The Fourth Phase of Water: Dr. Gerald Pollack at TEDxGuelphU has been added as a related post - related requested by chicchorea on that post.

Yeah I backed Elite: Dangerous from early on and have gone through various phases of delight and despair.

I'll spend more than the usual full price of a game buying virtual crap in Star Citizen if it delivers, but until then... I've learned my lesson.

I was surprised to hear John Oliver discussing the "Get Rid of the Penny" topic in the USA, not because the subject is uninteresting, but because he failed to point out the glaring anachronism that Americans still call their one cent coin a "penny".

Do they not realise that they started a revolution in 1765, declared independence in 1776, and started making one cent coins in 1793?

Why do they still call cents pennies? After more than 200 years, I would have thought that even the most parochial or remote American would have heard the news.

The Canadians aren't much better. The penny finally dropped there in 2012, when they stopped minting one cent coins. The first Canadian one cent coin was struck in 1858. One strange quirk is that the word penny in Canada used to refer to a two-cent coin, even though they never issued any 2 cent coins! It is possible they were referring to US 2-cent coins, which were issued from 1864 to 1873, but more likely because a French sous was worth approximately half a (British) penny, therefore a two sous coin was the near equivalent of a penny.

In Euroland, the Irish recently started to phase out the use of one and two cent coins, but most of their discussions were also about dropping the penny!

One solution could be to emulate Zimbabwe, where high inflation means that one US dollar is worth about 360 Zimbabwe dollars, or about 520 to a British pound. This neatly avoids the need for any fractional denominations.

Talking about fractional coins:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lawrence_chard/7145393421/

...which also reveals a surprising etymological link between coins and anatomy, as does this:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lawrence_chard/6390568191/

Perhaps the guy he mentioned getting a cent stuck in his anus was going for the closest alternative.

Maybe because he was phased.

Of course if he WASN'T fazed, that is a different story.

Back in '88, my admirably stupid cat randomly jumped off the sixth floor window of our apartment into the concrete sidewalk below. There was not even a scratch on him and he didn't look phased by it. Then again, he was really really stupid.

Cool -- I vividly remember my High School Chemistry class demonstration on this, with a pea-sized bit zipping around the surface of the water.

I want to see a big brick of it (1kg or so) in a similarly breakable but enclosing container and held 10m or so underwater in a lake (or something) by a wire mesh cage. Would chopping it up into smaller pieces to maximize the surface area increase the effect? Or would the violence of the reaction make cavitation / hydrogen bubbles that push the water out of way and make the reaction happen in multiple phases as the water gets pushed away and returns?

Picasso and the moderns were excited about art produced by children. They even collected art by children. The idea was to celebrate the creativity in works by children.

One article I read, about the Moderns, showed a composition by a child and then the same composition used by an adult.

At age 14 Picasso showed that he could handle realism. So the rest of his career was marked by phases including child-like imagery.

This Picasso-esque painter followed my on YouTube. He might inspire you guys: https://www.youtube.com/user/raeart

The problem is that sponsors will yank support in less time than it takes to change the channel when an episode of 19 and counting comes on, if and only if, it involves an individual or small group.

Getting them to yank support from a sporting organization that has a larger fan base and that is more corrupt than the NFL is almost impossible. In fact, and I wish I could find the article, Budweiser already doubled down on their support for FIFA after the indictments became widespread knowledge.

Realistically, I think that Blatter could make a video saying he knew all about this and completely supported every phase of the corruption without any chance of sponsors pulling from FIFA. The only way FIFA will fall is if the top teams and countries leave the league to form a competing one.

Edit: found the article, it basically has a statement saying they will continue to monitor their partner. the article goes on to compare it to a much stronger worded scolding of the NFL over DV. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-wont-budweiser-scold-fifa-2015-05-29

That's when they go to phase 2:

Replace the water mist with a urine mist.

Okay, super dodgy rough translation from my phone app goes something like this ...

"Real managed to take shots in the Moscow Yacht Club Pirogovo video is for you a fan of the sport, I can see an unusual member of one of the teams dinghy, his name our group was able to find the owner of the dog, and as you might guess it turned out to be the captain of the yacht.

If you believe the captain of his dog helps him in all phases of voyage can take the mooring lines or sail. Can hold a course and knows maritime terminology better than experienced sailor. Helps open boat turns but it's not all, dog can perform complex sports stunt trapeze from the line. Great respect for the other members of the club. This dog is in fact proven that can be floating."

My arguments were only about what the argument of legal rights, nothing else. I actually have three friends in Guam and I feel I'm more educated about the situation there than most Americans on the mainland. So thank you for acknowledging the soundness of my arguments, and keep in mind that I wasn't touching the socio-economic aspects of the situation, just John Oliver's misguided presentation of the facts.

