depends what you're getting and what you're using it for. also depends on how much time and energy you want to spend on researching and customizing. in my experience both have really failed users in the last 10 years or so.

Zaibach has been here longer than you, Bob. Edit: He quoted you 4 months ago, so yes you have heard not just of, but directly from him.

🤦‍♂️

Jesus, you can't research anything, that's why you believe OAN and trump, you know nothing, so you are free to believe them without any knowledge that would expose them as consummate liars.

You must be so scared, with everything you know being proven wrong constantly. The world without trump, without your fake news fed to you direct from Russia, with right wing terrorist organizations being rounded up and blocked from social media, you'll soon be alone in your cave of ignorance.

This has nothing to do with her capability. It never has been. It has to do with people pissed because there is a nominee during this time.

News flash, it doesn't matter if Trump wins or loses. He can nominate someone even after he loses. Until he is replaced, he is THE President of the United States.

No judge is required to have a photographic memory of the Constitution. I bet you could ask SITTING judges on the Supreme Court and have them miss a question. That is what clerks and research people are for.

What this comes down to is two basic things.

1. Merrick Garland never made it onto the court. People are still bitterly pissed off that he didn't. But what they forget is that he WAS nominated and did not get through the process due to a Republican majority. It was perfectly legal and was allowed. It sucks if you wanted him, but that is the way the game works.

2. People are STILL scared that Roe v Wade is going to go bye bye or the ACA is going to get kneecapped. News flash, SCOTUS has been majority Conservative leaning judges for YEARS. When Gorsuch was picked, all I recall hearing was OMG OMG, THE SKY IS FALLING, ROE V WADE IS DEAD! Same thing as when Kavanaugh was picked; although they were pissed about his supposed rape as well, every news site was repeating the mantra about Roe V Wade now dead.

It isn't going to happen. Not at a Federal level. It would be suicide for years. Conservatives, by and large, do not give a fuck about abortion. It's only the squirrelly ultra right wing pricks that care and Republicans sadly have to cater to them verbally to keep their votes. States, yeah, some will pass laws and then those will get turned away from SCOTUS like they have been for a while. The appellate courts will set the precedent on those rulings and they solidly rule for Roe v Wade.

Same thing for the ACA, although personally I wish that would die a fucking quick death. As I've said before many times, that little gem has fucked the value of my family insurance from work into the ground. I didn't get to keep my doctor unless I wanted to pay 2k+ per person per year, because he and a shit ton of other doctors went to Concierge fees to cover the money they were losing under the ACA. Now I have to go to either:

A. Doctor's who have horrible ratings for their practice, ie ones that suck or just don't care.

B. A clinic setup where I 'technically' have a 'family doctor' but in reality I can be bumped to others on staff or, most likely, a PA. There is no feeling that I know my doctor because, even if I do get to see him, they just run me through as fast as possible so they can get another patient in.

I have pre-existing conditions, so I empathize with those who are on the ACA. But the act itself is fucked up beyond repair. It needs to die and get replaced with a true national insurance. If not that, something that lets me go back to feeling like I have a real doctor and not just whoever is johnny on the spot at that moment.

It isn't going to be killed at SCOTUS though, they don't want to legislate. They will let it survive and if you think otherwise you are drinking the liberal koolaid that they are serving to round up voters.

I like the Youtuber and do agree with his other videos. I do not agree with this. I can diagnose a Macbook Pro right now if I had to, even after being away from Apple for around 8 years. But I might need to pull up a damn schematic or reference manual to know how much resistance I should be looking for on the PPbus if it isn't present when trying to power the thing on. If I and everyone else had photographic memories, we wouldn't have reference material. Wikipedia wouldn't exist. This is simply a nitpick because people are worried and still pissed.

You need to do some more research, there are some terrible bills out there in addition to ones with straightforward good things like background checks. The ghost gun fanatics will end up banning aluminum stock and most 3D printers, they are so ignorant.
https://www.westernjournal.com/dem-reps-attempt-get-rid-ghost-guns-ban-common-tool/
Ghost gun "kits" like you say are blocks of aluminum or polymer partially machined that have to be further machined to be turned into a gun. Cad files for turning a rectangular block of aluminum into a gun are easily available. These are not guns, and treating them as such is simply stupid.

Firearm accessories like magazines are critical parts to a functioning weapon. People have already been successful in getting most people to think 30rnd mags for an AR-15 is "high capacity" when it's actually the standard capacity. They want to ban every removable magazine, with zero data that it will reduce gun crime. There have been bills to define any semi-automatic weapon an "assault weapon". Ludicrous.

