 hours or 3 hours or 4 hours is enough. If we promote a vid, we have to worry if it will fall off in 5 minutes if someone else isn't being attentive or if it is a high traffic time and 5 people promote in quick succession.

I just don't see that the promote as it is currently designed is effective or workable or anything other than anxiety producing (for us badge whores and cheapskates who want our power points to have a return on our "investment".)

I love you guys, dag and lucky. I love the look of the site now (except PLEASE use black for text and get rid of/tone down the crosshatch background to the right -- there just isn't enough contrast. The sizing up helped, thanks for that.) I suspect that some of the design elements are necessitated by having to service mobile devices and regular computers, but I don't know enough to know if that is true or not.

Overall, the design is clean and pretty. There are pangs as certain things have gone away and some fumblings as we learn new things.

But I haven't seen a single positive comment about the way promotes are now working. As near as I can tell, there was a single goal -- keep the number down -- which is fine. I think the Sifters would be better served if:
1. the time limit was brought back
2. the promote area was treated like a pqueue, and if three were already there, no more could be added.
3. the old Promote presentation be brought back, so they looked like regular vids instead of like ads. (I did find myself squinting at them, with the eye slide that someone else commented on.)

So I asked a question way up in this post -- did anyone have a problem with 10 promoted vids on the front page? Any sifter?

Thanks for all the good work, guys. Really.

as long as there is time left on the clock, the ball can be put into play, but the ball remains in play until the play has ended, not when the time runs out. The player that intercepted the hail mary dropped the ball when the clock ran out, but didn't "down" the ball (instead he fumbled it), leaving the ball in play and enabling the team on the offense to regain possession and run it back for a touchdown.

does that help?>> ^NaMeCaF:

I dont get it. What happened?