Personally I'd love to see PR and Guam join. As for "why"... there are two main camps that I think might be right.

1)They honestly don't care. This mixes somewhat with the "they prefer the benefits of living in a Territory over what they'd gain by becoming a state." For example, if you live in PR and all of your income is made within the bounds of PR, then you don't have to pay US Federal Income Taxes. To me that doesn't really seem like a big deal. I think the people in this group would lean towards statehood if they weren't given the option to remain a territory (i.e. statehood or independence only).

2)They seem the fact that the US is still there as a remnant of military imperialism and they don't want to reward the US. In 1899 Samoa was carved up between Germany and the US during the stupid Kaiser's chest-pounding Imperialism phase that led up to WW1. Puerto Rico and Guam were both taken from the Spanish in the Spanish-American war. Cuba and the Philippines were as well, and those two chose independence and are now independent nations (Cuba was a special situation). The Virgin Islands were bought from Denmark during WW1 and the Marianas were taken from Japan during WW2. So... maybe these places feel like they aren't fully American. But honestly, I think that (with a possible exception of a large portion of Puerto Rico) this isn't the case. Or maybe they simply don't think they'd be an economically viable nation if they left. Look to Nauru as a great example of how fragile a small island's economy can be.

Puerto Rico had a really weird vote in 2012 that seemed to indicate statehood... but the ballot was horribly illegal (you can't have multiple, dependent questions of differing types on the same ballot)... so we'll have to wait til they redo it again with competence to see if they really mean it.

Add to all of this the comfort of the status quo. There's a certain philosophy of finding the sucky stuff that you're used to more palatable than the unknown.

But honestly... I don't know.

Need a steerable phased array of microwave emitters, along with the IR-camera. Could evenly heat food with varying water concentrations. A good use of that military radar tech.

@oritteropo

There are analyses floating around by just about every major player. A majority seems to agree that it would be manageable for the Eurozone and better for Greece. Others, including Varoufakis, argue that Grexit would destablize the Eurozone and be a catastrophe for Greece. Too many variables, too many vested interests... who knows what would happen.

The projections on the other hand were a hoot. What a joke they were.

What was the fiscal multiplier in their initial projections? Something along the lines of 0.75, right? Reduce public spending by a Euro and the economy contracts by just 75 cents. Too bad it turned out to be at least 2.5, probably even far more during certain phases. Ricardian equivalence, my ass.

Here is the IMF outlook of 2010. Bill Mitchell made a nice table for comparison. They did a crackerjack job, didn't they.

IMF research admitted their mistake in 2012, but the policy department doesn't seem to care. Shouldn't come as a suprise to anyone, given the role the IMF played in the application of the shock doctrine all over the world in the last decades. Chicago School of Economics, all the way.

If I look at the list of countries that were ruined by the IMF through policy advisory and loans with strings attached, I wonder just how they still manage to paint Syriza as the ones lacking credibility. Is it because they lack the experience of destroying an economy?

Yet with all that in mind, the Greeks actually prefer the IMF as a partner if the alternative is German officials. How depressing for me as a German.

Remember what Christine Lagarde said about Greece in 2012? The Grauniad still has the goods. Or how she argued for expansionary austerity in 2010? Krugman, to his credit, made fun of the concept back then, but even he severly underestimated just how willing these people are to turn this stuff into policy.

But still preferrable to German officials. Ouch.

Basically I'll throw in my opinion, which is really just to parrot someone else's... I'm guessing me and @eric3579 have fairly close to the same layout--screen wise (size or perspective), resolution wise, and so on. Since I have the same issues and concerns eric has (like channels and other "inclusions" a video belongs in). Right now it is harder to find some of the details for the videos posted--or they need to be in a more simpler and easier to access spot (but, as noted--this may be due to a size/resolution issue; since I don't know if everything scales correctly yet); which makes me hesitant to make any changes to any videos. But, as noted (and as I found out later on) the opt-in opt-out buttons are found nearby, allowing me to figure out what I need to, until we decide on a fully finished product.

One question I might ask is, does the new site--as of right now--already scale correctly no matter what resolution you are at? So if you go WAY up into the "4K" range, will the site look really bizarre (I know that there will already be far more "space"; but, is it setup right now to arrange all the site items to display in their correct positions)? Inversely, for a long time cellphones were forcing site admins to create a mobile edition of their website(s); but, thanks to smartphones (plus their fast CPUs, and 1080p screens) this is being phased out.

Keep chomping at the bit @lucky760; I'm sure with our feedback and your willingness to get this finished so quickly will indeed help us get more than likely a bit of what we all want out of this (making the community as a whole basically happy with the finished product; and as mentioned, hopefully helping newer users). Keep up the good job.