Works with most hot liquids with powders, I think I first noticed it in a mug of instant hot cider......

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_chocolate_effect

The hot chocolate effect, also known as the allassonic effect, is a phenomenon of wave mechanics first documented in 1982 by Frank Crawford, where the pitch heard from tapping a cup of hot liquid rises after the addition of a soluble powder. It was first observed in the making of hot chocolate or instant coffee, but also occurs in other situations such as adding salt to supersaturated hot water or cold beer. Recent research has found many more substances which create the effect, even in initially non-supersaturated liquids.
It can be observed by pouring hot milk into a mug, stirring in chocolate powder, and tapping the bottom of the mug with a spoon while the milk is still in motion. The pitch of the taps will increase progressively with no relation to the speed or force of tapping. Subsequent stirring of the same solution (without adding more chocolate powder) will gradually decrease the pitch again, followed by another increase. This process can be repeated a number of times, until equilibrium has been reached. Upon initial stirring, entrained gas bubbles reduce the speed of sound in the liquid, lowering the frequency. As the bubbles clear, sound travels faster in the liquid and the frequency increases

Hmmmm...ok, that's not legislation but is what I meant. A forced buyback program is going to have issues.

1) I have no problem with companies having to answer for injuries caused by the prescribed, advertised proper use of their product. If shoes were sold as having the greatest shin kicking power, doing the most damage when you kick someone, shoe manufacturers should be sued by those who get kicked. If manufacturers haven't modeled and advertised in a way that suggests dangerous uses, the suits will lose. Lawyers don't take loser cases, so it won't be an issue imo. Special protections from liability are a problem imo.

2) I've never understood the endgame there. What is an assault rifle, and how are their capabilities special? That said, no one is clamoring for Uzis to come back. Without a legitimate reason for high capacity fast shooting rifles, and no attempts to ban semi auto rifles, I'm just not that bothered by it, but I do think it's placating not meaningful legislation.

3) I have zero issues with registration or background checks. That seems the right way to deal with "assault rifles". There's no reason it should be expensive or time consuming if records are up to date. If they make it expensive as a tax disincentive against ownership, I have a problem. Shooting isn't a cheap sport, $10-20 a year shouldn't bother those who spent $2k on one rifle.

4) No issue at all with voluntary buy backs. Involuntary buybacks are going to be a legal and practical nightmare.

5) one purchase per month, a bit much. One purchase at a time, I'm ok with, that's 3 a month, right? I'm suspicious of anyone who needs multiple guns quick before they calm down.

6) I'm all for universal background checks. I don't want nutjob and violent criminals buying guns they aren't allowed to own.

7) I'm all for not allowing those who can't handle day to day existence to buy guns. I'm even ok with TEMPORARY removal of their guns in some cases, but only if they're returned immediately after they're deemed competent.

misdemeanor hate crime? I thought hate crime was an enhancement charge that took a misdemeanor up to felony level. I'm definitely against taking gun rights away permanently for misdemeanors.

9) dunno what that is.

10) the problem is you can buy a receiver that needs to be finished, as little as one tiny drill hole is enough, with no serial number or registration. It's just a chunk of metal until it's finished. No problem with a background check for every purchase, but a maximum of one check per month seems a reasonable compromise.

11) with proper oversight and a system that ensures it's not abused, no problem for me.

12) Yes, strict guidelines and quick return seem necessary. 48 hours without a doctor stating it's necessary would work, but as of now they aren't ready for prime time on that it seems.

13) had that in cali forever, not an issue yet.

14) as designed, smart guns wouldn't be hackable, there's no reason for wireless connectivity. Battery? Make it charge itself by shaking it like some flashlights? I like the idea that guns can only be used by the owner, solves so many issues, mainly being shot with your own gun.

15) depends on what constitutes "safe". I agree, guns for home defense need to be available quickly.

16) some ghost guns are milled on professional cnc mills but unfinished. 3d printed guns, I'm not a fan. 3 shots is plenty to murder someone, and with no identification it's a near perfect weapon for crimes.
3d printing is advancing constantly. You can print in metal with fine details now on home equipment. I think it won't be long before stable guns can be printed if they aren't already.

Thanks for doing the research. I seriously doubt most could pass even a democratic congress but some would, and most won't pass court challenges, but I understand your reluctance to put that to the test.

If you're going to fight the swamp thing, I won't argue against leaving a few snakes in the black lagoon. Some opposition is healthy, but the ability to be obstructionist on every idea is gridlock. I don't see it getting better.

