Aaaaaaahahaha! Good one Bob. The pot calling the glass vase black, I think.

It's a multi state fire, NPR is an appropriate source that actually investigates and had published an article on the exact topic with interviews and quotes from local officials. You made baseless claims about Oregon in your question about California, so local news sources wouldn't be a good source, and they also don't indicate any local forest fires are arson.

Archived from when and where? You know I'm not using your links, you have linked to virus hosts more than once. As a likely Russian operative, no one should trust any link you post. I certainly won't. Bobski #3,5,6,7,12,14,17, and 21 have been told this, you guys need to talk to each other.

We're talking about fires that started in the last month, not over decades. You don't need archived articles for that, so I'll assume these are years or decades of news story/records, the only date listed is 2014 in Ferguson, so massive propaganda FAIL Bob.

🤦‍♂️

No. One listen was one too many of that insanity. I was just curious how he would defend it, but not enough to listen to him again, particularly with 4 wannabe mancow in the mornings talking over each other.

He defended it by saying he was sexually mature enough at 14 for sex with adults, and someone else said they weren't ready at 14 to be fucked hard in the ass by a 32 (I think, could be the wrong age, but not by much) transvestite, implying that is Milo's story.
If you're arguing semantics that people who like sex with children aren't pedophiles, the American lexicon disagrees.

Nice explanation.

of note: technically inferior and under-gunned tanks (early German armor in the French and early Russian campaigns--once they ran into T-34s) could actually get more done tactically because they could talk to each other.

Thus, the importance of communication and netting in a unit's radios.

Even with Accessibility turned on, Mac OS is much less keyboard-only friendly than Windows. Blind people never use a mouse, and prefer Windows (at least the few that I've met)

Although iOS is quite good for blind people... I guess the 2 teams don't really talk to each other.

I agree with this. It's very important that people come together to fight for equality or whatever else they believe is right, but a movement has got to be self aware and self critical otherwise it will end up undermining itself.

Movements that become huge can have little groups forming within them and the outside world sees the actions of what might be an extreme faction for the actions of the whole. And things can become insular, where the members mostly talk to each other and reconfirm each other's worries and problems and things that weren't acceptable to you in a vacuum are ok because it seems like those problems are dominating yours and your friends' entire lives.

But that works regardless of the politics of the movement - from the left or right. So on the one hand you get die-hard gender rights campaigners using inherently sexist terms when arguing with the opposite sex, but you also get kind, considerate people rallying behind a right wing group or message because it starts with phrases like "we've got to look after our own first," but end up with racism and bigotry.

Seriously communicating as if they talk to each other. That seems pretty out there.

Let's say, for argument's sake, there are 1,500 advanced civilizations within 1000 light years of us.

If only 1 of those civilizations -ours- gives a shit about anything beyond their atmosphere, then there's your problem right there.

Once you add the chances of life, then intelligent life, then intelligent life that actually thinks it needs a way to talk to each other over long distances, THEN develops radio, only THEN can we hear them.

What if they just never got to broadcast signals? Wire and fibreoptic may have been just peachy for them. Or maybe they just got to cell phones before trying short wave...

Maybe they react to radio waves. Like the few people out there who get headaches -proven by blind tests- from being close to radio emitters.

Perhaps you might choose your words more carefully then, because your statement could easily be interpreted as racist...that's why I asked.

I stated that more police SEEMS to be a good solution to them over-reacting on it's face, but is actually not a good solution because they feed on each other and ALL over react, meaning more cops, more over reactions, unfortunately. If that's what you meant too, then we agree on at least one point.

Uneducated is NOT the same thing as unintelligent. You can fix the former, not the latter. As to the intellect of 'mobs', it's not applicable. This is not a mob we're discussing, it's a neighborhood with a number of individual witnesses, not a mob.
So, perhaps it's not racism but classism? You seem to be implying that poor people are all of lower intelligence, or do I misunderstand?

I will agree with you that eye witnesses are inherently untrustworthy, but if there were 100 women around that all gave the same story without talking to each other first, it would be incredibly unlikely they all made it up, would you not agree? Because they may have had time to speak to each other does not mean they did, I've never heard or seen any evidence (or before now even the implication) that they colluded. And if we suppose they all did speak together and came up with a story that, while a lie, also fit all the evidence (evidence which was yet to be collected or even found, btw), they would have to be criminal masterminds, no? Kind of hard to pull off in my opinion, especially if you're a group of below normal intelligence, uneducated thugs.