Tesla is a good buy today even at 52 week highs. There is a growth path forward in which new factories are coming on line
Giga
Shanghai
Berlin
Texas

+ Giga Nevada battery factory adding lines.

Limiting factor is battery. Battery day should lay out the path forward.


Tesla is profitable , last 4 quarters, and believe this will continue.

I am looking long term. Min 5 years to 10 years.
I am looking for production to double approx every year.

600k this year goal
1.2mil min goal next year
2.4mil + in 3 rd year.

I've posted the 2020 NC transportation outlook on the Sift. It is really worth a look.



Also any one interested should look at Kathy Wood of ARC investment. Just look for her on you tube.
This is ARC investment link
https://ark-invest.com/analyst-research/tesla-price-target/

Sandy Monroe ( you tube) tore down a 2012 and a 2020 model and was astonished at not only in improvements but absolutely astonished in the technology lead of the produce. His group does this and sell reports to all. Evey Asian and Europe atuo manufacture has bought his report. Not 1 American Auto maker has.

Ford, GM are far behind.

Every ICE maker ( ICE Internal Combustion Engine) will have to not only continue that investment and also invest in EV. Dont think they have enough Research investment dollars on hand to do both.



Musk is a visionary Just look at what he is doing besides cars.

Space X . Few step into the space race and succeed like Musk.

Boring company . Fed up with traffic jams he look for solutions. Looked at boring machines and found then to be 15 times slower than a snail. Got a team together and designed a boring machine 15 times faster.

Supplemental storage energy for peak energy demands.

Solar panels. Redesigned and lower cost of ownership.

Musk salary /bonus ties to achievement goals, not just a set amount.


This a BUY time.
This is like buying Apple when Steve Jobs came back to Apple.


Over valuation is what people see Tesla to be worth.
Market forces, Technological improvements and Government regulations will push EV market to forefront over the next decade. There is no stopping this.

Woo boy, this is a doozy! The fact of the matter is a video comment section is not the place to have this conversation. There's too much to discuss, too many questions from one another that are best asked soon after they're conceived, etc. I frankly just don't have the time to respond to everything you said. Don't take this as acquiescence; if you'd like to have a Zoom chat some time, I'd be down.

In any event, I'll respond to what I find either the most important or at least most interesting:

Having theories is definitely the best way to go about most of the things you consider fact (for the moment), but the fact of the matter (no pun intended) is that at some point you'll need to use some of those claims as fact/belief in order to take action. And it's just human nature to, if one believes in a claim for long enough, it becomes fact, despite all your suggestions of objectivity. It's easy to say you're a scientist through and through, but if you're really someone who doesn't believe anything and merely theorize things, I think you'd be a sad human being. But that's a claim that I leave up to the scientists.

> Yes, and I eat animals because they're delicious.

You think that's a defensible moral claim? I find that disgraceful. If you truly think your own pleasure is worth sentient beings' lives then... I don't know what to say to you. That strikes me as callous and unempathetic, 2 traits you often assert as shameful. This is my point. You sound pretty obstinate to at least a reasonable claim. To respond with just "they're tasty". You don't sound reasonable to me.

> You may be correct, but eating meat is hardly the worst thing humans are up to.

Aw, come on @newtboy, I thought better of you than to give me a logical fallacy. The fact that you're resorting to logical fallacies wwould indicate to me that either you're confronting some cognitive dissonance, otherwise why would you stoop to such a weak statement?

> I gladly discuss vegetarianism with honest people, but I'm prepared when they start spouting bullshit like " eating any red meat is more harmful than smoking two packs a day of filterless cigarettes" ...

There is a lot of scientific research (not funded by Big ___) that is currently spouting this "bullshit". What happened to your receptive, scientific, theory-based lifestyle? It's true nutrition science is a fucking smog-filled night mare considering how much money is at stake, but I find it telling that a lot of the corporations are using the same ad men from Big Cigarette to stir up constant doubt.

Again, I find it peculiar that you are highly suspicious of big corporations... except when it comes to something that you want to be true.

Again, this is my point. Take a moment, take a few breaths, and look inside. Can you notice that you're acting in the exact same fashion as the people you purport to be obscenely stubborn?

Check out NutritionFacts if you want to see any of the science. Actual science. I would hope that it would give you at least somedoubt and curiosity.

That's a true scientist's homeostatic state: curiosity. Are you curious to investigate the dozens (hundreds?) of papers with a truly non-confirmation-biased mind? How much of a scientist are you?

> I've never met a vegan that wasn't a bold faced liar in support of veganism, so I'm less likely to give them a full chance at convincing me.

This, for me, raises all sorts of red flags. That's quite a sweeping claim.