If I was racist I would argue that Gardner was also deserving. No, I lost a great hero beside me in Iraq that were of the black skin. Further, his best friend was wounded in more ways than most people can imagine.

And you just stated what I stated--that the more men on Gardner was an inappropriate use of force...which incidentally makes me look like I did not agree with it.

As for the low intelligence comment, you have to understand. One, mobs are always of low intellect. No matter how smart each individual might be. Two, poor neighborhoods are statistically at a disadvantages in education, to say the least. That is more systemic racial policies at work. So yes, they are lower intellect for both of those reasons.

I remember once witnessing an accident. Immediately a woman stated her "eye-witness" account. I looked at her and wondered how the fuck she could have the accident as remotely backasswards as she did. In fact, had it not been for me, the wrong driver would have been cited. Only because I pointed out the physical evidence of where the damage was and that the car spun around did things come out correct. On a side note, she was definitely poor...

I know what Lantern said and he is worse than a Ferguson witness. He is inherently the type of never-changing sludgery that would make a fine Islamic fanatic if he were born in different circumstances. I only point this out because you used witnesses unjustly. Just like the woman in my situation was not a criminal mastermind, nevertheless she was not fit to speak. If there were a 100 women like her around, the same would hold true. And how long do you think everyone had to talk to each other? Definitely enough time to feed off one another.

You start by introducing yourself, probably with the words "excuse me miss" first. if you think that the best way to meet new people is to straight up going for "daammmmmn", you have a lot of courtesy to learn.

Of course this all looks incredibly invasive to me. I'm from Finland, from Ostrobothnia. We do not talk to strangers and even less in this part of country. You can have 60 people in the same room with no one is talking to each other. It is considered rude, why would i talk to a stranger that i have never met and i'm never gonna meet again, i have nothing to say except empty small talk that is actually just a nervous tick, not actual communication... Just shut up, sit straight and mind your own business.

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

@enoch and @VoodooV, I wish I could put you two together in a room, in a quiet cocktail party setting and let you talk to each other face to face. I *know* you wouldn't be this mean to each other.

It's the same old cliche about the dehumanising effect of the anonymous web - try and remember that we're all human beings at the other end of the line.

I can only speak from my own experience, but I have witnessed most of the situations the poem addresses. It's not the case that nobody interacts anymore, but most people I know always seem to be keeping an eye (or two) on their smart phones or computer screens, fearing they might miss something 'important' on the Internet (like a new meme or a comment by some stranger who disagrees with their views who they might have to argue with, which suddenly becomes more important than the person they are actually talking to). It's hard to make new friends if people are only interested in their social media profiles and making new 'friends' there, but never actually contact each other or spend any time together.
I know people who cannot talk to one another without simultaneously reading articles or looking at funny pictures and videos on the Internet (and thus don't really listen to what the other person has to say); who are unable to do one thing at a time, because it is too boring to talk to someone or do anything at all without further entertainment. They lack the attention span to talk to each other for more than three minutes at a time, or watch a single TV show episode or movie without pausing it in order to watch some videos or post comments online. A friend of mine believes it's too boring to talk to each other without at least playing a video game at the same time. I know people who almost exclusively interact with their real life friends or relatives through social media (who mostly live in the same city).
I like the way the Internet connects people far away from each other, who might not even have met otherwise. I have met several people this way, who I wouldn't want to miss. The problem, which I believe is the main point of this video, is the way it seems to disconnect the people sitting next to each other, which I have experienced myself several times. The problems pointed out in this video might not apply to everyone and every region, but it seems to apply to the people around me.

Glad to see the videos are back to normal. I unsubscribed from him when the Galaxy Note Sponsored him and they had to do constant takes about talking to each other using the phone telling each other when people were coming and shit ugh commercialsm

Indeed.

...at any rate.. this is just banter. It doesn't even seem all that heated. Maybe they talk to each other all the time?

>> ^Porksandwich:

Couldn't understand a lot of what was said after the "drip" part.


There certainly was a lot of talking over each other, but this is what I heard:


Cox: "I think that just a drip of that quantative easing to the science budget would possibly transform our economy."

Campbell: "He could get into Downing Street anytime he wants, and why don't you stand for parliament?"

Cox: *Stammers*

Neil: "Good answer"

Cox: "Not much happens then does it, I think you've got to be ..."

Portillo: "don't you have a 15 year term in the House of Lords?"

Cox: " .. don't you have to be Prime Minister, at least, until you can get anything done?"