> Again, that would be long held theories in my case, and it's not hard to change them. Mad cow disease got me to change until I was certain it wasn't in America. No, I'm not recoiling. I'll listen to anyone who's respectful and honest.

So, you're willing to make decisions based on self-interest and not morality? Well, duh. Everyone does that. It doesn't sound like you had a self-reflective moment. It sounds like you merely had a self-interested decision based on the risk to your own health.

And finally, all your talk about Bob -- of course he acts, consistently, like a twat. I just don't like feeding trolls. I don't think there's anyone on Videosift who's on the precipice and would be pushed over into the Alt-right Pit by Bob's ridiculous nonsense.

> Edit: in general I agree that dispassionate fact based replies with references are better at convincing people than derision, there are exceptions, and there are those who are unconvinceable and disinterested in facts that don't support their lies.

Ironically, I think science has disproved this. Facts don't change minds in situations like this. There are lots of articles on this. I didn't have the wherewithal to dig into their citations, but I leave that (non-confirmation-biased) adventure for you. [1]

---

I knew I wouldn't make this short, but I think it's shorter than it could have been.

Lastly, I'm with @BSR; I do appreciate your perseverance. Not everyone has as much as you seem to have! Whenever I see Bob... doing his thing, I can always be assured you'll take most of the words from my mouth. [2]

[1]
Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds | The New Yorker
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds

This Article Won’t Change Your Mind - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/this-article-wont-change-your-mind/519093/

Why People Ignore Facts | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/words-matter/201810/why-people-ignore-facts

Why Many People Stubbornly Refuse to Change Their Minds | Psychology Today
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201812/why-many-people-stubbornly-refuse-change-their-minds

Why Facts Don't Always Change Minds | Hidden Brain : NPR
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/743195213

[2] This comment has not been edited nor checked for spelling and grammatical errors. Haven't you got enough from me?

@newtboy and my list doesn't show all of the media reports that are glossing things over. Like the ones saying that Huber was just holding a skateboard and trying to disarm Kyle, that Rosenbaum was just shot for no reason, that don't mention the 'peaceful protesters' carrying or firing guns, and so on.

I feel sorry for the kid because he is being torched by the media mob and he'll never have a shot at a fair jury trial. It would be nice if all media could take a second and do a MINIMUM of research like I did to find out all angles, THEN report fully. But they don't. Conservative media does one thing and the Liberal media does the other, neither tell the whole truth ever.

I've always thought if anyone could bring bob around it would be you.

Unfortunately the facts seem to have been spitballs at a battleship with him.

Your efforts have not been lost on everyone though and I applaud all the research and knowledge you've given to all in presenting the facts.

But sometimes when a child is fascinated with fire they will still play with matches no matter what anyone says. Sometimes you just need to get burned to discover the truth.

I can only assume that bob does what he does as to not be alienated from those he loves.

I know he does have some compassion in him.

https://videosift.com/video/Inbred-Family-The-Whitakers

It just needs some attention to grow.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/931266/pennsylvania-ballots-might-not-delivered-time-counted-postal-service-warns


No but You are swift on you feet for all research until I Say your wrong then you are suddenly dumb to search.

Pretty hilarious of you to act like it's my responsibility to research your ridiculous claims when you can't. You can't find proof of something that didn't happen after two months of looking, why would I waste my time?

Democrats committing vote frauds doesn't get mentioned on the news because it's nonsense, not factual, didn't happen. Republicans committing vote fraud does make the news however, because you people just won't stop no matter how many get caught.

What you offered finally was nothing but evidence of Republicans trying to suppress the vote by making vote by mail, the ONLY safe voting possible, unreliable. If enough mail in votes to change the results are disqualified for being late, expect the election to be invalidated by the courts, and civil unrest until a new election is held.

Some basic fact checking.

Hong Kong flu mortality rate < 0.5%
Covid-19 mortality rate 1.4%

So total BS right off the bat.

https://www.sinobiological.com/research/virus/1968-influenza-pandemic-hong-kong-flu

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/

Combine that with new research on how a majority of people who recover from COVID have lasting heart changes/inflammation/complications, and tell me again how eager you are to go to that party with all the proud non-mask-wearers: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/07/research-reveals-heart-complications-covid-19-patients

Actually, I find it informative to know what the q-anon crowd is claiming first hand, it gives me the opportunity to research it and have some facts ready to debunk the insanity in real life.
I am curious why he likes to post 1/2 hour far right propaganda videos he knows will get maybe 3 views and zero votes constantly. It seems like a waste of time for him. Maybe he has a quota to meet?